<p>Wellesley's acceptance rate is artificially high due to the fact that they cut out half the applicant pool, plus many girls won't apply there if they feel unomfortable going to an all-girls' college.</p>
<p>Just chiming in to reiterate: Wellesley is not a safety for anyone.
[quote]
[quote]
OK, so even with a 45% acceptance rate Wellesley would not be a safety?
[/quote]
In 2005, Wellesley's acceptance rate was 33.7%, out of an applicant pool of 4,347. So to start, it really helps to look at current stats.<br>
[quote]
Why would they reject a 2300 (assuming good grades) when it's above their 75%?
[/quote]
It's not an objective, stat-based practice - not for Wellesley or any other elite college. The biggest mistake that people make over and over again is looking at their GPA and SAT score and assuming that they will get in if they are at the upper end of the range. What you need to do is look at the BOTTOM end of the range to determine whether a student has a reasonable chance -- that is, if the 75% of Wellesley students have better than 1300 on their SATs, then it would be a big reach for anyone lower to apply. But once the applicant has their foot in the door-- they are pretty much competing on equal footing with all the other applicants.
[quote]
Back in the day, Wellesley seemed way above Vassar. Today they have almost indentical 50% ranges yet Vassar haas twice the applicants and a 29% acceptance rate.
[/quote]
Vassar is co-ed, so it's got a bigger applicant pool. Wellesley's reputation plus the fact that it a women's college means it has a self-sellecting applicant pool.
[quote]
The student in question here has been advised by her counselor at a sophisticated private school to consider it a safety.
[/quote]
Well, the school's own track record in admissions is an imporant factor, but your friend's daughter wouldn't be the first kid in the world to be misled by an overly optimistic g.c. [Andi? are you out there?]</p>
<p>Anyway... the point is, it's fine for her to apply to Wellesley, as a match; she needs to find a somewhat less selective college as a safety. If she is viewing Wellesley as a safety, then she probably needs more match schools on her list anyway - she probably has mislabeled several reach colleges as matches.</p>
<p>Thanks for all the input, it's clearly a match and notr a safety. I find it hard to understand the schools that have remained single sex. Among my own children and thweir friendas IU saw little interest. DD, who was hell bent on Columbia (and now attends) refused to apply to Barnard after spending a night with a friend there and feeling the girls there were not happy. </p>
<p>Anyone able to comment on happiness level at all girls schools?</p>
<p>I'm going to start as a freshman at Wellesley this year. I'd mostly like to reiterate what others have said. Wellesley could never really counted as a sure saftey for anyone, and although the number odds look good, the competition is stiff because everyone who applies really wants it and has their stuff together. Because it is a small school in a more isolated environment (suburbs) I think Wellesley chooses student diversity over pumping up numbers. This meany not only ethnic and economic diversity, but also EC diversity. I think the best thing to have on a Wellesley application (besides the grades) is one really passionate EC you have devoted tons of time to each year, and then a few smaller things that show you can balance more than one thing. Even then it might not work out if too many applicants have your EC. Because Wellesley has such a small community it needs diversity more. At a larger university diversity can occur from the simple fact that more people = more differences. Essays also seem very important to Wellesley admissions, especially the Why Wellesley essay. From my interactions with the admissions office I could tell that they are very personalized and might tend to sort applicant more by "personality" than numbers; and let's face it numbers aren't always a fair reflection of a person.
PS. if you want to get into Wellesley you should never write a lot about how you want to take classes at MIT (one sentance at the most). They might assume you applied there and they are just a back up.
