The Seven (now five) Sisters -- question

Parents Forum
61

<p>"Beyond the Hitler Channel" was a presentation given by a Smith prof at a conference held at Bucknell. The courses that professor teaches at Smith include "High Intermediate German," "Advanced Topics in German Studies," and "Elementary German." If we're going to judge a school based on the titles of presentations its faculty gives at conferences, well, this prof's going to have a lot of competition for the weirdest.</p>

<p>As for "what's in a recipe," I've definitely never heard of such a thing being offered at Smith. Perhaps the poster is thinking of the fact that the college offers student-taught (non-credit-bearing) courses each Interterm, some of which focus on cooking (others on auto repair, bridge, billiards, the prison-industrial complex, gumboot dancing, and electron microscopy, among other things)?</p>

62

<p>
[quote]
That's my point. Then you have no way of knowing if the women's colleges manipulated the ratings/reviews or not, or how accurate the assessment.</p>

<p>Peer reviews are done by those that, for all intensive purposes, have more than passing knowledge of their competitors credentials, professors qualifications and publish works, and the type of graduates they produce.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Erewhon, since there are pages and pages of discussions on CC about the peer assessment, the admitted manipulations by the same people you refer to, the recent "revolt" that led dozens and dozens of "peers" to refusing to participate in the peer assessment survey of USNews, I'll respectfully stop repeating the same argument. I would, however, suggest letting google point you in the right direction. </p>

<p>This said, feel free to disagree with my position. None of what we discuss herein will ever change the impact of rigged rankings.</p>

63

<p>Xiggi, Do you think the rankings for PhD rates I posted were rigged? You didn't mention the Bryn Mawr phenomenon I brought up.</p>

64

<p>total digression for a minute-- the correct term (phrase) is "for all intents and purposes" not "for all intensive purposes" . Must have picked that up during my seven sisters education :)</p>

65

<p>What I was asking was not if Smith had the weirdest titles, but I didn't understand trying to make a topic sound " Cute"</p>

<p>I found the course titles by looking up the online course catalog for fall 2008</p>

<p>
[quote]
First Year Seminars 156: Beyond the Hitler Channel: Fantasies of German-Ness in American Popular Culture
Fall 2008
Day/Time: not available
Credits: 4</p>

<p>This seminar will explore the evolution and construction of “German-ness”, or those characteristics associated in the American mind with German ethnicity and culture, in the American popular media since World War II. Participants will examine this evolution in a variety of media, including motifs from films (The Great Lebowski, The Producers, Dr. Strangelove, Marathon Man, Indiana Jones and others), television series (The Simpsons, Frasier, South Park, The X-files, SNL and others), the print media, and advertising industry, and will conduct their own original research into the creation and uses of “German-ness” in the 21st century. Counts toward German Studies major. </p>

<p>First Year Seminars 159: What's in a Recipe?</p>

<p>Fall 2008
Day/Time: not available
Credits: 4
{L}{WI}</p>

<p>What stories do recipes tell? What cultural and familial information is embedded in a recipe? Who wrote the recipe? Why? How does it reflect her (or his) life and times? What do we learn about the geography, history and political economy of a location through recipes? Are recipes a way for an underrepresented group to tell its story? Does a recipe bolster or undermine national cooking? This seminar will look at recipes and cookbooks from the Spanish-speaking world (in English) and theories of recipes from a variety of different sources. Our reading will inform our writing as we try to establish such connections as the politics of chocolate, olive oil cooperatives, avocado farms, the traveling tomato, potatoes, and the cultural milieu from which each recipe emerged. Knowledge of Spanish is useful but not required..

[/quote]
</p>

<p>They both sound interesting- but more like a community interest course- not something I would be paying thousands of dollars for.</p>

66

<p>What is wrong with a clever course title? We had a children's literature course called Kiddy Lit (get it-- Kitty litter.. haha. Ugh, I know..) and then there is always the geology class known as "rocks for jocks" (doubt it is the real title). If a faculty member can attract a student with a cleverly titled couse, I give them credit. More power to them.</p>

67

<p>emeraldkity4, those are first-year seminars. Here's what Smith has to say about them:</p>

