<p>That's one thing you can say about Swatties, we leave our garbage where we find it.</p>
<p>"I think I've read about that same Haverford tour guide at least a half-dozen times on the CC boards."</p>
<p>hahaha, I know, poor guy</p>
<p>"I think I've read about that same Haverford tour guide at least a half-dozen times on the CC boards."</p>
<p>Are we sure it's not a bunch of different tour guides? I met up with a tour in progress when I visited Haverford, because the Swarthmore shuttle left me at the wrong end of campus. So I got the last half of one tour and the first half of a later one. Both my tourguides talked about the Honor Code pretty much nonstop, and it definitely turned me off to the school.</p>
<p>I had a terribler Haverford guide. She didn't pick up garbage, but she did seem pretty disinterested in the school.
I also hated Wesleyan. Had a terrible guide there too. But also thought it was ugly and too overwhelming.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Both my tourguides talked about the Honor Code pretty much nonstop, and it definitely turned me off to the school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Getting beat over the head with the honor code by the tour guide was enough for my daughter to rule out Haverford as well.</p>
<p>Maybe Haverford should rethink its sales pitch.</p>
<p>That's the difference between Haverford and Swarthmore, Swarthmore students are evolved to the point that we live by the higher ideals of civilization whereas Haverford needs to have the Honor Code drummed into them early on to avoid wanton destruction and pillaging throughout their campus. I think that it is great that Swarthmore is so close to Haverford so that the Haverford administration has a positive example for their students to emulate.</p>
<p>While some tour guides “oversell”, if you ask applicants genuinely interested in HC, the emphasis on the code may not be viewed as so extreme. What seems to be bubbling through some of these posts, however, is the belief that personal opinions are the reference point for normal and that if you don’t like a particular college, it’s somehow their loss or their problem rather than simply about fit. This is ironic because Swat cherishes its reputation for being “intellectual” and “analytical”… and falling into a kind of ethnocentrism is neither. </p>
<p>It’s also interesting to see that the same people who champion that an education is not a popularity contest, who write # reasoned essays on the merits of a boutique LAC experience over traditional Ivy choices, who state that colleges (like applicants) have unique personalities, seem to then forget their words and judge other LACs as misguided if they don’t conform and market themselves for mass appeal. Since when is any LAC for mainstream appeal?</p>
<p>As one example, if HC’s Bio dept wanted to be mainstream, it would follow other LACs like Swat and teach a potpourri of general bio. Instead, it concentrates its efforts towards biomedical and nanotech research and subsequently offers the most thorough undergrad experience for this for the last 50 years (ie. only HC and Williams teach immunology and how to make monoclonal antibodies (a basic in this field)). Sure, it probably turns off many kids who want to study animals or environmental bio (all to be had at BMC), but for those kids interested in this area, there’s no better place. Same thing with HC’s code and the unique academic and social environment it fosters.</p>
<p>If you know anything about Swat (I was accepted, brother and college GF went there) you will realize how funny the last post is. My impression is that Swat doesn’t believe in an honor code, not because they “don’t need it”, but simply because, as a campus, they don’t care to formally deal with such things as “trust”, “respect” and “community” (which can be frustrating) and their energies are considered better spent elsewhere. “Not needing” and “believing you don’t need” aren’t the same and confusing the former for the latter is a presumptuous mistake to make as it often doesn’t reflect reality.</p>
<p>Each college has its own personality and attracts students that reflect that. In the case of Swat, it’s intellectual, opinionated, “quirky” (which ranges from exciting creativity to socially disturbed) and occasionally pretentious, and, as nicely illustrated by several posts, sometimes bitter, sarcastic and delusional as well. Let me see, my brother told me once of a Wharton hall mate who liked to sleep naked and this “weirded” out his roommate… so, instead of a civil discussion, the roommate just invited the whole hall into the room one afternoon nap without warning, or, the time when I was at a party in ML and the joke was that some kid left his camera in the bathroom so these students took advantage of that by taking serial pictures of hairbrushes being swished in the toilet and then placed back on the shelf for a good laugh, ect… As parents, you probably don’t hear about such things. Clearly, these are anecdotes but there seems to be a higher % of the emotionally immature at Swat than elsewhere. Unfortunately, while many socially adept kids who enter Swat leave with great opportunities at life, the many few who are arrogant, dismissive and who can’t hold a decent conversation unless it’s about academics, intellectual masturbation or complaining, remain socially stunted and wind up disastrously unprepared for the real world (especially outside of academics) where book smarts and quirkiness are not as highly valued as wisdom, maturity and social skills.</p>
<p>I'm applying to Swarthmore and didn't visit Haverford, but I think what turns me off about the honor code isn't what it stands for, which I think we all agree with at least to some extent, but the idea that you would need such emphasis on something that to me seems to be mostly common sense (behaving civilly and responsibly towards one another, as far as I can tell). Do I have the wrong idea? Is there more to it than that?
