Mt Holyoke vs Tufts

[Anonymous]

FWIW The parchment comparison tool didn't have enough data on Tufts vs Mt. Holyoke but puts it at 60% Tufts / 40% Mt Holyoke.

But, as PPs have said, they are really different schools. My DD will not consider any urban schools. She's interested in ecology and likes the LACs in the middle of nowhere. Mt Holyoke is on her list.

[Anonymous]

With the exception of Wellesley none of the old Seven Sisters are the colleges they were 50 years ago. Even Bryn Mawr isn't what it was. Because the cream of the crop goes to the Ivies and elite coed LACs. The same applies to MHC, which, incidentally, was always one of the "weakest" if not the outright weakest of the Seven Sisters when it came to student caliber. It never had the presence or national prestige Smith did for a while. That is not to say it isn't a quite decent college, for it is a quite decent college. But as PPs have pointed out. Tufts really is on a different level entirely in terms of student quality.

At MHC you will get a much smaller, and perhaps more nurturing environment (which from a different perspective can be viewed as babyish). I'm sure classes are just that much smaller. And the village campus environment is also different. You won't have the same resources at your fingertips that you will find at Tufts.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FWIW The parchment comparison tool didn't have enough data on Tufts vs Mt. Holyoke but puts it at 60% Tufts / 40% Mt Holyoke.

But, as PPs have said, they are really different schools. My DD will not consider any urban schools. She's interested in ecology and likes the LACs in the middle of nowhere. Mt Holyoke is on her list.

Tufts is barely urban. It is a bit of a stretch to call it an urban campus.

[Anonymous]

I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

Smithie parent and I totally disagree. Wellesley is fantastic but they all have benefits. Smith is the only women’s college to award a BS in Engineering.

Like I said, all good but different vibes.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

Smithie parent and I totally disagree. Wellesley is fantastic but they all have benefits. Smith is the only women’s college to award a BS in Engineering.

Like I said, all good but different vibes.

Most people have never heard of Smith to begin with and doesn't move the needle just like MH.

[Anonymous]

Anyone who irks a college because they tank “it moves the needle” is only kidding themselves.

[Anonymous]

Well said.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Anyone who irks a college because they tank “it moves the needle” is only kidding themselves.

Darn autocorrect!

Anyone who picks a college because they think “it moves the needle” is only kidding themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

And you are the arbiter of all such determinations, from the sounds of things!

I HAVE been to both schools. We did not like the look of the neighborhood around Tufts (too URBAN for our tastes).

We preferred MHC to Wellesley, due to its more supportive/less competitive sense of community.

And those opinions stand whether they move your needle or not.

[Anonymous]

Since Wellesley has been thrown into the mix, I do think there is more overlap and basis for comparison with Tufts for a student. Suburban, proximity to Boston, academically demanding, and intense. MHC just appeals to a totally different kind of student. I think if rural is part of the student’s differentiation then Smith is a better comparator than MHC.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

"Moves the needle"? To ... where?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

"Moves the needle"? To ... where?

Wellesley gets a certain quality of recruiters that MHC or even Smith do not. When comparing college prestige, it is worthwhile to consider that significant more prestigious college is going to open more doors for your first job after graduation. MHC is a fine college but it is fair to be honest when comparing it to Tufts or Wellesley.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

"Moves the needle"? To ... where?

Wellesley gets a certain quality of recruiters that MHC or even Smith do not. When comparing college prestige, it is worthwhile to consider that significant more prestigious college is going to open more doors for your first job after graduation. MHC is a fine college but it is fair to be honest when comparing it to Tufts or Wellesley.

The topic here is MHC vs Tufts, not MHC vs Wellesley. By making an argument for Wellesley, you seem to be implying that you can’t make an argument for Tufts - especially in the fields where the MHC and Tufts have comparable majors.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I fell like some of you have never visited or even know anything about either school. I am from Massachusetts and these schools are not even in the same stratosphere.

Tufts is not urban and Mount Holyoke is not in a depressed area. It is just very rural and you probably need to be an outdoorsy person to enjoy it.

Lastly, Wellesley is the only all woman;s college that moves the needle.

"Moves the needle"? To ... where?

Wellesley gets a certain quality of recruiters that MHC or even Smith do not. When comparing college prestige, it is worthwhile to consider that significant more prestigious college is going to open more doors for your first job after graduation. MHC is a fine college but it is fair to be honest when comparing it to Tufts or Wellesley.

The topic here is MHC vs Tufts, not MHC vs Wellesley. By making an argument for Wellesley, you seem to be implying that you can’t make an argument for Tufts - especially in the fields where the MHC and Tufts have comparable majors.

Actually, I think PP is saying s/he can't make the argument for MHC. I think PP's assumption is that the quality of recruiters at Tufts are at a higher quality as a given than MHC so that is a meaningful difference, among others. But it would not be a meaningful difference with Wellesley.