<p>
[quote]
Sorry, I don't think we owe the drive-by shooter anything.
[/quote]
Nobody owes anything to anyone here. It's about intellectual integrity and civility. You don't owe it to us or even to yourself to behave in a way that maintains both of these things, but I think these happen to be some of the very values an elite LAC tries to promote, so it only seems appropriate to keep intellectual integrity and civility in mind when making posts. Even when someone else seems unqualified to make a statement or when someone seems to have a hidden agenda when making posts, it is our duty as critical thinkers to assess the statements themselves, and not to attack the people or their motives. I'm far more interested, when engaging in topical discussion such as this (with Swarthmore being the topic), in learning why a statement is or isn't true than I am in learning why someone made the statement.</p>
<p>All of those things you said about that poster are irrelevant. The merit of his words are what should be considered, not the merit of him as a human being or critic. The question is whether his statements contain any truth and, if not, what the problems with his statements are. The question is not whether he's a "dweeb," how old he is, whether he transferred from the school where he did end up, whether he's miserable, whether Swat football players who were caught up in the termination of the football program are the angriest alumni around, or what Neil Austrian has to say about anything. To focus on such things is the internet equivalent of mudslinging and really gets us nowhere when it comes to learning about the positives and negatives of Swarthmore.</p>
<p>I think your tactics in these threads are overbearing, intellectually dishonest, and inhibit intelligent, critical discourse about Swarthmore. I think you'd be a much more valuable contributor if you'd stop making attacks on people and, if your goal is to be helpful around here, that would only assist you in your endeavors.</p>
<p>Our drive-by shooter knew nothing about Swarthmore. He didn't even apply to Swarthmore.</p>
<p>So, at best, we can take his drive-by shooting as the second-hand evaluation of a Swat varsity football player at the time the football team was axed. Of course that's relevant. Those football players (and, of course, Neil Austrian) despise Swarthmore for cutting the football program. Heck, Swarthmore helped many of them transfer to other schools.</p>
<p>It's not possible to evaluate our drive-by shooter's drive-by shooting without:</p>
<p>a) recognizing that the shooter himself knows nothing about Swarthmore</p>
<p>b) the drive-by shooting is based 100% on the feelings of a varsity football player "screwed by" Swarthmore in what is probably the second most charged event in Swarthmore's history.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's not possible to evaluate our drive-by shooter's drive-by shooting without:</p>
<p>a) recognizing that the shooter himself knows nothing about Swarthmore</p>
<p>b) the drive-by shooting is based 100% on the feelings of a varsity football player "screwed by" Swarthmore in what is probably the second most charged event in Swarthmore's history.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, in fact, it is. So what if he knew nothing about Swarthmore? That should be apparent to anyone who reads his arguments and finds them to be completely inaccurate and without merit. Were they completely inaccurate? If so, why? So what if he got his information from a disgruntled ex-football player? Is the information he got accurate or not? Can biases in these statements be discerned that clearly diminish their credibility? These things can be assessed without knowing squat about the poster or without concerning yourself with extra-textual matters such as the alleged dissatisfaction of ex-football player Swarthmore alumni. To give you an analogy, I read a book a few years ago called Guns, Germs, and Steel by Jared Diamond. I didn't -- and still don't -- know the first thing about Jared Diamond as a person, but I was still able to consider the statements he made in his book in a critical fashion. So, too, with posts on the internet. It's simply not my place or your place to go around calling people "dweebs" or to make assumptions about the motivations behind a statement. You assume that since the mentor was a football player that the football team's termination someohow played into his dissatisfaction with Swarthmore, just because some guy said the football players are the most disgruntled alumni out there. These are assumptions, not facts. Just because a person who was a football player at Swarthmore happens to have a negative opinion of Swarthmore, it doesn't mean it was because the football program was terminated. This is precisely what I mean by intellectual dishonesty. You have made assumptions about the person and then used them to discredit what the person said when, in fact, nothing about the person is relevant, and only his statements should be evaluated to determine whether they are true.</p>
<p>You claim it isn't possible to evaluate statements without evaluating the person making the statements. This is anathema to a wide swath of modern intellectual thought, and you seem to be the only person on this forum intent on calling people "dweebs" or "miserable" or whatever other disparaging names you decide are warranted, so it stands to reason that your statement is, in fact, false. Most people here seem capable of having discussions without evaluating and disparaging other posters.</p>
<p>The dean of my college used to work at Swarthmore for 28 years, and he said ALL the same things as the original poster. Stressed out students, you never leave campus, and a general state of competitiveness and misery.
