<p>Although I’m not zealous about the “college rankings,” the three LAC’s always seem to rank the top 3. What creates this unbreakable barrier between the Little 3 and other schools? Smarter kids? Better professors? Affluency? Name value?</p>
<p>The term "Little</a> Three" refers to the traditional athletic rivalry between Williams, Amherst, and Wesleyan, which dates back to the late 19th Century and continues today. Swarthmore is not a member of the "Little Three".</p>
<p>In terms of college rankings, Williams, Amherst, and Swarthmore stand apart from all of the other LACs in the country -- except two -- in terms of wealth, as measured by endowment per student. The only other LACs that are competitive by this measure are Pomona and Grinnell. However, these schools have the (perhaps unfair) disadvantage of being located outside the Northeastern US, where LACs enjoy the most public recognition and prestige. Williams, Amherst, and Swarthmore have the advantage of both $$ and location.</p>
<p>As an alumnus, I think Amherst is special. However, in truth, there are probably at least 20 other excellent LACs where one can get a comparable education. Just as CCers seem to focus on the ivies for universities, I would advise prospective students to look beyond these three colleges. It could turn out that location, academic program, or the nebulous but nonetheless real criterion of "fit" may make another school preferable. Additionally, it is difficiult to predict who will get accepted into the most selective LACs these days so it is good to have other alternatives (many equally good) if a student truly is interested in a liberal arts education.</p>
<p>Pomona is more selective than Williams, Amherst and Swarthmore. It is also the richest LAC on a per student basis. Its location near the other Claremont Colleges mean more flexibility than AWS can ever offer. It only suffers from location, but in terms of quality of lifer Pomona is higher up due to its location and the school's long tradition of caring for its students. AWS can't even compete with Pomona financial aid (with the exception of HYPS, very few schools can. Pomona should probably be the #1 LAC in the country.</p>
<p>Well...it's not...but it is a great school.</p>
<p>All 4 (WASP) are awesome schools. To get into all four of them is itself a massive achievement!</p>
<p>Average Freshman Need-Based Financial Aid:
Amherst College - $33,274
Pomona - $26,674</p>
<p>Average Entering Freshman SAT:
Amherst - 1430
Pomona - 1430</p>
<p>Endowment, Students, Endowment per Student:
Amherst - $1.7bil, 1,648, $1,032,000
Pomona - $1.46bil, 1,548, $943,152</p>
<p>So, yeah. Most of this is nitpicking, although I, personally, find the additional $7,000 that Amherst gives in financial aid on average to be quite significant. Pomona is most certainly comparable in terms of student quality, but its location outside of the Northeast is more a hindrance than you acknowledge. Most of the highly sought-after faculty are looking to teach in the Northeast, and as such AWS get the lion's share of the best faculty around in relation to LACs outside of the Northeast.</p>
<p>Anyway, it's hard to see how Pomona is "more selective" or why it should be considered the best LAC in the country. It's a fair argument, but it's not as distinct and apparent as you make it out to be. Pomona has its virtues, but AWS do, too.</p>
<p>Look, if someone wants to go to a liberal arts college with 6,000 other students, they might as well go to Dartmouth. End of story.</p>
<p>WASP...that's so perfect. Hahaha.</p>
<p>seriously!</p>
<p>Just to correct some misinformation above:</p>
<p>Top Schools Ranked by Endowment per student NACUBO</a> 2007 data</p>
<p>1 Princeton $2,331,935
2 Yale $2,212,096
3 Harvard $2,070,846
4 Pomona $1,139,742
5 Grinnell $1,038,883
6 Amherst $1,008,724
7 MIT $973,414
8 Swarthmore $971,181
9 Williams $923,404
10 Rice $907,589</p>
<p>Top 7 LACS ranked by Acceptance Rate (USNWR)</p>
<p>1 Pomona 18% (16.3% 2007-08)
2 Swarthmore 19%
3 Amherst 19%
4 Williams 19%
5 Claremont McKenna 22%
6 Bowdoin 22%
7 Middlebury 22%</p>
<p>Top 7 LACs ranked by 25th-75th% SAT scores (USNWR)</p>
<p>1 Harvey Mudd College (CA) 1420-1550
