This whole argument about whether it makes a meaningful difference to attend a T10 SLAC or a T100 SLAC is interesting and there are reasonable points to be made on both sides. But you know, that's not what the OP asked. S/he asked about the vibe at 4 specific schools, all of which are near the top of the barrel in terms of selectivity.

Whomever it is that's writing lengthy diatribes about how rankings don't matter, why don't you start a separate post and let the OP and others of us who are interested continue to get useful feedback on the schools her kid is interested in applying to.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i don't think I've ever heard any knowledgeable person describe the vibe at Swarthmore and Wesleyan as similar. Previous posters have outlined the differences pretty well.

When my kid was applying to SLACs, they applied to Wesleyan, Carleton, and Grinnell. The dream school was Brown, which didn't happen. Wesleyan is closer in vibe to these schools than it is to Swarthmore.

I agree. Your kid's list is a bit 'crunchier'. Others along the line might include Vassar, Earlham, Bard, Oberlin, Bates. (And even Sarah Lawrence, Bennington, or Hampshire ...)

I mean, I guess -- Carleton and Grinnell may be more "crunchy" but academically they're far superior to the schools you just listed and more much aligned with the schools on OP's list.

Here you go:

Carleton - 21% admitted, V: 660-750, M: 670-770
Grinnell - 19% admitted, V: 670-750 M: 683-788
Vassar - 25%, V: 680-750, M: 680-770
Bates - 14% admitted
Oberlin - 35% admitted, V: 650-690, M: 620-670
Bard - 57%
Earlham - 59%, V: 560-670, M: 550-660

The figures are from the Natl Center for Education Statistics. No test scores are listed for Bates or Bard.

US News rankings:

Carleton 9
Grinnell 13
Vassar 22
Bates 25
Oberlin 37
Bard 62
Sarah Lawrence 71
Bennington 79
Earlham 92
Hampshire 141

Ignore anyone who tries to get you to think that admit rates or USNWR rankings are a good way to make your decisions. The median SAT scores at Carleton and Grinnell are in the 99th percentile. At Oberlin, it's the 96th percentile. Bard doesn't make their Common Data Set public, but they're ranked very close to Rhodes College, whose Median SAT score is also in the 96th percentile. How much of a difference do you think there will really be between a school with the average score in the 99th vs. the 96th percentile? The distances between colleges in USNWR rankings appear much larger than they are. There are many colleges that are very close to one another academically.

Thank you. I'm the parent who originally listed these schools as of interest to a the same kind of student. Carleton, Grinnell and Vassar have the same SAT range, despite a 9pt difference. The Bowdoin kid I know applied to Bates. The Oberlin kid I know also applied to Bard. The Grinnell kid I know also applied to Earlham.

Hampshire, Bennington and Sarah Lawrence are all a bit different but it has to do more with culture (and they probably merit a look at financial stability which I think has been an issue with both Hampshire and Bennington but maybe I'm remembering wrong).

The higher ranked schools generally also have much higher endowments, which translates into much greater financial resources and stability while also allowing for things like need blind admissions and better economic diversity. A few years ago there were rumors that Bennington was even going bankrupt. And, yea, I'd say 99th is better than 96th. Why pay the same price for the 50th ranked school instead of the 10th?

No one is saying decisions should only be based on rankings, but they shouldn't be ignored either.

Carleton is ranked #9, and the University of the South is #49. Someone might prefer the latter because: 1) it's $10k less expensive; 2) it's 32 degrees warmer there today; 3) it's closer to home; 4) it has a semester system instead of trimester; 5) they like the idea of being a big fish in a small pond; etc. And because no one is going to care once they get into the workforce.

Oh, and how is the 99th percentile vs. 96th going to make any real difference in the classroom experience?

More false facts.

The entering class at the University of the South (Sewanee) in 2020 had middle 50-percent SAT scores from 1160-1340 and for Carleton 1340-1506. In other words, the top quarter ar Sewanee is equivalent to the bottom quarter of Carleton. This is around a 15 percentile point difference, not 3.

