operamom

Oh, frazzledmaybe! Thank you for sharing your story. I am so glad that you found MHC. Mount Holyoke is lucky to have you as a student!

Scholarfeminist

Frazzledmaybe,thank you so much for sharing your story with us. You have no idea how encouraging this is for me: I was not accepted at Wellesley and I am the girl that Diplomat talks about. I have a similar story with you: transeferring form a cc, 3.9 GPA, I am fluent in four languages, Political Science and Philosophy major, SATs were very good except for MAth (i have been out of high school for four years, and I did not even had the same program as US high schools)private high school in my home country, survivor of domestic abuse during my years at cc, I won full scholarship to attend my high school, 14 classes a semeseter (very advanced level); great 3 college professor (All PhDs and Fullbright scholars) recommandations (I have copies of the recommandations b/c they give me strength when things do not go so well and I have marks on my face), one amazing counselor recommandation- I have done a lot of community services here even though it has been EXTREMELY hard (plus a part job cleaning houses), the first one from my college to ever do an internship, president of a very large club at cc (my college has 20.000 + students). Phi Theta Kappa member and I have won a few awards, but I have taken classes for four years at cc, a few of them I had to retake because I withdrew due to my family situation. My application was very strong; my essay was about discrimination against women as an international phenomena and my personal experiences with it (how my professors in my home country thought that women are ignorant or how I am considered an immoral woman b/c of what I am studying), I had an on campus interview and to pay for the ticket to go there I had to sell a bracelet that my father gave me for my birthday. I was very disappointed with the interview: the lady asked me about my volunteer projects, looked at my transcript and said that she is amazed why I dropped 3 classes in one semester and repeated 9 times that I was most likely not to be accepted b/c it is very competitive. The interview lasted 15 minutes. I have been torturing myself for the last two weeks since I received the decision (rejected) and I can not stop thinking what would have happened if I did things differently- but I did more than my best with what I was given. Needless to say, the lady that interviewed me for MHC was very different from Wellesley and I am going to attend MHC in the fall (lets be friends)! Wellesley and Smith are the only ones that did not accept me from 9 colleges where I applied (including Georgetown, Columbia University, Hollins University, University of Pennsylvania). Reading your story gives me strength that It was not me who was not good enough, but probably the way they function over there. As my counselor says: Wellesley is a famous school, but they keep their noses up too high: if you are different from them, not a legacy and not wealthy, you are not going to get there. GO MHC- the more I read about it, the more I know I am going to love it there and fit much better than at Wellesley. Sorry for the second novel in this post.

frazzledmaybe

You're welcome, operamom. Thank you for your kind words.

Scholarfeminist, I am willing to bet that many other students have had similar experiences with Wellesley. If we found each other on this tiny thread, common sense points toward a larger true number of people with similar stories. It is very sad that they are unwilling to act on their own mantra of diversity. Diversity is not limited to a minority box checked on an application. Moreover, the type of diversity that is welcome should not be limited to what can be quantified and used to improve USNews rankings scores... I'll stop before I go on a rant about the worthlessness of the rankings lol.

I do think that we will be very happy at Mount Holyoke. Mount Holyoke certainly has the most beautiful campus I viewed during my search, and the students are well-spoken and incredibly friendly. We will be part of a truly diverse, open, tight community!

Feel free to send me a private message and I'll reply with my contact info.

advantagious

I realize that this thread is a few weeks old, but as a current Wellesley student I feel the need to comment because the comments here are so incredibly negative and I believe, unfair, against Wellesley and Wellesley students, in many ways.

1) The notion that all Wellesley students are "upper class, white, wealthy and of course, legacies". This statement is slightly ridiculous. According to Princeton Review, about 60% of Wellesley students are on financial aid and 60% of MHC students are on financial aid. According to Princeton Review, 47% of Wellesley students are white, 26% are Asian, 7% Hispanic, and 6% are African-American. Also according to Princeton Review, 52% of MHC students are white, 11% are Asian, 6% are Hispanic, and 4% are African-American. Even allowing for those students who did not report their race, Wellesley compares well to Mount Holyoke in terms of ethnic diversity. A quick search has not turned up the percentage of students at Wellesley who are legacies, but of the few I know, I can give you every assurance that they are every bit as intelligent and deserving of their spot as any other Wellesley student. I am sure that there are some who are not, but I am every bit as sure that you could find those students at MHC as well. Furthermore, the extrapolation that Diplomat makes from attending apparently one class that was not to her liking to claiming that "most" Wellesley women showed a high level of immaturity and intolerance is incredibly offensive. Of course I don't know what happened in that class, and I won't be so foolish to claim that those students might not have been immature and intolerant, but neither I nor any of my friends exhibits said immaturity and intolerance, and I don't think that a majority of Wellesley students do, either. I also do not think it is fair to judge an entire student body from one class.