hope this helped.</p>
<p>
[quote]
DD, who was hell bent on Columbia (and now attends) refused to apply to Barnard after spending a night with a friend there and feeling the girls there were not happy.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It just goes to say that one size does not fit all. My D was quite the opposite , starting out with the premise that there was no way that she woudlever think about applying to an "all girls" school. She spent a large amount of time at Columbia most of her life (my sister is a proud Columbia alum who worked there for over 10 years) and taking classes there. </p>
<p>When it came to applying for colleges, her thoughts were that she would not apply to Columbia on a bet, loved Barnard (and said you can definitely feel the difference between the cultures of the school), did not find the women to be unhappy, applied there and was accepted even though she chose to attend somewhere else.</p>
<p>I think kids see what they want to see. I know that when my daughter went to visit Barnard for the first time, she was shown around campus by a friend who graduated from a local high school and happened to share similar academic interests. The friend was very positive about Barnard and her experiences there; and my daughter felt very much at home there. I think in terms of campus social atmosphere she really liked NYU the best, but academically Barnard is a great fit. She does not want to attend an all-women school, but in her eyes Barnard doesn't really count as one -- she said that the only place on campus where she didn't see men around was the quad where the all-female dorms were. She is outgoing and meets people and makes friends easily, so I am sure she will have plenty of male friends.</p>
<p>Barnard may be closer to a safety than Columbia or Wellesley but it is still not a "sure thing."</p>
<p>For a less selective but excellent women's college, consider Mount Holyoke.</p>
<p>There are many happy students at MHC but a women's college environment isn't for everyone. It suits those who don't mind separating academic and social life and prefer not to multi-task in that respect. If fosters non-competitive close female friendships and leadership roles for women--truly a "sisterly" community. In retrospect, the majority of alumnae are very satisfied with their college experience--probably the less satisfied transferred out before graduation.</p>
<p>Also look at Skidmore and Wheaton ( both coed) as probable safeties.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why would they reject a 2300 (assuming good grades) when it's above their 75%? Their yield is only 44%.
[/quote]
Well, that is part of your answer right there. It is the schools with unsatisfactory yield, due to being used as a safety for the even more selectives, which are most sensitive to whether an accepted applicant will matriculate. The common wisdom to combat that is to evidence sincere interest in the school, via visits, interviews and the essays.</p>
<p>As a Wellesely alum, I can't speak with current on-the-spot information, but I do believe that gay life is not a dominant part of the culture there at all. In my day, taking classes at MIT was easy (and we were the first cohort to have that option). I would suggest she speak with an Admissions person about her specific interest in Sloan and Babson classes. Then, she'd be smart to ask some current students and/or MIT/Babson officials the same question.</p>
<p>I was also there during the critical decision-making period about remaining all women. They chose to be a place where women would be leaders in all phases of academic and campus life and to be the source of female leaders of the future. It's one choice; not for everyone. </p>
<p>The happiness factor at Wellesely is high. It is a self-selecting pool; there are mucho social opportunities (and emphatically NOT just with MIT, but rather the entire Boston/Cambridge college group). Wellesley students are very aware of where its alumnae head, once they go out into the "wide wide world." Whether it is Hillary Clinton, Diane Sawyer, Nora Ephorn, Madeline Albright or numerous leaders in the business and professional world, the role models who have gone before are exciting. The quality of teaching is stupendous. The campus is among the most beautiful in the country.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Barnard may be closer to a safety than Columbia or Wellesley but it is still not a "sure thing."
[/quote]
?????<br>
Barnard is the most selective of all the women's colleges. They have a 24% admit rate. So basically, from a purely statistical standpoint, the odds are about one in three of being admitted to Wellesley, and slightly less than one in four of being admitted to Barnard.</p>
<p>When it comes to the actual selection process, I have no clue -- I don't think there is a material difference in the "stats" of their admitted students, but I haven't looked closely. It's possible that Wellesley is more focused on stats than Barnard , or they look for higher academic attainment, whereas Barnard may be more artsy -- I just don't know. (But I do figure my own daughter had a boost from the artsy factor -- Barnard seems to like well-trained dancers). But simply by the admit rates, Barnard definitely is "reachier" than Wellesley -- and if you are going to look at the process as a crap shoot, then you have to look at the odds. (And with Columbia's less than 10% admit rate, I hardly see how it even gets mentioned in a sentence using the word "safety").</p>
<p>I agree with you that Mt. Holyoke would probably be a far more likely admit than either Barnard or Wellesley. But that's also just a judgment based on admit rates - at Mt. Holyoke, the odds are slightly bretter than one in two. But Mt. Holyoke might also attract a very well qualified set of applicants, if word has gotten out about how generous they can be with merit aid -- whereas need-only schools like Wellesley and Barnard aren't going to entice the kids with exceptionally strong stats in search of scholarship money.</p>
