<p>well, i can't decided which to apply ED to. Applying ED to Smith means the huge financial aid disadvantage, and I especially need that. Do you think the only way I'll be able to decide is visiting?</p>
<p>Applying ED to <em>any</em> school is risky when it comes to financial aid. That's the stated reason why both Harvard and Princeton did away with ED (plus, it gives them a chance to see the entire pool.)</p>
<p>If you apply ED anywhere, you should really visit beforehand since you will be committed to attend. What happens if you visit after your acceptance and find that it isn't right for you? As my d learned: on paper, a school might look great, but in person it isn't always so.</p>
<p>CP...fwiw, at one point if my D had applied ED anywhere, it would have been to Columbia, which was her #1 on paper. Until she visited. At which point, she didn't even bother applying, though she did apply to Yale EA instead. </p>
<p>Applying ED anywhere not only has risks re relative finaid packages but also about the applicant locking in a choice with less complete information.
Personally, I would feel okay about a student applying ED <em>only</em> if money was not a problem AND if he/she was <em>absolutely</em> sure that the college in question was the best fit for them.</p>
<p>Applying ED to try to lock in a prestige acceptance or something is probably one of the worst reasons for doing so.</p>
<p>I want to add that often a high schooler's priorities change over the course of a year. What my D wanted in the fall was not the same as what she wanted in the spring.</p>
<p>Yes. Criteria evolve, morph, etc. It's an intense process and I have a great deal of sympathy for those going through it.</p>
<p>As the mother of a Barnard student I am responding to one poster's cavalier dismissal of Barnard (and Mt. Holyoke and Bryn Mawr for that matter.) While it's true these schools outrank Barnard in USNWR, the methodology they use discounts all the facilities of Columbia which are part of any Barnard education. In terms of stats Wellesley's SATs are higher, but Barnard's GPA is higher. Both are higher than Smith's (but why quibble?) Barnard is now thhe most selective women's college in the country which dooesn't make it the best, but certainly makes it the equal of Smith and Wellesley. Although the average Barnard student takes 30% of her courses at Columbia, I don't think she feels that Barnard classes suffer by comparison. The average Barnardvstudent is also proud of the feminist tradition of her college. These are all wonderful institutions.</p>
<p>I agree with mythmom - i actually don't think it behooves any of us intereested in supporting women's colleges to decide which is "better" - EACH is "better" in some statistical way (USNWR, PHD acceptances, consortium choices, proximity to cities, famous alum) but all have MUCH MORE IN COMMON. We should support all these schools and encourage each student to check out each one individually. </p>
<p>I write this as a parent of a BMC student, and my son's girlfriend attends Barnard. Both are great places. I think also once the kids graduate, there is very much a feeling of sisterhood amongst womens college grads - my daughter recently found out a friends mom went to MHC and they had much to discuss, and the MHC alum was very helpful to her in exploring opportunities in her field. :)</p>
<p>Agreed, plum and mythmom. But the person who started this thread was interested in the rivalry between Wellesley and Smith, and so the discussion has centered around those two. </p>
<p>Naturally, everyone is going to have a favorite. That doesn't mean that they aren't all wonderful schools, with different strengths and weaknesses. (BTW, as you probably know, I <em>really</em> like Bryn Mawr. I don't know much about Barnard except by reputation.)</p>