2) The rejection of frazzledmaybe and Scholarfeminists have been bandied about as proof of how awful, short-sighted, and bigoted Wellesley is, when it actuality, it seems from reading both this and the Wellesley board that both were rejected for simply not meeting Wellesley's requirements for transfer admission, which is that only incoming Sophomore and Junior students can apply (students who have at least 2 years left to complete on their degree). frazzledmaybe argues that Wellesley is the lesser school because it is illogically will not "look past bureaucratic boxes". She is certainly entitled to her opinion; many people would argue that it is illogical in this day and age to maintain an all-women's student body but the Wellesley College administration disagrees with this and refuses to accept any number of truly spectacular male applicants with stories to rival any on this board because of their status as male. Again, a person may disagree with the policy not to accept students with more than 2 years of college credit just as a person may disagree with the policy not to accept male students, but the fact that Wellesley maintains both policies is not proof that Wellesley does not value diversity or only admits privileged applicants. I believe--as an actual student at Wellesley--that neither is true, and the statistics back up my assertion at least at the most basic level.

Additionally, I would note that this requirement is enumerated in the first paragraph on the first page pertaining to transfer admissions on the Wellesley College website, a page that is not particularly difficult to find. I agree that Wellesley erred if it did not make this requirement known to you, if that is indeed what happened, but the information is readily available and mistakes are possible anywhere. That doesn't excuse Wellesley for making a mistake, but again, it is not indication of Wellesley's total lack of character as an institution. You are upset that Wellesley and Smith disagreed with your assertion that you still had two years left on your degree, but they both did still disagree. Having only taken community college classes and/or having only taking 100 and 200 level classes does not prove that you were only a rising Junior, as one could be a rising Senior at Wellesley who has not taken any 300 level courses and can still be on track to graduate on time. I can understand that this was upsetting to you, but it does not prove that Wellesley or Smith's are lesser schools than Mount Holyoke--only that they have stricter transfer rules.

As to the notion of whether or not Wellesley wants "real" diversity: in my one year so far at Wellesley, there have been numerous forums for discussions of all kinds of diversity in which members of all communities are welcome. Wellesley isn't perfect; no one worth listening to would claim otherwise. I know very little of Mount Holyoke, besides the bare facts, but I would guess that it, like any other school, has its fair share of people who are neither as open nor as tolerant as others would like. This is not me trying to bash Mount Holyoke, or claim that Wellesley is "better" than it in some subjective way, but to simply point out that anecdotal evidence and a few bad experiences are not enough reason to throw *any* school away or claim that *any* student body is as a whole intolerant or unaccepting of diversity. Unfortunately there are intolerant people everywhere and although it is true that there are some at Wellesley, I can assure anyone reading this board that these students are not coddled or wordlessly accepted without challenge, and that most Wellesley students do value real diversity.

frazzledmaybe

Advantagious, I DO have two years left to complete on my degree. I am a transfer from a community college (i.e., a two-year college). Yes, it is technically possible to graduate with very few 300-level courses, but community colleges tend to not have many major-specific courses, so it would have been literally IMPOSSIBLE for me to graduate in less than 2 years. More importantly, I made it abundantly clear that I was aware that I could only transfer two years of credit. What logical institution cares if I have more than two years if I can only transfer two years? The fact of the matter is that Wellesley's admissions officers refused to look past a technicality that wouldn't even affect how long I'd need to attend.

I disagree that Wellesley only admits privileged students, but I maintain that their red-tape prevents them from accepting diversity that doesn't help their stats. If I were a few years older, I'd be eligible to apply through their older person's program, so it is a joke to say that there is some real reason for my ineligibility based on extra credits that, again, wouldn't even affect the two-year residency requirement. There IS a reason for not accepting males (this is a false analogy that you presented), and that is maintaining the all-women's environment and commitment to women's education.

Also, if you had carefully read my comment you would have seen that I called colleges about the residency requirement and was told that it did not apply for community college students. Almost all colleges have this requirement, so it was not something I only viewed on Wellesley's site. I even had an interview at Wellesley with an Adcom who saw my transcript and knew that I had more than two years of credit, yet nothing was said to me BEFORE I applied. Wellesley, like Smith (which I mentioned told me two different things within the very same day), needs to keep their people on the same page.

I understand that you want to defend your college, but red tape is red tape regardless of whether you have college loyalty. Of course Wellesley is a wonderful college, and I believe I pointed out that it offers many women wonderful opportunities; HOWEVER, it does not value true diversity more than silly rules. That is not arguable with stats, since obviously they wouldn't have rules to prevent better stats.For the record, I don't think anyone was trying to say that Wellesley should be thrown away as an option. We were only saying that in this area MHC (or at least the administration) is superior. Obviously there are close-minded individuals EVERYWHERE, so we would be fools to claim that MHC had that over Wellesley or vice versa. Wellesley had a student body open enough to be among most of our top choices, after all.

PS: Wellesley DOES accept male applicants if they happen to have female genitalia. Just saying.