<p>"These courses, some of which are team-taught, are designed to introduce new students to the excitement of intellectual discovery in a college environment. Each seminar focuses on a particular research interest of a Smith faculty member(s). The first-year seminars provide a solid academic foundation for a Smith education, including a focus on the development of writing, public speaking, critical thinking, class discussion, group work, library and quantitative skills. Most of the first-year seminars also satisfy the college's first-year writing intensive requirement."</p>

<p>It's commonly known on campus that the FYS are a little on the off-beat side and that most of the other courses aren't quite so "weird." Regardless, they're as academic as other courses and despite the quirky names, they're really great courses for some first-years. Not everyone came from a rigorous high school, and these classes help in the transition to college-level work.</p>

68

<p>Both of those are first-year "intensive writing" seminars - not required - but in which students write a paper per week or so, and have them intensively critiqued in multiple drafts by senior faculty. </p>

<p>(My d. took the "The Artist and the Courtesan: Representations of Women in 19th Century Opera", taught by one of the college's most famous (and feared) senior music professors - it ended up as a total of three students, and she worked her butt off.)</p>

69

<p>Citrusbelt, I don't think those rankings are "rigged" per se, but I don't think that they're particularly meaningful, either. It's a listing of the percentage of graduates in various disciplines who went on to get PhDs. As such, it's skewed towards small colleges which are focused away from career-oriented students. Future doctors, lawyers, etc. bring down the average. Great PR move from Reed's point of view (although the one Reed graduate I know from way back is an MD/JD.) I view it as a kind of GIGO stat. (And I'm unclear how UCSF got in there - it's a medical school. I don't think they even have an undergraduate program.)</p>

70

<p>I also think it is a poor stat. It is also focused away from low-income students, many of whom feel they have to go out immediately to work to support their families (regardless of their academic success), and from minority students, who, even when well-qualified, have not traditionally looked toward academia as a rewarding career. </p>

<p>(The only stat that would really matter is how many of those students who WANT such a career are able to attain it?)</p>

71

<p>(Ph.D. rankings also discriminate against future engineers and social workers, for whom a masters degree is the terminal "working" degree.)</p>

72

<p>PhD rates are to be discounted altogether then? I doubt that. I thought UC San Francisco was a weird one to have on there, too, by the way. Maybe they meant just "UC"? Usually PhD rates are somewhat predictive of graduate school placement possibilities, are they not? </p>

<p>So, if grad school placements and acceptances aren't predictive, how about med school placements? That is certainly preprofessional. I think you'll find that the little women's schools do pretty darned well in med school placements (as do most LACs).</p>

73

<p>Barnard, for instance, did turn out many PhD's but I think the focus has moved more to writers and the arts. Barnard turns out a remarkable crop of Pulitzer Prize winners, actors and theater folk. Its alums have also earned more MacArthur Genius Grants than any other LAC. Does that make it better? Not in my book, but a different yard stick than PhD production and just as valid.</p>

74

<p>Here is another twist on rankings:

[quote]
Our rankings measure academic quality and affordability, with quality accounting for two-thirds of the total. We started with data on more than 1,000 private institutions provided by Peterson's, then added our own reporting. Our list ranks the top 50 universities and liberal arts colleges in separate tables. To determine each category, we used the Carnegie classification system, which organizes institutions based on the highest level and number of degrees offered. </p>

<p>Admission rate is the percentage of applicants offered admission. SAT or ACT shows the percentage of the 2006-07 freshman class who scored 600 or higher on the verbal and math components of the SAT, or 24 or higher on the ACT. Student/faculty ratio is the average number of students per instructor. Graduation rate is the percentage of freshmen who earned a bachelor's degree within four years or within five years. </p>

<p>Total cost for academic year 2007-08 includes tuition, mandatory fees, room and board, and estimated expenses for books. Cost after need-based aid is the 2007-08 total cost minus the average need-based aid amount (excluding loans). Aid from grants is the percentage of the average aid package that came from grants or scholarships. Cost after non-need-based aid is the 2007-08 cost for a student with no demonstrated need after subtracting the average non-need-based aid amount (excluding loans). Non-need-based aid is the percentage of all undergraduates without need who received non-need-based aid. Average debt at graduation is the average amount owed by a graduate who took out education loans.</p>

<p>To break ties, we used academic-quality scores and average debt at graduation.

