Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’d choose Williams or Pomona for their special study abroad and fellowships with Oxford and Cambridge.

Those differences seem like valid reasons for picking one of these dozen or so schools over the others.

They may very well be. But with respect to the Williams program, they live in a house together away from the college. They share a bedroom with another Williams student. Sharing a bedroom is unheard of at Oxbridge; nobody shares a room. They are considered adults.

Pomona students actually live in the college, as far as I know, and live in their single rooms like a real Cambridge student. Just sayin’…

Anonymous wrote:my DC attends a well-known NYC private - 25 applicants to Williams and Amherst over the last 4 years, with 7 acceptances. 2 Pomona applicants both accepted. Pomona a wonderful school, but doesn’t have the cache with the east coast elite - not do I think the school gives a sht, it’s doing just fine without the east coast strivers who are ivy or bust, then williams/amherst or bust

Meh, Pomona has a ton of east coast people on campus. Maybe there’s space for nuance.

Anonymous wrote:This thread is embarrassing.

+100.

WASPB. LOL. Keep saying it over and over and it might become a thing.

my DC attends a well-known NYC private - 25 applicants to Williams and Amherst over the last 4 years, with 7 acceptances. 2 Pomona applicants both accepted. Pomona a wonderful school, but doesn’t have the cache with the east coast elite - not do I think the school gives a sht, it’s doing just fine without the east coast strivers who are ivy or bust, then williams/amherst or bust

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams and Amherst boosters typically punch up and highlight comparisons to ivies; Bowdoin Wes Middlebury punch up with comparisons to Williams and Amherst. Rarely if never do you hear Williams or Amherst booster saying “we are just as good as Bowdoin or Middlebury!”

One thing about Pomona boosters: they don’t go there at all. They don’t need to, being in California. That’s part of the reason Pomona is so on the rise, with no end to that trajectory in sight.

Pomona to me is more of a direct peer or West Coast version of Haverford - not any of the upper nescacs

But Pomona doesn’t compare itself to east coast SLACs. They don’t care because they don’t have to. It is a sign of strength. East coast SLACs can compare themselves to Pomona all they want — a sign of weakness.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams and Amherst boosters typically punch up and highlight comparisons to ivies; Bowdoin Wes Middlebury punch up with comparisons to Williams and Amherst. Rarely if never do you hear Williams or Amherst booster saying “we are just as good as Bowdoin or Middlebury!”

One thing about Pomona boosters: they don’t go there at all. They don’t need to, being in California. That’s part of the reason Pomona is so on the rise, with no end to that trajectory in sight.

Pomona to me is more of a direct peer or West Coast version of Haverford - not any of the upper NESCACs

That would be a great peer to have because none of the other schools being discussed are objectively better than Haverford in any way.

BUT BUT BUT USNEWS RANKING…and MY PERSONAL DISDAIN FOR THE WEST COAST! You didn’t factor that in!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This phenomenon is by no means limited to the more exclusive need blind SLACs like Amherst and Bowdoin (and by extension W, S, and P who do not publicize this data). Many others (e.g Hamilton, Bates, Haverford) included the foreign application and acceptance data in recent CDS and have just as large a proportion of foreign applicants. The SLAC model has been very popular with a certain set of well-to-do foreign students. Of course after this year I expect to see drastic declines in such applications.

Yes, absolutely, need blind or not, SLAC or Ivy, internationals have lower acceptance rates. For example, Grinnell is not need blind for internationals, but they have a lot of international students and give aid to many — so a ton of applicants.

But the point is that all of this is irrelevant if you are a domestic student. Then you have to “normalize” for athletes, Questbridge and like programs (admitted ED at nearly a 1:1 ratio), major donors or famous, medium donors plus legacy, first gen not doing Questbridge, geographic diversity, low-performing high schools etc.

Then yield, then percent of class admitted ED, whether there are two ED rounds or one, whether ED is even an advantage etc.

Then you will find that domestic chances of admission are different after WASPB.

In other words, the international gobbledygook is an unnecessary distraction.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams and Amherst boosters typically punch up and highlight comparisons to ivies; Bowdoin Wes Middlebury punch up with comparisons to Williams and Amherst. Rarely if never do you hear Williams or Amherst booster saying “we are just as good as Bowdoin or Middlebury!”

One thing about Pomona boosters: they don’t go there at all. They don’t need to, being in California. That’s part of the reason Pomona is so on the rise, with no end to that trajectory in sight.

Pomona to me is more of a direct peer or West Coast version of Haverford - not any of the upper NESCACs

That would be a great peer to have because none of the other schools being discussed are objectively better than Haverford in any way.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams and Amherst boosters typically punch up and highlight comparisons to ivies; Bowdoin Wes Middlebury punch up with comparisons to Williams and Amherst. Rarely if never do you hear Williams or Amherst booster saying “we are just as good as Bowdoin or Middlebury!”

One thing about Pomona boosters: they don’t go there at all. They don’t need to, being in California. That’s part of the reason Pomona is so on the rise, with no end to that trajectory in sight.

Pomona to me is more of a direct peer or West Coast version of Haverford - not any of the upper nescacs

That’s cool and all that you have that belief, but that’s not what this thread is about (nor is it reality).

Anonymous wrote:I’d choose Williams or Pomona for their special study abroad and fellowships with Oxford and Cambridge.

Those differences seem like valid reasons for picking one of these dozen or so schools over the others.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Williams and Amherst boosters typically punch up and highlight comparisons to ivies; Bowdoin Wes Middlebury punch up with comparisons to Williams and Amherst. Rarely if never do you hear Williams or Amherst booster saying “we are just as good as Bowdoin or Middlebury!”

One thing about Pomona boosters: they don’t go there at all. They don’t need to, being in California. That’s part of the reason Pomona is so on the rise, with no end to that trajectory in sight.

Pomona to me is more of a direct peer or West Coast version of Haverford - not any of the upper nescacs

Swarthmore or Pomona. I wouldn’t want to be in some far flung town.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:https://www.middlebury.edu/announcements/announcements/2025/04/budget-our-way-forward

For the Midd booster who denies everything

Don't start, there are so many threads with you getting batted around like a ping pong ball and nobody feels like dealing with your foolishness.

You’re such a moron, refusing to see any facts or accept any opinions. Too bad the facts don’t support your opinion! You’re talking to the wrong person but bring it on!

Anonymous wrote:

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.

This phenomenon is by no means limited to the more exclusive need blind SLACs like Amherst and Bowdoin (and by extension W, S, and P who do not publicize this data). Many others (e.g Hamilton, Bates, Haverford) included the foreign application and acceptance data in recent CDS and have just as large a proportion of foreign applicants. The SLAC model has been very popular with a certain set of well-to-do foreign students. Of course after this year I expect to see drastic declines in such applications.