<p>Agreed. Especially considering Georgetown is arguably just as liberal or moreso than W from what I’ve heard and seen from HS classmates who went there. </p>
<p>Then again, the vast majority of W alums I knew tended to be center-right or bona-fide conservatives…especially on fiscal matters. </p>
<p>Moreover, it’s even more odd considering back when I was in HS in the early-mid '90s, the vast majority of HS classmates who applied to schools like GTown, Duke, NDame, W, USAFA rarely applied to BC or its then peer colleges unless they were absolute BC sports fanatics. </p>
<p>Granted, from my NE urban public magnet STEM-centered HS, many parents and classmates…including those who applied to SAs tended to hold BC in lower regard academically back then…especially considering its STEM departments were perceived as much weaker than nowadays and atmosphere too “sporty/party school” for parental tastes. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Par for the course for many colleges of W’s academic ranking/reputation. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That seemed to be the case with the cousin and several classmates who went off to the SAs. At my HS graduation, the senior military officer sent to congratulate HS classmates admitted to one of the SAs theatrically took out their ROTC scholarship acceptances and ripped them up in front of our class to signify they have made a commitment to the SA in question. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>They can also cross-register at MIT and possibly Harvard(Not sure here). One W alum I dated briefly did most of her CS major courses at MIT.</p>
<p>Who is to judge that if you are willing to pay for several elite colleges that then you must be willing to pay for Wellesley? I think I’m pretty knowledgeable and I didn’t think the school was that great until reading about it because of this thread. If you’re not from the northeast, it is not as recognizeable as the others. People may not want their kids to go to single sex schools, or schools they perceive as ultra liberal. Or some people avoid small LACs because they often don’t have business or engineering. Just because it doesn’t make sense for one family doesn’t mean you can generalize.</p>
<p>Plus, isn’t the question of if Wellesley is worth the money the entire point of this thread?</p>
<p>Jym - loosely, yes. Generally that’s the way it should work. You definitely won’t get any summer programs/training until you’re contracted but there are differences between scholarship and non-scholarship students in when they contract and exactly how it commits them. In the OP’s case though, they’d have freshmen year as an enrolled cadet (no commitment from either party) before contracting assuming they met all the obligations & requirements to receive the scholarship as a sophomore.</p>
<p>I know MIT students can cross-register and take up to 50% of their classes at Harvard. I know Wellesley students can take certain classes at MIT. I don’t know if they can at Harvard. In any case, travel restrictions make that extremely challenging as well. My son has been trying for 2 years to get a class at Harvard and has never been able to make it work out with the MIT classes he needed, plus his ROTC commitments.</p>
<p>fendrock - that’s optimistic. I do think that if they realistically couldn’t do it, they wouldn’t offer the ROTC at MIT as an option. I know NROTC does not for that reason, so hopefully maybe it means the Army folks work with them better. I just wanted to make the OP and her daughter aware of the extensive time it would take away from her life/free time/studying even if she can work it out and make sure they consider the financial side without the scholarship just in case. </p>
<p>Packmom - I think things are a lot different between academies/ROTC than a century or so ago when it was viewed as the only way to succeed/make general, etc. These days everyone realizes top officers (and bottom officers) can come from any commissioning source. Occasionally, ring-knocking might get you some advantage or in a door, but it could be the same from any school - having a CO from Purdue when you graduated from Purdue might give you that same edge. It’s the same anywhere in the world. </p>
<p>Incidentally, my son spent 60 days last summer at an internship north of Vegas with JIEDDO so learned a lot about the EOD field, although I don’t think that’s something he plans to do (his interest is in subs). But that’s another opportunity that was open to him (mostly because the head person he interviewed with at JIEDDO was a MIT grad) that wouldn’t have been most likely if he were at USNA instead.</p>
<p>But Wellesley isn’t “ultra liberal.” My born-and-bred Midwestern husband certainly knew of its reputation all his life as the “Harvard for women” well before our D was interested. My D is not particularly interested in politics but is thinking of joining WC Republicans (her twin is active in his school’s Dem org so it’s pretty cute). They send so many alums into Wall St style positions only a fool would think it’s some ultra liberal bastion.</p>
It’s interesting to look at the D/R breakdown of campaign contributions on Wall Street - certainly, many of those big power brokers lean quite hard to the left. </p>
<p>That said, Wellesley does not take $250,000 from its students for the purpose of socially-enforced downward mobility. (Was that harsh?) Wellesley trains its students to be as successful as their parents are, and to be able to send their own daughters to Wellesley. Many ultra-liberal schools seem to push their students towards extraordinarily low-paying work (e.g. journalism, non-profits, or think tanks).</p>
<p>Think tanks are low paying? I’ve heard its an extremely coveted , hard to get job that is quite lucrative.</p>
<p>** And not sure that “ultra-liberal” schools “push” their students in any one direction- especially to low paying jobs. That would be counter-intuitive if they want alum donations. Its more likely that liberal thinking-give back to the community, non-profit, educators, etc are drawn to these types of schools.</p>
