Who is WASP (Williams, Amherst, Swat, Pomona) for?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“WASP” has never been heard of. What is that?

Yeah, why these four and not another set of four or a combination of a few of these with others? And why P which is all the way on the west coast whereas the 'WAS' are east and even that S is not in New England. Explanation anyone??

Endowment size, no other reason.

So they’re able to offer more to their students? Seems like a pretty valid reason to put them together.

Quite the opposite. They hoard their money. Look at institutions like Wesleyan which offer a lot more academic centers, departments, opportunities, with a lot less money. A lot of these schools' funds are going to excessive financial aid and administrative desires over the college itself.

"excessive financial aid" is a good thing.

I'd prefer more funding for professorships and academic centers for research. Research shows poorer students do better at institutions designed for the underprivileged and teaching state schools (look at the cal states). You could slash financial aid, get the same (or even stronger) cohort of students and give those students more educational opportunities.

[Anonymous]

The students that go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Among the small schools, West Point and Annapolis tend to get the strongest individuals with the best outcomes. Air Force is also doing really well these days.

Williams and Swarthmore also get great students - just not as fit. But some bright students really want the liberal arts college experience. I'd add Bowdoin here.

No one knows what Amherst is up to these days. And the great thing about Pomona is the consortium. Admissions for randos from the burbs are nearly impossible for Pomona. Tiny school in California. But you can apply to Pitzer, Scripps, and CMC and get all the Pomona classes you want.

If you’re worried about outcomes, CMC is better than all the other ones you mentioned.

CMC? The one that keep recruiting racist and sexist athletic teams over and over? No thanks. No outcomes are woth going school with people like that. They put the claremont consortium to shame.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1305305.page

https://www.claremontindependent.com/post/cms...emporarily-suspended

https://scrippsvoice.com/the-stag-survival-gu...ms-womens-swim-team/

https://tsl.news/stag-survival-guide/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Among the small schools, West Point and Annapolis tend to get the strongest individuals with the best outcomes. Air Force is also doing really well these days.

Williams and Swarthmore also get great students - just not as fit. But some bright students really want the liberal arts college experience. I'd add Bowdoin here.

No one knows what Amherst is up to these days. And the great thing about Pomona is the consortium. Admissions for randos from the burbs are nearly impossible for Pomona. Tiny school in California. But you can apply to Pitzer, Scripps, and CMC and get all the Pomona classes you want.

This is a seriously large pile of nonsense from the Pomona booster, or is it the Bowdoin booster as one cannot be sure. The service academies get solid students, none are near the top academically and if they were to be admitted to a top school, people would be screaming “undeserving”.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams

Swarthmore
Pros: Best LAC for graduate school admissions, beautiful, manicured campus, Access to Philly with Train station on campus, Cash Free Campus, Engineering program
Cons: Worst place to go if Pre-Professional, Academics over everything with a toxic relationship to "rigor," Has a dying/dead Consortium, Food is allegedly inedible, no social scene/party life after greek life disbanded-which had a really negative culture of SA

Can you say more about the "dying/dead consortium"? All three of the colleges (Swarthmore, Haverford, Bryn Mawr) talked up the consortium when we visited. My DD is planning to apply early to one of the other LACs in the consortium, and I think being able to cross-register for courses in any of the three schools is appealing for her.

Of course. DC is lucky to be very close to students at Swarthmore and Haverford and spent the night at both hanging with old high school friends. Swarthmore students explained that they hardly use the consortium, because its not that convenient and there's little incentive. Meanwhile, Haverford and Bryn Mawr students definitely use the Bi-Co extensively, and I was even able to take their cute little bus over to Bryn Mawr, which was a very short drive. All colleges will talk up their consortiums, but few work very well (Almost none at the level of Pomona's for example).

Agree that the Claremont Consortium is the gold standard. The small, contiguous campuses for classes and exceptional dining options make it accessible and enjoyable.

You are now responding to your own comments. How cute.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Among the small schools, West Point and Annapolis tend to get the strongest individuals with the best outcomes. Air Force is also doing really well these days.