So does that mean that Bryn Mawr's biology department mostly deals with environmental studies and animals? That worries me. I'm applying to BMC, but I'm a biochem/neuroscience kind of girl, and one of the reasons I'm not sure that majoring in bio would be right for me is that I want to avoid ecology and the like. I realize that this is way off-topic and that you probably don't have that much experience with Bryn Mawr's department (or Swarthmore's, for that matter), but any information would be much appreciated.</p>
<p>HCAlum:</p>
<p>The issue is not really what Haveford is all about, but rather that the tours are turning off prospective applicants before they even bother to learn about the school.</p>
<p>I wanted my daughter to consider Haverford for her list because, frankly, Swat looked like a reach at the time she first visited. She would not even consider Haverford after the tour...for reasons that later included feeling like she was beat over the head with the Honor Code.</p>
<p>ID… thanks for your response.</p>
<p>flower girl: As most people here don’t want to hear about an honor code, I’m not going to take up more Swat real estate discussing it other than to address your question. If you’re familiar with the medical profession, the HC honor code is like the Hippocratic Oath or the Code of Maimonides. I don’t know of any physicians that “have to check” these oaths to make sure they’re good doctors… but they’re nice to have as it describes the standards of your community or profession. In addition, “can honor be codified” has been debated at HC for the last 100 years and I don’t believe that there is much a non-HC person can say to a HC grad regarding such issues that has not already been discussed including whether it is needed at all. </p>
<p>I am actually very familiar with bio at all 3 schools as my sister went to BMC and brother to Swat and the difference in bio departments between SC and HC was a reason why I chose the latter (others being honor code, Bi-co resources and better pre-med record at top med schools… in fairness, Swat has a better record sending kids to top law schools, is more “activist”, has a better dining center, has a bell tower and its performing arts are astounding). When deciding on LACs, after campus fit and geography, the next thing you should investigate are your fields of interest (the department web pages). If you major in biochem at BMC, you should try to take as many courses at HC because the offerings are more rigorous… at least according to some BMC friends who were “shocked” by the pace of the senior seminars we took together. Neurobiology is a bi-college concentration and you’ll be taking a few classes at HC.</p>
<p>I actually sort of liked the idea of the Haverford honor code. If anything, I was dissappointed when I actually read a copy (which was considered such a strange request from an applicant that it actually took the admissions department quite a while to figure out where I could get one) and found out that in the last few years its been stripped of most of its actual substance and specificity. Now, it's a string of platitudes- "be honest," "respect others," etc. I mean, that's not so much a code. Everyone knows you should strive for those things, the whole point of the honor code is supposed to be to help you get there.</p>
<p>However, even though I appreciated the idea of the honor code, my tour guide still completely over-sold it. He made it sound like it was the only important thing about Haverford, and like every school without an honor code is innately less worthy. I'm not saying this is really a problem with the school, but from this experience combined with the stories from other tours I think its at least some bad PR.</p>
<p>I would have been happy to go to a college with an honor code, but was less happy about the idea of attending what seemed like almost an "honor institution" first and a college second. I agree with "fit" to the extent that if you can't stand the idea of an honor code, you shouldn't go there. Still, I felt that the school wasn't very welcoming to people who just don't want their entire life to revolve around the honor code.</p>
<p>HCAlum,
Since you seem to be a mature adult who has thoughtfully commented elsewhere on this board, I assume you realize that Duhvinci likes to "stir things up" on the Swarthmore board. IMHO, he doesn't represent Swat's best foot forward by making some of the statements he has made.. On the other hand, I was surprised to see you "stooping" to his level- "there seems to be a higher % of the emotionally immature at Swat than elsewhere." :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
better pre-med record at top med schools
