|By Alice on Monday, August 27, 2001 - 05:47 pm: Edit|
I know many women's colleges are highly regarded and competitive, but are often associated with a negative stigma. I am very interested in applying to Wellesley early decision (it's a ballpark/reach), but I do not have the resources to visit. I was wondering if anybody had any opinions on the women's college experience in general, as well as any information on the Wellesley environment.
|By califmom on Tuesday, August 28, 2001 - 08:45 am: Edit|
You may want to check salon.com, in which a recent (1999?) Wellesley alum wrote a pretty scathing article about the women's college experience. Of course, the article prompted a barrage of letters from other Seven Sisters alumni, some agreeing with her and some disagreeing. Check out the letters, too. FWIW, my sister went to a Seven Sisters school in the late 1970's and loved it, but perhaps times have changed!
|By Roger (Roger) on Friday, August 31, 2001 - 11:10 am: Edit|
Alice, one other suggestion. If you want a women's college experience that offers more coed mixing than some schools, check out Barnard. The fact that it is part of Columbia University and its location on Broadway right across the street make for a more integrated experience. Cross-registration opportunities and shared activities also create more integration. While some feel that the true women's college experience is diluted by the proximity to CU, others find the mix just right. Unfortunately (for applicants, anyway), as Columbia's selectivity has skyrocketed, it has also made Barnard tougher to get into. It's not uncommon for female students to use Barnard as a backup to their Columbia College app.
|By Cindy on Wednesday, September 19, 2001 - 10:43 am: Edit|
Is it true that Barnard students are second-class citizens at Columbia?
|By Roger (Roger) on Friday, September 21, 2001 - 09:40 pm: Edit|
Hi, Cindy. As an ex-CU parent, I'd say there is limited truth to that statement. While some CC students may have a generic attitude that Barnard has lower admissions standards, that doesn't seem to prevent them from forming great friendships with individual Barnard students. If you think Barnard is for you, I wouldn't think twice about this issue. I think that students from all parts of the University will accept you on your own merits. Columbia has perhaps the most diverse population of any college, and you will find that race, religion, national origin, and even the college you are admitted to, don't make a lot of difference in your individual interactions. Good luck!
|By Cindy on Saturday, September 22, 2001 - 10:36 pm: Edit|
Thanks, Roger. I'm planning on doing an overnight visit at Barnard. That should give me a chance to get some first-hand opinions on this, plus get a general feel for the school.
|By Myrna on Wednesday, October 10, 2001 - 09:40 pm: Edit|
I heard about research that showed that women educated in an all-female environment were more successful than those who were in coed schools. Not too long ago I heard someone on a radio talk show that said that was an isolated finding, and that most research didn't show much difference. Anyone know who's BSing whom? I think I'd prefer a coed university, but as long as there were coed social opportunities I could probably handle a women's college.
|By Joan (Jyber209) on Wednesday, October 31, 2001 - 08:05 am: Edit|
I have visited Barnard, Wellesley and Smith with my daughter. I think it is true that Barnard is like a "second-class citizen" to Columbia. The great majority of those who apply to both Barnard and Columbia and are accepted into Columbia choose to go there rather than to Barnard.
Smith and Wellesley, on the other hand, are sufficient unto themselves. However, Smith has the advantage of the 5-college consortium, providing plenty of interaction, activities on all five campuses, cross-registration, all supported by a free bus system (runs about every half hour). These campuses are all liberal and open-minded with respect to sexual preference. Lesbains are accepted however most students are heterosexual (not that it should matter!).
For my daughter, her theoretical preference would probably be a coed school but she found no coed school she likes as much as she liked Smith. She loves the campus, the classes she visited, the housing system, the community and consortium. Also, on women's campuses there is less concern about an outrageous party/drinking scene, a big issue of hers. She feels that Smith offers the closeness of a sorority without the negatives.
|By Roger (Roger) on Thursday, November 01, 2001 - 09:50 am: Edit|
>>The great majority of those who apply to both Barnard and Columbia and are accepted into Columbia choose to go there rather than to Barnard.<<
I'm sure this is true, but I'm not sure that it demonstrates second-class status for Barnard. Applicants who apply to both schools, I'd guess, are often using Barnard as a backup for the more selective Columbia. Students seeking a women's college environment probably wouldn't apply to Columbia in the first place.
Smith sounds like a great choice for your daughter. Good luck to her!
|By midwest mom on Saturday, December 01, 2001 - 12:59 pm: Edit|
I'm an alum of a women's college and am a strong supporter. I'm sad that my college has gone co-ed and if I'd been fortunate enought to have daughters, I'd have strongly encouraged them to select a women's school. I agree with the viewpoint that women's schools allow further development of leadership potential in women. The emphasis on coed settings is a loss for women, I believe.
|By Roger (Roger) on Sunday, December 02, 2001 - 10:59 am: Edit|
There seems to be quite a bit of anecdotal evidence that being educated at a women's college produces more outspoken students, perhaps with more leadership potential. The statistical data to support this seems to be lacking so far, but I think it's great to have the choice available. As more women's colleges merge or go coed, it seems to be a shrinking option. Too bad about your alma mater, midwest mom!
|By Dadster on Thursday, December 06, 2001 - 12:44 pm: Edit|
It seems like changing to coed status in an effort to boost enrollment may actually remove the major selling point of some women's colleges. I'd be interested to see some stats on the five or ten year track record of women's colleges who went coed to boost enrollment - I'd be just a bit surprised if it worked out in most cases.
|By college-mom on Friday, December 07, 2001 - 09:17 am: Edit|
One former women's college that I can point to off the top of my head is Wheaton (MA), where they waited until the college nearly went under in the late '80s before finally going co-ed. It is making a definite come-back now. (Its financial predicament is described in a book called "Crafting a Class, College Admissions and Financial Aid, 1955-1994, by Elizabeth Duffy, pub. in 1998. Here's a quote: "The college that expanded the most did so by becoming coed. Wheaton decided to become coeducational in 1988 after its enrollments declined 11 percent between 1980 and 1987 and administrators realized that its survival as a quality liberal arts college depended upon expanding its pool of applicants. Coeducation has allowed Wheaton to recoup its enrollment losses so that it now enrolls more students than at any other point in its history; its quality has begun to improve as well.") It could be that, in today's climate, it would be seeing increasing enrollment anyway, but it might not have survived to get to the year 2001 to find out. Goucher (I don't know when it went co-ed) does not seem to have done as well as Wheaton, but it's still hanging in there at least.
