Comparing LACs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

But Wesleyan did same as Bowdoin on CDS - reporting ALL scores, not just those submitted. That’s why theirs are lower.

How do they know about scores not submitted?

They require all enrolling students to submit before school starts. My kid was TO and had to send scores this summer.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

And the differences go away completely when you look at the Wes scores for submitters only—the apples to apples comparison. In fact, Wesleyan jumps to the top of the list on SAT (and is the same as Bowdoin on ACT).

SAT Composite percentile 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 1480 - 1520 - 1560
Bowdoin: 1470 - 1510 - 1530
Middlebury: 1440 - 1500 - 1530

ACT Composite 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 33 - 34 - 35
Bowdoin: 33 - 34 - 35
Middlebury: 33 - 34 - 34

Since we are already down in the weeds:
A) The Wesleyan data cited here is for admitted students. This is different than the test score data reported in the CDS and displayed above for Bowdoin and Middlebury, which is for matriculating students. Usually for a school in the position of Wesleyan (or any of the elite SLACs for that matter), admitted student data shows higher test scores, class ranks, etc. than matriculating student data, because many admitted students have also applied to, been accepted at, and will attend other "more desirable" schools such as Ivies.
B) It is incorrect to add together SAT subscores at the 25th - 50th - 75th percentile levels to infer composite scores at those levels. Look at the CDS data for any of these schools where both subscores and composite scores are reported-the composite score at the 75th percentile level is lower than the sum of the 75th percentile levels, and the composite at the 25th percentile level is higher than the sum of the 25th percentile level subscores. This is related to the difference between joint and marginal distributions.

"The narcissism of small differences" comes to mind here...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And the differences go away completely when you look at the Wes scores for submitters only—the apples to apples comparison. In fact, Wesleyan jumps to the top of the list on SAT (and is the same as Bowdoin on ACT).

SAT Composite percentile 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 1480 - 1520 - 1560
Bowdoin: 1470 - 1510 - 1530
Middlebury: 1440 - 1500 - 1530

ACT Composite 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 33 - 34 - 35
Bowdoin: 33 - 34 - 35
Middlebury: 33 - 34 - 34

Since we are already down in the weeds:
A) The Wesleyan data cited here is for admitted students. This is different than the test score data reported in the CDS and displayed above for Bowdoin and Middlebury, which is for matriculating students. Usually for a school in the position of Wesleyan (or any of the elite SLACs for that matter), admitted student data shows higher test scores, class ranks, etc. than matriculating student data, because many admitted students have also applied to, been accepted at, and will attend other "more desirable" schools such as Ivies.
B) It is incorrect to add together SAT subscores at the 25th - 50th - 75th percentile levels to infer composite scores at those levels. Look at the CDS data for any of these schools where both subscores and composite scores are reported-the composite score at the 75th percentile level is lower than the sum of the 75th percentile levels, and the composite at the 25th percentile level is higher than the sum of the 25th percentile level subscores. This is related to the difference between joint and marginal distributions.

"The narcissism of small differences" comes to mind here...

Points taken, and agreed. The larger point is that there is minimal if any distinction in test scores and qualifications among the students at these schools and that trying to separate the schools into tiers is an exercise in splitting hairs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

And the differences go away completely when you look at the Wes scores for submitters only—the apples to apples comparison. In fact, Wesleyan jumps to the top of the list on SAT (and is the same as Bowdoin on ACT).

SAT Composite percentile 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 1480 - 1520 - 1560
Bowdoin: 1470 - 1510 - 1530
Middlebury: 1440 - 1500 - 1530

ACT Composite 25th - 50th - 75th
Wesleyan: 33 - 34 - 35
Bowdoin: 33 - 34 - 35
Middlebury: 33 - 34 - 34

Since we are already down in the weeds:
A) The Wesleyan data cited here is for admitted students. This is different than the test score data reported in the CDS and displayed above for Bowdoin and Middlebury, which is for matriculating students. Usually for a school in the position of Wesleyan (or any of the elite SLACs for that matter), admitted student data shows higher test scores, class ranks, etc. than matriculating student data, because many admitted students have also applied to, been accepted at, and will attend other "more desirable" schools such as Ivies.
B) It is incorrect to add together SAT subscores at the 25th - 50th - 75th percentile levels to infer composite scores at those levels. Look at the CDS data for any of these schools where both subscores and composite scores are reported-the composite score at the 75th percentile level is lower than the sum of the 75th percentile levels, and the composite at the 25th percentile level is higher than the sum of the 25th percentile level subscores. This is related to the difference between joint and marginal distributions.

"The narcissism of small differences" comes to mind here...

Points taken, and agreed. The larger point is that there is minimal if any distinction in test scores and qualifications among the students at these schools and that trying to separate the schools into tiers is an exercise in splitting hairs.

DP. The exercise is always about splitting hairs so that someone feels superior to someone else. That’s the reason my kid wanted out of the DMV and NE schools. The overall culture here is ultra-competitive, snobby, and prestige hungry. Kid was super well qualified and went to the highest rated SLAC outside the NE and Mid-Atlantic. ED. One and done.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASP gets more Ivy rejects than the rest, which makes the school environments there somewhat more intense.