Sorry, I should have made it clearer that the two paragraphs above were responding to two separate statements. Paragraph two was not referring to Carleton vs. University of the South, but rather to the claim that the 99th percentile vs. 96th percentile makes a big difference.

The difference between the median SAT scores at these two colleges is indeed larger, although 13.5 not 15; you can't use scores from the 2020-21 CDS because neither school required test scores that year. That 13.5 difference does likely make for a difference in the rigor of the classes, but not enough that a student in the top few percentiles couldn't get a strong education in Sewanee. Thus, the decision to value the five factors I mentioned over classmates with higher test scores wouldn't impact a student's future negatively. And again, no one is going to care which of the two they attended once they're in the workforce. They're going to care what was made of the opportunities they were given, how capable that student is, how well they work as part of a team, whether they put in the extra hours when necessary, etc.

Among the 30 colleges and universities in the US with the highest SAT scores, only 6 are liberal arts colleges. In order, they are:

Harvey Mudd
Amherst
Williams
Swarthmore
Pomona
Grinnell

https://blog.prepscholar.com/colleges-with-highest-sat-scores

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i don't think I've ever heard any knowledgeable person describe the vibe at Swarthmore and Wesleyan as similar. Previous posters have outlined the differences pretty well.

When my kid was applying to SLACs, they applied to Wesleyan, Carleton, and Grinnell. The dream school was Brown, which didn't happen. Wesleyan is closer in vibe to these schools than it is to Swarthmore.

I agree. Your kid's list is a bit 'crunchier'. Others along the line might include Vassar, Earlham, Bard, Oberlin, Bates. (And even Sarah Lawrence, Bennington, or Hampshire ...)

I mean, I guess -- Carleton and Grinnell may be more "crunchy" but academically they're far superior to the schools you just listed and more much aligned with the schools on OP's list.

Here you go:

Carleton - 21% admitted, V: 660-750, M: 670-770
Grinnell - 19% admitted, V: 670-750 M: 683-788
Vassar - 25%, V: 680-750, M: 680-770
Bates - 14% admitted
Oberlin - 35% admitted, V: 650-690, M: 620-670
Bard - 57%
Earlham - 59%, V: 560-670, M: 550-660

The figures are from the Natl Center for Education Statistics. No test scores are listed for Bates or Bard.

US News rankings:

Carleton 9
Grinnell 13
Vassar 22
Bates 25
Oberlin 37
Bard 62
Sarah Lawrence 71
Bennington 79
Earlham 92
Hampshire 141

Ignore anyone who tries to get you to think that admit rates or USNWR rankings are a good way to make your decisions. The median SAT scores at Carleton and Grinnell are in the 99th percentile. At Oberlin, it's the 96th percentile. Bard doesn't make their Common Data Set public, but they're ranked very close to Rhodes College, whose Median SAT score is also in the 96th percentile. How much of a difference do you think there will really be between a school with the average score in the 99th vs. the 96th percentile? The distances between colleges in USNWR rankings appear much larger than they are. There are many colleges that are very close to one another academically.

Thank you. I'm the parent who originally listed these schools as of interest to a the same kind of student. Carleton, Grinnell and Vassar have the same SAT range, despite a 9pt difference. The Bowdoin kid I know applied to Bates. The Oberlin kid I know also applied to Bard. The Grinnell kid I know also applied to Earlham.

Hampshire, Bennington and Sarah Lawrence are all a bit different but it has to do more with culture (and they probably merit a look at financial stability which I think has been an issue with both Hampshire and Bennington but maybe I'm remembering wrong).

The higher ranked schools generally also have much higher endowments, which translates into much greater financial resources and stability while also allowing for things like need blind admissions and better economic diversity. A few years ago there were rumors that Bennington was even going bankrupt. And, yea, I'd say 99th is better than 96th. Why pay the same price for the 50th ranked school instead of the 10th?

