Amherst v Pomona

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont think any of the top half dozen slacs are struggling.

slacs a full rung down (ranked 15+) - yes, agree.

Top SLACs are doing great, to be sure, but they have still declined in relative prestige vis a vis top national universities over the last generation, in case you are unaware of that trend. Pomona is more insulated from this.

People who prefer LACs will always prefer LACs. There is no change in "prestige."

Numbers don’t lie. And facts are stubborn things.

What numbers?? What are the “facts” around the “prestige” of LACs 🙄

Applicant trends away from SLACs, towards urban areas, and towards national unis. Perhaps you missed the memo.

Perhaps you haven't noticed the acceptance rates or the 1500 average SAT scores from the top dozen SLACs?

Test optional.

Relative to National Unis? Not so much. You probably want to actual educate yourself before putting fingers to keyboard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither school would be a good fit for my kids, so have no particular feelings about either. But it seems to me a lot of people are stuck in the world from 30/40 years ago. Generally, people seem to be really underestimating how much the world has moved on from old New England. The West Coast, the South, and even the Midwest have much more going on than New England. Amherst seems really ossified to me. And their attempts to modernize and diversify haven't really succeeded. From what I've read, Amherst's attempts have led to more silos - there are the athletes, their are the black kids, there are the first generation kids, there are the residual WASPs, and they don't interact at all. It's like a bad high school. The New Yorker had a good article about Amherst as a community a few years ago. It seems like an exhausting place to be.

But Pomona seems kind of tiresome too in a West Coast way. It's very unlikely a white or asian unhooked UMC kid from the burbs of DC or NY or Chicago would ever be admitted to begin with. Pomona is all in with their view of "diversity." The upside to Pomona is the consortium. I always envisioned it as five schools on a cul de sac. The Pomona student can take classes at Harvey Mudd or CMC, and I think that's really cool. If the only choices in the world were Pomona and Amherst, I would totally choose Pomona - because there are outlets to go elsewhere and enlarge your community and experiences.

I'm not anti-SLAC at all, but these are such tiny communities that I think going to either Amherst or Pomona is so risky for 18 year olds. But the Pomona consortium is better than the Amherst consortium. Plus, weather, which is no small thing from October to March.

That New Yorker article was about a MIDDLE school in Amherst. If you’re referring to NY Times article, it actually puts Amherst in a good light on balance

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here are ignorant of the west coast, because they’re absolute brutish a$$holes, who need misery in their lives. West coast is lively for industries- tech, defense, sustainability, entertainment, lifestyle/wellness, art, Venture Capital/Fin tech, and Public Policy/American-Asian political opportunities. If you aren’t interested in those things, great, but don’t act as if it’s some unimportant region when California alone is fueling many other states with its returns.

Quite a bit of that is true but it also goes in the opposite direction. People on the West Coast, particularly in the Bay area are ignorant regarding SLACs and obsessed with CS. But as is often said IYKYK and there is no lack of SLAC representation on Sand Hill Rd, in SF Finance, or in the top ranks of FAANG management outside of engineering.

There’s just less LACs in the west coast. Doesn’t mean people trash them like they trash everything here, because it isn’t in New England or New York.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont think any of the top half dozen slacs are struggling.

slacs a full rung down (ranked 15+) - yes, agree.

Top SLACs are doing great, to be sure, but they have still declined in relative prestige vis a vis top national universities over the last generation, in case you are unaware of that trend. Pomona is more insulated from this.

People who prefer LACs will always prefer LACs. There is no change in "prestige."

Numbers don’t lie. And facts are stubborn things.

What numbers?? What are the “facts” around the “prestige” of LACs 🙄

Applicant trends away from SLACs, towards urban areas, and towards national unis. Perhaps you missed the memo.

Perhaps you haven't noticed the acceptance rates or the 1500 average SAT scores from the top dozen SLACs?

Test optional.