There's no doubt that with the exception of the most famous women's colleges (Wellesley, Smith, Bryn Mawr...) the remaining women's colleges are hanging on only to the extent that their endowments are large enough to permit them to do so. The existing women's colleges have much higher acceptance rates than their co-ed peers simply because most girls don't want to attend all-female schools. A couple of schools in the hanging-on-by-a-string category are Hollins and Sweet Briar in VA. Hollins has a very tiny endowment and is in serious jeopardy. Sweet Briar has a larger endowment and a very strong network of alumnae donors who are helping to keep it viable. But the contrast between Sweet Briar in the late '60s, when it had much higher application numbers and was very competitive for admissions, to now when it accepts over 90% of its applicants (and many of those have to be enticed with merit money), is striking. I really believe that it's tough to find large numbers of young women today who really want to be educated without men around, and attending Mom's all-female alma mater has lost a lot of the cache' it may have had a generation ago.
|By Dadster on Friday, December 07, 2001 - 12:13 pm: Edit|
Interesting info, college-mom. Perhaps one thing driving the reduced interest in women's colleges is the changing relationship between men and women in most college environments. From what I can tell, there is a lot less emphasis on dating relationships, and a lot more collegiality. Mixed group activities seem more popular, and there seems to be less drive to "pair off" than there was a generation ago. Coed dorms seem to support this lifestyle, too, by encouraging non-romantic friendships.
Thirty years ago, even on coed campuses, there was a sense that female students needed to be protected, presumably from the baser impulses of their male classmates. Women's dorms had very limited visitation, strict check-in rules, and curfews. Perhaps to many college-bound high-schoolers, women's colleges look like throwbacks to the bad old days...
It's too bad these women's colleges are struggling if, in fact, they provide a learning environment that makes their students more outspoken and self assured.
|By hoping to help on Friday, December 07, 2001 - 09:11 pm: Edit|
I believe Bryn Mawr is right next door to Haverford, with classes and even dorms shared. Definitely worth exploring.
|By Domer97 on Sunday, December 09, 2001 - 10:15 pm: Edit|
Dadster, I wouldn't be surprised in the least by application increases at new coed schools. I can imagine that a women's college going coed might attract a fair number of male applicants, particularly in the first few years of coed status. The female/male ratio is bound to be highly advantageous for the guys, which some guys might find appealing. This would probably more than offset the female diehards intent on a single-sex eduation.
|By Dadster on Thursday, December 13, 2001 - 12:02 pm: Edit|
I guess I'm just a traditionalist, but I mourn the passing of single-gender colleges. I think that women's colleges, and even the VMI/Citadel type schools, offered some unique alternatives to the typical university. At least some women's colleges remain and seem to be doing well enough to survive...
|By GFI on Monday, December 17, 2001 - 02:48 pm: Edit|
You may be right, Dadster, but the old "separate but equal" thing doesn't cut it anymore. Now, all you need is one person of the opposite gender who says they want to attend or they'll sue, and the walls come tumbling down. The environments may have had unique benefits, but the courts won't let them stay single-gender. I predict that even the remaining womens colleges will be gone within a decade or two at most.
|By Collegemom (Collegemom) on Tuesday, December 18, 2001 - 10:48 am: Edit|
GFI, I don't think the courts will do them in. These private schools are perfectly within their rights to serve a particular segment of the population, and it's hard to imagine how a successful court challenge would be mounted (or who would find it worth their time and money to do so, moreover). If this were something do-able, it would have been done by now. (And we still have plenty of single sex private high schools around as well.)
Far more likely to do them in would be pressures to remain competitive in the academic prestige game (for those that currently retain their high rankings, i.e., Wellesley, Smith, Bryn Mawr, Barnard). These four schools may be able to remain competitive as women's colleges so long as their enrollment numbers remain adequately filled with very smart young women. However, as the baby boom echo begins to taper off in a decade or so, they may become vulnerable once again to pressures to admit men. The alumnae they are currently generating may not feel quite as strongly against the idea as did their mother's generation.
I am really skeptical about how long some of the financially weaker (and academically weak-ened) all-women's schools will continue to hang on into the near term, even through the current boom in applicants nationwide. I hope that the better of them will opt to admit men before it's too late--for several of them such a day of decision is very close indeed.
|By GFI on Wednesday, December 19, 2001 - 08:53 pm: Edit|
Collegemom said: These private schools are perfectly within their rights to serve a particular segment of the population
I agree, but how many schools are truly private these days? Just about every school relies on the federal government for some kind of funding - research, grants, student aid, etc. Unfortunately, logic doesn't seem to enter into these "integration" decisions - it just takes one unhappy person with a determined lawyer.
|By kewliegirl on Wednesday, December 26, 2001 - 01:20 pm: Edit|
I just thought I'd pop in on this conversation. When I was in HS (1997 grad), my dad (a Virginia Military Institute graduate, a brother school of where I eventually attended) suggested I look into women's colleges. I would not even think about it. I ended up at the local community college for a year.
Passing through Staunton, Va. that year, I saw Mary Baldwin College, and instantly fell in love. I then looked at Hollins, Sweet Briar (both Va.) and Agnes Scott, Ga. I knew I didn't have the grades for a Seven Sisters school, and Mary Baldwin just felt like home to me.
While I am not your average pearl-wearing, madras and penny-loafers kind of girl, it was where I belonged. I missed the "boys," but VMI, UVA, JMU, Hampden-Sidney, etc., were all close enough. I did not go to get my "Mrs." degree like women's colleges are believed to offer.
I do not regret a single thing about going to MBC. I run into high school friends who did not know where I ended up. I often hear, "YOU? YOU went to a women's college?"
...so I just smile that sweet smile and say, "Why yes, did you not think I was classy enough?"
Unlike many I graduated with in HS, I landed a job immediately after graduation. I still believe that one reason for that is that employers look highly upon single-sex schools. And darned if I didn't make sure to indicate that on cover letters!
|By Applying and Dying! on Friday, June 21, 2002 - 12:03 am: Edit|
I m thinking about appying early decision to Smith, but am not completely sure about how I feel. I still have a lot of time to decide, but I would like to know how much better my chances are when applying early decision. Also, if anyone has any info about Smith they would lke to share, I would greatly appreciate it!
|By Fennel on Friday, June 21, 2002 - 08:28 am: Edit|
If you are not completely sure how you feel, do NOT apply Early Decision! You are bound to go if you are accepted.
|By Dadster on Friday, June 21, 2002 - 11:55 am: Edit|
A & D, there's still plenty of time to think things over, and perhaps do some visits. As Fennel suggests, though, don't do ED if you aren't really sure. In the months before the ED deadline, though, perhaps some research will help you decide.
|By Joan (Jyber209) on Friday, June 21, 2002 - 02:40 pm: Edit|
My daughter is going to Smith this fall (class of '06). We did a lot of research on the school, visited several times, and she sat in on classes and she also spent a month there one summer. Please e-mail me off list with any specific questions.
