Smith vs. Barnard vs. Mount Holyoke vs. Simmons (Class of 2023)
peyre1
26 replies5 discussionsRegistered User Posts: 31 Junior Member
Hello! I am a rising senior interested in applying to a few women's colleges. My grandma went to Smith and loved her experience. I am interested in a science/business related major (like public health, nutrition, public policy, or environmental science). I am also interested in playing soccer if I get accepted. I want a college that would be close to other co-ed colleges which is why I have picked women's colleges near other colleges. I have friends at Mount Holyoke who love it. I have heard different opinions on Smith (many have said that students are weird) and many say that Barnard students are competitive and stressed. Any advice?
18 replies
Replies to: Smith vs. Barnard vs. Mount Holyoke vs. Simmons (Class of 2023)
Smith is really great too and one of the prettiest campuses you will find. It has produced many successful and super accomplished grads over the years.
I was part of the five college system in school and didn’t take advantage of it. But had friends at both schools. My Holyoke was, to me, a bit more “chill” But that was as a visitor.
The top LACs don't generally offer professionally-oriented bachelor's degrees. They would typically recommend that you major in a traditional liberal arts field as an undergraduate, then go to grad school somewhere else for a suitable professional master's degree (like an MBA or MPH).
Most top LACs will have "environmental science", as well as traditional undergraduate science majors like biology or chemistry. They will typically offer "economics" (which is more theoretical) as opposed to "business".
I'm super biased (I majored in a traditional liberal arts field as an undergraduate at a women's LAC) but I would agree with that. I would also argue that professional undergraduate degrees in most fields don't necessarily give you a 'leg up' over traditional liberal arts majors; the top LACs continue to offer traditional liberal arts & sciences majors because they know it doesn't and won't impede the career progression of their graduates.
That said, a lot of LACs are offering academic opportunities - like certificates, minors, off-campus study, etc. - that have a more professional bent to it. Smith has an environmental science and policy major, a public public minor, and a global financial institutions concentration. Mount Holyoke has a minor in entrepreneurship, organizations, and society and Nexus (https://www.mtholyoke.edu/acad/nexus) programs in the following fields: law, public policy and human rights; development studies; and global business, among others. Both schools also participate in certificate programs co-administered with the other Five Colleges in culture, health, and science; sustainability studies; reproductive health, rights, and justice; peace and world security studies; coastal and marine sciences and several other areas that may be interesting to you. (They also both have majors in environmental sciences or studies).
Barnard has majors in environmental science and environmental sustainability and a minor/program in human rights. At Barnard, you can also draw upon the strength of Columbia's school of public health - one of the top 5 in the nation and which often offers 4000-level courses open to undergraduates.
Simmons does offer more professional majors - business; an economics or political science + public policy 3+1 program that allows you to finish with an MPP; health informatics; three nutrition programs (including another BS/MS program); public health; a combined public health + nutrition BS/MS program; and a couple of minors in other related areas (public policy, sustainability, etc.)
Here are some other women's colleges to check out, especially since the ones on your list are all very selective:
Agnes Scott College (has a public health major in partnership with Emory)
Bryn Mawr College (also competitive, but has a major in health studies)
Spelman College (my alma mater; has a health sciences major and minors in food studies and public health)
All of these colleges also have environmental studies/sciences majors.
Wellesley College should be considered. I think that there are frequent mixers with MIT students.
All are high IQ schools.
Barnard is very "go go' and the student she hung ut with (the daughter of a family friend) said there's not as much 'hanging out' there and more 'let's have coffee' interactions. Tends to attract 'edgy' kids ready to change the world. Very diverse, but one interesting comment from the student we knew was there were a lot of students from wealth and a lot on full or almost need-based aid -- not so many middle/upper middle class. Of course, that was just her impression. Access to Columbia and being in NYC is a huge part of the experience. They don't offer merit aid.
Mt. Holyoke is pretty well-balanced student body -- very pretty campus and really cool traditions. Easy to find your niche kind of school. Lots of support from the college to pursue your interests. My D's friend goes there and LOVES it. They have focus on international students too and they offer good merit.
