Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan's admit rate is higher, although all of these schools are reaches by definition since they admit less than 20% of applicants. I think Wes also has more of an artsy scene.

Make sure you read this thread for ideas of safeties and matches: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1027917.page

And consider looking at some LACs outside the Northeast where your kid might have some geographic advantage (or at least not a geographic disadvantage!)

Not true any more. Wesleyan is extremely hard to get into now, as are most of the others on the list.

What about Bates? Colby? Hamilton? Colgate? They are all fine schools and they are in cold areas.

Colby, Colgate, and Hamilton are comparably competitive to Wesleyan. In fact, I think the Colby admit rate is nearly half that of Wesleyan for the last two years.

Yes, Colby's admit rate is half of Wesleyan - but Colby also has no application fee and no supplemental essays which drives up applications. Colby actually gets nearly 2x as many applications as Bowdoin (the power of a free application and no supplements).

The rest of these schools have similar admit rates
Bates: 14.1% (2020), 17.3% (2021)
Colgate: 27.5% (2020), 17% (2021) - got to be story behind the significant decrease in Colgate's acceptance rate - increase apps due to test-optional? kids applying more places?
Hamilton: 18.4% (2020), 14% (2021)
Wesleyan: 20.9% (2020), 19.3% (2021)

Actually, Bates and Wesleyan (and Middlebury) also don't have any supplemental essays, and Hamilton's and Colgate's very short supplemental essays are optional.

Anonymous wrote:Colgate’s applications doubled in the pandemic when they went test optional …
https://www.colgate.edu/news/stories/colgate-receives-record-number-applications-admission

Thanks, that makes sense.

Anonymous wrote:I was the PP who said Wesleyan has a higher admit rate - I meant this in reference to the OP's query about Bowdoin, Swarthmore, and Williams, which each admitted fewer than 10% of applicants last year. That wasn't meant as a criticism. I think Wesleyan is a fantastic school and would have liked for my kid to apply. In the end he got in ED to another one of the schools in the 20:29 post. All great schools!

I'm the poster at 20:29. I agree - Wesleyan is a great school and we know some really smart kids who are there now. On paper it looked like a great option on paper for my DS (plus one of his favorite high school teachers had gone there) but when we visited it just didn't feel right to him (not a criticism of the school at all). I think it could be a great fit for our other son but may be too difficult to get into in 3 years. My DS ended up at one of the other schools on that list, too. He could have been happy at a number of them.

I was the PP who said Wesleyan has a higher admit rate - I meant this in reference to the OP's query about Bowdoin, Swarthmore, and Williams, which each admitted fewer than 10% of applicants last year. That wasn't meant as a criticism. I think Wesleyan is a fantastic school and would have liked for my kid to apply. In the end he got in ED to another one of the schools in the 20:29 post. All great schools!

Colgate’s applications doubled in the pandemic when they went test optional …
https://www.colgate.edu/news/stories/colgate-receives-record-number-applications-admission

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan's admit rate is higher, although all of these schools are reaches by definition since they admit less than 20% of applicants. I think Wes also has more of an artsy scene.

Make sure you read this thread for ideas of safeties and matches: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1027917.page

And consider looking at some LACs outside the Northeast where your kid might have some geographic advantage (or at least not a geographic disadvantage!)

Not true any more. Wesleyan is extremely hard to get into now, as are most of the others on the list.

What about Bates? Colby? Hamilton? Colgate? They are all fine schools and they are in cold areas.

Colby, Colgate, and Hamilton are comparably competitive to Wesleyan. In fact, I think the Colby admit rate is nearly half that of Wesleyan for the last two years.

Yes, Colby's admit rate is half of Wesleyan - but Colby also has no application fee and no supplemental essays which drives up applications. Colby actually gets nearly 2x as many applications as Bowdoin (the power of a free application and no supplements).

The rest of these schools have similar admit rates
Bates: 14.1% (2020), 17.3% (2021)
Colgate: 27.5% (2020), 17% (2021) - got to be story behind the significant decrease in Colgate's acceptance rate - increase apps due to test-optional? kids applying more places?
Hamilton: 18.4% (2020), 14% (2021)
Wesleyan: 20.9% (2020), 19.3% (2021)

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan's admit rate is higher, although all of these schools are reaches by definition since they admit less than 20% of applicants. I think Wes also has more of an artsy scene.

Make sure you read this thread for ideas of safeties and matches: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1027917.page

And consider looking at some LACs outside the Northeast where your kid might have some geographic advantage (or at least not a geographic disadvantage!)

Not true any more. Wesleyan is extremely hard to get into now, as are most of the others on the list.

What about Bates? Colby? Hamilton? Colgate? They are all fine schools and they are in cold areas.

Colby, Colgate, and Hamilton are comparably competitive to Wesleyan. In fact, I think the Colby admit rate is nearly half that of Wesleyan for the last two years.

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan's admit rate is higher, although all of these schools are reaches by definition since they admit less than 20% of applicants. I think Wes also has more of an artsy scene.

Make sure you read this thread for ideas of safeties and matches: https://www.dcurbanmom.com/jforum/posts/list/1027917.page

And consider looking at some LACs outside the Northeast where your kid might have some geographic advantage (or at least not a geographic disadvantage!)

