<p>Hi I need some serious advice on college. I have three colleges that I value the most: Amherst, Middlebury, and Wesleyan. I need to know which one is a better place for a “wanna be a cancer curer”? </p>
<p>I thank you for your comments!</p>
<p>I do not have detailed knowledge of any of these three, but have extensive knowledge about training “cancer curers”.</p>
<p>The first question is, are you saying your want to be a doctor, or you want to be a scientist. If the latter, I am going to say none of the above, and if you have the choice of those you should think about somewhere where you have unlimited prospects for world class research. I am not saying that is a must, those places produce scientists, but just a thought. They do seem to vary in the type and quality of Biology they do. If you are interested in the former, I suppose it is about med school acceptance rates which are published by each school.</p>
<p>I am thinking of becoming a scientist, but I am also very good at other subject areas. I am not sure what I want to do yet, to be honest. I hate chem, but I love bio and physics. Does that combination sound odd?</p>
<p>A fourteen y/o science prodigy would be almost certainly be better off at a place like Cornell or MIT, for a variety of reasons, not the least of which being Wesleyan’s emphasis on independence and maturity. You need a pretty good head on your shoulders to get by at Wesleyan.</p>
<p>That being said, Wesleyan is no walk in the park academically either. As far as I know, Wesleyan is the only liberal arts college (LAC) in the country that receives grants from the National Institutes of Health (NIH), which, as it happens, includes the National Cancer Institute. </p>
<p>You won’t be winning any Nobel Prizes while at Wesleyan, but, I’m assuming you know that. I’m assuming you haven’t made up your mind definitely what you want to study. I’m assuming you’re curious, but, are nowhere close to a glide path to a scientific career. That’s what LACs are for – to help you make up your mind.</p>
<p>At Wesleyan, (and, Amherst and at Middlebury) you may not find particle colliders (or, empty construction sites where research centers were meant to go, until a year ago) but, you will find serious scientists doing serious, interesting work. What’s more, their highest priority will be showing you – first-hand – what a scientist’s life looks like and in teaching you how to think like one.</p>
<p>A love of biology and physics does not sound odd at all:<a href=“http://www.wesleyan.edu/molbiophys/[/url]”>http://www.wesleyan.edu/molbiophys/</a></p>
<p>Thanks for replying. Cornell or MIT do not fit into my personality. Moreover, I am not this huge fan of science, either. I am good at it, though. I just want some major which would challenge me the most, at the same time it has to be interesting. My high school does have a very weak science prep, I think. I took IB Bio I this year and I was the only A in all five classes of my teacher. I took AP CHem as well, and even though I got A, I hate it. I like physics, but I have not had any serious look into it. I think those small liberal arts can help me out alot, rather than MIT which is for kids who kind of know what they’re doing in sciences. I am just interested in sciences. I am nothing like a grade A scientist, to be honest, but I love research.</p>
<p>JW, one of the best scientific young talents I know is a Wesleyan grad…one of the reasons I am so supportive of my own son’s interest there. I like the science there relative to Swarthmore. I also have faculty friends at the other two places mentioned and they are first rate. So there are good science faculty that I know at all three places.</p>
<p>Nigiri, which school do you consider better for law? you see I swing around! sorry!</p>
<p>I know nothing about law schools, i am a scientist and we deal with the seeking the truth ;)</p>
<p>HAHA…I am considering applying to Amherst or Wesleyan for ED. One or the other. I think of have a good chance of getting in at both schools, Wesleyan more than Amherst. I think I should be happy with both! It’s a no loss situation. Both are prestigious and very good academically. My only concern is the social atmosphere. Are people PROUD of themselves there?</p>
<p>I had a question? Is Cornell that good of a school? I know it’s an ivy but compared to Wesleyan or Amherst, which one is better? How big are classes?</p>
<p>one must remember that the Ivy League is simply an athletic league. yes, all 8 members are prestigious schools, but their Ivy status does not designate them as THE top 8 schools. modern media has given Ivy League the connotation of excellence, which it deserves… yet I would argue many schools offer a better undergrad education than Harvard. who would want to be taught by TAs? additionally, one must consider which school is the “best” for each person. Cornell may be the best choice for person A, but a horrible choice for person B.</p>