No one is saying decisions should only be based on rankings, but they shouldn't be ignored either.

Carleton is ranked #9, and the University of the South is #49. Someone might prefer the latter because: 1) it's $10k less expensive; 2) it's 32 degrees warmer there today; 3) it's closer to home; 4) it has a semester system instead of trimester; 5) they like the idea of being a big fish in a small pond; etc. And because no one is going to care once they get into the workforce.

Oh, and how is the 99th percentile vs. 96th going to make any real difference in the classroom experience?

More false facts.

The entering class at the University of the South (Sewanee) in 2020 had middle 50-percent SAT scores from 1160-1340 and for Carleton 1340-1506. In other words, the top quarter ar Sewanee is equivalent to the bottom quarter of Carleton. This is around a 15 percentile point difference, not 3.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually think there is a difference between the top schools and the others. We visited a ton of SLACs in the last year and attended SLACs ourselves. Obviously some of the ranking differences are arbitrary but these schools are not all the same.

+1. How many students/parents would choose Rhodes over Williams, for example?

No one's saying they're all the same. They're just not as different academically as people think, so someone who likes the warmer weather and lower price at Rhodes should not feel like they're sacrificing anything in order to make that choice.

Upon what do you base your assumption that people SHOULD choose Williams over Rhodes? Probably a significant part of it is that USNWR has had them significantly higher ranked for over 30 years. But WHY are they ranked higher? The 3-point difference in SAT percentiles isn't enough to yield a significant difference in the level of classroom rigor or discussion, right? So what's the real difference? Take a look at the USNWR criteria and weights used to rank and tell us honestly if they're the criteria that matter most to you in a school. The quality of education at different colleges is much closer than the impression one gets from looking at how far away they are from each another in rankings.

Think about it this way. There are over 2500 4-year colleges in the US. If someone were to rank the 2500 most desirable locations on the planet to take a vacation, and you can only choose one of them to attend, would you make your decision based on the criteria those rankers chose and think that there must be a huge difference between #10 (say...Rome) and #100 (say...Zion National Park)? Not likely. There are many, many very desirable places to visit, and you would go to your own criteria for what you're looking for in a vacation and choose based on that. Your criteria would likely yield many of the same places, but in a completely different order. The same is true for colleges. The number of colleges that can satisfy any given student's needs is much large than most people believe.

If you like anecdotes, consider this: My cousin's oldest daughter turned down Penn and Hopkins to attend Catholic U. She liked the scholarship they offered and the traditional Catholic education. After 4 years, she had both a bachelor's AND a Master's in biomedical engineering, and a job as a researcher at NIH waiting for her upon graduation. She could not have hoped for better results if she'd chosen one of the other two schools.

Where did you get the idea that there's only a 3 percentage point difference between the SAT scores of entering students at Rhodes and Williams??? For the most recent entering class for which stats are available for both school -- the entering class of 2020 --the mid-50 percent range for Rhodes is 1250 to 1400 and for Williams it's 1430 to 1540. Assuming the mean for Rhodes was 1325 and doe Williams 1485, we're talking about the 88th percentile versus the 97th. That ain't three points.

It helps to make sure your facts are right before you pontificate.

Anonymous wrote:The rankings can change quite a bit over time. As I said, Vassar dropped 9 or 19 spots in one year. Do you really think the school changed that much? Reed refused to play along from the beginning and is commonly believed to be a much stronger school than the ranking would reveal.

You've just named two outliers. This isn't common at all.

The rankings can change quite a bit over time. As I said, Vassar dropped 9 or 19 spots in one year. Do you really think the school changed that much? Reed refused to play along from the beginning and is commonly believed to be a much stronger school than the ranking would reveal.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:i don't think I've ever heard any knowledgeable person describe the vibe at Swarthmore and Wesleyan as similar. Previous posters have outlined the differences pretty well.

