<p>Swarthmore has massive grade deflation from what I hear.</p>
<p>Grade deflation, possibly (though really, at least now, more like less grade inflation than most other top schools, not true deflation)...but Swarthmore certainly has grades! Perhaps the poster is confused about what school they're talking about, because the only aspect of Swarthmore that could be considered non-graded is the pass/fail first semester...but MIT does this also, and at Brown, one can take, theoretically, as many classes as they want P/F, and I doubt the poster would call those schools crazy.</p>
<p>I love Swarthmore, and I am biased because I'm heading there next year (ED admit, whoo!), and certainly think it's one of the finest academic institutions in the country, on par with Williams and Amherst. But, I do think Pomona probably ties, and that the four of them are really all on equal footing. And of course, Wellesley, Middlebury, etc. are excellent also, and probably have just as good academics, but I don't know if I would put them quite at the level where I would consider them interchangeable with the other four. But only in this twisted CC-world where we make minuscule and largely irrelevant distinctions such as that. Every college that has been mentioned on this thread is amazing, really.</p>
<p>
[quote]
this twisted CC-world where we make minuscule and largely irrelevant distinctions such as that
[/quote]
ya got that right!</p>
<p>Swarthmore is definitely on par with Amherst & Williams. But the impression I get (not being an expert on any of them) is that Swat is the toughest school to survive. And I don't mean that in a negative way, it sort of speaks to the 'grade deflation' remark--it's just a bit of a pressure cooker. Intense!</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only thing negative I can think of about Swarthmore is that it's intense. If that's not for you, then maybe Pomona
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uhh, Pomona is quite intense too. </p>
<p>I would say Pomona and Harvey Mudd aren't even third. More like tied for first with Williams and Amherst. Although HMC isn't really a true "LAC" so it's hard to compare it to LACs.</p>
<p>Wow, I found the environment and atmosphere at Pomona to be much more relaxed than Swarthmore. YMMV of course ;)</p>
<p>sorry football, i would argue that there are several schools above middlebury that havent even been mentioned. but again, there are such small distinctions at the top, that its hard to differentiate among the top 10</p>
<p>Most people don't realize it, but based on acceptance rates and SAT averagess alone, Pomona is far and away the most difficult to get into. It's endowment per student is on par with AWS too.</p>
<p>I also think that Swarthmore's pretty interchangable with Williams and Amherst, just minus the amount of jocks. (I'm biased too, going there ED, but they're really very close academically, just with different locations and student body makeups.)</p>
<p>but middlebury jsut seams like its rising the msot, and by far te msot fun</p>
<p>hmm and I believe Wellesley is underrated because of the all-women factor.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Most people don't realize it, but based on acceptance rates and SAT averagess alone, Pomona is far and away the most difficult to get into. It's endowment per student is on par with AWS too.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>So true. If you look at USNWR rankings for selectivity, Mudd Pomona and Amherst are tied for first for selectivity. IMO Mudd and Pomona get the shaft in the general rankings (especially Mudd) because of their extremely small sizes (even for LACs).</p>
<p>Yeah, I think the Pomona colleges are so selective in large because of such a small population. So in some sense, their selectivity are "inflated" because they admit so few people every year.</p>
<p>I don't think so. We accept a very few number of people a year, but we also receive a very few number of applications a year. Also it is "Claremont Colleges", not "Pomona Colleges."</p>
<p>3rd best LAC for what? Football? Prestige? Art history majors? Oboe players?</p>
<p>There's no best school for everyone. It's all about fit.</p>
<p>Bowdoin! Yeah!</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yeah, I think the Pomona colleges are so selective in large because of such a small population. So in some sense, their selectivity are "inflated" because they admit so few people every year.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, LAC's can only dream of reaching the selectivity of much larger industrial schools such as Berkeley! </p>
<p>You are so right, Vicissi ... one only needs to check the selectivity of Caltech to understand that schools that accept "few" people have inflated selectivity. Come to think about it, does that apply to Princeton as well?</p>
<p>/end sarcasm!</p>
<p>pomona is good - i could see that as a third, but wellessley is ll girls os it odnt really count</p>
<p>I would go with Swarthmore, Reed and Carleton as top three.</p>
<p>speaking of Carleton, I am a little surprised to not hear its name mentioned (I'm biased, considering I will be going there next year). I know people here are anti-USNWR, but it did give Carleton a higher ranking than Pomona, so I'm not quite sure why everyone is jumping on Pomona over it....</p>
<p>That being said, I love Pomona, my sister is a senior there, and she can't say enough good things about it. If I hadn't gotten accepted at Carleton, Pomona was my #1 choice(although, if I hadn't gotten into Carleton, the odds of me getting into Pomona would have been pretty low...)</p>
<p>So, why no mention of Carleton?</p>
<p>you want to go to the best LAC where you have almost a 50% chance of getting accepted? Reed College in Portland.</p>