Re early decision, I agree with earlier posters - don't do it if you're not sure. Also, Smith says they only take about 20% of the class ED so there are plenty of spots for regular decision applicants.
|By Sally R. on Tuesday, June 25, 2002 - 07:47 pm: Edit|
Smith has two early decision options. The first deadline is November 15; the second is January 1. (The only difference between the two is that the first one is for U.S. citizens only.)
If you think Smith may be your first choice, but you're not sure yet, the second ED option may be right for you. It would certainly allow you a lot of time to investigate further. You can even arrange to spend a night on campus. The office of admission will set that up for you. Keep in mind that you must choose a Monday through Thursday night, between late-September and early December.
Early decision at Smith tends to be a good bet for borderline candidates. In other words, it WILL help their chances. That's true just about everywhere, of course. When a college knows you're a "sure thing," they are more apt to give you the benefit of the doubt.
What else would you like to know about Smith and/or the admission policies? (You've got the ear of a Smith admission ringer here, so fire away.)
|By Uninitiated on Tuesday, June 25, 2002 - 08:09 pm: Edit|
I can't resist. What's a ringer?
|By Sally R. on Tuesday, June 25, 2002 - 09:19 pm: Edit|
In athletic terms, it's someone who's brought in to compete from a higher level or league--could be legitimate or not. (That notorious over-aged Little Leaguer from NY might fall into the latter category).
Webster will tell you it's "one who enters a competition under false representation."
In this case, however... an insider.
|By Parental Unit on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 06:00 am: Edit|
I see many people asking about department strengths but also realize there is a strong liklihood that students will change their focus at least once during undergrad. Do you think prospects should select a college based on their anticipated major or on the basis of the school taken as a whole? How can an interested student determine a college's strengths and weaknesses? The latter, especially, are rarely identified. Would you give your opinion of Smith's?
While free expression of sexual preference is basically a good thing, Smith is strongly associated with lesbianism that some report shows itself in an over-the-top and in-your-face way. Does Smith run the risk of being seen as a one-issue school? Does the administration see this as a problem, does it have a position on this?
WRT admissions, do you cooperate or share lists with schools whose applicants overlap with yours?
Is there any dis/advantage in declaring a major?
Thanks very much in advance.
|By Amomynous on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 08:33 am: Edit|
Thank you for your generous offer.
How does Smith counter the trend away from women's colleges/towards coed and lure top applicants?
Smith and Holyoke seem to be so similar. Can you help distinguish them?
About stories that colleges might need a basoonist or soccer goalie which would help the chances of someone who plays the basoon or tends goal: how can applicants find out what colleges need and learn what they are looking for?
|By Sally R. on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 02:29 pm: Edit|
This one is for Parental Unit. I'll get to Amomynous in a minute.
Lots of questions here (good ones, too) but the twelve-page response they might generate could violate the fundamental don’t-hog-the-discussion-board ground rule (or, at the very least, put dozens of readers to sleep, especially those not interested in Smith or women’s colleges) so how about if I answer them one at a time, promising to get through the whole list by the end of today (well, maybe, make it tomorrow)?
The first question is this: Do you think prospects should select a college based on their anticipated major or on the basis of the school taken as a whole? How can an interested student determine a college's strengths and weaknesses? The latter, especially, are rarely identified. Would you give your opinion of Smith's?
Actually, there are several questions here, but they work well together. Yes, undergrads do tend to change their focus, especially those in liberal arts environments (as opposed, say, to students admitted to more specific programs such as physical therapy, nursing, hotel management, etc.) Thus, when making college decisions it’s important to ask not only “Does this school offer what I THINK I want to do?” but also, “What ELSE is available, in case I change my mind?”
At most top liberal arts institutions (like Smith) this kind of thinking presents few problems because the school will offer excellence in a broad range of areas. A student, for instance, who shows up as a prospective English major and then decides to switch to economics won’t have any trouble finding top-shelf opportunities in both departments.
I get asked all the time about the “best” or “strongest” departments at Smith, and I admit my answer may sound like a cop-out when I reply that “they’re all strong,” but Smith really works hard to maintain parity in every field. What I then always add, however, is that there are larger, more popular departments, (e.g., government, psychology) and smaller, less favored ones (astronomy, classics), and the bigger departments usually provide more class choices than the small ones do. The trade-off, however, is that small departments typically offer an excellent chance for students to know their professors and fellow majors especially well. Moreover, at Smith students really have the best of all worlds because they also have easy access to four other institutions (Amherst, Mount Holyoke & Hampshire colleges, plus the University of Massachusetts), which expands their course opportunities many fold.
When you visit campuses and ask admission officials about strong or weak departments, you will probably not often get an answer that you find terribly helpful. A better approach might be to:
1. Check catalogue listings for course offerings. Do some departments seem rather thin? Also see how many classes are not offered every year and thus may be hard to get into.
2. Contact profs in fields of potential concentration (e-mail is best; the admission office or Web site can provide names and addresses) and ask specific questions (e.g., “Do most students who choose your courses get in?” “What sort of major-related work or schooling have some of your students pursued after graduation?” “Do you ever do research or work on special projects in conjunction with students?” etc. Not only will you gather some useful info from your research, but also you will get a sense of whether some colleges appear more friendly and inviting than others.
3. Make sure to ask admission folks how easy it is to switch majors. Usually, at liberal arts colleges it’s not a big problem, especially if a student’s mind gets changed early on. One advantage at Smith is that there is no core curriculum, so if a student’s first-year courses heavily favor one area (e.g., humanities) and then she decides to switch direction and focus on science or social science, she can load up on classes in her new area and not be worried about leaving requirements unfilled.
