<p>Swarthmore and Haverford are both fantastic colleges. Personally, I think Swarthmore is better, but they are in fact very similar schools. I really liked both of them, but ultimately, I decided to attend Claremont McKenna, which is also a superb LAC. I chose it for its strong economics department, beautiful weather, easygoing student body, and nurturing environment.</p>
<p>Amherst
Williams
Swarthmore
Pomona
Claremont McKenna
Haverford</p>
<p>I took Bowdoin out from my first posted list.</p>
<p>Numbers don't lie but they can mislead and that's where you're mistaken. The comparison isn't as "silly" as you think. Colleges aren't isolated test tubes that you can compare discreetly. Numbers have to be taken in context. Swat may have more $, but so what? HC is in a real consortium with BMC, while the Tri-co is in name only.</p>
<p>Swat has about 1450 students and an 8:1 student:faculty ratio and it is functionally the smallest LAC around (every single other LAC operates close to 2000 students). HC has BMC (1200+1300) and also a student faculty ratio of 8:1, with the faculty being equally impressive (remember my list from before?). Added, 2+speaker series, concert series, movie series, ect... the breadth and depth of most departments are far greater in the Bi-co. </p>
<p>Swat is a great school and all, but there are real limits to it. You can't do everything with 1450 kids. Actually, given tri-co and Penn, it operates more around 1550 kids... but that is still very small. The comparison isn't as lopsided as you think.</p>
<p>To not include Swarthmore in your top 10 LACs (behind Hamilton?) because you like Haverford better of the three Phila LACs is pretty strange logic.</p>
<p>I might or might not include CMC in my top ten (it's certainly good enough), but if I didn't, it wouldn't be some bogus reason like "I've already included Pomona so CMC and Mudd are out of the running".</p>
<p>That's like saying you won't include Harvard on a list of top universities because you visited Tufts and liked it the best of all the Boston area unis.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Swat is a great school and all, but there are real limits to it. You can't do everything with 1450 kids.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>At least they have a swimming pool.</p>
<p>Also, a quick check of the Arabic offerings for next fall at Haverford shows:</p>
<p>Intro Arabic - one section - Haverford
2nd year Arabic - one section Bryn Mawr</p>
<p>At Swarthmore next fall:</p>
<p>Intro Arabic - two sections
2nd year Arabic - one section
3rd year Arabic - one section</p>
<p>The limitation on any school's offerings is cash money, aka "per student endowment". It's hard to say Haverford is the top school in Tri-co when it has the third largest endowment per student (out of three schools) and when Swarthmore's per student endowment is more than double the per student endowment of Bryn Mawr and Haverford combined.</p>
<p>PS: Quakers don't argue about how has the best football team. It's all about who has the geekiest scientists!</p>
<p>The football arguments are between Williams and Amherst, along with arguing about who can chug more beer and throw cow chips the furthest across a frozen lake (during graduation week).</p>
<p>kwu, why are you penalizing Claremont Mckenna, Harvey Mudd, and Swarthmore for having the same "<em>resources</em>" and "location" of Pomona and Haverford? Although Claremont Mckenna and Swarthmore have different missions, I would say that both provide amazing opportunities for students. In my opinion, the Claremont consortium is the best working consortium in the US and it doesn't seem logical in your research to reward Pomona for the benefits of the consortium without acknowledging the resources of CMC and HMC.</p>
<p>Claremont McKenna has the internship program, the ath with a speaker every night of the week (Bill Clinton, Bono, Anderson Cooper just to name a few this past year), the Washington DC program, 11 research institutes...</p>
<p>I'm not sure if any other colleges have these....</p>
<p>
[quote]
Lack of grade inflation puts you in the top 10...
unless there are at least 10 LACs out there that don't engage in the practice and still have other things to offer.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't get the reasoning for this. How does grade inflation = worse education?</p>
<p>interesteddad, does one of your children attend Swarthmore?
Are you an alumnus? Just curious, because I find your consternation very amusing.</p>
<p>Fine, my logic is unusual in regard to singling out one school within a consortium to "rank," but it's my "personal judgment," alright?</p>
<p>I am not putting Swat, Wellesley, CMC, HMC, etc. behind "Hamilton," I just didn't bother to consider them at all. If you angry old people would like me to revise my list on actual academic quality and not personal preference, I'd be happy to do so.</p>
<h2>I can't wait 'til the next few posts, when I am lambasted to pieces because I didn't include Carleton and Davidson. Again, no single-sex Wellesley.</h2>
<p>skyhawkk08, you forgot Pitzer and Scripps, which are great schools too, I'd imagine. Funny thing is, when I was deliberating which of the Claremont schools to apply to (my school limited me to nine colleges), I ultimately chose CMC. I stick by my reasoning that HMC is too specialized.</p>
<p>Davidson is def in top 10 somewhere. Also look at LAC-like schools. Alittle bit bigger, more athletics, research, but still focused on the undergrad. Best of all worlds.</p>
<p>Tufts
Rice
Brown
William & Mary
Dartmouth
Wake Forest</p>
<p>swish: Schools like Brown, Rice, Tufts, Dartmouth, etc. are NOT LACs and, IMO, do not belong in a top LACs list. While some see them as "the best of both worlds," for someone who really wants an LAC experiance, a school like Tufts will seem too big.</p>
<p>I, for instance, chose Wes to apply to ED over Brown, because while I did like a lot of things about Brown and would have been happy there for other reasons, as someone who mainly liked LACs, Brown just seemed too big--and I wasn't even as attached to the idea of a small LAC as other people are. In fact, for me, Wes was the "best of both worlds"...bigger than some of the really small LACs, but still half the size of Brown. For some people, Wes would be the biggest they'd be willing to look.</p>
<p>"arguing about who can chug more beer and throw cow chips the furthest across a frozen lake (during graduation week)"</p>
<p>Really, id? Did you go to school in the Arctic? Now we know what you did as an undergrad -- so much so, it was difficult to realize what was what. Or perhaps it took you 4 1/2 years to graduate, and the ceremony was in January.</p>
<p>Where's foghorn leghorn when we need him. "It was a joke, son. It was a joke..."</p>
<p>I did return to Wiliamstown from spring break my senior year only to have it snow a foot the next week -- in April. That pretty much blew. BTW, the current temp in Williamstown is 38 degrees.</p>
<p>Catfish, if your grades don't reflect your proficiency with the material, then why bother with grades? While grade inflation isn't always indicative of the rigor of the courses, it's a good measure. In general, the more challenging the courses the better.</p>