What are the academic programs each WASP is known for?

[Anonymous]

It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of humanities focus at these colleges is quite sad

I think these posters are overstating things. These are first of all liberal arts colleges (without graduate level programs) and people are magnifying the differences.

Every top SLAC is seeing a massive decline in humanities students, and now faculty.

I dont know about that. I do know their very nice endowments are escaping the endowment tax, which is pretty major.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of particular programs at two of these colleges, Williams is notable for art history and Amherst is notable for neuroscience. Both offernational-level economics programs.

What does that mean? Amherst also seems to have very few permanent faculty and dedicated faculty to neuroscience.

With respect to the economics departments of Williams and Amherst, their faculty contribute research papers to economics journals at a rate greater than that of the faculty at some national universities over ten times their size.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

I disagree. Many have curricular focuses and investment in certain majors over others. Even if they didn’t, we can’t pretend Williams Philosophy or Religion department is getting the same love and resources as the Econ department.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of particular programs at two of these colleges, Williams is notable for art history and Amherst is notable for neuroscience. Both offernational-level economics programs.

What does that mean? Amherst also seems to have very few permanent faculty and dedicated faculty to neuroscience.

With respect to the economics departments of Williams and Amherst, their faculty contribute research papers to economics journals at a rate greater than that of the faculty at some national universities over ten times their size.

You’re missing quite a few schools in between. Williams certainly is the top school for economics: https://ideas.repec.org/top/top.uslacecon.html

[Anonymous]

I’d choose Williams for their amazing geoscience and mathematics programs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d choose Williams for their amazing geoscience and mathematics programs.

+1

[Anonymous]

Amherst, Swarthmore, and Williams all top for pre-med.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-medical-school

Note where they are sending their students. Those three send a number to Harvard and Penn. Pomona also strong, but sends to UCLA and UCSF. All Tier 1 med schools, but there is generally an East vs. West coast split as far as feeders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Amherst, Swarthmore, and Williams all top for pre-med.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-medical-school

Note where they are sending their students. Those three send a number to Harvard and Penn. Pomona also strong, but sends to UCLA and UCSF. All Tier 1 med schools, but there is generally an East vs. West coast split as far as feeders.

Don’t really see the difference. Not like UCSF is a bad med school, it’s a Harvard Hopkins equivalent. Pomona is basically the same as swat for med. it has 115 versus 118 and swarthmore is slightly smaller. These lists change little by little every year. Next year, we’ll see Amherst below swat or completely different placements.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of particular programs at two of these colleges, Williams is notable for art history and Amherst is notable for neuroscience. Both offernational-level economics programs.

What does that mean? Amherst also seems to have very few permanent faculty and dedicated faculty to neuroscience.

With respect to the economics departments of Williams and Amherst, their faculty contribute research papers to economics journals at a rate greater than that of the faculty at some national universities over ten times their size.

They really don’t. The RePEc lists have multiple lists for this kind of thing, including ones that weight by the number of authors. Williams doesn’t crack the top 100 on any list. Amherst isn’t in the top 500.

Which is fine. They are LACs and they aren’t expected to. But let’s not overstate it.

Agree with the other poster though that Williams > Amherst in this field.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst, Swarthmore, and Williams all top for pre-med.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-medical-school

Note where they are sending their students. Those three send a number to Harvard and Penn. Pomona also strong, but sends to UCLA and UCSF. All Tier 1 med schools, but there is generally an East vs. West coast split as far as feeders.

Don’t really see the difference. Not like UCSF is a bad med school, it’s a Harvard Hopkins equivalent. Pomona is basically the same as swat for med. it has 115 versus 118 and swarthmore is slightly smaller. These lists change little by little every year. Next year, we’ll see Amherst below swat or completely different placements.

I think the point is about East versus West Coast feeders, which is a fair point to consider.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of particular programs at two of these colleges, Williams is notable for art history and Amherst is notable for neuroscience. Both offernational-level economics programs.

What does that mean? Amherst also seems to have very few permanent faculty and dedicated faculty to neuroscience.

With respect to the economics departments of Williams and Amherst, their faculty contribute research papers to economics journals at a rate greater than that of the faculty at some national universities over ten times their size.

They really don’t. The RePEc lists have multiple lists for this kind of thing, including ones that weight by the number of authors. Williams doesn’t crack the top 100 on any list. Amherst isn’t in the top 500.

Which is fine. They are LACs and they aren’t expected to. But let’s not overstate it.

Agree with the other poster though that Williams > Amherst in this field.

+1, if you’re that interested in economics and want to get into a top grad economics program, you shouldnt be afraid to work with the experts and attend Chicago, Princeton, Dartmouth etc. If you NEED a lac, Williams or Claremont Mckenna are the strongest bets.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst, Swarthmore, and Williams all top for pre-med.

https://www.collegetransitions.com/dataverse/top-feeders-medical-school

Note where they are sending their students. Those three send a number to Harvard and Penn. Pomona also strong, but sends to UCLA and UCSF. All Tier 1 med schools, but there is generally an East vs. West coast split as far as feeders.

Don’t really see the difference. Not like UCSF is a bad med school, it’s a Harvard Hopkins equivalent. Pomona is basically the same as swat for med. it has 115 versus 118 and swarthmore is slightly smaller. These lists change little by little every year. Next year, we’ll see Amherst below swat or completely different placements.

I think the point is about East versus West Coast feeders, which is a fair point to consider.

Not really. https://magazine.pomona.edu/2024/spring/birds-of-a-feather-at-harvard-med/" target="_new" rel="nofollow"> https://magazine.pomona.edu/2024/spring/birds-of-a-feather-at-harvard-med/. This is really just nonsensical east coast bias that spreads all over this forum. Going to Williams isn’t going to be a detriment to a UCSF hopeful, nor Pomona for a Harvard Med hopeful.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

Agreed. You generally go to a SLAC for a well-rounded liberal arts education (which unfortunately no longer seems to be valued). Learn how to think. So though some might theoretically be better than others in particular areas, if you are going to college because you want to be 100% focused on bio or Spanish or Econ, these probably aren’t the places for you.

I work on Wall Street and I prefer to hire smart SLAC grads of all majors and we will teach them what we want them to know. Then when the world changes and they need to adapt, they tend to be the best at doing so. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer people agree with me.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

Agreed. You generally go to a SLAC for a well-rounded liberal arts education (which unfortunately no longer seems to be valued). Learn how to think. So though some might theoretically be better than others in particular areas, if you are going to college because you want to be 100% focused on bio or Spanish or Econ, these probably aren’t the places for you.

I work on Wall Street and I prefer to hire smart SLAC grads of all majors and we will teach them what we want them to know. Then when the world changes and they need to adapt, they tend to be the best at doing so. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer people agree with me.

People disagree because we are in an era of necessitated specialization. No longer do we need general programmers- we have AI. We need highly trained thinkers. I’ll take a kid who has actually worked on Neural networks over the Williams kid who can just rattle off about knot theory.