Finally, keep in mind that even though liberal arts students usually must choose a major, the whole idea is to get a broad academic experience, and the major can sometimes become almost irrelevant. Besides, statistics show that when liberal arts grads land their first post-college jobs, those jobs are as likely to be in fields linked to extracurricular pursuits as they are to college majors. So, while you’re investigating colleges and their academic departments, make sure you stop by (or contact) the career placement office (Smith has an especially good one, geared to the particular needs of women) and see what they have to say, too.
|By Sally R. on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 03:09 pm: Edit|
Okay, Amomynous, this one’s for you:
The good news for Smith College is that while statistics do show that only a fairly small percentage of high school girls will consider a single-sex school (and some of those who do are under duress from an alumna mom or granny), the times still aren’t as bad as they used to be a dozen or so years ago. Favorable studies have suggested that males and females often learn differently and that women’s colleges provide opportunities for empowerment (I don’t like that word much, but it works well here) that coed colleges may not.
Still, women’s schools do struggle to get the word out and lure those top prospects. Smith, for instance, has created the STRIDE program which offers its most outstanding applicants the chance to do one-on-one research with a faculty mentor (and get paid for it) right from day one. Smith also recently launched an unprecedented program in engineering (with mucho merit aid available to the front-runner candidates), and engineering students at Smith never have to worry about getting a subliminal message that suggests they ought to be in the elementary ed building or the poetry center. Yet, women’s colleges are not for everyone, and I would never twist a reluctant arm to fill out an application.
Smith and Mount Holyoke College ARE similar, and if I meet a student who is desperate to go to Smith (especially if she is a borderline applicant) I always urge her to look at MHC as well, even if it wasn’t on her original list, thus increasing her chance to get into at least one. Some differences include: CORE CURRICULUM: Mount Holyoke has a distribution requirement (it includes foreign language, among other things), Smith does not. SIZE: Not a biggie, but Smith has about 2,600 students on campus as compared to MHC with under 2,000. LOCATION, (LOCATION, LOCATION): Northampton, Smith’s host city, is a groovy, happening place with lots of restaurants, galleries, coffee houses, independent movie theatres, etc, while South Hadley, home to Mount Holyoke, is far tamer. Northampton is undoubtedly the hub of the Five-College area, even more so than rival Amherst. Mount Holyoke students tend to head to one or the other for entertainment. There are also some differences in the housing systems, and Mount Holyoke no longer requires SATs. Most important, though, is for prospective students to visit BOTH campuses and look for a gut reaction, which may not be based on anything specific but shouldn’t be ignored either.
As far as what are known as “institutional priorities” (those bassoonists and soccer goalies, etc.), you can ask directly and see what response you get. I personally think that admission officials need to be more candid with parents and applicants, but often they don’t know themselves, right up to decision time when an SOS comes in from the conductor or coach. What you CAN do, however—if your child has a specific strength (let’s say she’s the goalie)—is to contact each coach on her target-college list and ask, “How are you fixed for goalkeepers these days?” In a perfect world, of course, you could go to a Web site (www.goalies.com?) and get a list of every institution in need of new talent in the net.
In fact, I’m going to be doing some research in the months ahead that will explore these “hooks” at various colleges and universities, and I must admit I’ll be curious to see how forthcoming admission folks and administrators will be when asked point blank what’s on their applicant wish list.
|By Parental Unit on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 08:15 pm: Edit|
Thank you for such a comprehensive answer. Honestly, I meant to include some sort of "release" because I knew that answering all those questions would take time, then I forgot to include it!
Interestingly, a representative from your neighbor down the road at Amherst commented similarly about department breadth and depth.
Your solid suggestions are invaluable, they should be archived here because questions like these appear all the time.
|By Sally R. on Wednesday, June 26, 2002 - 09:14 pm: Edit|
Thanks, Parental Unit, for your kind words. Here's Part 2, as promised. This one addresses your questions about lesbianism at Smith.
When I enrolled at Smith in the late 1960s, the college had a reputation as a bastion for bright young women from privileged families who wore cashmere sweater sets and pearls; in more recent years, it’s garnered acclaim for its lesbian population. Both descriptions inaccurately pigeonhole an institution that boasts a varied student population, but—like many stereotypes—there ARE underlying truths.
As Smith’s renown as a supportive environment for lesbians has become more widespread, the college does indeed attract applicants who have already identified themselves as gay while in high school. However, whether or not this creates an “in-your-face” milieu that threatens heterosexual students is really a matter of opinion.
I routinely hire Smithies to baby-sit for my 5-year-old son. I pay them obscenely well because I want them to snap to attention when they hear me on their voice mail, but I admit that I feel my generous remuneration also buys me right to solicit their candid opinions on campus topics. To date, none of my sitters have been gay (although declaring their sexual orientation is certainly not a prerequisite for the job), and we have frequently discussed the college climate. All of these students have had very positive experiences at Smith and answer affirmatively when I ask them if, with hindsight, they would do it over again.
While all agree, too, that the lesbian population at the college is visible and often vocal, they still insist that straight students make up the majority. I do hear of those who leave Smith because they are dissatisfied with the single-sex environment, and some have claimed that the lesbian presence is overwhelming. One of my sitters responded to this charge by pointing out that, “People have different tolerance levels for diversity. A lot of kids talk about wanting to have it at their college, but when they really confront it, they can’t handle it, and they’re actually more comfortable at a place that’s fairly homogeneous.”
Of course, Smith administrators and faculty are concerned about stereotypes. They don’t want Smith known as an “anything” college, whether it’s lesbians, debutantes, scientists, preppies, poets, or jocks, but they also want it to be a place where ALL students can feel welcomed and safe.
If I had a daughter who was considering Smith but had reservations about how she would fare at a single-sex school, I would certainly urge her to spend a night on campus and to wander around during the day, visiting classes, and talking to as many current students as possible. Keep in mind, too, that, if a heterosexual applicant is concerned about being chased around the coffee table by her lesbian roommate, she ought to at least recognize that date rape at women’s colleges is practically unknown—along with binge drinking and many of the other alcohol-related crimes that seem to be sky-rocketing on coed campuses. Also, if she ultimately decides on Smith, I know where she can make a bundle as a baby-sitter!
|By Amomynous on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 06:19 am: Edit|
Thank you so much for your thorough reply. Being so close to each other, I thought that the 2 schools' locations were the same so you've added a new perspective. Would you mind if I add a few more questions to be addressed when it's convenient?
Since it's harder to get into Smith than Holyoke, does that mean someone needing merit aid might be better off applying to Holyoke because they will be stronger when compared to the rest of the applicant pool and will therefore be more likely to earn a bigger merit aid package? Is it fair to assume colleges apportion their budgets for financial aid similarly?
The consortium looks great on paper, how does it play out IRL? How frequently do Smith students take classes at Amherst? Is it feasible to rely on your buses for social events? Even during the week? They don't stop at 10 PM, do they?
