Hamilton or Wesleyan?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

Don’t you maybe think you have this perspective, because you’re an alum? I’m in a highly competitive industry, and if I see a Wesleyan student, I’m not taking them as seriously as I will a WASP/CMC/Middlebury alum.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WAS>Pomona/Wes>Bowdoin>Middlebury>the others

So where are woman's SLACs positioned here, like Wellesley, Smith and Barnard?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WAS>Pomona/Wes>Bowdoin>Middlebury>the others

So where are woman's SLACs positioned here, like Wellesley, Smith and Barnard?

They’re really just wrong.

WASP>Wellesley/Bowdoin>Midd/Carleton/CMC>Barnard>Smith

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WAS>Pomona/Wes>Bowdoin>Middlebury>the others

So where are woman's SLACs positioned here, like Wellesley, Smith and Barnard?

They’re really just wrong.

WASP>Wellesley/Bowdoin>Midd/Carleton/CMC>Barnard>Smith

Agree with this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

Don’t you maybe think you have this perspective, because you’re an alum? I’m in a highly competitive industry, and if I see a Wesleyan student, I’m not taking them as seriously as I will a WASP/CMC/Middlebury alum.

I've heard references to SWAMP rather than WASP reflecting Middleburys increasing strength particularly in Finance.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

Don’t you maybe think you have this perspective, because you’re an alum? I’m in a highly competitive industry, and if I see a Wesleyan student, I’m not taking them as seriously as I will a WASP/CMC/Middlebury alum.

I've heard references to SWAMP rather than WASP reflecting Middleburys increasing strength particularly in Finance.

Middlebury is not at that level yet. Half of WASP isn’t even known for finance, it’s about historic legacy, grad school admission, and unique undergraduate offerings at the elite level.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

Don’t you maybe think you have this perspective, because you’re an alum? I’m in a highly competitive industry, and if I see a Wesleyan student, I’m not taking them as seriously as I will a WASP/CMC/Middlebury alum.

I've heard references to SWAMP rather than WASP reflecting Middleburys increasing strength particularly in Finance.

Midd is a great school, but I'm convinced that SWAMP has more to do with acronymic novelty than Midd's relationship to Carleton, Bowdoin, CMC, and Wellesley, etc.

[Anonymous]

I'm a Hamilton grad. It has always been a solid school for those in the Tri-state and NE area. In my day, Wes was academically superior.

Hamilton to its credit has tried to expand access with programs like HEOP, POSSE and Questbridge. It is need blind whereas Wesleyan is need aware. Given how expensive college is these days, that is going to be a factor for a lot of families.

Hamcoll doesn't have the same cachet as other big name LACs, but students can get a good education.

[Anonymous]

PP here

Out of curiosity, I looked up the US News rankings. Hamilton and Wesleyan were both ranked 14. Middlebury was ranked 19 which seems off though.

[Anonymous]

Hmm ... the school founded by Alexander Hamilton (Hamilton) vs. the school that educated the creator of the Hamilton musical juggernaut (Wesleyan)???

Might be another Aaron Burr v. A. Ham level match up ...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Hmm ... the school founded by Alexander Hamilton (Hamilton) vs. the school that educated the creator of the Hamilton musical juggernaut (Wesleyan)???

Might be another Aaron Burr v. A. Ham level match up ...

One is impressive, the other is cringey and constantly talked about on tours, because there’s nothing interesting or attractive about the school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Hmm ... the school founded by Alexander Hamilton (Hamilton) vs. the school that educated the creator of the Hamilton musical juggernaut (Wesleyan)???

Might be another Aaron Burr v. A. Ham level match up ...

One is impressive, the other is cringey and constantly talked about on tours, because there’s nothing interesting or attractive about the school.

Hamilton alum again.

Although I agree with your sentiment about the college namesake, I definitely would take Lin-Manuel over Hamilton's foremost literary light, Ezra Pound.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:PP here

Out of curiosity, I looked up the US News rankings. Hamilton and Wesleyan were both ranked 14. Middlebury was ranked 19 which seems off though.