HOWEVER...like with every college campus, there will be people who love it and people who hate it. I like having a BALANCED life, though, so I chose Vassar, where the education was as good (rankings aren't everything) but the stress level was lower.</p>
<p>Vassar is a nice school. My daughter goes there for a weekend visit at least once each semester to see close friends from study abroad. Oh, wait...never mind...she must be lying to me when she calls from the car or the train in Poughkeepsie. Swarthmore students never leave campus, let alone for a whole three day weekend. Come to think of it, she must be lying about weekends in NYC, too.</p>
<p>Whatever possessed you to come to this forum and bash Swarthmore? Just trying to keep the unhappy Northwestern freshman's drive-by shooting thread from two years ago alive with your own drive-by shooting?</p>
<p>Do you have any connection whatsoever with Swarthmore? Alumni? Parent? Student?</p>
That's some great interpretation of the text. I'm sure the poster meant never in the completely literal sense, rather than the sense that would suggest Swarthmore students leave campus much more infrequently than typical college students. So, yes, your daughter has been lying to you.</p>
<p>Why would anyone give a damn what a drive-by shooter, from Vassar, with absolutely zero connection to Swarthmore says? The poster didn't really "mean" anything because the poster has no clue about Swarthmore.</p>
<p>BTW, how often does a "typical college student leave campus"? Is that covered in one of your internet surveys?</p>
<p>I do think that the most valid observations of any location are those who have actually experienced it. Hearsay is never the same as actual experience. That is why current students or recent alums have the most valid observations. Parents who spend time on campus and who are in close touch with their students also have good information. </p>
<p>I do not pretend to give current information about the universities that I have attended for my degrees because it is not up-to-date. I would never draw conclusions about other places because I have no direct knowledge of them.</p>
<p>As to going off campus: I rarely did this during the school year when I was a student even if I had a car, because everything was right there at school. That was then, and I can see that the current students I know there have the same experience but I would let them speak for themselves.</p>
<p>My child at Swarthmore goes off campus occasionally but is so busy does not have time. Gets away during breaks.</p>
<p>On these internet surveys you study, do they happen to say if typical college students are more or less likely to leave campus on a Saturday night when there is free booze on campus?</p>
<p>Just a aside on academic rigor: Surprisingly enough (at least to me) Williams is the school just below Swarthmore on the Boalt Scale. Swarthmore: 89.5, Williams, 89. Chicago was a few steps down; I don't remember how many. This makes me laugh because S would not apply to Swarthmore (because of stories of rigor) and chose Williams over Chicago.</p>
<p>So, although Chicagoians insist their school is the most academic, it's not necessarily so.</p>
<p>I think the most notable thing about Swarthmore (and this is true of Haverford but in a different way) is its Quaker heritage and its commitment to social justice. The core values of Swarthmore will satisfy a student body who share these values, and I hope most who are there do.</p>
<p>I show Iron Jawed Angels to my women's studies class and Alice Paul (the character here -- feature film history about the suffrage movement -- pretty accurate) indicates that Swarthmore prepared her for her role in history. I have no doubt that it did.</p>
<p>However, the wonderful legacy of Swarthmore does not require that other LAC's be denigrated.</p>
<p>Not all colleges are for everyone. The problem is that it is difficult to know before you arrive on campus whether or not there is a good fit between the student and the school. In that more information is better than less, I think that it is a positive thing for A.E. and Interesteddad to disagree on Swarthmore. People have different experiences. Since I am a parent I can't give a perspective as key as that of a student. What I think everyone does agree on, however, is that Swarthmore is much more work than other schools. Compared with Williams or the Ivys, faculty at Swarthmore demand much more time in the books than other schools. In return, students get unlimited attention and support. It is a contract that is not for everyone. I have one child at Williams and one at Swarthmore. There is no question that the one at Williams is happier and has a more balanced life. The freshman at Swarthmore is getting an excellent education but at the cost of having any balance to her life. This isn't to say she never leaves campus--that is not the standard. Rather,it is the number of hours per class that is expected. If you put in 15 hour days studying, everyone can leave campus once in a while. But, is it worth it for an 18 year old to feel that they have to work that hard? I am not sure and I don't think she is either.</p>