Scripps has the west coast, chill vibe. Some students skateboard around. The women we met said it didn't feel as much like a women's college -- and they liked that. When we ate at the Scripps dining hall it was about 25% male b/c all the Claremont Colleges students share dining and other facilities. And Scripps students usually take one or two courses (out of 4) each term at one of the other colleges. Very racially/ethnically diverse. Offer some nice merit, but I don't think to that many students. You can take light rail into LA in about an hour which is cool.
Just our impressions -- good luck!!
For Smith, it would take you about 15 minutes to travel to UMass, Amherst, or Hampshire (all co-ed schools) using their free shuttle for students in the Five College Consortium, so they are not as accessible as Columbia is to Barnard (right across the street). However, you can easily walk off campus into Northampton to meet men if that is what you desire. Smith is a D3 school which means playing soccer there would be an easier goal to achieve. Also, since they are a liberal arts school, they would be able to offer you the classes you need without leaving campus (although you'll have the option of taking classes at any of the other four colleges later on).
Both schools are solid choices and you would probably be happy at either. I found a special love for Smith in particular, so I may be biased, but I think it may be a better fit for you than Barnard in the end. I don't know much about MoHo, but I do know that if you went to Smith or MoHo, you'd be able to take a few classes at the other college you don't end up attending.
This is not at all true. Not even close.
It's so far off base that I don't know how to respond beyond that.
Obviously a misinterpretation from a high school student who attended an arts-oriented summer intensive (See course listing at https://barnard.edu/admission-aid/high-school-pre-college-programs/summer-programs/liberal-arts-intensive ) and made the mistake of thinking that was somehow representative of the school.
My daughter was a poli sci major at Barnard. She took many courses at Columbia but all of her poli sci courses were at Barnard. So since the OP says she is interested in public policy -- she'll find extensive offerings at Barnard. Of course all of Columbia's offerings will also be open to her... but she would have plenty of support for her interests from the Barnard faculty.
I'd note that Barnard and Columbia are fully integrated for most things. When a Barnard student takes a class at Columbia, she is not "leaving campus" .. she is walking across the street. A typical student might cross that street multiple times every day -- and both campuses are very compact, so not far to walk. So most of the time the distinctions between a class being at Barnard or at Columbia is irrelevant -- many of the same classes (same course number) are offered at different times on both campuses-- simply because the same class may be taught by faculty at either college.
Same for the statement about Barnard students being "allowed" to play "for Columbia" on "their" teams. That's like someone describing a father who is caring for his own children as babysitting. Both Barnard and Columbia athletes play as part of the "Columbia/Barnard Athletic Consortium." So a Barnard athlete is playing for their own school team, not as some sort of guest for a separate school. It is indeed Division 1, and I don't know about the availability of club or intramural playing opportunities for women's soccer.
See https://barnard.edu/pressroom/fact-sheet
The numbers in parenthesis are the totals in each major for the 2017 graduating class, as reported at https://nces.ed.gov/collegenavigator/
Actually, in 2017 there were also 30 neuroscience majors. (If combined with other life sciences, the total is 60, making biological and biomedical sciences actually the third most popular major, and pushing Art HIstory to 6th place.
More majors: 28 Urban Studies; 21 math & statistics; 19 history; 18 anthropology; 18 asian studies; 16 computer science; 16 foreign language & literature; 14 sociology; 13 environmental science/studies; 12 architecture
Visual & performing arts? In 2017, there was1 visual arts major; 1 music, 5 dance, 7 film, 8 drama.
Not that it matters -- it just illustrates how unreliable a visitor's impressions can be. I think Barnard has very intense academics, with particular strengths in social sciences, humanities, & life sciences. I don't believe that Barnard offers any visual arts courses -- the course directory lists only courses offered via Columbia. (Which of course Barnard students are free to enroll in.... but the point is that among the small fraction of Barnard students who end up taking most of their coursework at Columbia, the visual arts major would be one).