<p>When we toured Wellesley, our tour leader ... told us she was in the minority politically. However, she made it very clear that Wellesley was "not like Smith" and you could avoid gays if you want too... most do .... in fact, "they" keep to themselves, "fortunately." She hardly came off as an accepting member of society. Her attitude was a real turn-off to our family ... no application there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
However, she made it very clear that Wellesley was "not like Smith" and you could avoid gays if you want too... most do .... in fact, "they" keep to themselves, "fortunately."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Wow. That's so different from any of what I've seen among the Wellesley students I know.</p>
<p>wow that's so weird...definitely not typical of most wellesley girls. but again, wellesley is all-girls so people pick it for different reasons...so of course there are the kind of people who are rabidly afraid of anything to do with sex....</p>
<p>In my D's cohort of friends, Barnard accepted several girls with significantly lower GPAs/SATs than girls who were waitlisted. As I said above, the interpretation was that they wanted girls who would aspire to Barnard, not girls who saw it as their backup to Columbia (no one who had also applied to Columbia was accepted).</p>
<p>
I think jmmom said it best ( loved the "wide, wide world" reference) - Wellesley is a place where women can develop the confidence and leadership skills that will take you anywhere. Studies have shown that women are often much more quiet and passive in a coed classroom, often deferring to the dominant (and louder) voices of men within that environment. That just doesn't happen at a women's school where every voice is heard and encouraged. </p>
<p>It's also a place where great female friendships can be made without the distraction of men . On the other hand, the social life can be great. Students are far from isolated here. It's only 12 miles to Boston and Cambridge and it requires only the smallest amount of initiative to hop on a bus (they run continously from campus) into Boston or Cambridge to attend events at Harvard, MIT, etc. MIT is not the only social outlet for Wellesley women by far and most MIT men are not geeks (although, a few famously are - I remember a guy who literally came to a Wellesey mixer wearing a pocket protector, pens and calculator! Yikes!) Social events pull students from all over the area -Harvard, MIT, Babson, Brandeis, Tufts etc and mixers (or frat parties etc.) at those places as well as at Wellesley are numerous. </p>
<p>Many women choose Wellesley despite, not because of, it's single sex status, but go on to appreciate all that really means. I'm not saying that it's for everyone, but I'm glad it hasn't gone coed and its popularity seems to only be on the rise.</p>
<p>Twinmom, I am really surprised to hear that story. I think your guide told it how it was when she said "she was in the minority politically" there. But, still, unbelievable that she said all that. We, too, had some characters on our many tours and S would have crossed many fine places off his list if he had used some of them as a criteria. But I agree that schools ought to do their best to ensure that those representing the school are not like the young woman you encountered.</p>
<p>Also, ditto to all those who've said that Wellesley is nobody's safety!</p>
<p>yeah i agree with roshke, i'd feel much more open in a class full of girls. but i wouldn't belong at wellesley--all my closest friends are guys...that would be tough...</p>
<p>"I am really surprised to hear that story. I think your guide told it how it was when she said "she was in the minority politically" there. But, still, unbelievable that she said all that. We, too, had some characters on our many tours and S would have crossed many fine places off his list if he had used some of them as a criteria. But I agree that schools ought to do their best to ensure that those representing the school are not like the young woman you encountered."</p>
<p>Agreed. If the school had felt right otherwise, I would have suggested that she overlook the tour guide's comments and/or go back another day. Just goes to show how one guide can influence someone's decision. The school was breathtakingly gorgeous and had much to offer ... including a beautiful new science center. Just wasn't right for my daughter - but I am sure there are many incredibly happy young women there - like everywhere else.</p>
<p>As a fellow tour guide, I can tell you NOT to base your decision based on that comment! Perhaps she's right, that "it's possible to avoid gay students on campus"- I've personally not tried- but that is certainly not the prevailing attitude on campus.</p>
<p>not sure. Is it that difficult to go to this college?</p>
<p>It's impossible to say how difficult a college will be for any given student. So much depends on your high school preparation, what courses you choose, and your own strengths and weaknesses. I came from a good, although not top-tier, college preparatory high school, and I've found that some things came naturally to me and weren't challanging, while others tested me quite a bit. I think that you'll always be able to find something challanging, as long as you're willing to challange yourself.</p>
<p>Wow. I can say that comment is pretty atypical of most Wellesley students seeing as most people here have the good sense not to say such things. Most people have the good sense not believe in such things an "us" versus "them" mentality in regards to the LBQT community. People are people Wellesley as a school is extremely queer friendly. Sadly, bigots are everywhere: I cruise the Wellesley specific forum all the time, but found out about this thread through Wellesley's community, where people have been wondering how a tour guide would be so dense and concerned about the girl's privacy.</p>
<p>I can see where the sentiment comes from. The biggest LBQT issue for Wellesley students is not the existence of an LBQT community, but rather the rude inquiries and comments about the LBQT community from people who have never set foot on campus. I imagine the conservative tour guide gets more of these questions than most people and gave the stock answer that she uses to placate her even less tolerant friends and acquaintances. No excuse for the rudeness though.</p>