Quote:
|
AE, there's part of your answer.
|
Actually, no, you haven't answered anything I asked. I don't see how you can say that Haverford's sciences are outstanding, whereas Swarthmore's are merely excellent, when you can see plainly at
REED COLLEGE PHD PRODUCTIVITY that Swarthmore is ahead of Haverford in Ph.D. productivity in sciences and engineering, in general, in addition to being ahead in the biological sciences specifically. And, getting back to the OP, we see Harvey Mudd is ahead of both in general, and ahead of Haverford (but not Swarthmore) in biological sciences.
For Ph.D. productivity in general, Haverford doesn't even make the top ten list, whereas Swarthmore is third overall. This points to the other academic departments, such as language and music and so on, likely being stronger at Swarthmore than at Haverford.
There's really just no comparison. Haverford is fine and all, but it is not at the level of Harvey Mudd or Swarthmore (or even Carleton).