[/quote]
</p>

<p><a href="http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/privatecolleges/privatecollege.php?schoollist=lib_arts&sortby=RANK&orderby=flip&states%5B%5D=ALL&myschool%5B%5D=none&outputby=table#rank%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.kiplinger.com/tools/privatecolleges/privatecollege.php?schoollist=lib_arts&sortby=RANK&orderby=flip&states%5B%5D=ALL&myschool%5B%5D=none&outputby=table#rank&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

75

<p>Selectivity and academic strength are not the same. </p>

<p>Schools that are popular- Miami and NYU for example-- can be more selective than they are strong. I think women's colleges are the opposite. Women I know who graduated from SS schools unanimously praise the strength of their undergraduate education and all of them were very well-prepared. That said, some were unhappy with the lack of men. </p>

<p>Honestly, I see a comparison with HBCUs. These colleges are often very good at training and nurturing their students-- but, because they draw from a narrow group (of course, anyone can attend a HBCU but most people who do are black), they are not seen as quite as prestigious as some of the more general schools. But it's a bit like comparing apples and oranges. If I asked you for the name of the 5 most prestigious colleges, you might not name a women's college or a HBCU, nor might you name Julliard. But if I said I had a daughter at Wellesley, a son at Julliard and a daughter at Spellman, most people would probably be impressed.</p>

76

<p>Off topic somewhat. I attended Wellesley for one year, hated it, left for Penn, was happy. I thought Wellesley would provide an intellectual atmosphere, but all the girls talked about was where they were going on the weekend, with whom, wearing what etc etc. Ugh. Of course this was 1000 years ago, and it is quite possible things have changed.
My D will be going to Penn, but I pointed out that Bryn Mawr has a superior Russian dept, and outstanding French dept, and she will probably end up commuting at some point.</p>

77

<p>dufay, the people I hung out with were nothing like that, but they certainly did exist. I think they are everywhere--it can just be harder to avoid groups you don't have much in common with at a smaller school.</p>

<p>Overall, I would describe the students at Wellesley during my time there as "The Woman in the Grey Flannel Suit." Lots of people going on to business, law, and medical schools. Others aiming at graduate programs in academic areas. (Some commentator on the radio recently pointed out that virtually all the well-known female economists in the US were Wellesley grads.) "Wendy Wellesley" was very bright, very hard-working, perhaps a bit more conformist than at other comparable places. Less inclined to be artsy. Of course, I wasn't Wendy Wellesley by any stretch of the imagination, and neither were my friends...I think back to the people I hung out with most, and there are 2 lawyers (one of whom started out in a PhD program and switched), a doctor, a clinical psychologist, a former Presidential speech writer, a chemist, an ad exec (an ABD from an Ivy), and a world traveller/ESL teacher and perpetual grad student in a scientific discipline. </p>

<p>Another thing that plays into it is that we entered college at the tail end of the era of big student strikes and so on. I could see the students in classes after mine growing steadily more conservative--in comparative terms only, of course! There was one such event while I was in college, a 1-day strike over something to do with Viet Nam--and Wellesley's student body voted to go to class instead. <g></g></p>

78

<p>As a female MIT grad from the Dark Ages ('75), who chose NOT to attend a women's college (I'd gone to an all-girls' high school), I saw many of my friends attend the seven sisters and love every minute of it. I fought to be treated as an equal--I took it for granted that I should be (that girls' school taught me a lot about that)--but the professors did not. </p>

<p>Times have changed, but I think the culture of excellence and leadership that the women's colleges foster has been their reason for success. My daughter's friends who attended women's colleges had successful experiences there.</p>

<p>As for prestige, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, Smith are highly prestigious, MHC slightly less so. Barnard vanished into Columbia for a while but is re-emerging and will no doubt regain its prestige.</p>

79

<br>


<br>

<p>Not at all. Here in SoCal, Pomona is well-regarded among the academic crowd and is perhaps the most prestigeous of the Claremont schools to those who pay attention to such things, but if you say "Pomona College" to the average man-on-the-street he'll very likely think you are talking about Cal Poly Pomona.</p>

80

<p>"(Some commentator on the radio recently pointed out that virtually all the well-known female economists in the US were Wellesley grads."</p>

<p>Laura D'Andrea Tyson, head of Clinton's Council on Economic Advisors, is a Smithie. ;)</p>