Not super important, but oberlin has an amaaaazzzing ice cream parlor in town
I don’t think that the issue is that these schools have “fallen” in the last 45 years. I think that what has happened is that hundreds of other schools have “risen.”
45 years ago, if you were a top student and and wanted to go to a top college, there were probably only about 25 schools on your radar (which included the three above).
In the intervening years, many other schools upped their game and rose into the bracket of “top schools that top students want to attend.”
NYU, WUSTL, Duke, Vandy, Rice, etc. were not in that group 45 years ago and they certainly are now… and in some cases are sitting at the very top of it.
That’s a good point, @soze. As illustrated by this n-Gram:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=the+Oberlin+College%2Cthe+Haverford+College%2Cthe+Davidson+College%2Cthe+Wesleyan+University%2Cthe+Amherst+College%2Cthe+Williams+College%2Cthe+Pomona+College%2Cthe+Bowdoin+College%2Cthe+Carleton+College&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthe%20Oberlin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Haverford%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Davidson%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Wesleyan%20University%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Amherst%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Williams%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Pomona%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Bowdoin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Carleton%20College%3B%2Cc0
N-grams measure the frequency with which words and phrases appear in print over time, as recorded by Google. From this one it’s pretty easy to see which LAC has “fallen” the furthest since its peak in the mid-1960s - it’s AMHERST.
Not sure why you prefaced them all with “the” (because IME no one ever says “the Amherst College,” but if you omit it, you get a somewhat different looking n-gram.
If you include Brandeis, I’m actually a bit surprised that it zoomed to the top of this list and has stayed there since 1970.
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Oberlin+College%2CHaverford+College%2CDavidson+College%2CAmherst+College%2CWilliams+College%2CPomona+College%2CBowdoin+College%2CCarleton+College%2CBrandeis+University&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2COberlin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CHaverford%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CDavidson%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CAmherst%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CWilliams%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CPomona%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CBowdoin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CCarleton%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CBrandeis%20University%3B%2Cc0
You have to exclude Wesleyan from this list, because there is also “Ohio Wesleyan University”, “Texas Wesleyan University”, etc.
Completely disagree with the falling star thing. Oberlin has strong and rewarded programs across the board as does Wes. They are prob my favorite LACs as they both have active and well balanced student bodies. O is granola artsy and Wes is urban artsy. Both have good campuses. My kids choose hi prestige schools, but these were in there until the end. Also consider Grinnell.
Well, in all fairness, in order to filter out references to all the other Wesleyans with state names in front of it, you have to use the definite article. But, if you remove Wesleyan from the mix entirely (and, substitute Swarthmore), you see a similar result with Amherst,Williams and Oberlin cresting in the mid-60s then gradually levelling off until pretty indistinguishable from other top LACs:
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=Swarthmore+College%2COberlin+College%2CHaverford+College%2CDavidson+College%2CAmherst+College%2CWilliams+College%2CPomona+College%2CBowdoin+College%2CCarleton+College&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2CSwarthmore%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2COberlin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CHaverford%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CDavidson%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CAmherst%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CWilliams%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CPomona%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CBowdoin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2CCarleton%20College%3B%2Cc0
Here’s what it looks like, if you include each of the above-mentioned colleges with the definite article in front of all their names (to filter out other “Wesleyans”
https://books.google.com/ngrams/graph?content=the+Brandeis+University%2Cthe+Swarthmore+College%2Cthe+Oberlin+College%2Cthe+Haverford+College%2Cthe+Davidson+College%2Cthe+Wesleyan+University%2Cthe+Amherst+College%2Cthe+Williams+College%2Cthe+Pomona+College%2Cthe+Bowdoin+College%2Cthe+Carleton+College&year_start=1945&year_end=2008&corpus=0&smoothing=3&share=&direct_url=t1%3B%2Cthe%20Brandeis%20University%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Swarthmore%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Oberlin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Haverford%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Davidson%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Wesleyan%20University%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Amherst%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Williams%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Pomona%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Bowdoin%20College%3B%2Cc0%3B.t1%3B%2Cthe%20Carleton%20College%3B%2Cc0
Considering Brandeis was less than twenty years old by the mid-sixties, it did extraordinarily well.
“I don’t think that the issue is that these schools have “fallen” in the last 45 years. I think that what has happened is that hundreds of other schools have “risen.””
In several prominent cases I’m aware of, those rises were stimulated by huge contributions to their endowments.
By contrast, according to these links, if I skimmed them correctly,Wesleyan and Brandies seemed to have suffered from suboptimal endowment growth along the way, due to ill-timed expansion strategies and/or sub-optimal endowment investment, use or financing strategies.
http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/wesleyan-university/325337-why-is-wesleyan-endowment-so-low-p1.html
http://innermostparts.org/2009/02/01/did-debt-cause-brandeis-financial-woes/
While Oberlin attributes its rankings fall more to the de-emphasis by US News of the academic peer-review survey
http://oberlin.edu/alummag/spring2007/features/the-numbers-game.html
@myyalieboy LACexpert2 seems to solely be using US News ranking on which to base the “fallen star” nomenclature, even if it’s a drop of only 5-6 spots, academic strength of student body notwithstanding
I can’t speak for Brandeis, but, I for one would hate to revert to the “old” Wesleyan of 1965, the peak year of its endowment per student. True, it was per capita the “richest college in the country” for about two decades (mainly due to a constant stream of income from “My Weekly Reader”). But, that was cold comfort to 1,500 guys with virtually nothing to do on a Saturday night - no music scene to speak of, very little in the way of dance or theater. Wesleyan had sports. And, students could bar hop downtown (thank goodness, for the 18 y/o drinking age!) But, that was it. In short, it was a typical little ivy.
