Comparing LACs

[Anonymous]

Do you think there's a meaningful difference in caliber of students at WASP vs. the next tier (Bowdoin, Midd, Wes, etc.)?

[Anonymous]

Parent of a WASP student here. Not really. If you look at the overall averages, the WASP schools will have marginally higher stats. (Emphasis on "marginally.") But the vast majority of kids in the top non-WASP LACs would thrive at the WASP schools; and the WASP kids would still be challenged at other top LACs. My guess is that the top 50-75% of students at the top non-WASP are virtually indistinguishable from their WASP counterparts.

The best place to test this would be the Claremont Colleges. I'm guessing that Pomona students don't notice any "caliber" difference in their counterparts at CMC and Mudd, although I'm sure there are cultural differences.

[Anonymous]

That is helpful, thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parent of a WASP student here. Not really. If you look at the overall averages, the WASP schools will have marginally higher stats. (Emphasis on "marginally.") But the vast majority of kids in the top non-WASP LACs would thrive at the WASP schools; and the WASP kids would still be challenged at other top LACs. My guess is that the top 50-75% of students at the top non-WASP are virtually indistinguishable from their WASP counterparts.

The best place to test this would be the Claremont Colleges. I'm guessing that Pomona students don't notice any "caliber" difference in their counterparts at CMC and Mudd, although I'm sure there are cultural differences.

Claremont parent here and exactly! HMC kids are definitely seen as the smartest and pitzer students are sometimes joked as the dumbest but everyone laughs and people feel like everyone’s peers

[Anonymous]

The lac gap has very little to do with rigor. Arguably the most rigorous LACs Reed and Harvey Mudd are lower rank than their WASP counterparts, and Reed is rather low ranked. It’s more about resources.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parent of a WASP student here. Not really. If you look at the overall averages, the WASP schools will have marginally higher stats. (Emphasis on "marginally.") But the vast majority of kids in the top non-WASP LACs would thrive at the WASP schools; and the WASP kids would still be challenged at other top LACs. My guess is that the top 50-75% of students at the top non-WASP are virtually indistinguishable from their WASP counterparts.

The best place to test this would be the Claremont Colleges. I'm guessing that Pomona students don't notice any "caliber" difference in their counterparts at CMC and Mudd, although I'm sure there are cultural differences.

+1 and even going down a tier in the LACs I think the only difference really is a greater SES diversity. There are plenty of smart kids who want the LAC experience who can't afford the highly ranked LACs but will choose to go down the rankings for merit $ vs. going to their big state U.

[Anonymous]

Bucknell is a great choice if you don't quite have WASP stats, or even if you do. Outcomes are incredible.

[Anonymous]

Look up the stats before test optional and it is clear WAS is best but the next 6-10 are close enough. Below the top 15 LACs it starts to decline fast

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Look up the stats before test optional and it is clear WAS is best but the next 6-10 are close enough. Below the top 15 LACs it starts to decline fast

Not best, just most exclusive.

[Anonymous]

It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

As a person with children at Pomona and Swarthmore…the classes dropped in diversity this year substantially. I’m sure the current class is more academically competitive however.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Bucknell is a great choice if you don't quite have WASP stats, or even if you do. Outcomes are incredible.

Does it have a pipeline to the Street?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The lac gap has very little to do with rigor. Arguably the most rigorous LACs Reed and Harvey Mudd are lower rank than their WASP counterparts, and Reed is rather low ranked. It’s more about resources.

Reed’s lower ranking is likely because they have boycotted rankings since the mid-1990s. They had been a top 10, but when they boycotted, USNWR tried to punish them by dropping them into the 80s. Reed basically said “F you,” and made their defiance a part of their brand.

But for the most part, I agree that rankings are more about size of endowment than anything.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

But Wesleyan did same as Bowdoin on CDS - reporting ALL scores, not just those submitted. That’s why theirs are lower.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

Amherst might weight diversity, but they weigh athletics more. 40% athletes, majority white athletes