Does this approach make any sense to you - assume that any school of Smith's caliber is acceptable academically so instead focus on personal preferences and fit when making a choice? (social concerns over academic ones)
Should risks be taken with essays? I've heard both yes and no. Some say that in most cases applicants shouldn't try to be too funny in their essays because when humor doesn't work, it falls very flat. But reading a pile of essays must be so boring. Besides using good judgment, what's your opinion? Do you see it work more often than not?
|By Parental Unit on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 08:19 am: Edit|
My impression came from posted messages, they weren't verifiable but were credible in tone and content. The complaint wasn't a fear of being the target of physical, sexual aggression but more a wish to avoid an in-your-face attitude which some felt was prevalent on campus. Your word, overwhelming, probably fits best. I completely understand Smith's wish to avoid being known as an "anything" college but wonder how it can be avoided. I think your sitter hit the nail on the head when she observed that some people think they want more diversity than they really do.
I guess there is some amount of detachment from an issue people agree with but isn't on their personal agenda, they may support gay rights and sympathize with the struggles but don't want to hear about it too much.
|By Sally R. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 09:00 am: Edit|
AMOMYNOUS, I don’t know too much about merit aid at Mount Holyoke but I THINK (and do check this out to verify) that, as at Smith, their greatest chunk of financial assistance is need-based. Both colleges have excellent need-based aid (and even "comfortable" families are often pleasantly surprised by the amount they qualify to receive), but the merit aid is scant and highly competitive. At Smith, for instance, merit awards include those for engineering majors, a few international students, students from nearby Springfield, and for a handful of the tip-top applicants in the entire pool (we’re talking serious superstars here).
In general, if a student is looking for a merit award s/he is best served by applying to some colleges that are “below” his or her level of admissibility. While Smith is typically considered “harder” to get into than MHC, the difference is probably not egregious enough to affect aid—especially at these colleges that are so heavily need-based. One never knows how these things will shake out, of course (and I’ve even heard of girls who are admitted to Smith and wait-listed at Mount Holyoke), and—as I said earlier—students with strong interest in one of these schools are usually wise to apply also to the other, but I wouldn’t count on using a Mount Holyoke application as a strategy to garner more aid than you might get from Smith.
The Five College Consortium really does work. The buses generally run into the wee hours (maybe not Sundays—can’t recall), so they’re available for cultural and social events as well as for cross-registration. I do, however, think that there is less back-and-forthing (especially for classes) than some prospective students realize. For instance, only about 1/5 to ¼ of the Smith student body will elect a class at another consortium school during any given academic year. This, most students insist, is not because the Consortium doesn’t “work,” but because it’s so easy to get engaged in—and excited about—what’s available right at Smith. Thus, students who intend each semester to elect a class on another campus somehow end up postponing that choice until it’s time to don their caps and gowns.
Have to take a dive in a wading pool now. Will answer your other questions in bit, if I live to tell the story.
|By Sally R. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 04:12 pm: Edit|
Here's another answer, Amomynous, re essays: I'm all for taking risks with humor in essays, and there's nothing like an amusing one to make a bored or beleaguered admission official sit up and take notice, but a student shouldn't push beyond what feels comfortable, just for the sake of being entertaining.
And "entertaining," BTW, doesn't necessarily mean outrageous, as in shocking. A good pal of mine who is a Yale admission official notes that she's horrified by how many essays she's seen on bodily functions (throwing up, constipation, and nose-picking)! As she wisely points out, "Seinfeld did a thing on his TV show about nose-picking that was quite funny, but it's something that high school students usually aren't going to be able to pull off as successfully."
In other words, parents, (assuming that your children will let you within 50 feet of their application essays) check them out to see if the writing is clear and interesting and answers the question being asked, and--above all--if the voice you're "hearing" is really their own.
|By Amomynous on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 07:31 pm: Edit|
Merit aid: Your remark is a real eye-opener because I think it's a commonly held belief that both schools are fairly generous with merit aid. Thanks for setting the record straight.
Humor in essays: That's funny. So, basically if it can pass the gag reflex test and everything else is reasonably in order, it's a go. I can't imagine anyone even considering bodily function topics back in the olden days. Times sure have changed.
|By Sally R. on Thursday, June 27, 2002 - 11:34 pm: Edit|
Sorry, Parental Unit, it's bedtime and I didn't finish all your questions as promised today (need to get that air conditioner in my study PRONTO).
Anyway, I'll do the quickie before I hit my (cool) bedroom:
Is there any dis/advantage to declaring a major?
I assume you're still talking Smith here, so I won't get into the broader topic of admission to specific programs, which is often mandatory at universities or at colleges that aren't strictly liberal arts schools.
At Smith, it's always interesting to see what an applicant lists as her area of potential concentration, though some write simply "undecided." (It's okay to do that, but I would prefer to see something more along the lines of "I could change my mind a hundred times, but right now French Lit is warring with English Lit for my attention." This makes it look as if the student has at least put some thought into the issue.)
For borderline candidates, the choice of major can OCCASIONALLY make a difference. For instance, if a student is interested in an undersubscribed major, the college may be bent on boosting the numbers, and this choice could end up being a teeny advantage. (Many course catalogues list enrollment by major, so you can tell what the less popular ones are.) On the other hand, if a student writes down a choice that seems to come from left field (e.g., Latin, for a kid who's only studied Japanese), then a word or two of explanation should follow ("I enjoyed studying Roman history in 10th grade, but my school doesn't offer a Latin program.")
Conversely, if a student is aiming for a very tough field (e.g., physics, pre-med) but has an extremely weak science and math background, her evaluators might think that Smith is too big a reach, should she want to remain in that area.
Finally, another way choice of major is now significant at Smith is because of Smith's new engineering program. Students who indicate engineering as a likely major are automatically eligible for merit aid that is earmarked for future engineers. (Those who win the dough and change their major don't keep the scholarship).
So, bottom line: at Smith, choice of likely major doesn't typically affect admission outcomes, but it can.
|By Dadster on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 08:33 am: Edit|
Parental Unit, to generalize the "choosing a major" question, it often can make a difference. At some universities, the major actually dictates which school reviews the application. Schools within a college/university often have different admission standards and selectivity. Even when majors are in the same school, sometimes subtle effects might be at work. E.g., a college that has had a decline in Classics majors might look more favorably on a Classics applicant than yet another psych or pre-med one. For the major selection to have maximum credibility, it should tie into demonstrated academic or EC interests. For example, a Classics major who had taken no Latin or Greek courses might be a bit suspect.
|By Parental Unit on Friday, June 28, 2002 - 11:46 am: Edit|
Thanks, Sally and Dadster. I appreciate your willingness to go into detail instead of relying on simple, pat answers.