No one was thinking, “Oh, wait. we need to keep our endowment numbers up so that we can remain at the top of the USNews poll” - there WAS no USNews poll. The money was there to achieve certain strategic goals, mainly, the creation of what would be the equivalent of a Seven Sister college out of virtually thin air. The alumni were not going to dig deep into their own pockets so long as the college had the reputation it did for vast wealth. Even so, it would take an entire generation before that image was eroded.
In the meantime, the place is harder to get into now than at any time in its history; its faculty has done nothing but gain in stature (stem cell research, a shared Nobel Prize, 14 NIH CAREER grants in the last ten years, the only LAC in the country to receive NIH backing for a pre-doctoral training program) and the students rarely want to leave campus.
I’m not sure which part of that I would want to give back.
“I’m not sure which part of that I would want to give back”
IMO
The parts you might consider wanting to give back would be the timing of their campus expansion to occur right before the baby bust years (not the expansion itself, but just that particular timing),and the overly conservative investment strategies referenced in the link .Because these eroded the growth of the endowment . You could have this same wonderful place today except with more money to spend, for whatever worthwhile purposes the university could find to use it for. Class sizes, faculty salaries, financial aid, summer study, etc, no doubt they could do something worthwhile with more funds.
“In the meantime, the place is harder to get into now than at any time in its history”
According to numbers from its Common Data Set ,Wesleyan admitted 23.9% in 2014. I can’t find averages published, the midpoints of 25%-75%ile ranges SAT CR+M total 1385.
For the class entering in 1971 ,22% were admitted. Average SAT 1326 old scale which is probably pretty much the same thing.
I believe that Oberlin and Wes get a lot of overlapping applications. I really don’t know what “preppie vibe” means, but there are differences in size and location that seem to me to be a lot more significant. If your concern is about finding your tribe, I think you won’t have a problem at any of them. I’d think more about what you want to study and what resources the school offers. I don’t know about the others, but Oberlin takes a lot of transfers, so from that standpoint it might be easier to integrate.
So, to summarize, back in the 1970s, Wesleyan did in fact, double in size over the space of about 5-6 years with no loss in selectivity. That IMO is no mean feat.
Ha ha I swear some people on CC are very brash! Anyways Wes and Oberlin are still great and have recognition as great schools, regardless. I don’t have an “agenda” (what the heck this isn’t a Cold War undercover operation). From students I’ve met, Wes did not impress them and generally students that get into Wes and visit love it or hate it.
In terms of Oberlin, while it’s a great school, it’s selectivity is not on par with other well known LACs. This initially surprised me.
Now please I don’t mean to denigrate these schools’ reputations and I don’t have a crazy agenda goodness!
Well, 40 posts in 48 hours doesn’t exactly make you a shrinking violet either!
Which explains why no discussion of top LACs ever seems complete without a thorough vetting of Wesleyan. Despite your rather relentless theme about its having “fallen” twenty years ago, it somehow always manages to crop up in the conversation.
Another school that remains lively and relevant to any conversation about fine and unique college experiences. I don’t recall the OP asking how selective it was.
Mmm, the jury’s still out on that.
Re#34 :
Quite the optimist.
Based on your own words "“In the meantime, the place is harder to get into now than at any time in its history”,I take it that the school has not been that selective since the 70s at least.
If that’s the case, I guess what you might say, more fairly, is Wesleyan doubled its size, and some 40 years later it is just now approaching the level of selectivity it had before its expansion.
While various schools that were unquestionably its peers in selectivity before its expansion have become considerably more selective over those same ensuing decades, both than they were before and than Wesleyan is now.To the extent that they now no longer really consider themselves peers anymore, in that particular respect.
“In terms of Oberlin, while it’s a great school, it’s selectivity is not on par with other well known LACs. This initially surprised me.”
Oberlin is an east coast school located in the midwest. It is an ultra-liberal private college located in Ohio, a financially strapped relatively conservative swing state. Only 7% of Oberlin’s students come from Ohio; only 20% are from the entire midwest. It is drivable from the east coast, but it is a long drive. Stick Oberlin in Massachusetts and its selectivity profile would look a lot different.
Selectivity of the midwest LACs has always suffered somewhat. But Grinnell got rich (Intel & Berkshire Hathaway stock) & became more competition. Carleton became more competition too, but I’m too lazy to look up how it happened.
Why?Because I agreed with you?
Meh. Wesleyan’s 1971 peers have grown MARGINALLY more selective in conventional terms over the past 40 years, with the echo boom an obvious factor. However, the real winners are a handful of colleges that were not on anyone’s radar at the time: The Claremont Colleges, most of which are headed for single digits. Btw, I’m not aware that increased selectivity translates all that well in terms of alumni achievement. As I stated elsewhere, Swarthmore’s preoccupation with SATs probably cost them their first presidential alumnus. And, where are the Amherst Joss Whedons? The Williams Matthew Weiner? I’d like to meet them. As with Wesleyan’s fantastic endowment wealth during the sixties and seventies, a marginally lower selectivity rate is cold comfort if the college in question has to reserve 1 out of every 10 male admits for members of its football team.