Relative to National Unis? Not so much. You probably want to actual educate yourself before putting fingers to keyboard.

Top universities are going back to test required.
Top LACs haven’t even thought of it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither school would be a good fit for my kids, so have no particular feelings about either. But it seems to me a lot of people are stuck in the world from 30/40 years ago. Generally, people seem to be really underestimating how much the world has moved on from old New England. The West Coast, the South, and even the Midwest have much more going on than New England. Amherst seems really ossified to me. And their attempts to modernize and diversify haven't really succeeded. From what I've read, Amherst's attempts have led to more silos - there are the athletes, their are the black kids, there are the first generation kids, there are the residual WASPs, and they don't interact at all. It's like a bad high school. The New Yorker had a good article about Amherst as a community a few years ago. It seems like an exhausting place to be.

But Pomona seems kind of tiresome too in a West Coast way. It's very unlikely a white or asian unhooked UMC kid from the burbs of DC or NY or Chicago would ever be admitted to begin with. Pomona is all in with their view of "diversity." The upside to Pomona is the consortium. I always envisioned it as five schools on a cul de sac. The Pomona student can take classes at Harvey Mudd or CMC, and I think that's really cool. If the only choices in the world were Pomona and Amherst, I would totally choose Pomona - because there are outlets to go elsewhere and enlarge your community and experiences.

I'm not anti-SLAC at all, but these are such tiny communities that I think going to either Amherst or Pomona is so risky for 18 year olds. But the Pomona consortium is better than the Amherst consortium. Plus, weather, which is no small thing from October to March.

That New Yorker article was about a MIDDLE school in Amherst. If you’re referring to NY Times article, it actually puts Amherst in a good light on balance

Why is the New Yorker writing about the demographic makeup of a middle school in the middle of Massachusetts? I need to see this.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here are ignorant of the west coast, because they’re absolute brutish a$$holes, who need misery in their lives. West coast is lively for industries- tech, defense, sustainability, entertainment, lifestyle/wellness, art, Venture Capital/Fin tech, and Public Policy/American-Asian political opportunities. If you aren’t interested in those things, great, but don’t act as if it’s some unimportant region when California alone is fueling many other states with its returns.

Quite a bit of that is true but it also goes in the opposite direction. People on the West Coast, particularly in the Bay area are ignorant regarding SLACs and obsessed with CS. But as is often said IYKYK and there is no lack of SLAC representation on Sand Hill Rd, in SF Finance, or in the top ranks of FAANG management outside of engineering.

At least that's what I saw the west coast people think high of top UCs over top east colleges except HYPSM, despite the fact of big portion of student body in UCs are community college transfers. I personally knew a few, who were sub-par student but transferred to Berkeley from CC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Neither school would be a good fit for my kids, so have no particular feelings about either. But it seems to me a lot of people are stuck in the world from 30/40 years ago. Generally, people seem to be really underestimating how much the world has moved on from old New England. The West Coast, the South, and even the Midwest have much more going on than New England. Amherst seems really ossified to me. And their attempts to modernize and diversify haven't really succeeded. From what I've read, Amherst's attempts have led to more silos - there are the athletes, their are the black kids, there are the first generation kids, there are the residual WASPs, and they don't interact at all. It's like a bad high school. The New Yorker had a good article about Amherst as a community a few years ago. It seems like an exhausting place to be.

But Pomona seems kind of tiresome too in a West Coast way. It's very unlikely a white or asian unhooked UMC kid from the burbs of DC or NY or Chicago would ever be admitted to begin with. Pomona is all in with their view of "diversity." The upside to Pomona is the consortium. I always envisioned it as five schools on a cul de sac. The Pomona student can take classes at Harvey Mudd or CMC, and I think that's really cool. If the only choices in the world were Pomona and Amherst, I would totally choose Pomona - because there are outlets to go elsewhere and enlarge your community and experiences.