When my kid was applying to SLACs, they applied to Wesleyan, Carleton, and Grinnell. The dream school was Brown, which didn't happen. Wesleyan is closer in vibe to these schools than it is to Swarthmore.

I agree. Your kid's list is a bit 'crunchier'. Others along the line might include Vassar, Earlham, Bard, Oberlin, Bates. (And even Sarah Lawrence, Bennington, or Hampshire ...)

I mean, I guess -- Carleton and Grinnell may be more "crunchy" but academically they're far superior to the schools you just listed and more much aligned with the schools on OP's list.

Here you go:

Carleton - 21% admitted, V: 660-750, M: 670-770
Grinnell - 19% admitted, V: 670-750 M: 683-788
Vassar - 25%, V: 680-750, M: 680-770
Bates - 14% admitted
Oberlin - 35% admitted, V: 650-690, M: 620-670
Bard - 57%
Earlham - 59%, V: 560-670, M: 550-660

The figures are from the Natl Center for Education Statistics. No test scores are listed for Bates or Bard.

US News rankings:

Carleton 9
Grinnell 13
Vassar 22
Bates 25
Oberlin 37
Bard 62
Sarah Lawrence 71
Bennington 79
Earlham 92
Hampshire 141

Ignore anyone who tries to get you to think that admit rates or USNWR rankings are a good way to make your decisions. The median SAT scores at Carleton and Grinnell are in the 99th percentile. At Oberlin, it's the 96th percentile. Bard doesn't make their Common Data Set public, but they're ranked very close to Rhodes College, whose Median SAT score is also in the 96th percentile. How much of a difference do you think there will really be between a school with the average score in the 99th vs. the 96th percentile? The distances between colleges in USNWR rankings appear much larger than they are. There are many colleges that are very close to one another academically.

Thank you. I'm the parent who originally listed these schools as of interest to a the same kind of student. Carleton, Grinnell and Vassar have the same SAT range, despite a 9pt difference. The Bowdoin kid I know applied to Bates. The Oberlin kid I know also applied to Bard. The Grinnell kid I know also applied to Earlham.

Hampshire, Bennington and Sarah Lawrence are all a bit different but it has to do more with culture (and they probably merit a look at financial stability which I think has been an issue with both Hampshire and Bennington but maybe I'm remembering wrong).

The higher ranked schools generally also have much higher endowments, which translates into much greater financial resources and stability while also allowing for things like need blind admissions and better economic diversity. A few years ago there were rumors that Bennington was even going bankrupt. And, yea, I'd say 99th is better than 96th. Why pay the same price for the 50th ranked school instead of the 10th?

No one is saying decisions should only be based on rankings, but they shouldn't be ignored either.

Carleton is ranked #9, and the University of the South is #49. Someone might prefer the latter because: 1) it's $10k less expensive; 2) it's 32 degrees warmer there today; 3) it's closer to home; 4) it has a semester system instead of trimester; 5) they like the idea of being a big fish in a small pond; etc. And because no one is going to care once they get into the workforce.

Oh, and how is the 99th percentile vs. 96th going to make any real difference in the classroom experience?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually think there is a difference between the top schools and the others. We visited a ton of SLACs in the last year and attended SLACs ourselves. Obviously some of the ranking differences are arbitrary but these schools are not all the same.

+1. How many students/parents would choose Rhodes over Williams, for example?

No one's saying they're all the same. They're just not as different academically as people think, so someone who likes the warmer weather and lower price at Rhodes should not feel like they're sacrificing anything in order to make that choice.

Upon what do you base your assumption that people SHOULD choose Williams over Rhodes? Probably a significant part of it is that USNWR has had them significantly higher ranked for over 30 years. But WHY are they ranked higher? The 3-point difference in SAT percentiles isn't enough to yield a significant difference in the level of classroom rigor or discussion, right? So what's the real difference? Take a look at the USNWR criteria and weights used to rank and tell us honestly if they're the criteria that matter most to you in a school. The quality of education at different colleges is much closer than the impression one gets from looking at how far away they are from each another in rankings.

