<p>well, this is the choice i gonna make by May 1. you may be done with this kind of thread but I do need your opinion. International student for both US / Canada, no FA.</p>
<p>McGill: Biomed, Life Science
UCLA: BioChem
Smith: Undecided</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>Well, one major difference you want to consider is the fact that Smith is a small (compared to the universities) liberal arts college, while McGill and UCLA are both large research institutions. This will result in a difference in the overall learning and social environment as well as the resources available to you. That said, Smith is known for being strong in the sciences, so you wouldn’t necessarily be giving anything up by going there. I can’t really say more without knowing a bit more about your goals and interests. I hope this helps!</p>
<p>Yeah I would say that these schools couldn’t possibly be more different. UCLA is the biggest of the UC schools, McGill is a large research institution in Canada, and Smith is a small liberal arts college in New England. </p>
<p>For bio-chem, one thing to think about is that while the larger universities will have very impressive research programs, a lot of the best research will be done by grad students, and what’s left for undergrads you will have to fight for with hundreds of others. At a small school like Smith, with no grad program, all the of the research opportunities for students are done by undergrads and there’s less competition for courses and research work among the smaller group of students.</p>
<p>yeah I agree that those schools are totally different. call me late bloomer, i mean that.
I am not quite clear about what to do and what I want, even by now.</p>
<p>I do like the learning atmosphere in Smith, particular it has science /engineering strength.
However, huge schools like UCLA may have more resources (though you have to fight for it), and you may meet more different people over there.</p>
<p>Cygne, currently I may want to attend med-school after ug, OR I’d like to work for IB with knowledges in life science. I guess everything is open to me and I hope to gradually make up my mind in first 2 years in college.</p>
<p>Thank you SmithieandProud. What if I wanna find a job right after ug? It is one option that I work for 2 years then attend a decent biz school.</p>
<p>As far as making up your mind goes, I think that the more intimate learning environment and the open curriculum at Smith would be more conducive to exploration. And I’ve heard that the Smith alumnae network is excellent! (I’m kind of amusing myself here. I haven’t even deciding whether I’m going to Smith, but I’m still ready to sing its praises.)</p>
<p>where will you possibly go?</p>
<p>I’m trying to decide between Smith and Amherst, actually, so the geographical difference isn’t much. 
I also got into Dartmouth, Mt. Holyoke, and Dickinson, but Smith and Amherst make the most sense both financially and in terms of fit for me. I’m going to both their open campus events next week, so we’ll see how that goes!</p>
<p>Woow~ impressive…
will you share us the experience of visiting day?</p>
<p>Thanks; I’d love to share. :)</p>
<p>Please take into perspective that TheMom has worked at UCLA for nearly 30 years and we know it intimately. For our D, UCLA vs. Smith would have been a no-brainer in Smith’s direction but D didn’t even apply to the UC’s as none really met her criteria as they evolved though Irvine was almost her safety even though it violated my informal “no school within 200 miles of home” rule, which UCLA would have violated by 196 miles or so.</p>
<p>All the geographical underbrush aside, qualitatively for a undergrad education for most students in most majors, I think Smith wins hands down. Class size, undergrad research opportunities, the living arrangements, relationships with professors, and multiple levels of counseling (at Smith) all push in Smith’s direction. </p>
<p>It’s a fact that TheMom and I were biasd in favor of large research universities and that when we finally “got” the LAC picture we were blown away. (Fwiw, there was a survey that showed large numbers of Ivy League profs sent their offspring to LAC’s…that was an interesting datum.)</p>
<p>A seemingly small thing but worth noting is that UCLA is one the quarter system, which is both unforgiving and short, the latter being a consideration for things like internships and “abroad” programs.</p>
<p>Miandou, I think as a large LAC, D found Smith large enough that it wasn’t socially claustrophobic, a concern I’d have with an LAC with an enrollment in the 900-1400 range.</p>
<p>Make no mistake, UCLA is a great university; I just came from an event there and I’m proud to be associated with it even by marriage. But the qualitative experience at Smith is terrific.</p>
<p>====</p>
<p>Cygne, one of the early things on our radar about Smith was the account of a then-current Smith student who also took classes at Amherst. In her opinion, the Smith students were a lot more independent and assertive than their counterparts down the road, more content to let the guys dominate in the classroom. Just a data point.</p>