Not true any more. Wesleyan is extremely hard to get into now, as are most of the others on the list.

What about Bates? Colby? Hamilton? Colgate? They are all fine schools and they are in cold areas.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Swathmore kids are known for being super intense. Like enjoying studying and Friday’s in the library types. Studying a lot and enjoy it.
Bowdoin is the “new” Williams - viewed as the “best” SLAC for the privileged. Kids are generally well rounded and sheltered but have some fun. Not as intensely self pressures as Swat. Williams is pretty much like that too.
Wes is a little bigger and many more quirky students. More are into science than many of the other high tier SLACs.

No one thinks Bowdoin is the best lac. Williams and amherst win out cross admits almost every time

And the ivies win out on cross admits for Amherst/ Williams but lots of people want a slac.

My kid attended Bowdoin. They didn't apply to Williams because they felt it was too secluded. They didn't like Amherst when we visited because the students seemed too closed off and snobby. To be fair, that doesn't even mean the students are like this at all. It means that that was the impression we got from a several hour tour with a particular tour guide on a Spring day several years ago. So what? Amherst is a great school and so is Williams and so is Bowdoin. I don't understand why people feel they have to criticize the other schools.

In full disclosure, my kid got into a whole lot of wonderful slacs and, in the end, chose between Bowdoin and Wesleyan. They would have been happy at any one of about six slacs where they were accepted. They were not sheltered, privileged or white. My kid is an underrepresented minority from a public school and, while I am college-educated, I didn't earn that much and my kid qualified for lots of financial aid. I could see my kid being happy and doing well at any one of those schools. And, for anyone who thinks this is a humble brag, my other kids applied to slacs - as did I back in the day - and didn't get into any of them.

OP, I suggest you visit and I wish your kid lots of success.

Bottom line is that the campus climates can differ significantly at these SLACs. Some are very politicized and heated, as the events at Haverford show. Not all of them are like that.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see what you did there. I think you have it backwards if you are going to define the campus climate at all these schools as institutionally racist. Not all SLACs attract large numbers of students who think about it this way and think it is OK to threaten and harass their classmates and shut down a school.

Just because "large numbers of students" don't think about things in a certain way doesn't mean things are not so. Large numbers of people think the election was stolen . . .

We get it, OP. You don't like what happened at Haverford. You're entitled to your view, and you've expressed it clearly. Moving along . . .

We get it PP. You want to pretend that all these schools are the same and that what happened at Haverford was no big deal and so you’re repeatedly trying to spread disinformation to serve those goals. Moving along...

In any event, your last comment makes no sense. The discussion in this thread has broadly been about the ways in which the student bodies at different SLACs differ or are similar to each other. So discussing the prevailing views of large numbers of students at these particular schools is absolutely relevant. You seem to think that all of these schools are the same and that what happened at Haverford could have happened at any of them. I disagree. Could you see a student strike like this happening at Williams or Bowdoin? I could not.

I couldn't have seen nearly half the US population believing the election was stolen. And I have a hunch that the good people of Haverford didn't see what was coming before it came either. So I'm never going to say never, PP.

Last time I'm going to participate in derailing OP's thread.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I see what you did there. I think you have it backwards if you are going to define the campus climate at all these schools as institutionally racist. Not all SLACs attract large numbers of students who think about it this way and think it is OK to threaten and harass their classmates and shut down a school.

Just because "large numbers of students" don't think about things in a certain way doesn't mean things are not so. Large numbers of people think the election was stolen . . .

We get it, OP. You don't like what happened at Haverford. You're entitled to your view, and you've expressed it clearly. Moving along . . .

We get it PP. You want to pretend that all these schools are the same and that what happened at Haverford was no big deal and so you’re repeatedly trying to spread disinformation to serve those goals. Moving along...

In any event, your last comment makes no sense. The discussion in this thread has broadly been about the ways in which the student bodies at different SLACs differ or are similar to each other. So discussing the prevailing views of large numbers of students at these particular schools is absolutely relevant. You seem to think that all of these schools are the same and that what happened at Haverford could have happened at any of them. I disagree. Could you see a student strike like this happening at Williams or Bowdoin? I could not.

Anonymous wrote:I see what you did there. I think you have it backwards if you are going to define the campus climate at all these schools as institutionally racist. Not all SLACs attract large numbers of students who think about it this way and think it is OK to threaten and harass their classmates and shut down a school.

Just because "large numbers of students" don't think about things in a certain way doesn't mean things are not so. Large numbers of people think the election was stolen . . .

We get it, OP. You don't like what happened at Haverford. You're entitled to your view, and you've expressed it clearly. Moving along . . .

One of the Haverford student group’s demands, about which they were unhappy that the admin did not agree and which was one of the bases for their strike, was the demand that the Haverford administration needed to “actively work toward police and prison abolition.”

I see what you did there. I think you have it backwards if you are going to define the campus climate at all these schools as institutionally racist. Not all SLACs attract large numbers of students who think about it this way and think it is OK to threaten and harass their classmates and shut down a school.