Is there any other way to estimate departmental popularity (under or over-subscription) other than looking for a list of enrollment by major? It's not a bad idea but seems to rely on reading between the lines. It would be hard to evaluate the numbers without some context or basis of comparison.
|By Sally R. on Friday, July 05, 2002 - 02:12 pm: Edit|
One good old-fashioned way is to ask. Let's say, for instance, that an applicant is thinking of indicating a future major in either English or music. Enrollment statistics suggest that English is a very popular department and music far less so. A call to the music department office, however, might lead you to learn that--while not so many students MAJOR in music--many do elect one or even lots of music classes during their four years, so the department is indeed a sought-after one.
In my mind, that would make selecting a music major a better bet for a "hook" at admission time, but--while you're on the phone--ask the music department representative (could be a secretary you're speaking with, but you can ask for a faculty member, if you'd prefer), if there's any chance the major could be discontinued. It doesn't happen often, but sometimes colleges do decide to eliminate unpopular majors altogether. If that's the case, then indicating this field as a potential area of study in order to increase one's odds of admission can actually backfire!
|By Sally R. on Friday, July 05, 2002 - 02:25 pm: Edit|
BTW, Parental Unit, I never answered one of your earlier questions. Sorry! You wanted to know if Smith College shares applicant lists with other colleges.
According to Debra Shaver, senior associate director of admission, Smith does not trade APPLICANT information with other colleges but does share lists of those who ENROLL via EARLY DECISION with a 30+-member consortium that also includes the Ivy League schools, Stanford, the "Little Ivies" (Amherst, Williams, etc.) and other well-known institutions.
Moreover, a couple years ago, she recalls, Mount Holyoke and Smith both admitted the same student at early decision time. This came to light when the student notified Mount Holyoke that she would not accept their offer of admission because she had accepted one from Smith. Because the student had signed a commitment telling Smith officials she was only applying Early Decision to one college, Smith rescinded their offer, and the student was not admitted to either school.
Shaver also remembers another student admitted early by Smith who, several months later, notified the admission office that she had elected to attend a west-coast college instead. Shaver contacted that school and told them that this student was reneging on a signed statement of commitment. Officials at the other school said, essentially, "too bad," and took her anyway.
Bottom line: those who mess around with ED commitments may live to tell the story--or not. And who knows what monkey wrenches the recent Harvard change of heart re Early Action policy will throw into the whole ED imbroglio?
|By Parental Unit on Saturday, July 06, 2002 - 05:36 am: Edit|
Very interesting! Thank you!
|By Merry on Saturday, July 06, 2002 - 08:59 pm: Edit|
Hi. I've been reading a lot of these posts with interest. Just wondering if anyone knows much about Wellesley specifically. If you do and would care to share your opinions/experiences/views, I'd very much appreciate it. Thanks. :-)
|By Jenny Benvenuto on Wednesday, August 21, 2002 - 10:00 pm: Edit|
Just want to know about Wells college my daughter is really intrested .Anybody know what the social life is like?
|By hoodie85 on Saturday, September 07, 2002 - 04:29 pm: Edit|
I am an alum of Hood College, a small women's college in MD (men are admitted to take classes but not as residents) Our president is considering making the move toadmit men as residents. I would be interested to hear from alums from other former single-sex colleges to see how they feel the reputation/image of their school has changed (for better or worse) since the change. While I dread the death of tradition, I think I would hate the death of the college itself more. What do you think??
|By Admin (Admin) on Tuesday, September 10, 2002 - 11:20 pm: Edit|
[moved questions about SATs to SAT I, SAT IIs, and Score Choice]
|By Eyoste on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 05:15 pm: Edit|
I'm an alumna of Mississippi University for Women, graduated in 2000. Although MUW is now coed (15% male), it's still predominantly female and has a lot of tradition of an all-female school. I loved going to school there and wish I could tell young girls it's a wonderful experience. Unfortunately, MUW is struggling as well with funds and admissions. There is a movement to change its name and boost male enrollment (making it similar to the other 7 public universities-and also taking away its uniqueness). Alumni are fighting it (including many male alumni!), but we don't know if it will save it.
And contrary to popular belief, we still had very busy social lives (a larger coed university was 30 minutes away, as well as an airforce base!)
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 07:28 pm: Edit|
?? about Smith/Barnard/etc.
Is Sally R. still around? GREAT informative posts.
We'll be visiting Smith, MHC, and Barnard in April, along with Harvard, Yale, and Columbia. (Daughter is probably a good "fit" with Smith & Barnard, a slight reach for Columbia, and a substantial reach for Harvard & Yale...though I don't think _anyone_ is a slam dunk for Harvard.) Those are six of my daughter's top 10, though MHC is probably one of the two "safety" schools on her list.
My daughter would really be interested in comments that point her at specifics to check out for Smith vs. Barnard. She likes Smith's open curriculum, vastly prefers NoHo to South Hadley, would probably prefer NYC to NoHo...but it's not a deal breaker.
Given all that, I'd be interested in any compare/contrast between Smith & Barnard.
|By Jyber209 (Jyber209) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 08:54 pm: Edit|
My daughter looked at Barnard and ended up at Smith, where she is VERY happy. We thought that Barnard had a "back door to Columbia" feeling; also, the Barnard campus seemed dead on the weekend we visited.
Smith is a place with a lively campus life on its own. The academics are very strong and the professors are wonderfully supportive. My daughter did a great J-term (intersession) program in Madrid in January.
Feel free to e-mail me with any questions.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Friday, January 31, 2003 - 10:51 pm: Edit|
Thanks, Jyber, I'll do that.
I've read that one of the reasons Barnard is dead on the weekends is that everyone has the whole city of New York to go out and get lost in, whereas Smith is more self-contained but not stifling or claustrophobic.
