<p>D is considering applying to Scripps, a sch w/ which I am totally unfamiliar. What's Scripps like socially? Academically? </p>
<p>Comparison to schs I know well (Smith, MHC, Wellesley, Bryn Mawr, etc.) would really help me picture Scripps in my mind's eye.</p>
<p>Scripps is a bit different from the NE womens colleges in that it is part of the Claremont Consortium, a group of five schools that are all located adjacent to each other. As a result, students can, and do, cross register at the other colleges and many of the extracurriculars and social activities are run jointly by all five schools. As a result, Scripps probably has more opportunities for social and academic interaction with males than any of the NE colleges, with the possible exception of Bryn Mawr (because of the proximity of Haverford). </p>
<p>Scripps has a beautiful campus with great dorms. The campus is reportedly on the quiet side, but there's lots of social stuff at the other 4 colleges across the street so it's a good combination. Scripps has excellent academics, especially in the humanities, but if Scripps is weaker in a particular academic area, the opportunity to take classes at the other schools automatically fills the gap. Basically, you have both the advantages of a small all-female liberal arts college and the benefits of a small co-ed university. </p>
<p>There is a livejournal discussion group for Scripps, which I'd advise you and your daughter to check out. Just by reading what Scripps students are talking about you can learn a lot about the atmosphere. Additionally, students are pretty willing to answer questions from prospective students. Here's the link: <a href="http://www.livejournal.com/community/scripps_college/%5B/url%5D">http://www.livejournal.com/community/scripps_college/</a></p>
<p>Actually, Smith and Holyoke are part of a very similar consortium. It reminds me most of Holyoke.</p>
<p>Zagat, yes, I know Smith and Holyoke are part of the 5 college consortium but the two have a different feel. The 5 colleges are spread out geographically requiring you to take the shuttle between them, whereas the Claremonts are all right next to each other, literally within walking distance. As a result, there are many more cross-ties between the Claremonts than the 5 college consortium, especially in terms of shared activities and taking classes at the other schools. That's why I would compare the Claremont consortium more to the Bryn Mawr-Haverford relationship than the 5 college relationship. Academically, however, I would say that I agree with you that Scripps is probably most similar to Mt. Holyoke.</p>
<p>Could anyone expand a bit more on Scripps' general atmosphere? How about academic reputation?</p>
<p>The term "consortium" doesn't really convey the degree of shared resources at the Claremont Colleges. For example, dining facilities, libraries, health services, IT, and security are all operated by a central administration.</p>
<p>In addition, the science courses at Scripps, Pitzer, and Claremont McKenna are offered by the "Joint Science Program", basically a shared science division.</p>
<p>It's a fascinating model: five small undergrad colleges, each with a specific identity, sharing a large campus infrastructure while maintaining autonomous endowments, administration, and admissions. Combined, the five are about the size of the undergrad component of a mid-size university.</p>
<p>Pomona and Scripps are traditional general-purpose LACs. Harvey-Mudd and Claremont-McKenna are very specialized. Departments in those specialties are much, much larger than you would find at an LAC of their sizes. For example, McKenna has nearly 300 Econ majors, which is 3 to 6 times more than you would typically find at an LAC.</p>
<p>Bryn Mawr and Haverford have a little bit of that, with Bryn Mawr kids taking all their visual arts courses at Haverford. But, it still doesn't approach the shared resources at the Claremont Colleges.</p>
<p>I think the model has a lot of merit.</p>
<p>Didn't know all that, sounds amazing.</p>
<p>Scripps is most similar to Mt. Holyoke with its distributional requirements, but it also has a core humanities curriculum of 3 courses, which is modeled on what Smith had 50 years ago, but abandoned. It's a terrific place.</p>
<p>The shared resources are wonderful! What is surprising, however, is the level of duplication, which in some areas prevents each of the schools from becoming more than the sum of its parts. The combined music resources, for example, of Scripps and Pomona, if organized well, would put it up there with one of the Ivies, or at least one of the musical LACs, but the lack of specialization means that, for example, there is little musical theatre, no opera, no baroque program, etc., all of which could be found at the 5-Colleges in Mass. Similarly true with language offerings. ID is right that it should have the undergrad resources of a good mid-size u. But in fact it doesn't.</p>
<p>It is still a terrific place (and very, very beautiful), but really could be so much more.</p>