<p>And, I do have to agree with A.E. The food IS terrible.</p>
<p>"Balance" is in the eye of the beholder. Some students wouldn't feel "balanced" living on a campus where students smear feces on the walls and defecate in the common rooms of dorms. Or put up Hitler's Birthday commemerative posters in response to Holocaust Rememberance. Or scribble the N-word on the doors of African American students. Or have their lives disrupted by binge drinking rates well above the national averages.</p>
<p>Hi parentswat&wms,
What a great combo of schools! S#1 looked at both and didn't care for Williams at all. (My H and I thought it was great!) He matriculated at Swarthmore and graduated this past June. In addition to handling the workload quite well, he was able to devote 20-30 hours per week to two extracurricular activities. He rarely left campus for any "significant" reason, but that was by choice. It may be that your D just needs a bit of time to adapt to the workload and figure out the best way to handle it.</p>
<p>momof3sons: You may be right that things will get easier. My Swarthmore student gets out of the library when in season (an athlete) but complains that most of her friends are happier working than doing anything else. I have a third at a West coast elite school and both the Williams and Swarthmore children work much harder (maybe its the weather) but in return, are probably getting a better education. Still, comparing the schools, the amount of work asked of the Swarthmore students is just much more.</p>
<p>My daughter transferred to Swarthmore after her freshman year from another rigorous LAC (an excellent school, although not as highly ranked as Swarthmore or Williams). She applied to transfer because she was not happy with the isolated location and the predominant social life at her first school, not because she was disappointed with the academics. I would say that she spent as much time on her schoolwork at her first school as at Swarthmore, and that the quality of the professors and level of personal interaction is pretty much the same at both schools. She is much happier at Swarthmore because she feels that she is now among peers who are more like her, people who are very interested in what they are learning and who also like to have fun (in ways other than drinking for the sake of getting drunk). Last year, her hall was very close and there was a tremendous amount of socializing (usually involving food), parties, etc. on that hall. Most of her friends are involved with one or more time-consuming activities, in addition to their classwork,so it is hard to fit everything in and still get a decent amount of sleep, but that is typical of many college students everywhere. Swarthmore may not be for everyone, but my daughter is so happy there and she was not at all happy at her first school, although she normally is a person who does well in new situations. I will say that the grading curve appears to be stricter at Swarthmore than at her first school, as she earned a higher GPA as a freshman than she has so far at Swarthmore, but her grades are still very good. FWIW, the food at Swarthmore may not be fantastic, but the food at her first school was much worse, even on Parents Weekend when you would think that the school would make an effort to serve respectable food.</p>
<p>ID, please take a breath and calm down. We know you can't stand it when anyone has a positive thing to say about Williams, but I think you have been a little unkind. I have a pretty good idea of what goes on at Williams (just as you seem to at Swarthmore) and that was a blatant misrepresentation. I certainly wouldn't characterize Swarthmore based on several isolated (yes, isolated) events that may not have all even been caused by students there. I am sure Swarthmore is wonderful, but, so is Williams, and many other schools. I bet it very likely your daughter would have loved Williams if she attended, just as much as mine would love Swarthmore if she was there. I think that because the schools and students are probably, in fact, very similar, we all resort to tribal instincts and demonize the "other" and exaggerate the small differences (library bound geeks or drunken jocks, perhaps?)
peace</p>
<p>I think it's fair, in a thread that has now gone on for two years "warning" prospective students about the evils of Swarthmore, to point out some of the things at other schools that that students won't likely enounter at Swarthmore.</p>