I'm trying to stay on an even keel at this point, let alone keeping my daughter on an even keel. Her top four schools, in some order, are probably Harvard, Columbia, Smith, Barnard; Smith, however, is being very proactive in wooing her: the local party--fine, everyone local who has expressed interest gets invited. But the top ballet teacher wants her to come and both take class and then talk over lunch the next day. The head of the orchestra has asked to meet her while she's there, that just in response to a query about the program. A Government teacher was very quick to positively respond to a request to sit in on a particular class. It's kinda like a two-way romance and they [Smith] have been very encouraging...and this before they even know her grades/test scores.
|By Jyber209 (Jyber209) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 10:25 am: Edit|
My daughter is taking ballet at Smith and loves it. (She does this as an extra class.) One of the reasons she did the Madrid program was because it offered the opportunity to study flamenco dancing as well as Spanish. What instrument does your daughter play? My daughter plays flute in Smith's wond ensemble. (She also played violin but is not playing it at Smith.) Daughter is considering being a government or economics major. She was able to sit in on several classes with no problems when she visited in October 2001 and had her Smith interview.
By the way, my daughter would never have considered a single-sex school had she not spent a month at Smith one summer in high school. She fell in love with it then and never found another school she liked as much - and believe me, we looked!
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 11:53 am: Edit|
My daughter plays French horn. She doesn't want to major in music but would like to continue playing in orchestra as long as the time committment isn't too great...she really wants to explore other things. Smith's orchestra seems to be a good but low-key program, it might be a good fit.
When we started this process, a women's college was a slight negative for her. But at the college preview party, I was standing off on the fringes as the 15 or so current students were talking about their Smith experiences and what they liked/disliked.
My daughter was sitting cross-legged on the floor in the middle of the room and I almost literally saw the cartoon lightbulb go off over her head when one of the young women said something to the effect of: "When I go over and take classes at Amherst (cross-registration via Five College consortium), the women there--you know they're bright, they have to be to get there--let themselves be so overshadowed in the classroom by the guys. That just doesn't happen with Smith students."
My daughter is fairly active in classroom participation and already gets some resentment from guys over it. Even some of the more socially inclined girls, those who worry more about boys than academics, say things like "Can't you work a little more to fit in?", where "fit in" means "let the boys take center stage in class."
In many ways I hope she gets accepted at Harvard or Columbia...but I keep getting the feeling that Smith might really be the best place for her. The dilemma will be hers, not mine, and I'm kinda glad.
Question for you jyber: my daughter goes to school in Santa Monica and it's a pretty liberal campus...Nader got more votes than Bush in the Mock 2000 Presidential election.
In this environment, my daughter is moderately conservative, though she'd be a liberal if not flaming liberal in many parts of the country.
(I.e., she's very pro-Clinton and can't stand Bush.)
Given this thumbnail, what's your take on how
she'd fit in politically at Smith? Politics are important to her--she wants to major in government--but she's centrist in a lot of ways.
|By Jyber209 (Jyber209) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 12:45 pm: Edit|
My daughter was a Nader supporter. We live in suburban Philadelphia which is quite Republican but my daughter is politically liberal although not radical. She believes firmly in equalization of school funding for inner city schools, for example.
Smith is a very liberal campus politically - heavily against war, etc. The campus Republican Club is considered reactionary. There is some concern about an over "politically correct" atmosphere -- an assumption that the liberal way is the only way, and that others don't deserve a polite hearing. When the Republican Club sponsored a visit from Ann Coulter it was very controversial.
Lifestyle choices at Smith are liberal as well - very supportive atmosphere for diverse sexualities, etc. My daughter is politically liberal but her personal lifestyle is quite conservative. She is comfortable at Smith but people who are not open minded might have a problem there. You have to be accepting of other choices and comfortable enough with your own not to be threateded by others'.
The women at Smith seem to value being able to focus on their academics during the week and not having to balance that priority with social issues - at least as far as guys are concerned. One negative is that for someone who does want to meet young men, it is an artificial setting -- but is is a wonderful environment for getting to know oneself!
My daughter went to a Philadelphia area Smith party before she made her decision and was struck that the young alumnae - and other acceptees -- there seemed simpatico with her - that is what solidified her decision. She feels more at home at Smith than she did at her academically strong, but football and cheerleader style, high school.
I would imagine that most of the professors are liberal leaning. That would be the case most places your daughter is thinking of, I would imagine.
Your daughter is blessed to have a father with such a thoughtful and supportive approach to her college decision.
By the way, the dance program is supposed to be among the best college programs in the country. They also do some "pooling" of opportunities with master classes at some of the other colleges, but I think Smith has the biggest program on campus in the area. There is a faculty-choreographed dance program each fall.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 01:55 pm: Edit|
Great stuff, Jyber. (I'm posting here instead of
taking to e-mail on the off-chance that other parents might be interested in the discussion.)
Off topic, you don't live in West Chester, by any chance?
My daughter rolls her eyes at reactionaries--and Republicans in general--but finds the "politically correct" both overstated and grating. I think she can probably live with it but that's exactly the thread I was trying to tease out.
As far as personal lifestyles, it sounds like our girls may be similar: tolerant but personally conservative.
As for meeting young men, I've heard that the party scene does equate with what you call artificial but that it's a lot better if you can meet someone simpatico in classes. The environment where one can get to "know one's self" is indeed one of the things that I'm picking up on being so good about Smith.
The dance program--especially for ballet--seems to be one of the two strongest we've found on paper for schools that are also highly challenging academically and not located in the South or non-industrial Midwest/Rocky Mountain states, which is where my daughter _doesn't_ want to go to college.
The master class thing sounds interesting. I hadn't run across that and I'm going to file it away.
|By Jyber209 (Jyber209) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 03:08 pm: Edit|
No, we don't live in West Chester, but my daughter took classes at the Dance Center there for many years and was associated with the Brandywine Ballet Co. there.
We live about 10 miles away in Berwyn (near Devon). Do you know the area?
If your daughter is considering single-sex schools, did she consider Bryn Mawr or Wellesley?
We preferred Smith probably for personal reasons but I wondered if they might be on your list.
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Saturday, February 01, 2003 - 04:22 pm: Edit|
My foster-mother (nee Slagle) grew up in West Chester.
Neither Wellesley nor Bryn Mawr offers sufficient ballet as near as we can tell...at least neither popped up in the list of more than 400 college dance programs listed in Dance Magazine. Besides, with either of those two I know I'd mis-spell them sooner or later.
My daughter is keeping her own counsel at the moment but the top four seem to be Smith, Harvard, Barnard, Columbia. I suspect that things may shift as each of the schools becomes more "real" as opposed to numbers and words on paper.
Mount Holyoke is a back-up at this point, insurance if she likes the Five Colleges thing but if for some reason doesn't make it into Smith; got to say, she looks very good for Smith at the moment, imo.