<p>Yes. The degree of duplication is just as impressive as the degree of cooperation! From what I have read, it is a crazy-quilt of resources, some shared by none, some shared by all, some shared by three colleges, but not all, and so on and so forth.</p>
<p>In reading a lengthy report on the future of the consortium published by the central Claremont Colleges entity, the protectiveness of the individual schools is the barrier to more efficient sharing of resources, for example, shared professor chairs. Most of those intiatives require centralizing more of the endowments and operating budgets.</p>
<p>My hunch is that Pomona is the 800 pound gorilla when it comes to Claremont politics. It was Pomona that found itself with more money than they knew what to do with years ago. One option was to found grad school divisions and become a university. Instead, they opted to start a second undergrad school (Scripps), then another, and another, and another.</p>
<p>I know this would never happen, but it would probably make sense for Scripps to go co-ed and specialize like Harvey-Mudd or Claremont McKenna, but in the music and the arts.</p>
<p>I'm sold on the theoretical model from an economic efficiency standpoint. However, at the end of the day, if you really take advantage of the efficiencies, you may find yourself with just another mid-size University. Does Claremont-McKenna really offer a different product than the combination of large Econ and Poli Sci departments and Government/Bus/Pre-Law theme housing at a mid-size University? If all five colleges really specialized to that degree, why not just make them all large departments in a mid-size undergrad university? Or, why not just take Smith or Amherst or Pomona and grow the enrollment to 5000?</p>
<p>Be that as it may, I think it's a fascinating model. I'm a little surprised more people don't talk about it, if for no other reason than it is refreshing to see something completely different. One of the problems is that, in marketing the five colleges, none of them really spell out in plain English what each of the five is all about. Pomona talks about Pomona, Scripps about Scripps, CMC about CMC, etc.</p>
<p>idad, you are right that pomona is the 800 pound gorilla. I think, in some ways, they are reluctant to share certain things with "inferior" schools. </p>
<p>There is a certain amount of bad blood between Pomona students and students at the other 4 colleges, in the sense that Pomonans usually stick to their own campus and are looked on as snobby. Whether or not this is true.... well, opinions vary. But let's just say that, for awhile, Claremont McKenna had a tshirt that said, "puck fomona." Just as Pomona has a bit of Swarthmore envy, so does McKenna have a bit of Pomona envy. </p>
<p>Personally, I have a lot of respect for Scripps, Claremont McKenna, and Mudd. But Pitzer, IMHO, is not really up to the standards of the others. I took 2 classes there and was not really challenged in either one, and a lot of the students were not very intellectually engaged. Of course, that's just my experience.</p>
<p>Scripps is probably a lot like Holyoke, but with a VERY California feel. Think orange trees and Spanish architecture. Think girls in swimsuits doing their homework on beach towels on the lawn. Scripps girls are a varied bunch... you will see everything from nose rings to tie dye to banana republic. But all are very bright and motivated. </p>
<p>Irene, Pomona '03</p>
<p>
[quote]
Just as Pomona has a bit of Swarthmore envy
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That doesn't make a bit of sense to me. I view those two schools as absolute equals in every regard -- one being very California and one being very "northeast".</p>
<p>Wasn't Pitzer originally conceived as the Hampshire College or New College of Florida style unstructured, experimental school? I don't think any of those 70's experiments has really panned out as well as hoped. In fairness thought, it is really hard to build a college from the ground up in 30 years.</p>
<p>Yes, I think of Pomona and Swat as being very similar, as do many Pomona students. But since Swat (and William and Amherst, etc.) are older and on the east coast, there is kind of a sense that we are just copycatting them. Even Pomona's administration sometimes seems like they're trying too hard to be "just like" an east coast LAC. Like, "SEE? We Californians can grow Ivy too!"</p>
<p>Pitzer was actually founded in the early 60s, I believe. A couple years back they celebrated their 40th "birthday." The front page of the 5 college newspaper queried: "Pitzer: a noble experiment or a 40 year hangover?" or something along those lines.</p>
<p>"I don't think any of those 70's experiments has really panned out as well as hoped. In fairness thought, it is really hard to build a college from the ground up in 30 years."</p>
<p>I think Evergreen has turned out far better than anyone would have imagined. It has become a major feeder for well-spoken, well-read individuals who know how to write making their way into key positions in county and state government, major social welfare and environmental organizations, and with more than its fair share of artists and musicians (think the Simpsons). </p>
<p>Turned out a lot better than many things from the 70s (think the Williams library!) </p>