Also true: WASP has a high proportion of kids who were admitted to Ivies and Ivy+'s but chose fit over brand. My DC being one example.

Very true. The amount of people from DC's hall at Pomona who chose it over ivies is startling. LACs have a very specific culture and brand that helps attract students.

[Anonymous]

^^The food alone at the 5C’s is reason enough to choose them-my DC is constantly sending pics of steak, sushi, custom pasta bowls, fresh salads etc!

[Anonymous]

My kid had coach support from both Williams and Wesleyan a couple of years back - and I checked in with a number of Wall Street connections to determine the perception difference - the unanimous response was there is none - he went to Wes and luved it and landed big job (thru Wes alumni) straight out of school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

Amherst might weight diversity, but they weigh athletics more. 40% athletes, majority white athletes

Williams and Swarthmore are at 33%.

Not only are the majority of athletes white; the majority of white kids at these schools are athletes. If you are a white non-athlete, these schools, by definition, don’t want you. Stick to the Chicago’s of the world and their 7% athletes: much better admission odds.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASP gets more Ivy rejects than the rest, which makes the school environments there somewhat more intense.

Also true: WASP has a high proportion of kids who were admitted to Ivies and Ivy+'s but chose fit over brand. My DC being one example.

wes over ivy here

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It seems like things are changing a bit wrt the top slacs. Amherst, Swarthmore, and Pomona are going in one direction, weighing diversity more in selecting their classes (according to IPEDS data) and accepting a far larger fraction of students test optional than they used to. Bowdoin and Williams are holding steady, making only incremental moves in class composition and continuing to accept about 60% of their class (a bit more for Williams) from the pool of test submitters. Since Bowdoin stopping including the scores of attending students who took the SAT/ACT but did not submit with their application, their reported stats have bounced back to par with the WASP schools.
Middlebury and Wesleyan are not quite at the same level in terms of admitted student stats.

But Wesleyan did same as Bowdoin on CDS - reporting ALL scores, not just those submitted. That’s why theirs are lower.

How do they know about scores not submitted?

They require all enrolling students to submit before school starts. My kid was TO and had to send scores this summer.

So when they say don't submit unless you are above the 25th, which set do they mean?

[Anonymous]

Are you that competitive that you would let the answers to this question influence where your kid winds up? That status-seeking?

Please just find a school where your kid will be happy and get a good education. All of this comparison is sad and unhealthy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:WASP gets more Ivy rejects than the rest, which makes the school environments there somewhat more intense.

Also true: WASP has a high proportion of kids who were admitted to Ivies and Ivy+'s but chose fit over brand. My DC being one example.

Well, you and/or your kid obviously have a sense of self that far exceeds that of OP!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Parent of a WASP student here. Not really. If you look at the overall averages, the WASP schools will have marginally higher stats. (Emphasis on "marginally.") But the vast majority of kids in the top non-WASP LACs would thrive at the WASP schools; and the WASP kids would still be challenged at other top LACs. My guess is that the top 50-75% of students at the top non-WASP are virtually indistinguishable from their WASP counterparts.

The best place to test this would be the Claremont Colleges. I'm guessing that Pomona students don't notice any "caliber" difference in their counterparts at CMC and Mudd, although I'm sure there are cultural differences.

Pomona students definitely do not take CMC anywhere as seriously as HMC. Being decent at Econ isn’t the same as the rigor of a STEM degree

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:^^The food alone at the 5C’s is reason enough to choose them-my DC is constantly sending pics of steak, sushi, custom pasta bowls, fresh salads etc!

It's amazing to me how much better college food is (at least at some schools) than it was back in the day. We toured Wesleyan last weekend and ate brunch in the dining hall. Omelette bar, waffle bar, tofu scramble (lots of vegan options actually), typical brunch sides like sauteed potatoes, sauteed kale, etc. And everything was delicious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Parent of a WASP student here. Not really. If you look at the overall averages, the WASP schools will have marginally higher stats. (Emphasis on "marginally.") But the vast majority of kids in the top non-WASP LACs would thrive at the WASP schools; and the WASP kids would still be challenged at other top LACs. My guess is that the top 50-75% of students at the top non-WASP are virtually indistinguishable from their WASP counterparts.

The best place to test this would be the Claremont Colleges. I'm guessing that Pomona students don't notice any "caliber" difference in their counterparts at CMC and Mudd, although I'm sure there are cultural differences.

Pomona students definitely do not take CMC anywhere as seriously as HMC. Being decent at Econ isn’t the same as the rigor of a STEM degree

Of course, Pomona students are highly varied and I'm so sure some snobs exist, but this hasn't been my DC's impression or experience. DC has classes with several 5C students and has reported that there are no obvious academic or intelligence differences. Per DC, one of the more refreshing aspects of Pomona is the lack of competition or tryhards. There's a general awareness that everyone is smart and accomplished, but kids don't seem to be walking around intellectually sizing one another up or bragging about themselves.