<p>What are Grinnell's academic strengths as an undergraduate institution? For example, Middlebury is known for foreign languages/international affairs, Vassar is known for it's strong humanities and art history, etc.</p>
<p>Apart from having an attractive campus with a large monetary endowment, what is Grinnell's claim to fame?</p>
<p>I tend to think PhD productivity is a relatively solid indicator of the strength of primarily academic fields.</p>
<p>The following information is based on the 2005-06 HEDS Weighted Baccalaureate Origins Study (made available October 2006). The national rankings of the undergraduate institutions of origin are for doctorates earned between 1995 and 2004 (i.e., 10-year time frame). There were 1,469 colleges and universities listed as origin institutions. (this: Baccalaureate</a> Origins Study is for multiple different time frames that primarily compares Earlham to nearby schools and the top 5 or so, and you can see where Grinnell is at on different disciplines over multiple generations)</p>
<p>Foreign Languages
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 1
Bryn Mawr College...................................................... # 2
Kalamazoo College..................................................... # 3
Amherst College.......................................................... # 4
Reed College................................................................. # 5
Carleton College.......................................................... # 6</p>
<p>Linguistics
San Francisco Conservatory of Music.................. # 2
California State University System Office .......... # 3
Swarthmore College .................................................. # 4
Reed College................................................................. # 5
Wilson College.............................................................. # 6
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 7</p>
<p>Anthropology
Bryn Mawr College...................................................... # 1
Beloit College................................................................ # 2
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 3</p>
<p>Economics
Swarthmore College.................................................. # 1
Grinnell College........................................................... # 2</p>
<p>Sociology
University of Chicago ................................................ # 6
Wesleyan University................................................... # 7
Carleton College.......................................................... # 8
Brown University......................................................... # 9
Wilson College ............................................................. # 10
Grinnell College........................................................... # 11</p>
<p>Psychology
Bryn Mawr College...................................................... # 6
Spelman College ......................................................... # 7
Wellesley College ........................................................ # 8
Wesleyan University................................................... # 9
Pitzer College................................................................ # 10
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 11</p>
<p>Mathematics & Statistics
Harvard University ...................................................... # 6
Pomona College .......................................................... # 7
Princeton University................................................... # 8
Rice University .............................................................. # 9
St John's College (Santa Fe, NM) ........................... # 10
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 11</p>
<p>Chemistry
Harvey Mudd College................................................ # 1
California Institute of Technology........................ # 2
Wabash College........................................................... # 3
Reed College................................................................. # 4
Carleton College.......................................................... # 5
Grinnell College........................................................... # 6</p>
<p>Biological Sciences
Harvey Mudd College................................................ # 4
University of Chicago................................................. # 5
Massachusetts Institute of Technology.............. # 6
Kalamazoo College..................................................... # 7
Earlham College........................................................... # 8
Grinnell College ........................................................... # 9</p>
<p>Oooh...I like foreign languages and linguistics! </p>
<p>I like Grinnell alot, but lately I've just been wondering what it is that separates it from other top LACs.</p>
<p>I don't know what separates any LAC from another. I've always looked at Grinnell/Carleton/Middlebury as the Midwestern AWS. Grinnell has an incredibly strong tie to social activism, I guess? Grinnel Corps predates the Peace Corps, Grinnell has a London, China and Washington campus--but Carleton has a bunch of travel abroad seminars that are taught by their professors, too. Their basketball team is famous for "The System," but honestly I doubt anyone seriously cares about athletics in this little division 3 liberal arts conference (and I'm saying that as someone who's probably going to play football).</p>
<p>Carleton's location is probably preferable since it's about an hour from St. Paul, which (imo) is a better area than Iowa City or Des Moines. I don't know much about Carleton's campus but I know the Grinnell facilities, probably because of their endowment, are pretty exceptional. St. Olaf and Beloit are working on new LEED science centers, but I believe Noyce dwarfs both of them.</p>
<p>It's kind of a toss-up. I got a vibe I wasn't thrilled with from Carleton, Macalester was nicer, Grinnell was the best of all of the schools I talked to with the exception of Dartmouth, Tufts and Lawrence. The two schools we're talking about are small liberal arts colleges in the Midwest that, relative their undergraduate population, are pretty much loaded. If you want to find differences you're probably going to have to look for them in person. I guess the closest analogy is Swarthmore and Williams, where Williams is older, a little more traditional and has more money, and Swarthmore is generally considered the more academically rigorous. I think it's just the community you prefer when you visit them.</p>
<p>Do you mean Macalester? Middlebury is in Vermont.</p>
<p>To understand your analogy, tetrishead - you're comparing Grinnell to Williams (correct?) and what exactly to Swarthmore?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do you mean Macalester? Middlebury is in Vermont.
[/quote]
Yes, I meant Macalester. I have prior "relations" with Middlebury, for some reason I accidentally inject them into any discussion in which a college starting with the letter M is involved.
[quote]
To understand your analogy, tetrishead - you're comparing Grinnell to Williams (correct?) and what exactly to Swarthmore?