<p>Both Pitzer and Hampshire have been hampered by very low endowment levels (which can't be made up by the state.) With the crush of state u. admissions in California, I think there will be major positive changes at Pitzer over the next decade, as the student body changes.</p>
<p>ID - Pomona did not "start" Scripps; Eleanor Scripps did, with the explicit idea of founding a "Smith" on the west coast. I don't want to leave the impression that I think Scripps inadequate - I think it is great, and both my d. and I thought there were significant areas where it was actually better than Pomona. But I do think that, had they organized themselves like the 5-colleges in Mass. with the extensive 5-college certificate programs and joint faculty, they could have been so much more.</p>
<p>Scripps was the money behind Scripps College. The vision for the Claremont Colleges was that of James Blaisdell, President of Pomona from 1910 on. In 1925, he opened the second school, The Claremont Graduate School. In the 1920's, he had sold Eleanor Scripps (of the newpaper Scripps) on his idea. She purchased most of the land adjacent to Pomona the colleges now sit on and made a $500,000 donation to found a woman's college as the third school. Claremont Men's College (was added in 1947).</p>
<p>Here's a little blurb on Blaisdell:</p>
<p>Here's a more detailed account (starting on page 4 of the PDF) including quotes from fund-raising letters Blaisdell wrote to Scripps and her replies. The first step in actually implementing his plan was acquiring land surrounding Pomona. Eleanor Scripps purchased much of the needed land.</p>
<p>I think it's accurate to say that both Pomona (Blaisdell) and Scripps played instrumental roles in the founding of the women's college.</p>
<p>can you really get a women's college experience in such close proximity to 4 co-ed schools?</p>
<p>I suppose it depends on what you mean by women's college experience. It is true that males from the other schools can register to take Scripps courses, so not all classes will be all female. I guess that DOES kind of defeat part of the purpose of going to a women's college. </p>
<p>I do see your concern. If D wants a true women's college experience, she may be better off somewhere else. Scripps might be better for people who want something more in the middle-- an environment that is VERY supportive of women, where they can live in dorms with women exclusively, but also an environment where there is quite a bit of contact with men.</p>
<p>Here's why Pomona is the 800-pound gorilla and why they may be reluctant to "share" more resources. </p>
<p>2004 Endowments:</p>
<p>Pomona: $1,150 million
Claremont-McKenna: $316 million
Harvey Mudd: $179 million
Scripps: $179 million
Pitzer: $52.7 million</p>
<p>I agree with the above opinions that Scripps' proximity to co-ed schools is similar to Bryn Mawr and Haverford, but that culturally and academically, it's a lot more like Mt. Holyoke.</p>
<br>
<p>can you really get a women's college experience in such close proximity to 4 co-ed schools?</p>
<br>
<p>Most of the selective women's colleges have this kind of relationship to a greater or lesser extent. Of the Seven Sisters that remain, Wellesley is the only one without a great deal of cross-registration, and even there, there's a lot of interaction, especially with MIT (there's a co-ed singing group with MIT men, etc.). Even Mills has a co-ed grad program. Most of the women's colleges view this as a plus, not a minus. At BMC, which has possibly the most intimate brother-school relationship after Barnard, despite the presence of a few Haverford men in the courses, it's extremely clear who's running the show.</p>
<p>"D is considering applying to Scripps, a sch w/ which I am totally unfamiliar. What's Scripps like socially? Academically? </p>
<p>Just wanted to add that, while my d. really liked Scripps (and so did I), it didn't have anything like the air of intellectual excitement that she sensed at Smith. Some of it is sheer size, I think. Some of it is in the new or unique ventures - the engineering school, the women's financial network, the amazing JYA offerings, the STRIDE research positions for first- and second-year students. Some of it is the 250 older students. Some of it is the very "happening" town (No one would ever mistake Claremont for Northampton.) Some of it is that Smith is the hub of the 5 colleges (with more imports than exports.) Some of it is the 5-college offerings (and roving faculty).</p>
<p>My d. wasn't actually looking for a women's college, and was accepted at a slew of co-ed ones, from Williams on "down" (whatever that means). But, for her, she simply found more "there, there" than at the other LACs she visited.</p>
<p>Though I haven't yet visited Scripps, I agree with you mini... Smith has a very exciting, happening atmosphere. I think it has to do partly with the type of student that goes there (Smithies seemed to me to be very vocal, involved and spunky) and partly to do with the town of Northampton, which is something of a cultural mecca in the Pioneer Valley. Mini, what did you find the atmposphere to be like at Scripps?</p>