<p>NO Collegialmom. I did not write nor did I suggest any such thing in which you are accusing me. In fact, I explicitly wrote 4 times initially and 3 times in my latter posts including what I hoped to be a user-friendly and concrete camping metaphor that this wasn’t about making generalizations. If I wanted to make a generalization, I would have only needed 1 paragraph. </p>
<p>*** The context of my initial post was to ENTERTAIN what could account for the “DIFFERENCE” with Swat having (get this!!!) 5 more PhDs than Haverford in 10 years.*** (surprised that this is even a “debate”)</p>
<p>So, IF we are to indulge that this difference is significant, what are those possibilities? Given that Swat’s bio isn’t 100% health related, it probably attracts more kids interested in organism based bio and developmental studies which is more in line with a PhD. So, in my mind, out of these 5 people/10 years, maybe this accounts for… I don’t know, what’s a reasonable estimate… “3” of them. So that leaves maybe “TWO” LEFT and the stuff I wrote later (“SECONDARILY”) was in regards to that… to the minority of students at Swat who MAY possibly account for this residual and everything I said is true. </p>
<p>IF people believe that a difference of 5 more PhDs/10 years is a commentary on the quality of Swat’s bio program or the intelligence of its students IN GENERAL, is it that much of a stretch to also suggest that the consistent presence of really obnoxious Swat alumni/students on CC over a 2 year time period is a commentary on the PRESENCE OF A SELECT MINORITY OF STUDENTS as well? Note: While some would generalize the 1st statement, I did not make a generalization with the 2nd. </p>
<p>If you’re not following, then you need to read the last paragraph again.</p>
<p>As my brother (1 year older), college GF and ### college friends and friends from medical school went to Swat within the last decade, I have my experience and theirs. The same issues that they discussed are the same one’s I’m seeing here on CC. Again, while there are conceited posts on every LAC forum, I have yet to read of any so socially maladjusted as here. IN FACT, if I remember correctly, several CURRENT students have written/implied that “…there are a few more dudvinchi’s at Swat than expected…”. My assertion that you are taking offense to is utterly benign. Can a few OF THESE PEOPLE be science majors/pre-meds and be either shut out of med school given their pretense and everything else that I wrote about or the fact that they just aren’t “people persons” and prefer not working with patients? Can some OF THESE PEOPLE then account for the remaining miniscule difference that is the crux of this ridiculous “debate”? That is my point and you should read the last 2 sentences of my initial response again as I said it there too.</p>
<h2>I did not make generalizations. My comments were directed at a small yet noticeable contingent of students. Given that you suggested that, just because your son/daughter and their friends are OK, everyone else is “sparkling” is a generalization. Isn’t it possible that you just may not have met the % of kids at Swat that I’m writing about, that CURRENT STUDENTS have written about and who make themselves known through their graffiti from time to time on CC? How can you argue with that?</h2>
<p>Fhimas: The Phoenix post was a parody but there is a little bit of truth to it as with all “jokes” (yes, some Haverford people are there cause they got rejected from Swat). I’m pretty sure I didn’t say “all”. All I said when we last communicated was that going to a top LAC is self-selected and the kids who choose to go there over bigger name places do so for a reason… most students value a great/intimate/personalized undergrad education and many of those kids value this OVER other things like name recognition, a larger social mix, larger and more wild parties, ect. All of the latter are “mainstream” ambitions for most kids so LACs then do attract “quirkier” kids by definition, right? … and “quirky” can run the gamut with shy and a little awkward being one possibility… Among LACs, there is more selection as well… many students who choose to go to a women’s college choose them over more prestigious co-ed schools and universities and do so for a reason; kids who enjoy sports may prefer go to a school that supports such activities; ect… although the LACs are very similar in many respects, each is a little bit different in their academic focus, culture and opportunities and I think that draws a few more of each type of kid to each school. I think when you have a t-shirt that says “Anywhere else would be an A”… that will attract many kids who want to just challenge themselves 100% and work hard (period)… but I think it will also draw A FEW MORE kids who also use that to look down upon others as well.</p>