She needs to take some of the SATII's still and will take another crack at the SAT I in the fall...her scores are fine for Smith but an increase wouldn't hurt for some of the other schools on her list and, frankly, her SAT verbal is signficantly under both her PSAT score and what you would expect if you listened to her talk for half an hour.
Hey! This is February 1! One month down, eleven to go in the Year of College Applications.
|By Izzadoora on Friday, February 07, 2003 - 03:44 pm: Edit|
I recently had to withdrawl for medical reasons during the first semster of my senior year at Randolph-Macon Woman's college. Now that I am of sound mind and body my school is not treating me well and I don't think returning would be the right thing to do.
I want to return to school as soon as possible but I want to keep the same experience I had at
R-MWC (traditions, etc...). I don't know too much about other women's colleges and am concerned about being able to transfer all of my credits. I know that I don't want to go to Hollins, Sweet Briar, or Mary Baldwin. Do you have any suggestions about which colleges I should look into. I only applied to R-WMC and OU when looking for colleges almost four years ago. When I went to Smith's Website it said they only transferred two years of credits. I can see where they are coming from but I don't know if I could handle the cut in status.
|By Vali (Vali) on Friday, May 02, 2003 - 12:40 pm: Edit|
I recently visited Bryn Mawr and have liked it more than any other college I have visited so far; the more I read and hear about it, the more I like it.
However, I have always had more male friends than female friends, and I am generally more comfortable being the only girl in a room than in a room of all girls. In light of this, I was hoping to find out what people thought of the Bryn Mawr/Haverford social scene...Are there real friendships formed, or is it mostly artificial importation of best- or boyfriends?
|By Elf (Elf) on Sunday, July 20, 2003 - 01:47 pm: Edit|
Vali (or anybody else),
I am seriously considering going to an all-women's college. My sister attends Chatham and likes it because of its close proximity to other coed colleges. As she said, "Boys when you want 'em, none when you don't." I have been to Bryn Mawr's web site and have requested info and interviews with students, but what was your visit like? I have heard so many good and bad things about women's colleges even though I like the atmosphere of Chatham.
|By Soozievt (Soozievt) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 11:19 am: Edit|
Yikes, I had never read this thread til now but it is a great one. First, many thanks to Sally for providing an inside and knowledgeable view and taking the time to do so!
The one post that I really related to is now a very old one but anyway....it was by Joan/Jyber 209 whose daughter was enrolling in Smith at the time of her post. I have a daughter who is entering her senior year in a month. She sounds a little like Jyber's daughter in that she had never thought originally about attending an all women's college and prefers coed. She never even looked into the womens' schools. This past year, we visited all the schools she is interested in. Late in junior year, when reading about Smith, plus we know some local girls who attend, so many of Smith's attributes are ones that appeal to my daughter. The only thing is that it is all Women. But she saw how there is the consortium and thus there are chances to mix with guys as well. She decided that she did not want to be closed minded about a women's school and now wants to go visit Smith cause in every other area, it appeals to her. So, we will definitely visit this fall. I would likely classify Smith as a "match" school for her and it is good to have another one of those since the admit rate at many schools or her list is so low that you cannot count on admissions.
Someone earlier on this thread was talking/asking if you should pick schools around your major. I think it should be a factor but not the only one. Like everyone says, kids often change their intended major. On the other hand, for my own child, her intended major has strongly been one of the factors in choosing schools to apply to. This is cause she wants to go into architecture and NOT every school offers that field. She figures if she ever changes her mind, the schools will have umpteen other majors available. But vice versa is not true....she could not switch into architecture at a school that does not offer it. Thus some schools she MAY have normally loved are no longer an option...places like Amherst or Williams. So, in cases such as these WHETHER the school HAS the major IS a factor. Obviously this is true in some other areas like business, engineering, animal science, etc. I guess another level of selecting schools could be the quality of their program in a student's area of interest.
Someone's post here caught my eye when they mentioned soccer goalies...LOL...my kid is one. I would love to hear about Sally's research on what things a school is looking for. I know they want to build a diverse class.
Some things that appeal about Smith so far to my own child is that....they have architecture, the housing system (she loved a similar set up, though bigger, at Yale and Harvard), the area/location sounds fun, the open curriculum, they have a varsity ski team!!!, she might be able to make their sports teams (plays soccer, ski racing, tennis), could still do band and dance there, the five college consortium might offset the all girls aspect, and also local kids who attend like it there. So, we will definitely be visiting soon.
I appreciate the input of parents who have kids who have attended, and those who have visited (the Dad's daughter) and Sally R. especially. I will print the thread out for my daughter to see when she gets back from Europe. She just called from France as I was reading this thread!
|By Thedad (Thedad) on Monday, July 21, 2003 - 12:23 pm: Edit|
I just re-read this whole thread. Wow. It was very helpful to me for trip planning and two of the posters here were incredibly kind and generous off-line.
If anyone is interested, looking the Parents Forum for the "College Visits" thread (the first one, not Part II). I posted a report of our trip to Smith which, as a trip, was the single best visit we had.
|By Coolmom (Coolmom) on Tuesday, July 22, 2003 - 05:32 am: Edit|
I recently read an article in the Philadelphia Inquirer about Bryn Mawr College. It is part of a four college consortium which includes Haverford, Swarthmore, and University of Pennsylvania. Students take classes at all four schools and e.g. Bryn Mawr's school for social work is mainly at the University of Penn's campus in Philadelphia. Haverford and Bryn Mawr students are allowed to actually choose dorms on either campus but since they are about 5 minutes apart and there is a shuttle going between Haverford, Bryn Mawr and Swarthmore constantly that is unnecessary. Bryn Mawr students are very highly rated academically and because of it's location as part of Main Line Philadelphia (absolutely gorgeous area) it is always rated for it's beautiful campus. All students have single rooms unless they specifically ask for a room to share. Some of the rooms even have non working fireplaces and are really lovely. I know women who have turned down scholarships at MIT, Harvard and Duke to go there because they felt that they would be given more opportunity. The other thing is that companies between NYC and Washington D.C. recruit there alot.
P.s. If you are absolutely in to the jock thing Villanova is a mile down the road although they are not part of the academic scene.
This "Women's Colleges" thread was buried in an archive for some time. "elf" revived it... and then I moved it into the active area--knowing there are several readers currently interested in the content.
Report an offensive message on this page E-mail this page to a friend
|Posting is currently disabled in this topic. Contact your discussion moderator for more information.|
|Administrator's Control Panel -- Board Moderators Only|