Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Some of the differences have to do with distinct distribution requirements. Depending on the student's interests and strengths, this might be a factor to consider. From my research so far: Amherst is the only open curriculum WASP school. Swarthmore requires three courses in each of the three academic divisions, with 20 credits outside of the major department. Williams is also three in three. Pomona has substantial distribution requirements too, if I recall correctly. If Bowdoin is also under consideration, it's one in each of its five areas (one of which is DEI).

Swarthmore's Honors program is distinct (and impressive), though students can write senior capstones at any SLAC. Some require, some don't.

OP, if you look up major numbers for each school, you'll have a good sense of the dominant majors. This will give you at least some sense of the academic culture of the school, eg which have the more robust humanities programs.

Pomona only requires 6 courses in different fields, less than Williams and Swat.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Amherst is the number 1 lac for christs sakes!

#2 actually, but the Amherst troll always finds these threads.

Nope, number 1. Most dedicated to the liberal arts, while not just committing to corporate finance. It sets up grads for their careers rather than pushing them into consulting and IB.

Please stop. You can't make up arbitrary rankings. You're not helping your cause.

Anonymous wrote:Some of the differences have to do with distinct distribution requirements. Depending on the student's interests and strengths, this might be a factor to consider. From my research so far: Amherst is the only open curriculum WASP school. Swarthmore requires three courses in each of the three academic divisions, with 20 credits outside of the major department. Williams is also three in three. Pomona has substantial distribution requirements too, if I recall correctly. If Bowdoin is also under consideration, it's one in each of its five areas (one of which is DEI).

Swarthmore's Honors program is distinct (and impressive), though students can write senior capstones at any SLAC. Some require, some don't.

OP, if you look up major numbers for each school, you'll have a good sense of the dominant majors. This will give you at least some sense of the academic culture of the school, eg which have the more robust humanities programs.

Anonymous wrote:Some of the differences have to do with distinct distribution requirements. Depending on the student's interests and strengths, this might be a factor to consider. From my research so far: Amherst is the only open curriculum WASP school. Swarthmore requires three courses in each of the three academic divisions, with 20 credits outside of the major department. Williams is also three in three. Pomona has substantial distribution requirements too, if I recall correctly. If Bowdoin is also under consideration, it's one in each of its five areas (one of which is DEI).

Swarthmore's Honors program is distinct (and impressive), though students can write senior capstones at any SLAC. Some require, some don't.

OP, if you look up major numbers for each school, you'll have a good sense of the dominant majors. This will give you at least some sense of the academic culture of the school, eg which have the more robust humanities programs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Amherst is the number 1 lac for christs sakes!

#2 actually, but the Amherst troll always finds these threads.

Nope, number 1. Most dedicated to the liberal arts, while not just committing to corporate finance. It sets up grads for their careers rather than pushing them into consulting and IB.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Amherst is the number 1 lac for christs sakes!

#2 actually, but the Amherst troll always finds these threads.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Amherst is the number 1 lac for christs sakes!

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Amherst is the number 1 lac for christs sakes!

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

Agreed. You generally go to a SLAC for a well-rounded liberal arts education (which unfortunately no longer seems to be valued). Learn how to think. So though some might theoretically be better than others in particular areas, if you are going to college because you want to be 100% focused on bio or Spanish or Econ, these probably aren’t the places for you.

I work on Wall Street and I prefer to hire smart SLAC grads of all majors and we will teach them what we want them to know. Then when the world changes and they need to adapt, they tend to be the best at doing so. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer people agree with me.

People disagree because we are in an era of necessitated specialization. No longer do we need general programmers- we have AI. We need highly trained thinkers. I’ll take a kid who has actually worked on Neural networks over the Williams kid who can just rattle off about knot theory.

Another dim CS drone. And when things change in a few years the Williams kids adapts…..the other one is now basically a doorstop.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

Agreed. You generally go to a SLAC for a well-rounded liberal arts education (which unfortunately no longer seems to be valued). Learn how to think. So though some might theoretically be better than others in particular areas, if you are going to college because you want to be 100% focused on bio or Spanish or Econ, these probably aren’t the places for you.

I work on Wall Street and I prefer to hire smart SLAC grads of all majors and we will teach them what we want them to know. Then when the world changes and they need to adapt, they tend to be the best at doing so. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer people agree with me.

People disagree because we are in an era of necessitated specialization. No longer do we need general programmers- we have AI. We need highly trained thinkers. I’ll take a kid who has actually worked on Neural networks over the Williams kid who can just rattle off about knot theory.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:It’s not a valid question. They are known for being strong all around SLACs. They really aren’t known for each having a specific strength.

Agreed. You generally go to a SLAC for a well-rounded liberal arts education (which unfortunately no longer seems to be valued). Learn how to think. So though some might theoretically be better than others in particular areas, if you are going to college because you want to be 100% focused on bio or Spanish or Econ, these probably aren’t the places for you.

I work on Wall Street and I prefer to hire smart SLAC grads of all majors and we will teach them what we want them to know. Then when the world changes and they need to adapt, they tend to be the best at doing so. Unfortunately, fewer and fewer people agree with me.

Anonymous wrote:Amherst: nothing. There's absolutely no reason to go there over WSP, or even Bowdoin and Middlebury. Ugly campus, mediocre outcomes, expensive tuition, overemphasis on DEI. Avoid at all costs.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The lack of humanities focus at these colleges is quite sad

I think these posters are overstating things. These are first of all liberal arts colleges (without graduate level programs) and people are magnifying the differences.

Every top SLAC is seeing a massive decline in humanities students, and now faculty.

Still blithering….