Think about it this way. There are over 2500 4-year colleges in the US. If someone were to rank the 2500 most desirable locations on the planet to take a vacation, and you can only choose one of them to attend, would you make your decision based on the criteria those rankers chose and think that there must be a huge difference between #10 (say...Rome) and #100 (say...Zion National Park)? Not likely. There are many, many very desirable places to visit, and you would go to your own criteria for what you're looking for in a vacation and choose based on that. Your criteria would likely yield many of the same places, but in a completely different order. The same is true for colleges. The number of colleges that can satisfy any given student's needs is much large than most people believe.

If you like anecdotes, consider this: My cousin's oldest daughter turned down Penn and Hopkins to attend Catholic U. She liked the scholarship they offered and the traditional Catholic education. After 4 years, she had both a bachelor's AND a Master's in biomedical engineering, and a job as a researcher at NIH waiting for her upon graduation. She could not have hoped for better results if she'd chosen one of the other two schools.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually think there is a difference between the top schools and the others. We visited a ton of SLACs in the last year and attended SLACs ourselves. Obviously some of the ranking differences are arbitrary but these schools are not all the same.

+1. How many students/parents would choose Rhodes over Williams, for example?

No, they're not the same - but most kids apply to several they like and hopefully, get into more than one.

At many of the lower tier schools, say in the 50-100, there's about a 10% group of v. high achieving students who receive full rides or very significant merit aid. This can be a meaningful option esp. for kids who really want a LAC but whose parents fall in the "donut hole" of financial aid--earn too much to get it but not enough to pay for the higher ranked schools. For those kids who miss getting into a T20 LAC, getting a full-ride at 50-70 ranked one can be better than going to a 25-50 one. Plus they usually get a lot of perks and then stellar recommendations from profs who have worked with them a lot.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I do actually think there is a difference between the top schools and the others. We visited a ton of SLACs in the last year and attended SLACs ourselves. Obviously some of the ranking differences are arbitrary but these schools are not all the same.

+1. How many students/parents would choose Rhodes over Williams, for example?

No, they're not the same - but most kids apply to several they like and hopefully, get into more than one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:we have multiple fam members that attended swarthmore within the last decade.

Williams wanted to recruit two of them but they accepted their swat recruiting offers instead.

The biggest difference is swat is way more diverse. Racially, socially, body types, attitudes, presentation etc.

Being a Philly area school vs rural New England/nescac really shapes the atmosphere even if Williams does make a concerted effort to diversify.

I actually wanted my sibling to go to Williams but it was better they ended up at swat as we are not a nescac family. You know exactly what I mean.

What does not being a NESCAC family mean?

DP……NESCAC students are all very familiar with their peer institutions and that spills over into social and professional environments. It’s a network.

Swarthmore is very liberal and diverse. There is transportation into Philly and the little town of Media. Kind of a tourist town. Swarthmore is tough academically but if you are pre professional and do well at Swarthmore you have a good chance of admission to upper tier grad programs. It’s can’t be that hard DS graduated summa.

Anonymous wrote:I do actually think there is a difference between the top schools and the others. We visited a ton of SLACs in the last year and attended SLACs ourselves. Obviously some of the ranking differences are arbitrary but these schools are not all the same.

+1. How many students/parents would choose Rhodes over Williams, for example?

Anonymous wrote:we have multiple fam members that attended swarthmore within the last decade.

Williams wanted to recruit two of them but they accepted their swat recruiting offers instead.

The biggest difference is swat is way more diverse. Racially, socially, body types, attitudes, presentation etc.

Being a Philly area school vs rural New England/nescac really shapes the atmosphere even if Williams does make a concerted effort to diversify.

I actually wanted my sibling to go to Williams but it was better they ended up at swat as we are not a nescac family. You know exactly what I mean.

What does not being a NESCAC family mean?