Which among WASP would you choose to ED and why?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious as I have a kid looking at Swarthmore. Is it not considered similar to Williams/Amherst in these conversations (most of which center on WAP and Bowdoin) bc of perceived intensity or something else?

yes, I think WASP is alive and well as top 4. I also think Midd and Bowdoin are really just a half a step behind. Very tough admits, really nice environments, great career outcomes. I personally would pick Bowdoin and Midd over Amherst. If a kid liked the vibe of one over the others, that's the way to go. They're that close in prestige etc

Midd is nowhere close — and declining. The only schools a 1/2 step behind WASPB are Harvey Mudd, Claremont McKenna, and Wellesley. Harvey Mudd and Claremont McKenna, though, are on the upswing, while Wellesley is on the downswing.

If Midd continues its decline it will be on the Colgate, Hamilton, Bates, Holy Cross, Reed tier. The focus should be on avoiding that, not pretending it is something it isn’t.

You are just pathetically stupid.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams Amherst Swarthmore, but trying to figure out P. Pomona, really? One of these things is not like the others.

You seem out of touch. One of these is being picked over the others, consistently. Go talk to young people and see which they prefer. Hint: it is not a tired old northeast SLAC but the one that is “different.”

I love your enthusiasm but the application numbers quickly disprove your hypothesis.

It’s yield, baby. Think real hard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Just curious as I have a kid looking at Swarthmore. Is it not considered similar to Williams/Amherst in these conversations (most of which center on WAP and Bowdoin) bc of perceived intensity or something else?

yes, I think WASP is alive and well as top 4. I also think Midd and Bowdoin are really just a half a step behind. Very tough admits, really nice environments, great career outcomes. I personally would pick Bowdoin and Midd over Amherst. If a kid liked the vibe of one over the others, that's the way to go. They're that close in prestige etc

Midd is nowhere close — and declining. The only schools a 1/2 step behind WASPB are Harvey Mudd, Claremont McKenna, and Wellesley. Harvey Mudd and Claremont McKenna, though, are on the upswing, while Wellesley is on the downswing.

If Midd continues its decline it will be on the Colgate, Hamilton, Bates, Holy Cross, Reed tier. The focus should be on avoiding that, not pretending it is something it isn’t.

Midd is declining according to one ranking that notoriously plays with methodologies. In the latest Niche ranking, it comes out ahead of Amherst (and btw--the top three are Claremont colleges). In the new Washington Monthly ranking, Midd comes out ahead of Amherst, Swarthmore, and Bowdoin.

The new president just announced that the college is shutting the money-losing Middlebury Institute in 2027. Already taking steps to re-prioritize the undergraduate college. I look forward to seeing what's next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

this is interesting to me. are numbers on this in the CDS?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

but the ivies are also need blind for international. so what's to normalize?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

but the ivies are also need blind for international. so what's to normalize?

What this person is saying is that poorer schools, endowment wise, are somehow better than you think because they can’t afford to go need blind for internationals. Gee, that’s certainly one way to look at it…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hi Midd hater! hope all is well with you!

? Midd is a great school on the very prestigious Davidson, Colby, W&L, Carleton, Wesleyan, Vassar, CMC, Harvey Mudd, Wellesley, Barnard, Haverford, Grinnell rung. Wouldn’t call it the worst school on that rung, or the best. Somewhere in the Midd, so to speak. WASPB it is not. Don’t get greedy!

I would say that people push back because your assertion is nonsensically incorrect

The top 9 SLACs (10 if you count Barnard have SAT medians of 1500+.
There are 5 more with medians of 1480/1490.

All of these schools are effectively the same with student profiles which for 90% of the student population overlap with the T10 universities.

Arguing that any of these schools are better than any of the others is just an exercise in mental masturbation. It makes the insecure feel good but it isn't reality.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

but the ivies are also need blind for international. so what's to normalize?

What this person is saying is that poorer schools, endowment wise, are somehow better than you think because they can’t afford to go need blind for internationals. Gee, that’s certainly one way to look at it…

anybody who is currently need blind for intl could stop being need blind with a press release. Nobody is doing this because they have to

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

If you think you know math and want to “normalize” admit rates, you need to normalize for percentage of class filled ED. If you actually know how to do that — I am will find that the % filled ED effect is much greater.