<p>And as an aside, having gone to one of those “liberal” schools, I can count many doctors, lawyers, judges (local, state and federal), professors, and other professionals amongst my classmates. There are also musicians and artists and photographers. One that comes to mind was the son of a famous artist and philanthropist. He followed in their footsteps, and I am honored to know him. These are not bad attributes. Please tone down the snark.</p>
<p>Fine. Tone down the sanctimony in return. There are lots of ways to “give back” to society. Being successful in business and creating jobs for people (and even enough wealth to become a philanthropist) is one of them. </p>
<p>As for the tanks, they pay their name brand PhD’s/former official types well, but a lot of the kids who head to DC straight from college to work for them are on the all-ramen diet. You do that for a couple of years on the way to grad school, but it is not a career path for most.</p>
<p>No sanctimony (besides, was responding to aries, not to you, but if you feel you were snarky, far be it from me to argue). Of COURSE there are lots of ways to give back. That was the point. </p>
<p>Many early career jobs are low paying. Sow what else is new. Most have to pay their dues one way or the other. Important not to be short-sighted.</p>
<p>OK. H says that because D applied to all three academies…receiving nominations to all three, but only an appt to AFA, she was qualified for ROTC. I remember one letter from Senator Lugar saying that she did not receive his nomination (she instead received Senator Coats), and he was nominating her for ROTC. That is how the ROTC scholarship happened. She did not apply directly to ROTC per se, but to the academies and presumably, that list was shared with ROTC.</p>
<p>Fendrock, where are you from? Is there anything about Wellesley your daughter doesn’t like? Where did other D go?</p>
<p>Sounds like you are a fan of the school. Sounds great. Thank you.</p>
<p>LaBechtel - my D is the same age as fendrock’s D – rising junior. We are from the Chicago suburbs. We just returned from visiting D, who is staying for summer school. She loves W and we are very pleased with it. My other child is at NU. </p>
<p>Certainly not! Especially not when compared with pre-1980’s Berkeley, Vassar, Reed, Oberlin before sometime in the '00s*, Antioch, etc.</p>
<p>When I think of a W alum stereotype based on the ones I’ve known, they’re all highly conventionally ambitious women gunning for the top political, military, civil service, academic, and other categories of high status jobs. </p>
<p>In short…OP’s D fits right in at W. And when she becomes one of TPTB, alums from the real “ultra-liberal” colleges…and many many others will be there to serenade her with massive annoying protests. :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Not necessarily. </p>
<p>FYI, many such schools also produce entrepreneurs with some social consciousness…like Ben and Jerry’s (Oberlin College), or Apple founders Steve Wozniak(Berkeley) and Steve Jobs(One term at Reed).</p>
<p>Here is a midwesterner who had heard of Wellesley AND knew it was a great school long before this thread appeared. It is also reputed to be a VERY type “A” place – both my Ds passed on applying because of that reputation, but for the right woman I think it is a fantastic opportunity. I know a couple of young women who have attended, and they are extremely bright, focused, and articulate. I think Wellesley IS a great opportunity if you can afford it. But as others have said, your D may find the ROTC route to be tough sledding given the location issues – so don’t send her if you can’t continue to pay if she drops out of ROTC. But it sounds like you can, just don’t really want to…</p>
<p>True. However, the common pattern I kept noticing is that among those applying to and getting admitted to those tier of colleges, the liberal Catholics and those who don’t want a highly religiously conservative/restrictive college environment gravitated to Georgetown. </p>
<p>The ones who preferred the highly religiously conservative/restrictive college environment or who were Notre Dame family/sports fans gravitated to Notre Dame.</p>
<p>I do think that ROTC at MIT might be difficult to get to. I think the one “lie” about W is that it’s simple and easy to get to Harvard and MIT. It isn’t. But, presumably other women do it, so it’s not undoable.</p>
Thank you. I sit on enough Boards of Directors to know how much people in those positions make (or rather, do not make), but thank you for the independent verification.</p>
<p>I found that such discussions were lacking at my alma mater, and there seemed to be an ethos that was reminiscent of the 19th century’s upper crust: you can be a lawyer, doctor, statesman, or socialite, but never admit that you actually have to work for a living, doing things solely for the purpose of making money. </p>
<p>The harsh reality is that when you are talking about the elite, expensive schools, a narrow emphasis on “giving back” will virtually guarantee downward mobility. I’m a rock-ribbed conservative, but heck if I didn’t understand some of where those Occupy Wall Street kids were coming from. Smart, upper-middle class kids with a lot of motivation, fifty grand in debt, and a non-profit job that barely pays enough for tuna fish. Recipe for disaster, really. My own alma mater has started to emphasise business in the last year or two - perhaps coincidentally, after a solid decade of a very low alumni giving rates. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t call Wellesley’s drive to have its alumnae succeed either “liberal” or “conservative”. I think it’s an honest assessment of reality. </p>
<p>(ALL: I deliberately said “many… seem” not “all… are”. Please bear that in mind as you respond.)</p>