Yes, you are correct that this spirited debate about two schools that appeal to many of the same types of kids and that are more similar than different is pretty silly. Partisan disputes are never pretty. Also love that in a thread ostensibly about Hamilton v. Wesleyan (which in retrospect has got to be a Lin Manuel Miranda bit), someone can't help but invoke the more "prestigious" SLACs to make sure they know their place, though maybe Middlebury doesn't count this year because they dropped to 19. Let's keep fighting about it though. I sure need Middlebury Mom to remind me again that they're almost as good as the WASPs if we would only just understand. Let's see if we can keep this thread cranking until RD later this spring!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Can someone explain what’s with the historic eliteness to Wesleyan? There’s not a single standout program there that clarifies to me why everyone is riding on its past prestige? Every other top LAC has easily identifiable academic programs that make them well known, but Wesleyan just…doesn’t?

Wesleyan has historically had a very strong science program as compared to other SLACs, and still does. That is because it is larger than other SLACs, grants PhDs in the sciences, and has excellent science facilities, giving undergraduate science majors many more opportunities than are available at the smaller LACs.

It provides great support for kids who want to get MDs or PhDs. At one point in my department in a top 3 medical school we had a senior faculty member, a junior faculty member (me), and 2 residents who had graduated from Wes.

I’ve rarely meet faculty members or trainees (resident or fellow) from other SLACs, but Wes alumni of all ages are all over the place in medicine.

If you aren’t in science or medicine then you might not be aware, but this is truly a “standout area” for Wesleyan.

This is where my ?s form. Wes isn’t a top 20 grad feeder for any of the sciences, and I was being generous and tried to include CS, Psych, and Math just in case I missed something. It isn’t even in the top 40 for almost any of those. It also isn’t unique in its premed matriculation- all of WASP and most top 20 LACs have a better med school acceptance rate with a very similar amount of students applying to med school (Wesleyan is around 50 applicants per year, and most WASP schools are a similar number, Amherst has a higher applicant total and acceptance rate).

Lastly, I work in the sciences. I’ve been to various national conferences and do work in Optics. Wesleyan grads are nowhere interesting to be found or anywhere more common than other grads. I’ve frankly met way more people from Williams, Pomona, and Mudd than the 2-3 Wesleyan grads I can recall.

I’m more convinced that Wesleyan had a bit of an overstated reputation due to its “Little Three” affiliation and hasn’t really found its bearing in a program or outcome that’s unique. Reminds me a lot of Haverford, which has a similar history of being compared to the top lacs (it was seen in a similar light to how swarthmore is today) but hasn’t rediscovered or realigned its strengths with the times.

+10, Wesleyan has not been a household slam dunk WASP peer for decades. It really isn’t much different to Hamilton now, may be worse.

A lot of people who do the hiring are, however, older, and running at least 10-20 years behind the current trends. We also don’t obsess over fine gradations in SLAC rankings (until our kids apply to college).

I went to Wes, so I always take a second look at alumni applications. My spouse - who did not got to Wes, but says he thinks I’m smart - has hired 2 Wes grads in the last 10 years, and both have been fantastic.

So we know that if we hire a wes alum then there’s a good chance that we can get a smart and hard-working individual who is curious about the world and can write coherently.

However, I think the same about most SLAC grads! Although, oddly, I am not very familiar with Hamilton, and may not have even clocked it as a SLAC until our kids started thinking about college.

In summary, not that long ago Wesleyan far better known than Hamilton, and both hiring managers and grad/prof school selection committees skew old, so - fairly or unfairly - Wes might still provide an edge in thar respect.

Don’t you maybe think you have this perspective, because you’re an alum? I’m in a highly competitive industry, and if I see a Wesleyan student, I’m not taking them as seriously as I will a WASP/CMC/Middlebury alum.

I've heard references to SWAMP rather than WASP reflecting Middleburys increasing strength particularly in Finance.

Middlebury is not at that level yet. Half of WASP isn’t even known for finance, it’s about historic legacy, grad school admission, and unique undergraduate offerings at the elite level.

Middlebury was T5 in LACs for decades until they started adding nonsense like FGLI et al to the USNWR rankings. Middlebury was also slow about aggressively expanding their endowmentthough hopefully that will cahnge with Patton out the door.