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would love to know where you found meaningful data for that (i.e. over a sufficiently long period of time to avoid year to year fluctuations). </p>
<p>Here is a chart of where Swat grads from the Classes of 1997 to 2001 have received advanced degrees:</p>
<p>M.D. degrees have come from:</p>
<p>Albert Einstein
American University
Baylor
SUNY Brooklyn
Case Western
Columbia University
Cornell
Dartmouth
Drexel
Duke
Emory
George Washington
Georgetown
Harvard
Loyola
Michigan State
Mt. Sinai
New York Med. College
NYU
Ohio State
Penn State
SUNY Stoney Brook
Thomas Jefferson
Tufts
Tulane
UC Davis
UCLA
UC San Diego
UC San Francisco
U Colorado
U Illinois
U Iowa
U Michigan
U New Mexico
UNC-Chapel Hill
U Penn
U Pittsburgh
U Rochester
U Texas - Dallas
U Virginia
Vanderbilt
WUSTL
Yale</p>
<p>
[quote]
As parents, you probably don’t hear about such things.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As parents, we probably went to college, too. I feel quite confident in stating that Swarthmore doesn't have the exclusive franchise on stupid college behavior!</p>
<p>I also feel quite confident that the presence or absence of an "Honor Code" has little or no correlation with stupid college behavior. In fact, I dare say that Haverford has probably had an incident of stupid college behavior once or twice during its history.</p>
<p>If one thinks there is a higher percentage of the emotionally immature at Swarthmore, I present to you the denizens of an institution that has to rely upon a bag of pithy little dilbert maxims such as "don't cheat,""don't steal," and "be nice," to govern their everyday existence. Apparently the elders at a neighboring institution has so little faith in their collective student body that they have to cast over them this ridiculous set of guidelines on how they should behave in civilized society. Swarthmore students already know how to behave in society and don't require an artificial code to live by. Thankfully, all the specs who are turned off by the constant tribal drum of the honor code are strong enough to have forsaken the kool aid. Btw, I don't see anything wrong with being emotionally immature, where do you think we are? We're in college, if not here, then where and when? Back to school in two days. Need to wash my toothbrush and hairbrush in the school toilets, for some reason, my mom won't let me do this at home.</p>
<p>BTW, Peindre, along with Carleton, have you thought about looking into Haverford? You don't need any "fun" money to visit, in fact, it seems from this board that a visit may actually be discouraged.</p>
<p>Clearly, I’m testing my time management skills here.</p>
<p>1) JPP: Nice response. I have to forward it to the admissions director when I get a chance.</p>
<p>2) Momx3: I’m sorry if you took it that way… please note that I also said that many Swat students have fine social skills and it’s a small but noticeable contingent of the latter. Please don’t take it out of context. That’s my impression and that of # people I know from Swat… from my brother to friends that I met on Capitol Hill, at the Mayor’s Office of NYC and during residency who all said the same thing. Personally, I always thought it was a truism and the running joke at Swat. </p>
<p>I think we agree that one aspect of Swat that’s different from, say, Williams, Amherst, Bowdoin, Middlebury and Haverford is that it’s a little more quirky and eccentric. Actually, it kind of celebrates that and as I said before, “quirky” can range from “WOW!!” to “w-w-w-o-o-o-w”. All schools have their strong suite and also their underbellies as well and, like many things, what makes a college strong and unique can also be a problem as well… size of LACs, single-sex education, athletics at Williams, honor code at Haverford… and I believe many of Swat’s strongest attributes are also (if not checked) weak points as well. Swat doesn’t seem to have an athletic culture that, although there’re issues with this, can also promote more mainstream activities and interactions between students. Swat also isn’t in the Midwest like Carleton, Oberlin or Grinnell or have as strong a Quaker vibe as Haverford and, as a result, isn’t as gentle of a place. In addition, “Anywhere else it would have been an A”, promotes a culture of condescension towards others. As a result, Swat doesn’t have as many moderating influences on kids who may come in with interpersonal skills on the “fringe” or egos larger than the endowment. Without such tempering, such kids don’t have as many opportunities to frame their conduct and also they seem to attract similar types.</p>
