<p>Ok, so I am currently enrolled (and just completed 1 year) at Smith College. I applied to transfer to Barnard and Macalester College. I was admitted at Mac, but waitlisted at Barnard. Now I’m trying to make decisions and wondering, 1) what are the chances i would get off the barnard waitlist/is it even an option? and 2) whether or not anyone knows why I would have been waitlisted at all given i’m currently admitted to two institutions that are ranked higher than Barn?
Hope that doesn’t sound snotty, but i’m just a little miffed right now. Also if anyone has any experience with the Barnard theatre or government programs, i’d love to hear about them! Thanks!</p>
<p>Regarding your second question it's simple, different colleges look for different things. Also, rankings are highly arbitrary and it is difficult for single sex colleges such as Barnard to rank as highly as co-ed colleges such as Macalester. To assume that because you got into the latter you are automatically entitled to get into colleges that are of so called lower rank, I think would be a total misunderstanding of US college admissions, which in general seems to be a largely unpredictable process.</p>
<p>For you to get off the Barnard waitlist, their transfer yield will have to be lower than normal, meaning fewer transfers accept their offer of admission than they expected. </p>
<p>Barnard is not ranked far behind Smith. I agree with hope2transfer a/b the reason - you never know.</p>
<p>Barnard is a lot harder to get into than either Smith or Macalester. That may be a function of geography -- i.e, applicants prefer Manhattan to Northhampton or St. Paul -- but that's the truth.</p>
<p>I don't know about transfer admits, but here are comparative freshman admit stats from Fall 2006:</p>
<p>Barnard: Percent admitted: 25.5%</p>
<p>SAT Score range: </p>
<p>SAT Critical Reading 640 740
SAT Math 640 710
SAT Writing 640 740</p>
<p>Macalester: Percent admitted: 39% </p>
<p>SAT Score range: </p>
<p>SAT Critical Reading 630 740
SAT Math 630 710
SAT Writing 620 720</p>
<p>Smith: Percent admitted: 53% </p>
<p>SAT Score range: </p>
<p>SAT Critical Reading 580 700
SAT Math 560 670
SAT Writing 640 730</p>
<p>It's pretty obvious that statistically it is twice as hard to get into Barnard than Smith, and Macalester is about midway between the two; and that the stats of admitted students at Barnard & Macalester are about the same, but significantly higher than Smith. </p>
<p>None of that is relevant to the quality of the school, but if you were looking at US News "rankings" to figure out your chances, then you made a big mistake.</p>
<p>US News uses a methodology to rank that undervalues Barnard, because they look at things like size of endowment or the size of the college library and other resources, and Barnard's numbers look very small -- but Barnard is paying pro-rata to use Columbia's resources, so for a rather nominal cost, Barnard has bought Butler library for all of its students --- along with various other resources. So to US News and their paper tally, Barnard looks like a small underfunded college which can't possibly provide the same for its students as larger, better funded LAC's like Smith & Macalester.... meanwhile Barnard athletes are playing Div I sports while the other LACs are Div III, Barnard students have full access to the entire Columbia course catalog, etc. </p>
<p>Anyway, as far as transfer admission goes, it may depend on entirely different factors, such as your major.</p>
<p>For admissions the most relevant US News statistic would be its LAC selectivity ranking. For 2007 this was:</p>
<p>Barnard # 9
Macalester # 24
Smith # 41</p>
<p>The selectivity ranking is extremely misleading. 50% of the ranking is determined by SAT scores. Smith has the largest percentage of Pell Grant students in the country, hence, lower test scores. Barnard is 66% Caucasian, Smith 42%. Smith serves the minority population, and all that entails, to a much larger degree. It’s also undisputed SATs scores are not indicative of success in college.<br>
As Calmom stated, one would expect Barnard to have a lower acceptance rate (more applications) due to more students preferring NYC over Northampton or as a means of attending Columbia (coed environment) via Barnard.</p>
<p>As an aside, Smith is awarded the most Fulbright scholarships in the country. The college is doing something right. ;)</p>
<p>Evidently it is not doing something completely right for the OP.</p>
<p>Fit is a very individual thing though, and I'm sure many others are very happy there.</p>
<p>Perhaps, as you contend, SAT scores may not be indicative of success in college. Ditto high school GPA, or % admitted. However these metrics, in combination are generally used to indicate admissions selectivity, which is the point here. Perhaps in Smith's case this data is distorted as you point out. In which case there is no objective way whatsoever to measure its actual probable degree of selectivity for a particular population of applicants.</p>
<p>For purposes of this thread though, the data for the other two schools is actually more relevant. Since OP is already at Smith.</p>