2 Pomona College (CA) 1370-1520
3 Amherst College (MA) 1330-1530
4 Carleton College (MN) 1330-1490
5 Swarthmore College (PA) 1320-1530
6 Williams College (MA) 1320-1520
7 Claremont McKenna College (CA) 1310-1490</p>
<p>Pomona is a great school. But fewer notable alum, not as well developed a network, not as good placing students into top grad schools. And it was the location for Teen Wolf Two. Maybe an east coast bias in favor of WAW in that the Ivies are all here and the competition for great profs seems to be more intense. A student would be proud to attend any of the top LACs. Anytime you make a list something has to be at the top. For over the 200 years the Little Three have been doing a pretty good job. </p>
<p>"Its founders strove to create "a college of the New England type;" in order to reach this goal, the board of trustees included graduates of Williams, Dartmouth, Colby and Yale.[2]" </p>
<p>Not sure they have surpassed their role models yet.</p>
<p>I think the endowment per student for universities should be considered separately from that for colleges. The endowment for the universities also helps support graduate programs and the infrastructure for such programs, so it may not be fair to use the undergraduate population in the denominator for these figures. I believe that endowment per student for colleges may reflect more accurately money that is actually directed towards undergraduate education. In that sense, the endowment per "undergraduate" student for universities may be an overestimation of actual expenditures from that endowment that are used to support undergraduate education. </p>
<p>All of these schools are terrific and they not only have a tradition of excellence but also the financial means to maintain and promote it. Other colleges that have large endowments include: Grinnell, Wellesley, and Smith. I believe their endowments are greater than, or approach, one billion-all directed toward undergraduate education.</p>
<p>For whatever it is worth, the little three-Williams, Amherst, and Wesleyan are often called the little ivies. They are as old as many of the ivies and have a lot of their own traditions and rivalries (primarily athletic) similar to the ivies-just on a smaller scale. They also tend to draw similar students although the focus is more on a liberal arts education. The other schools on the above list as well as some other excellent colleges are certainly comparable academically. However, they do not have the same mystique-perhaps they have not been around long enough or perhaps of their locations outside NE.</p>
<p>What we found was that these schools, because they have been around so long, not only have long-established traditions, but opportunities which have evolved through the last 180 years or so. They have inherited not just money from alums but places and inroads into places like the Folger Library for their students. Their location also serves them well. They are not that far from what many consider the cultural hub of the US, (NY) and government hub (DC). D's Renaissance Marvels class went to NY twice, then they flew them all to DC to see a play and spend time in the Folger. Schools newer and farther just don't have those same abilities. A firend, who is a dean at MIT, when she heard D was accepted at Amherst, said, "You have to let her go- it's one of the mini ivies! They do so much for their students!"</p>
<p>One person's "mystique" is another person's "inflated assessment based on perception, not fact".</p>
<p>Regarding grad school placement, the WSJ 2003 list of Top</a> Feeder Schools to top grad schools showed the following:</p>
<p>Top Feeder Schools (Only LACs listed)
5 Williams
9 Amherst
10 Swarthmore
13 Pomona
15 Wellesley
18 Haverford
22 Claremont McKenna
23 Middlebury</p>
<p>This ranking, however, was criticized for being narrow and "Northeastern" biased, with only these schools considered as "Top Grad Schools" listed</a> here</p>
<p>Med Schools: Columbia, Harvard, Johns Hopkins, UCSF, and Yale
MBA Programs: Chicago, Dartmouth Tuck, Harvard, MIT Sloan, and Penn Wharton
Law Schools: Chicago, Columbia, Harvard, Michigan, Yale</p>