<p>3) Yes. Haverford does seem to have a better record of sending kids to more and the best medical schools. 1st, med schools, unlike law schools, don’t publish undergrad rosters cause it’s not in the culture of med schools to care about such things so if you want a list, that will not happen. However, I believe I’m a reliable person and, ID, as you’ve seen from some of my posts before, I seem to be a reasoned individual who can appreciate the meaning of numbers.</p>
<p>During my 4 years in med school when my friends and I visited each other at the top programs in Boston, NYC, Philly and Baltimore, yes, HC seemed to consistently send double and occasionally triple the number of grads to these schools compared to Swat each year, which was surprising to some. Now, I can’t vouch for this but some random non-HC person wrote the following, which reflects my experience… I’m surprised that I wasted my time actually looking it up but it gives you an idea of HC’s prowess with med admissions…</p>
<p>JHU's 2004-2005 med school class had 6 Haverford grads, 3 Bryn Mawr grads, and 3 Amherst grads, which compare favorably to the 5 Northwestern grads, 7 Dartmouth grads, 11 WUStL grads, and 13 Columbia grads.</p>
<p>Let’s assume this is true. The simplistic answer that I will not support is that it’s just because HC is better at sending kids to med school… please note I said HC “has a better record”, not that it’s “just better” at doing this. There’s a difference. The reasons are multi-factorial and include…</p>
<p>a) Most importantly, the many smart kids from Swat who can get into these med schools probably choose to do other things like get a PhD, MBA, JD…</p>
<p>b) Given HC’s emphasis in biomedical research, it seems to attract top kids interested in a medical career. By contrast, Swat’s bio is split with ecological and organism based bio so it’s less health related. Also, HC has a “Medicine and Society” concentration and a well known bio-ethicist on its faculty. Yes, Yes, I’m also aware that you don’t have to be a science major to go to med school as my friends who were music and history majors are now ophtho and ortho residents.</p>
<p>c) HC’s pre-med advisor is an academic physician from Penn as well as the daughter of the former head of the JHU Dept of Medicine. The former pre-med advisor was also an MD and, when the time comes, the next one will probably be as well. By contrast, Swat’s pre-med advisor before and as now is a PhD and has no clinical training. In addition, she also seems to counsel for pre-law too. The type of knowledge a pre-med advisor (who’s actually in the trenches and is friends/family with academic MDs) can give students is much different than someone with no such background. In addition, given the HC advisor’s contacts, she, in my experience, doesn’t hesitate to call and speak directly to the admissions heads of any med school (she’s 1st name basis with many) to push for students… a pre-med advisor who just got her PhD within the last 5 years does not have that kind of access or moxie. For example, my friend had a bad cold during her interview at HMS and, after this was debriefed, the pre-med advisor called up the head of admissions to intervene... either way, my friend was golden and was accepted. During my interviews, # admissions heads stopped me to ask “How is Dr. Wheeler doing?”. Please note that most top colleges and universities have PhDs as pre-med advisors so it's not like Swat is doing something different to hurt chances… it’s just not HC in this respect.</p>
<p>d) Swat’s “quirkiness”, “intellectuality” and “political activism” if not tempered aren’t attractive to med schools. This relates to my earlier response. If an interviewer doesn’t think that an applicant can relate to a patient, would make a patient feel uncomfortable, or may not fit with “medical culture” (which is a bit conservative and subdued), they will not be accepted. Again, plenty of kids at Swat with normal social skills and who know how to sell themselves but, like I said before, it’s not a school that necessarily encourages moderation and, if students don’t watch themselves, behavior and words that are considered appropriate at Swat will quickly turn off the majority of people in America who do not go to “quirky and intellectually intense” LACs.</p>
<p>4) Finally, considering I spent approx 20 minutes writing the initial response on one try, which is otherwise quite well written and thoughtful IMO, a slip here and there is expected. Please don’t pick it to death. I imagine similar people with the same time constraints would also write parts that may be better worded. Now, although this has been fun, got to seriously go…</p>
<p>Wait a minute, HC Alum. Am I reading this correctly? You are basing your conclusion that Haverford has more success at top med schools on your observation of more Haverford grads at John Hopkins, where the part-time med-advisor has specific ties?</p>