<p>Thanks, TheDad; I seem to remember reading that observation somewhere. (I’ve read quite a lot off the Smith forum.) I’ll be interested to see if I notice any of that when I visit both schools this coming week. I tend to be pretty outspoken in class anyway, so I don’t think that I’ll have much of a problem. Actually, I tend to intimidate a lot of my peers because of that. I can’t wait to go to school with a bunch of really engaged students!</p>
<p>My d. was recruited at Williams (and accepted), but chose Smith over it. She visited Amherst as well, but after kicking the tires, just didn’t apply. Smith just had more…everything! (except Y chromosomes). Better housing, more varied dining choices, more language opportunites, much bigger music and art departments, better town, better advising, more active class participation, more diversity, (oh, and yes, this was a factor, much less weekend drinking.) Now I happen to think Amherst is a great place, and I love their President Anthony Marks. But, after four years of watching her experience (she graduated last year, and is now a graduate student at Princeton), I honestly believe Smith is the better school.</p>
<p>Thank you, Uncle Dad, and mini.</p>
<p>Financially, since I havn’t applied for FA as intl’s, my dad will have to pay quite a big money for me compared with going to McGill. I wish UCLA/Smith will be worthwhile…
Smith will be more expensive than LA and I guess that’s the normal difference in State when you choose a private school rather than a public university…</p>
<p>Any idead about the job placement after Smith?</p>
<p>Smith has a great Career Development Office (CDO). It’s a lifetime resource, so you can keep coming back and using it even if you’re 55 and want to change jobs. </p>
<p>They offer recruitment events there from the best grad schools and companies, they also do resume and interview skills counseling and they even rent suits to students for job interviews. </p>
<p>Also, they do a lot of out of office work to prepare you. They connect you to the alumnae network and help you find internships, they can give you advice about where and how to market yourself so you get the job, they’re really just great. </p>
<p>Plus, at a smaller school like Smith, you get a lot more personal attention from the career office and from the alumnae network. You don’t have to compete against as many people for every internship or high-level contact, and you don’t have to worry about being just an anonymous face in the office. </p>
<p>Sorry, I know I sound like a cheerleader, but I really like the CDO.</p>
<p>Another positive review for the CDO. </p>
<p>D’s path to the job she took upon graduation started with a recommendation from the local coordinator of Smith’s Picker Program in Washington D.C. D applied for an internship for the summer between her junior and senior years and didn’t get it but was the runner up…the successful candidate could start two months earlier and stay a month later. But the organization was impressed with her and invited her to apply for a regular job in the fall. She did and she got it. To get some idea, she was just part of the team reviewing applications for internships for this summer. They had 500+ applications for 10 spots, said spots not being interchangeable, i.e., they were looking for different combinations of skills and experience for each slot. The point being that her Smith connection set her on the way to getting a very good first job where even internships are highly prized.</p>
<p>…I feel my balance inclines to Smith now…it gonna be a first serious choice in my life. Thank you all for the information / opinions shared. any cons?</p>
<p>Smith is smaller than UCLA or McGill, and more expensive. There’s a lot MORE of everything (reserach studies, equipment, though again a lot of that is reserved for grad students). UCLA is obviously a bigger city than Northampton, McGill will be a lower cost of living because you’ll be paying Canadian dollars for everything (though Northampton will also be a lower cost of living than UCLA).</p>
<p>Possibly the single-sex environment, if you don’t think you’d be happy with it. The “feel” will definitely different from a coed school.</p>
<p>One of D’s friends at Smith put it this way: the advantage of the single-sex school is that the guys are out of your hair when you don’t want to deal with them.</p>
<p>Finding guys for extended relationships is certainly more of an effort at Smith…I think that’s been discussed elsewhere. The lack of guys leads to less social drama…or at least a different mix of drama.</p>
<p>My D said it’s like an extended sleepover party, but with academics. Someone once asked her if they had sororities at Smith. My D laughed and said, “What would be the point?”</p>
<p>But it is a definite issue. The single-gender aspect is both Smith’s greatest strength and its greatest weakness.</p>