Swarthmore vs. Middlebury in general

<p>^^nngmm, you beat me to it! (I have been out most of the day.) A.E., my kid ('07 graduate) was one of the ones who only went into Philadelphia infrequently for an occasional concert or to meet up with a friend from Penn. He had more than enough to do on campus to keep him occupied. I guess you could say he enjoyed the "bubble" for that part of his life.</p>

<p>AE's last post reminded me of a piece of journalism I had to read in class about Beijing- A City on Fire I think it was titled...I'm kicking myself for recycling it. Anyway, the author expressed the same sentiment: that booming megalopolises (megalopoli?), quite counterintuitively, can actually exacerbate someone's feeling of isolation. Darn, darn, darn, I wish I could quote it, it was beautifully written. Oh well.</p>

<p>Shameless plug: Middlebury '11!</p>

<p>

I will leave it to the readers here to judge whether it is some sort of conspiracy; that's not something I've said or even implied, and for you to suggest so looks an awful lot like a strawman. I'm just letting people know that the Swarthmore administration does provide many incentives to students to stay on campus an overwhelming majority of the time, and that it further puts up roadblocks to having an easy go of getting off campus and around the local area (via stringent parking restrictions, for example).</p>

<p>

This is an interesting point and, while not completely apposite to the discussion, it does go to highlight that proximity to a bigger city is not tantamount to less isolation, which is the faulty premise upon which the entire argument for students at Middlebury being more isolated than those at Swarthmore is based. There are a number of factors involved, many of which I've tried to bring to light in the case of comparing relative isolation that students experience at Swarthmore and Middlebury, and how the isolation at one school is not really any greater or less than that at the other.</p>

<p>^ So: if one will not have a car on either campus, Midd is more isolated than Swat.</p>

<p>EDIT: Ack, didn't mean to revive a dead thread. Alas.</p>

<p>I have been to both campuses and as an innocent by-stander (don't have a kid at either) I think isolation is different at the two campuses.</p>

<p>Middlebury, while more effectively isolated, has the feeling of being open to the town.</p>

<p>Swat feels more like a medieval castle -- it is the town. (Yes, I agree with interesteddad that it is more accessible to other places.)</p>

<p>This comes down to a preference in the "feel" of a place.</p>

<p>Both are awesome schools and all students could get a wonderful education at each; most students could fit in at both, although there are some who are obviously more suited to one than other.</p>

<p>I found both extremely appealing, not that my opinion is that significant. Just making an observation.</p>

<p>mythmom, I'm with you. I've visited both campuses twice--they both have their good points--and in the end, it shouldn't be a question of which school has better off-campus activities, it should be all about what the individual student wants and will take advantage of. </p>

<p>Personally, I'd love to go to either one. :)</p>

<p>I go to high school and live in the Wallingford-Swarthmore area, and I can tell you there are more high school students on Swat's campus than Swat kids lol. they are pretty isolated</p>

<p>It is a nice campus though</p>

<p>Razor--how does the number of HS students at Swarthmore have anything to do with the isolation of the campus?</p>