<p>Cornell is an excellent school, but I would say Wesleyan and Amherst are just as strong academically. for what it’s worth, Cornell gets an 88, Amherst a 94, and Wesleyan a 97 for Academic Rating on Princeton Review. Cornell is a much larger school than the two LACs. You must ask yourself what you want in a school. </p>
<p>class sizes are fairly comparable… Amherst has an 8:1, Wesleyan 9:1, Cornell 10:1 (close to 9:1) student faculty ratios. of course, an intro science course will be larger at Cornell than Amherst, but upper classes should be comparable.</p>
<p>Thank you smartalic34. I thought about the same thing. I know for sure that both Wesleyan and Amherst are far above Cornell as far as undergrad studies go, but I am again as you said amazed at how media makes those ivies look like they are the mecca of knowledge!</p>
<p>it’s no accident that the phrase “Ivy League” really took off in the 1950s (even though it had been knocking around for about twenty years before then), a time of tremendous stride in the advertising business. “Ivy League” and “Scotch tape”, “Brillo pad” and “Xerox machine” were all examples of specific products that so completely defined what they were, in terms of an untapped public need, that they came to be used generically (“little ivies”, “public ivies”, West Coast ivies, southern ivies, etc., etc…)</p>
<p>That sounds reasonable. I am in love with two schools now! It’s a hard one between Wesleyan and Amherst!!! I have applied to visit both campuses, but I think campus life will be the tip point then. How is the social life at both schools? As far as people being arrogant sometimes about their accomplishments?</p>
<p>if you are visiting both campuses, you might want to wait until you do so to make a decision. sometimes you’ll step on a campus and get a “gut” feeling either way. plus, you may just enjoy one vastly more than the other.</p>
<p>i agree with smartalic34. you should definitely visit. each school is “arrogant” in a different way, perhaps because of the differences in host cities.</p>
<p>Amherst is both a town and the name of a college. Traditionally, it formed the rough, taciturn, western edge of Massachusetts that people associate with New England once you leave the confines of Boston. Both town and college have grown slowly over the years, accumulating wealth. The biggest event of the last 150 years was probably when the State of Massachusetts located its land-grant college just a mile away from the town square. To give you some idea of the skewed perspective of long-time natives: townspeople still complain that Amherst College occupies three quarters of the original town square. Meanwhile, something like a third of the population consists of University of Massachusetts students.</p>
<p>Wesleyan is completely different. The biggest event to take place within its host city (aside from the founding of Wesleyan, itself) was probably the wave of immigration that took place in the last decade or two of the nineteenth century. Mainly from southern Europe – Sicily in particular – the Roman Catholic arrivals took little notice of the Methodist college on the hill and Wesleyan, in turn, did very little to attract them. The invisible lines still exist.</p>
<p>Today, the air of self-satisfaction sits as easily around Amherst as a cashmere sweater after a game of tennis. It’s basic claim to fame is 1) it’s vast wealth 2) it’s small size and, 3) all the exclusivity that 1) and 2) imply. You walk around campus, hoping to make eye contact with someone until you realize they’re all afraid you might ask them the same rude question, “How do I get nto Amherst?”, at which point, of course, they would be obliged to tell you the truth, “Um, you can’t.”</p>
<p>Wesleyan students, for their part, are much friendlier around visitors these days, especially prospies. They can’t wait to mess with their heads; to induct them into the secret tunnel that directly connects Foss Hill to Williamsburg, Brooklyn (jk); it is almost as if they are making up for lost time after all those years of “hiding amidst the trees of Middletown” to mix with the masses. Even the wealthiest students will tell you, quite earnestly, that they’re “really no different than you are” while they queue up for a movie or wait to grab a salad at the Usdan Center.</p>
<p>So there you have it. Amherst still thinks of itself as Master of All It Surveys (so long as it doesn’t look too hard at the high-rise buildings of UMass) while Wesleyan thinks of itself as the vanguard of a warmer, fuzzier – more PC – version of the yuppie: the urban preppy.</p>
<p>Wow Thank you JW! I am getting the picture here. It will be a change no matter where I go. I can’t wait untill I visit both campuses!
Thanks again!</p>
<p>I find it stupid of those accepted amherst kids to tell others they can’t get in. Like they weren’t themselves nervous. It’s just a school!!</p>
<p>^^well, i’m exaggerating somewhat. I don’t think a `herstie would actually say that to your face. they would just think it. </p>
<p>Oh, and there’s no secret tunnel from Foss Hill to Brooklyn. I’m just messin’ with ya. :D</p>
<p>Hi JW: To say the least I am in love with Cornell but SAT’s are a big no-no. Should I do UVa or should I do questbridge?</p>