<p>Don't you think we'd need a little broader universe of top medical schools to make that kind of conclusion? For example, if I'm a California resident and get in-state tuition at one of the UC med schools compared to full-fare at a private med school, I might very well consider a UC med school "top". BTW, I think this whole attempt to compare med school admissions between top LACs is an exercise in total futility. It is my experience that a good applicant from ANY top LAC has extraordinarily strong prospects for good med school admisssions. I would say that is true of Swat, Williams, Amherst, Pomona, Haverford, Smith, Davidson, Carleton, Grinnell, Pomona, and so on and so forth across the board. When more than 1 out of every 10 members of a typical graduating class is accepted into med school, it's very difficult to suggest that there is any significant impediment. Any differences in med school admissions rates among any of these schools are irrelevant, especially looking at it from the viewpoint of a high school senior who has no clue what kind of applicant he or she might be four, five, or six years down the road.</p>
<p>I would also question your conclusion that Swarthmore doesn't have an athletic culture. In many ways, it may devote more resources to athletics than Haverford. 20% to 22% of Swat's students play on a varsity athletic team. Swat even has basic athletic facilities like a swimming pool that Haverford does not. I don't think anyone would accuse Haverford or Swarthmore of being "jock schools". After all, neither even has a football program. But, I think it misrepresents Swarthmore to suggest that there is not a sizeable contingent of athletes. Actually the percentages of varsity athletes are pretty typical for LACs around the country.</p>
<p>No.</p>
<p>I said “better record” which, to me is different than “more success” which implies certain things… like higher acceptance rates (who knows), more capable students for medicine (probably not true), better advising (very true), ect. Better record is simply “more numbers” and, like I said, a lot of that has to do with the fact that bio is bio-med at HC and that kids from Swat may choose to do other things. Didn’t I make that point #1 and #2? Clearly, good students from Swat who want to be pre-med will be competitive (who said they weren’t ??) but just that the advising and advocacy for them is not as strong as Haverford’s and they just have to appreciate that what is tolerated at Swat (quirkiness, “intellectual self-congratulation” and “issues and activism”) are not “normal” in the real world (even among Ivy and other LAC grads) and some kids (as everywhere) fail to transition from college to life effectively. In Swat’s case, given that its frame of reference is not as main stream as other colleges, such poor adaptations are more glaring for some Swat grads with personalities on the “fringe”, especially in the more conservative and subdued culture of medicine.</p>
<p>JH is the only example I could find on this silly site. I don’t have my and my friend’s face books from HMS, Columbia, Cornell, Sinai, and Penn, ect. with me but yes, over those 4 years that we visited each other, HC had more grads at each of those schools than Swat and occasionally many more… and, as can be seen from that post, still seems to be just as good if not better than before. There are advantages with having a pre-med advisor who is on a 1st name basis with admissions’ heads at many schools, whose wellbeing is inquired by those decision-makers, and who also has an MD behind her name. There’s no argument here.</p>
<p>Please note that in my reply to camellia girl and elsewhere, </p>
<p>I have always stated that applicants should look at 1) fit 2) geography 3) academic/professional offerings in that order when discussing top LACs. If someone feels smothered with Haverford, they should not go there just because the pre-med is stellar as, if they’re not happy, they won’t do well. No offense, but who is it that seems to promote kids looking at PhD rankings and whether a college has a sushi bar or not if it fits their argument? </p>
<p>I wasn’t talking about % of athletes or amount of $ spent on athletic resources. Again, when did I write such things? I was talking about culture and that Swat has less of an athletic and mainstream one than many schools, which has its +/- as I outlined. Seriously, considering this is pretty obvious and you yourself have stated time and time again that Swat is not as “mainstream or preppy” as all the schools I listed, that it’s more “quirky and geeky”, I must inquire why you seem to be picking at this now… after I point out that “quirky and geeky” has its detriments as well.</p>
<p>HC Alum, Bravo!</p>