[/quote]
Carleton, in my mind anyway. The reputation is that they're incredibly rigorous (which isn't to say Grinnell is an easy school). Looking back I might be wrong, some of the statistics seem to not line up with what I've heard from students at Carleton--the stupid Princeton Review rankings like "their students never stop studying" has Grinnell ranked higher, and Grinnell seems to do better in PhD productivity.</p>
<p>Onilawliet, if you scroll back through previous threads you'll find my 'Why Grinnell" which lists the things we saw that separated Grinnell from the other top LACs. Number one on the list was the smallest class sizes of ANY of the top LACs-the largest class is 30. At Middlebury, Bowdoin, Carleton and a host of others, the intro classes to bio, chem and psych (for example) were all 70 or more.</p>
<p>A clarification - on class sizes I should have said typically 50-70 for intro classes for Bowdoin, Carleton etc in comparison to Grinnell (which has largest 30 but more commonly 24). There was a comment from a Carleton student that it wasn't till his junior year that he finally began seeing the small classes that he was expecting at a SLAC. I assume Grinnell's much smaller class sizes for intro classes must have something to do with higher budgets due to their larger endowment: for instance, Bowdoin had the same approx 100 students in intro bio in the fall semester as did Grinnell, but Bowdoin had 2 sections of 50 and Grinnell had 4 sections of 24 (and Carleton's intro bio had even more students than Bowdoin). Of course the larger intro science classes in the other SLACs also break up into smaller sections when they have labs.</p>
<p>Grinnell's president has also committed to keeping the same size student body and adding more faculty. The small size of their lab science classes was cited as a particular strength.</p>
<p>These schools are all so great that, imo, it comes down to feel.</p>
<p>Just a clarification of M's Mom's clarification about Carleton class sizes and Tetrishead's comment about Carleton's PhD productivity and Swarthmore analogy:</p>
<p>M's Mom: Carleton's intro calculus, chemistry, physics, psychology class sizes only average in the 30s. Bio tends to be the one larger holdout, averaging in the 60s with a pretty wide range term to term. Freshman seminars average less than 15. Most of the remaining classes underclassmen take are in the teens to 30's, upperclassmen in the single digits to 20's. A remarkable amount of intimate interaction with faculty is established day 1 of freshman year.</p>
<p>Tetrishead: If you check out Grinnell's postings of PhD productivity you'll actually see that Carleton sits at #6 nationally, Grinnell at #10.
<a href="http://www.grinnell.edu/offices/institutionalresearch/reports/PhDProd_F06.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.grinnell.edu/offices/institutionalresearch/reports/PhDProd_F06.pdf</a>
Regarding the Swarthmore comparison: Rigor may be similar, but Carls are a ridiculously happy bunch of jokesters famous for refusing to take their work (or themselves) too seriously. A quick look at the school's web site and you'll see what I mean.</p>
<p>Thanks for the additional perspective on the Carleton class sizes, 1190. </p>
<p>I do want to mention though that it was not just intro bio classes that were larger at Carleton than Grinnell. My son was particularly interested in both chem and bio, and these were the stats from the Carleton registrar's website for the beginning chem courses last fall:<br>
Chem123 Principles of Chemistry: 47 students registered
Chem230 Equilibrium and Analysis 38 registered
Chem233 Organic Chem: 82 registered
In comparison, the Grinnell registrar's website had the foll info for beginning courses in Chem at Grinnell for the fall:
Chem129 General Chem: 24 students (3 sections each)
Chem210 Inorg Chem: 23 registered
Chem221 Organic Chem: 20 students avg (4 sections)</p>
<p>Of course, these are details in the big scheme of things - Carleton's also a fabulous school and we were extremely impressed when S and I visited.</p>
<p>Carleton sure loves their organic chem :). Smaller lab groups are better as u can probably get in Grinnell.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Tetrishead: If you check out Grinnell's postings of PhD productivity you'll actually see that Carleton sits at #6 nationally, Grinnell at #10.
Grinnell</a> College Web Service - 404 - page not found
Regarding the Swarthmore comparison: Rigor may be similar, but Carls are a ridiculously happy bunch of jokesters famous for refusing to take their work (or themselves) too seriously. A quick look at the school's web site and you'll see what I mean.
[/quote]
You're right, I went back and realized I was looking at a different time frame, and specifically within one discipline. This is the problem with too many studies--it causes an overload of information in my brain, and when I go to "in there" to retrieve something all that comes out is the wrong information and synopses of Family Guy episodes. Somehow I don't think I'll be majoring in mathematics. :P</p>
<p>I don't doubt that students at Carleton are happy, most of the Midwestern schools seem have less "baggage" than their Northeastern counterparts.</p>
<p>This baggage-free student body is why my D liked the midwest schools.</p>
<p>My son as well.</p>
<p>Agree with tetrishead, citrusbelt and bethievt.</p>
<p>Forgive the generalization, but this may be the broader answer to OniLawliet's question of what separate top Midwestern LACs from many of their more numerous Northeastern cousins.</p>
<p>Tetrishead: It is strange to me that you would compare Macalester/Grinnell/Carleton to Amherst/Williams/Swarthmore. </p>
<p>Oberlin tends to be more highly regarded (historically) than Macalester, so I would argue that it is more deserving of a slot if one must arbitrarily choose only three schools.</p>
<p>Is anyone here familiar with how strong Grinnell's English Department/Major is? Thanks.</p>
<p>As a student in his senior year at a rigorous, selective LAC, I will tell you that this thread is somewhat off the mark.</p>
<p>The quality of a particular major is contingent on many unpredictable variables, especially at an LAC. This is because the people who take a particular class and contribute to its discussion can be an integral part of the experience. Moreover, renowned faculty are not always great teachers. There have been numerous instances in which a class with a "better" professor has been worse by virtue of the students who decided to take the class, some of whom were less proficient in the field than others. At an elite LAC, it is usually safe to assume that most of the people in each class will be serious about their studies, graduate school-bound, and eager to contribute. </p>
<p>Those factors alone, regardless of the resume of the professors in the English department, amounts to a great education.
I think it is safe to assume that any program at Grinnell is of superlative quality.</p>