I'm not anti-SLAC at all, but these are such tiny communities that I think going to either Amherst or Pomona is so risky for 18 year olds. But the Pomona consortium is better than the Amherst consortium. Plus, weather, which is no small thing from October to March.

That New Yorker article was about a MIDDLE school in Amherst. If you’re referring to NY Times article, it actually puts Amherst in a good light on balance

Why is the New Yorker writing about the demographic makeup of a middle school in the middle of Massachusetts? I need to see this.

Hilarious.
https://www.newyorker.com/news/annals-of-education/the-meltdown-at-a-middle-school-in-a-liberal-town

Was that a RWNJ talking point being passed around?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Neither school would be a good fit for my kids, so have no particular feelings about either. But it seems to me a lot of people are stuck in the world from 30/40 years ago. Generally, people seem to be really underestimating how much the world has moved on from old New England. The West Coast, the South, and even the Midwest have much more going on than New England. Amherst seems really ossified to me. And their attempts to modernize and diversify haven't really succeeded. From what I've read, Amherst's attempts have led to more silos - there are the athletes, their are the black kids, there are the first generation kids, there are the residual WASPs, and they don't interact at all. It's like a bad high school. The New Yorker had a good article about Amherst as a community a few years ago. It seems like an exhausting place to be.

But Pomona seems kind of tiresome too in a West Coast way. It's very unlikely a white or asian unhooked UMC kid from the burbs of DC or NY or Chicago would ever be admitted to begin with. Pomona is all in with their view of "diversity." The upside to Pomona is the consortium. I always envisioned it as five schools on a cul de sac. The Pomona student can take classes at Harvey Mudd or CMC, and I think that's really cool. If the only choices in the world were Pomona and Amherst, I would totally choose Pomona - because there are outlets to go elsewhere and enlarge your community and experiences.

I'm not anti-SLAC at all, but these are such tiny communities that I think going to either Amherst or Pomona is so risky for 18 year olds. But the Pomona consortium is better than the Amherst consortium. Plus, weather, which is no small thing from October to March.

This is hilarious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I dont think any of the top half dozen slacs are struggling.

slacs a full rung down (ranked 15+) - yes, agree.

Top SLACs are doing great, to be sure, but they have still declined in relative prestige vis a vis top national universities over the last generation, in case you are unaware of that trend. Pomona is more insulated from this.

People who prefer LACs will always prefer LACs. There is no change in "prestige."

Numbers don’t lie. And facts are stubborn things.

What numbers?? What are the “facts” around the “prestige” of LACs 🙄

Applicant trends away from SLACs, towards urban areas, and towards national unis. Perhaps you missed the memo.

Perhaps you haven't noticed the acceptance rates or the 1500 average SAT scores from the top dozen SLACs?

Test optional.

Relative to National Unis? Not so much. You probably want to actual educate yourself before putting fingers to keyboard.

Top universities are going back to test required.
Top LACs haven’t even thought of it.

That's because admissions staff at large universities need standardized test scores to weed out the crap applicants when sifting through tens of thousands of applications. At sLACs, they can take the time to actually read transcripts and essays to identify students who will succeed there.

[Anonymous]

I can't believe this is going on for so long. They're both incredible schools, they both see each other as peers, you can't go wrong with either. It's just a matter of whether you'd like to be in Southern California or Western Massachusetts but otherwise they're 95% the same school with the same undergraduate experience.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here are ignorant of the west coast, because they’re absolute brutish a$$holes, who need misery in their lives. West coast is lively for industries- tech, defense, sustainability, entertainment, lifestyle/wellness, art, Venture Capital/Fin tech, and Public Policy/American-Asian political opportunities. If you aren’t interested in those things, great, but don’t act as if it’s some unimportant region when California alone is fueling many other states with its returns.

Quite a bit of that is true but it also goes in the opposite direction. People on the West Coast, particularly in the Bay area are ignorant regarding SLACs and obsessed with CS. But as is often said IYKYK and there is no lack of SLAC representation on Sand Hill Rd, in SF Finance, or in the top ranks of FAANG management outside of engineering.