<p>The study did not include several top ranked grad schools, including (USNWR) #2 Stanford Business, #3 Stanford Law, #7 Stanford Med, #8 UC Berkeley Business (Haas), and #8 UC Berkeley Law. If these schools were included in the WSJ rankings, one would think schools like Pomona and Claremont Mckenna, because of their west coast location, would have risen in the rankings.</p>
<p>And if you're talking about students who go on to get PhD's, Pomona ranks well there too...</p>
<p>Baccalaureate</a> Origin of PhD Recipients 1986-1995
3 Swarthmore
14 Pomona
15 Williams
16 Amherst</p>
<p>All these schools are magnificent - I just don't think Williams/Amherst/Swarthmore are necessarily better, when looked at objectively, mystique notwithstanding.</p>
<p>/\ Sarah's Dad... since you made a caveat about the WSJ rankings regarding geographic bias (which is plausible), I'd also encourage you to analyze the rankings you quote in other directions as well. </p>
<p>1) I forget the #s, but I believe the difference in % going to a "top" professional school between #5 to #23 is very small. I think it ranges from about 4% to 2.5% or something like that... for a class of 400 kids, that's like an absolute difference of maybe 4-5 more kids... so a numerical ranking really exaggerates absolute differences... not to mention that, at least in medicine, I can guarantee that any of the top 25-30 hospitals/ med schools (or more) deliver similar training and can get you to where ever you want to go (a cardiac cath is the same at Brigham vs Penn or Duke or Case or Mayo). </p>
<p>2) In terms of ranking acceptance rates, if you really want to, I think you have to consider that, I believe, only Amherst and Haverford have one ED where they accept only 33% of their entering class. Other schools accept up to 50% of their entering class with EDI/EDII or admit a higher proportion of their class under EDI such as Williams that accepts 40% (if I remember correctly). As such, these schools can accept less students in the RD round where yields are much lower and less favorable for schools (40-50%) than ED that is binding (98-100% yield) to fill the remainder of their class. In terms of absolute %, these schools should have an adjusted acceptance rate of 2-4% higher the greater they are from a 33% EDI baseline... if you want to compare such rates.</p>
<p>I'm not really a fan of ranking any of these top schools by using such blunt tools but, if you want to quote rankings IMHO, I think it's important to recognize their limitations... both to support and refute preconceived notions of where one's favorite school should be. :)</p>
<p>HC - I agree completely. For instance, although Pomona has two rounds of binding early decision, for 2007 they accepted only [url=<a href="http://www.pomona.edu/institutionalresearch/collegedata/CDS%200708_v2.htm%5D20.7%%5B/url">http://www.pomona.edu/institutionalresearch/collegedata/CDS%200708_v2.htm]20.7%[/url</a>] (132 of 637) of those ED applicants, lower than any other LAC, I believe, and lower than most ivys. Pomona could have easily filled it's entire freshman class from its ED applicants alone (637 applicants for 375 spots), which would have generated an overall acceptance rate of 6.3% (5907 applicants for 375 spots, assuming 100% yield). Although schools can definitely "appear" more selective by accepting more than the typical 30-35% from their ED applicants, Pomona actually "appears" less selective than they really are, by limiting ED acceptances.</p>
<p>As far as cardiac caths, I'd say you're generally right, having twirled a few Judkins catheters myself ;)</p>
<p>edit... </p>
<p>WSJ:</p>
<p>9) Amherst 7.5%... 23) Midd 3.5%... difference of absolute 4%... 16 more kids in a class of 400 which separates a WSJ rank of 14 "rungs"... that's almost a kid per rung!</p>
<p>(I see the academic MDs in the house pymen too... have consensus :) )</p>
<p>Many of the ed's at the little ivy's are athletes, not to pad percentages. Williams for example has won the Sears Cup for many years running as the top Division lll athletic college. Sort of the Stanford of the LACs. Williams Amherst football was featured on College Gameday this fall. Does Pomona play sports?</p>