You are incorrect because any school with the levels of selectivity of the ones that we are discussing can fill the class from the applicant pool several times over without reducing their stats.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

this is interesting to me. are numbers on this in the CDS?

In some of them but not all of them. Enough schools properly report that the trends are there if you look at a large enough set of CDS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:hi Midd hater! hope all is well with you!

? Midd is a great school on the very prestigious Davidson, Colby, W&L, Carleton, Wesleyan, Vassar, CMC, Harvey Mudd, Wellesley, Barnard, Haverford, Grinnell rung. Wouldn’t call it the worst school on that rung, or the best. Somewhere in the Midd, so to speak. WASPB it is not. Don’t get greedy!

I would say that people push back because your assertion is nonsensically incorrect

The top 9 SLACs (10 if you count Barnard have SAT medians of 1500+.
There are 5 more with medians of 1480/1490.

All of these schools are effectively the same with student profiles which for 90% of the student population overlap with the T10 universities.

Arguing that any of these schools are better than any of the others is just an exercise in mental masturbation. It makes the insecure feel good but it isn't reality.

You are just making a boundary in a different place (after 10, rather than the WASPB 5). But we don’t know what your 10 are. “Effectively the same with student profiles” sounds pretty masturbatory to me. Hope you are not advising students, though, as to the “sameness” of what your 10 are. The back half of your 10 are much easier admits, especially with ED…

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

but the ivies are also need blind for international. so what's to normalize?

The Ivy admit rates are also much higher than what you see reported. For domestic applicants Dartmouth is over 9% and Cornell is over 11%. The numbers are available if people look.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

If you think you know math and want to “normalize” admit rates, you need to normalize for percentage of class filled ED. If you actually know how to do that — I am will find that the % filled ED effect is much greater.

You are incorrect because any school with the levels of selectivity of the ones that we are discussing can fill the class from the applicant pool several times over without reducing their stats.

This is a common myth. Not true.
Stats wise, though, is irrelevant to the extent that there are holistic admissions.
Take the applicant standpoint. Go ahead,domestic applicants only: WASPB are much, much harder admits.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:There’s not a single Princeton math assistant professor who is a liberal arts college grad. They aren’t bad schools but Williams or Pomona is no where near a Princeton

For someone who is so concerned about math, you have a shockingly poor understanding of sample size.

Interesting that there’s always at least 1 or 2 students from Harvard MIT Or Princeton in the grad student class of Princeton math but 0 LAC students across the board. Hey dingbat 0/400 is still 0.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I loved Amherst when I visited a million years ago, so I'd ED there. Although I didn't see Swarthmore and I think I might have loved it too.

But if I had a kid who had so little opinion on geography etc . . . that they were asking this, I'd have them ED to a SLAC that was also excellent and a little easier to get into. Grinnell or Middlebury or something. (I don't have a kid who wants SLAC so I am not that knowledgeable). Why pick a WASP?

Absolutely. Go down a rung and ED might actually help. (Bowdoin is not down a rung.)

Bowdoin’s stats are nearly identical to Middlebury’s. Biggest difference is that Middlebury is much larger.

Latest admissions cycle:
Bowdoin acceptance rate: 6.8%
Middlebury acceptance rate: 13.99%

Bowdoin ED acceptance rate:14.8%
Middlebury ED acceptance rate: 30.5%

Bowdoin's acceptance rate is artificially deflated because of their need blind policies for international students. They get about 3000 excess applications from international students because of this policy. The same issue holds for Williams, Amherst, the Ivies and other need blind for internationals schools. About 42-45% of Bowdoin's applications are international in a typical year. Domestic applicants have a 12% acceptance rate.

If you normalize of financial aid you will find that all of the top SLACs have a 10-12% admissions rate and the rate for the Ivies is 7-10%.

but the ivies are also need blind for international. so what's to normalize?

What this person is saying is that poorer schools, endowment wise, are somehow better than you think because they can’t afford to go need blind for internationals. Gee, that’s certainly one way to look at it…

Other way around. The need blind schools aren’t nearly as selective as they appear because they draw huge numbers of international applications but only take a very tiny portion of them which “artificially” skews their numbers.