At least that's what I saw the west coast people think high of top UCs over top east colleges except HYPSM, despite the fact of big portion of student body in UCs are community college transfers. I personally knew a few, who were sub-par student but transferred to Berkeley from CC.

The highly educated Caucasian population sees UCLA and UCB for what they are; great graduate schools. They do not attach the weird level of prestige to them that immigrants do. The tech oriented look for top privates and the others do the same but also add in the top SLACs both east and west.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'll say is one is more notable than the other!
Pomona: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pomona_College_people
Amherst: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Amherst_College_people

No question about it, people tend to impose own feeling or view based on self experience. But hard data is hard to discount.

Not really when you consider that Amherst is 300 years older than Pomona. Might want to normalize to the last 100 years and see what things look like.

300 years older?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here are ignorant of the west coast, because they’re absolute brutish a$$holes, who need misery in their lives. West coast is lively for industries- tech, defense, sustainability, entertainment, lifestyle/wellness, art, Venture Capital/Fin tech, and Public Policy/American-Asian political opportunities. If you aren’t interested in those things, great, but don’t act as if it’s some unimportant region when California alone is fueling many other states with its returns.

Quite a bit of that is true but it also goes in the opposite direction. People on the West Coast, particularly in the Bay area are ignorant regarding SLACs and obsessed with CS. But as is often said IYKYK and there is no lack of SLAC representation on Sand Hill Rd, in SF Finance, or in the top ranks of FAANG management outside of engineering.

At least that's what I saw the west coast people think high of top UCs over top east colleges except HYPSM, despite the fact of big portion of student body in UCs are community college transfers. I personally knew a few, who were sub-par student but transferred to Berkeley from CC.

The highly educated Caucasian population sees UCLA and UCB for what they are; great graduate schools. They do not attach the weird level of prestige to them that immigrants do. The tech oriented look for top privates and the others do the same but also add in the top SLACs both east and west.

Thank you for speaking on behalf of all highly educated Caucasians, o' Grand Dragon. I'm glad we conducted that empirical survey on college prestige at the last Klan meeting.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:People here are ignorant of the west coast, because they’re absolute brutish a$$holes, who need misery in their lives. West coast is lively for industries- tech, defense, sustainability, entertainment, lifestyle/wellness, art, Venture Capital/Fin tech, and Public Policy/American-Asian political opportunities. If you aren’t interested in those things, great, but don’t act as if it’s some unimportant region when California alone is fueling many other states with its returns.

Quite a bit of that is true but it also goes in the opposite direction. People on the West Coast, particularly in the Bay area are ignorant regarding SLACs and obsessed with CS. But as is often said IYKYK and there is no lack of SLAC representation on Sand Hill Rd, in SF Finance, or in the top ranks of FAANG management outside of engineering.

At least that's what I saw the west coast people think high of top UCs over top east colleges except HYPSM, despite the fact of big portion of student body in UCs are community college transfers. I personally knew a few, who were sub-par student but transferred to Berkeley from CC.

The highly educated Caucasian population sees UCLA and UCB for what they are; great graduate schools. They do not attach the weird level of prestige to them that immigrants do. The tech oriented look for top privates and the others do the same but also add in the top SLACs both east and west.

Thank you for speaking on behalf of all highly educated Caucasians, o' Grand Dragon. I'm glad we conducted that empirical survey on college prestige at the last Klan meeting.

😂😂

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:All I'll say is one is more notable than the other!
Pomona: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Pomona_College_people
Amherst: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_Amherst_College_people

No question about it, people tend to impose own feeling or view based on self experience. But hard data is hard to discount.

Not really when you consider that Amherst is 300 years older than Pomona. Might want to normalize to the last 100 years and see what things look like.

300 years older?

They meant to say 67 years (1821 vs 1887).