<p>I am having a tough time deciding between these two schools for ED. I am interested in neuroscience and theatre. I am also very social and like to party on the weekends. I want a school where people aren't interested in grades, but, rather learning and having intellectual conversations. I play the jazz piano and really enjoy music. I would classify myself as pretty hipster (sorry for sounding pretentious).</p>
<p>I really like Wesleyan because of the abundant performing opportunities and intellectual student body. However, the campus is not as nice and it is about an hour and a half from my house (a little close).</p>
<p>I really love the Middlebury campus and love the idea of being in rural Vermont near abundant skiing, but I am wary about the preppiness of the school and the lack of theatre opportunities.</p>
<p>Wesleyan sounds better for you. The kids at Middlebury and Bowdoin tend to have a certain “hi-pro glow” that may or may not be to your liking, whereas Wes kids have a somewhat grittier vibe as well as a rather precious radicalism. Prepare for alternative pronouns and gender designations!</p>
<p>^Hey, let’s get @arcadia down here! It seems like every year at about this time, the Wesleyan forum becomes the lightening rod for NESCAC bashing. :-?? </p>
<p>@wesleyan97: I always wanted to know how this works. Since the kids at Middlebury and Bowdoin have a certain “hi-pro glow” and Wes kids have a grittier vibe, I want to know how that works. Do Admissions at Middlebury and Bowdoin seek out those glossy kids and select them in greater percentages? Or do them come in looking like a Wes admits and then are groomed and shined up over the next four years. Does the faculty at Wesleyan fashion that kind of granularity and, if they do, how and why? How do the student populations at fairly similar institutions become so different or do they start out that way? Can you indulge my fascination with this here?</p>
<p>haha. I’ll be brutally honest and totally subjective here. The guys at Bowdoin and Middlebury (especially Bowdoin) are unusually healthy looking, rugged, and attractive. The girls (I’m as PC as anyone but you seem really to want to know) on average have that kind of field-hockeyish old-money horsey look. There was also a phenomenon referred to, terribly, as “Bowdoin butt.” I’m not going to spell that one out for you. I was a skinny twerp who looked about 12 years old when I started at Bowdoin; once when I went to the librarian’s desk, he leaned over and said, “Hello, are you from one of our local schools?” At Wesleyan the women definitely had the upper hand in terms of attractiveness–lots of stunning, exotic, and stylish NYC-looking types. The guys were a much more mixed bag. You’d be very hard pressed to find a nebbish at Bowdoin, while at Wesleyan there was kind of a surfeit of scrawny, unathletic, idiosyncratic looking boys (like myself). The jocks at Wesleyan segregate themselves much more than at Bowdoin, where because the small student body has to field a full complement of teams, the students tend to more often be athletic than not. Strangely the athletes at Bowdoin were much kinder than those at Wesleyan (esp. the helmet sports), who to be honest were often quite boorish (throwing weights around in Freeman, etc.).I was at Wesleyan at the transition between hippies and hipsters, and by gritty I mean unkempt, not outdoorsy. Somehow at Bowdoin the students manage to be both rugged and polished. Okay, to finally address your question…the kids at Bowdoin arrived looking quite shiny and prep schoolish (much as they do at Middlebury and Williams) and those at Wesleyan look more self-consciously “other,” wearing keffieyehs etc. The faculty does nothing to fashion the students in any particular direction, except perhaps in the identity-political majors/courses. I know precious little about other LACs. I think Wesleyan wants more of the shiny kids–for one thing they can pay full freight. I remember being driven to my Wesleyan interview by a lax player friend from Bowdoin. Barbara-Jan Wilson, then dean of admissions, gave my friend the serious up and down and launched into an almost seductive you’ll-love-it-here speech before he could tell her that he was just there with me. Speaking to what seems your larger question, I think much of the sameness one observes at the various LACs results from self-selection, not some process of moulding by the administration or faculty. Sorry for what amounted to a silly bunch of digressions. I don’t know that this is a topic one can or should take seriously. </p>
<p>Amherst and Williams don’t have graduate students in the sciences, a fact you cannot ignore when making that comparison.</p>
<p>Speaking of diversity, Wesleyan is now the least racially diverse of the Little Three, and I’m guessing the socioeconomic gap might be even larger.</p>
<p>Wesleyan:
31% students of color in Classes 2014–2017 (7% Black or African American; 8% Asian or Asian American; 10% Latino or Hispanic; .07% Native American, .1% Native Hawaiian or other Pacific Islander; 6% two or more races); 8% international students</p>
<p>Amherst:
0.1% American Indian/Alaskan Native
13.9% Asian
12.9% Black/African-American
14.2% Hispanic/Latino
6.2% Multi-race (not Hispanic/Latino)
0.0% Native Hawaiian/ Pacific Islander
46.2% White
6.6% Unknown</p>
<p>Williams:
Asian/Native Hawaiian/Pacific Islander
11.0%
Black or African American
8.0%
Hispanic/Latino
11.0%
White
58.0%
Two or More Races
5.0%
Non-Resident Alien
7.0%</p>
If you add internationals from Africa, Asia and Latin America, the total non-white population at Wesleyan hovers around 40%. But, race is only one part of the picture: Wesleyan has the third largest percentage of Pell Grant recipients in NESCAC a fact noted by the New York Times recently:
<p>“If you add internationals from Africa, Asia and Latin America, the total non-white population at Wesleyan hovers around 40%.”</p>
<p>If you exclude graduate science students (who function essentially as laborers; a Wesleyan PhD in the sciences isn’t going to get them far), does that number hold up?</p>
<p>I’m relieved about the economic diversity rating. When that article first came out Vassar’s position atop the list surprised me so much that I barely noticed the rest of it.</p>
Graduate students are practically invisible at Wesleyan, but, if you did include them, the non-white population would probably increase to about 50%.</p>
<p>OP, out of curiousity, why isn’t Vassar on your list? It has really strong neuroscience, drama and music, is farther from your house than Wes, but not as remote as Mid. It is probably about as social as Wes. Their URSI program means that even 1st years can get paid summer research opportunities. </p>