Williams and Swarthmore also get great students - just not as fit. But some bright students really want the liberal arts college experience. I'd add Bowdoin here.

No one knows what Amherst is up to these days. And the great thing about Pomona is the consortium. Admissions for randos from the burbs are nearly impossible for Pomona. Tiny school in California. But you can apply to Pitzer, Scripps, and CMC and get all the Pomona classes you want.

If you’re worried about outcomes, CMC is better than all the other ones you mentioned.

CMC? The one that keep recruiting racist and sexist athletic teams over and over? No thanks. No outcomes are woth going school with people like that. They put the claremont consortium to shame.

https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1305305.page

https://www.claremontindependent.com/post/cms...emporarily-suspended

https://scrippsvoice.com/the-stag-survival-gu...ms-womens-swim-team/

https://tsl.news/stag-survival-guide/

Yes. It also happens to make really strong students who go out into the world and make a buck or two: https://www.degreechoices.com/best-colleges/rankings/liberal-arts/
https://www.bestcolleges.com/news/analysis/wall-street-journal-college-rankings-measure-outcomes/.
I'm not sure why a scandal that happened with an athletic team is in conversation, since it has nothing to do with my comment.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Among the small schools, West Point and Annapolis tend to get the strongest individuals with the best outcomes. Air Force is also doing really well these days.

Williams and Swarthmore also get great students - just not as fit. But some bright students really want the liberal arts college experience. I'd add Bowdoin here.

No one knows what Amherst is up to these days. And the great thing about Pomona is the consortium. Admissions for randos from the burbs are nearly impossible for Pomona. Tiny school in California. But you can apply to Pitzer, Scripps, and CMC and get all the Pomona classes you want.

This is a seriously large pile of nonsense from the Pomona booster, or is it the Bowdoin booster as one cannot be sure. The service academies get solid students, none are near the top academically and if they were to be admitted to a top school, people would be screaming “undeserving”.

A pomona booster...who doesn't want people to go to Pomona and describe admission as "nearly impossible." Sounds like a crap booster.

[Anonymous]

SLAC boosters have got to be the most naval-gazing, boring group of people.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:SLAC boosters have got to be the most naval-gazing, boring group of people.

All boosters. This isn't special to liberal arts colleges.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLAC boosters have got to be the most naval-gazing, boring group of people.

All boosters. This isn't special to liberal arts colleges.

No, it really is. This forum is full of thread after thread of SLAC boosting bores.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLAC boosters have got to be the most naval-gazing, boring group of people.

All boosters. This isn't special to liberal arts colleges.

No, it really is. This forum is full of thread after thread of SLAC boosting bores.

Good luck when you meet the UVA or W&M booster.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:SLAC boosters have got to be the most naval-gazing, boring group of people.

All boosters. This isn't special to liberal arts colleges.

No, it really is. This forum is full of thread after thread of SLAC boosting bores.

Good luck when you meet the UVA or W&M booster.

True, they're just as bad.

[Anonymous]

WASP is just an acronym. Other than being top liberal arts colleges, these schools are all very different. Perhaps, Williams and Amherst share more similarities, like being closer geographically. If you’re smart enough to attend these schools, certainly you think beyond this logic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:“WASP” has never been heard of. What is that?

Yeah, why these four and not another set of four or a combination of a few of these with others? And why P which is all the way on the west coast whereas the 'WAS' are east and even that S is not in New England. Explanation anyone??

Endowment size, no other reason.

Bowdoin’s endowment is now greater than Swarthmore’s.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:WASP is just an acronym. Other than being top liberal arts colleges, these schools are all very different. Perhaps, Williams and Amherst share more similarities, like being closer geographically. If you’re smart enough to attend these schools, certainly you think beyond this logic.

They're all pretty similar. I don't know why everyone acts like they're completely unrelated and have nothing in common. Our tours at all 4 pretty much said the same thing and the offerings are nearly identical.