What in the world is with the Amherst hate?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real—Williams is still the gold standard for liberal arts colleges. The academics, alumni network, and tutorial system put it in a league of its own. The idea that Amherst somehow “beats” Williams is a stretch.

And Pomona? Please. It benefits from the California name and the 5C branding, but take away the weather and consortium and it’s mid at best. It doesn’t have the same intellectual culture or rigor. It’s more like a small West Coast hybrid than a true LAC.

As for Amherst—it's solid, but it’s definitely overrated. The open curriculum is a double-edged sword, and a lot of people overhype the “diversity” angle without looking at depth of scholarship or faculty engagement. I'd honestly put Haverford above Amherst. Haverford's honor code, academic intensity, and intellectual seriousness make it a true LAC standout. Amherst is lucky to still be in the top 6, let alone top 4.

Let’s not confuse prestige with substance.

I see comparisons to Pomona on a lot of other SLACs’ threads, but the reverse is not the case. I think it is pretty obvious which school is on an major upswing and which schools are fighting to maintain what they have.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

I am skeptical of all these consortiums that schools advertise. Talk to students and it seems like 95% never take advantage of them at all, mainly because of commuting inconvenience.

Also, I don't get how getting access to UMass, Smith, Mt. Holyoke and Hampshire makes it "academically unmatched". Ironically, it's the access to UMass that provides the most course optionality.

In fairness, a place like Swarthmore gets access to classes at UPenn (in addition to Haverford and Bryn Mawr).

[Anonymous]

These threads are so weird.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real—Williams is still the gold standard for liberal arts colleges. The academics, alumni network, and tutorial system put it in a league of its own. The idea that Amherst somehow “beats” Williams is a stretch.

And Pomona? Please. It benefits from the California name and the 5C branding, but take away the weather and consortium and it’s mid at best. It doesn’t have the same intellectual culture or rigor. It’s more like a small West Coast hybrid than a true LAC.

As for Amherst—it's solid, but it’s definitely overrated. The open curriculum is a double-edged sword, and a lot of people overhype the “diversity” angle without looking at depth of scholarship or faculty engagement. I'd honestly put Haverford above Amherst. Haverford's honor code, academic intensity, and intellectual seriousness make it a true LAC standout. Amherst is lucky to still be in the top 6, let alone top 4.

Let’s not confuse prestige with substance.

The real rankings put Richmond ahead of Haverford.

Be real. Richmond? I guess that’s when you can’t trust rankings.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Let’s be real—Williams is still the gold standard for liberal arts colleges. The academics, alumni network, and tutorial system put it in a league of its own. The idea that Amherst somehow “beats” Williams is a stretch.

And Pomona? Please. It benefits from the California name and the 5C branding, but take away the weather and consortium and it’s mid at best. It doesn’t have the same intellectual culture or rigor. It’s more like a small West Coast hybrid than a true LAC.

As for Amherst—it's solid, but it’s definitely overrated. The open curriculum is a double-edged sword, and a lot of people overhype the “diversity” angle without looking at depth of scholarship or faculty engagement. I'd honestly put Haverford above Amherst. Haverford's honor code, academic intensity, and intellectual seriousness make it a true LAC standout. Amherst is lucky to still be in the top 6, let alone top 4.

Let’s not confuse prestige with substance.

Let's be real....

Williams isn't the "gold standard for liberal arts colleges". WASP isn't "gold standard for liberal arts colleges" either.

There are 10 liberal arts colleges with basically identical student bodies by academic measures (SAT 1500+ and 50%+ testing) and they are all equally excellent in their outcomes. Anyone who believes that they can actually be stack ranked in a meaningful manner is delusional.

YOu are correct....do not confuse your perceived "prestige" regarding Williams for actual substance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The Amherst booster(s) is insufferable. Cue the hate. The overly enthusiastic nonsense this person, or these individuals, is spewing comes with a corresponding backlash. Amherst may well be a good school but it’s not comparable to Harvard or Stanford and the insinuations that it’s superior need to stop.

It's perfectly comparable to any top university for undergraduate education. It's also arguably superior to any of the schools that you mentioned for undergraduate education. That same argument holds for at least 9 other SLACs as well. Those who insinuate that research universities are superior need to stop. Different people have different preferences and that should be respected.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

Well only hate it because we they offered zero aid to our kid and we couldn't afford it as it is so darn expensive. Our kid is local not international.

[Anonymous]

Also we didn't like segregation between athletes -non athletes, gay-straight, black-white etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

Amherst is a great school, but no need punch down on Williams and Pomona to make the point. I’d add Bowdoin to the mix of these peer schools given its low acceptance rate, low % of ED admits and grad school placement.

These are strong institutions, just different in location and “personality”.

+1. The self awareness is not strong with this one.

+2.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve never heard Amherst hate.

It’s sort of like when people say bad things about Amherst.

[Anonymous]

Faulty premise. There is no Amherst hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Faulty premise. There is no Amherst hate.

Hmmm. maybe this thread inadvertently sparked one? You have to go to Amherst to understand that logic or GMU but not Williams.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

I am skeptical of all these consortiums that schools advertise. Talk to students and it seems like 95% never take advantage of them at all, mainly because of commuting inconvenience.

Also, I don't get how getting access to UMass, Smith, Mt. Holyoke and Hampshire makes it "academically unmatched". Ironically, it's the access to UMass that provides the most course optionality.

In fairness, a place like Swarthmore gets access to classes at UPenn (in addition to Haverford and Bryn Mawr).

We visited Swarthmore. At the information session, the AO said, "In theory, our students can take classes at UPenn but it's hard to arrange, esp. at Wharton, and in practice, it very rarely happens. Most students DO take advantage of the opportunity to take classes as Haverford and Bryn Mawr."

So . . ..

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

I am skeptical of all these consortiums that schools advertise. Talk to students and it seems like 95% never take advantage of them at all, mainly because of commuting inconvenience.

Also, I don't get how getting access to UMass, Smith, Mt. Holyoke and Hampshire makes it "academically unmatched". Ironically, it's the access to UMass that provides the most course optionality.

In fairness, a place like Swarthmore gets access to classes at UPenn (in addition to Haverford and Bryn Mawr).

The claremont schools are adjacent to each other and really well integrated.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst gets way too much hate for how strong it actually is. It’s easily one of the top liberal arts colleges—honestly better than Pomona or Williams in many ways.

It’s need-blind for international students, has incredible financial aid, and one of the most diverse student bodies among elite schools. The open curriculum and access to the Five College Consortium make it academically unmatched.

People underrate Amherst because it’s less flashy, but by the numbers—and by outcomes—it’s a clear leader. Stop sleeping on it.

I am skeptical of all these consortiums that schools advertise. Talk to students and it seems like 95% never take advantage of them at all, mainly because of commuting inconvenience.

Also, I don't get how getting access to UMass, Smith, Mt. Holyoke and Hampshire makes it "academically unmatched". Ironically, it's the access to UMass that provides the most course optionality.

In fairness, a place like Swarthmore gets access to classes at UPenn (in addition to Haverford and Bryn Mawr).

I can’t speak for other consortiums, but DD is at Bryn Mawr and has taken a class at Haverford every semester so far (and so have her friends). Swarthmore and UPenn are more rare, but it’s really common to see Haverford/Bryn Mawr students in each others classes. It’s why there’s men in some of the pictures of BMC classes on their website/social media.