<p>just wondering
which of the claremont colleges is hardest to get into
or which is the hardest to be at?</p>
<p>Probably Pitzer because it is so tiny and with the Common Application it’s easy for the same people applying to one Claremont to apply to all of them. Harvey Mudd is pretty much an engineering school, so if you don’t like the curriculum, you won’t stay for long.</p>
<p>Statistically, Pomona and CMC are about tied with a 16% admission rate. </p>
<p>Hardest to be at? Academically? Socially? That’s all relative, no?</p>
<p>Harvey Mudd/Pomona
CMC
…
…
…
Pitzer/Scripps</p>
<p>Although Scripps would be the hardest if you were a guy…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I usually say:
HMC/Pomona
CMC
Scripps
Pitzer</p>
<p>Atomicfusion and Brassmonkey, I actually have a lot of trouble with those characterizations. There are pretty obvious reasons why I could be called biased, but I’ve taken many courses on every Claremont campus (when graduation came around, I had to count up my on-campus courses to make sure I’d met the numerical requirement), and I have to disagree with you both.</p>
<p>First, these are small, specialized schools. One student is going to get into Mudd easily, but be rejected from Pitzer. Another will get accepted happily to Pomona, but be turned down by Scripps. Each of the schools has a sufficiently large and well-qualified applicant pool that it can pick and choose its students, so while two schools have the lowest acceptance rates, one has the highest average score in one area, one the highest average score in another, whatever, it also depends a lot on who you are as an applicant and how you play to the schools strengths. I’m headed to a grad school that’s ranked 3rd hardest in the country to get into (in its field), behind Harvard and Yale. Ranking wise, it’s not 3rd, and it’s average scores–which are the biggest part of admission to grad schools of this type–are (relatively) far below many of its peers. But there are plenty of other factors at work. In some ways, for example, I think that Pitzer could easily be labeled the most difficult Claremont to get into. Why? Because so many people see the stats and think they’re shoe-ins, but fail to recognize that the school is looking for very specific qualities in its students. Admissions can be highly unpredictable and many students who appear exceptionally well-qualified are turned away (while numbers aren’t a guarantee into any LAC, they generally seem to allow for a bit more ease of prediction). So while obviously it’s true that CMC, Mudd, and Pomona are very difficult to get into, I always think it’s a mistake to try and rank LACs–which are looking for so much more than high scores–like this, especially among a set of schools with such vastly different (but all self-selected) applicant pools. If the OP means which Claremonts have the lowest acceptance rates, which have the highest SAT scores, or some other very specific question, that’s a different and more easily answered question.</p>
<p>Secondly, like I said, I’ve taken many classes all over Claremont. To assume that difficulty of coursework or grading corresponds directly to school ranking would be a mistake. Similarly, to assume that quality of education corresponds even remotely to any of these things–difficulty of coursework, difficulty of grading, or ranking–would be poor judgment. You might be able to make vague and semi-applicable generalities about academic difficulty, but even these would be highly questionable. Remember, among other things, that many departments are shared, faculty shift between campuses, students cross-register, and so forth, making Claremont almost impossible to rank in such a way as this (not to mention the fact that a student’s major will almost definitely play a larger role than her school in the overall difficulty of her academic experience).</p>
<p>As Elizzan says, “difficulty” is all relative. I know Mudd students who can not stand hum courses. They fail them. The material just doesn’t make sense. I know plenty of Scripps students who would feel the same way about Frosh Chem (and to be clear, I also know plenty of exceptionally literate Mudders and science-savvy Scrippsies). And social “difficulty” is even harder to rank. “Difficult to be at” needs to be clarified a bit. Sure, Mudders suffer the heaviest workload, but they’re also rewarded by one of the most close-knit campus communities (just a random example).</p>
<p>We’re all going to have an argument for why our school is great/underrated/difficult, and a good reason why we didn’t choose “that school across the street.” If one of the schools works for you, it won’t be because it’s the third ‘most difficult to be at.’ It’ll just work. No, I don’t necessarily think that all of the Claremonts are on equal footing, but I also don’t think there’s any good reason for them to span the top 50 as they do, and I really don’t think that they can be so linearly ranked based on so little (and such general) criteria. </p>
<p>(And yes, after four years of hearing so many of my Claremont peers debate which of our wonderful, well-respected, and specialized schools is hardest/best, I’m defensive and I’m a little annoyed. Sorry, guys ;))</p>
<p>Okay, so for the record, I realize that the above was a veeeery unnecessarily lengthy and involved post. I just saw this thread going in the direction of some obnoxious former threads and I jumped the gun in my response. </p>
<p>The points still stand, but my apologies for some irrelevancy (and perhaps for some poor phraseology…there are a few things which I won’t make a point of mentioning now, but which I really hope I didn’t accidentally imply).</p>
<p>The distilled version is this:</p>
<p>(1) It’s hard to rank the Claremonts.
(2) OP, please clarify your question a bit.</p>
<p>:p</p>
<p>Mine was referring to admission. The difficulty of the courses fall mainly on the material (its hard to make DiffEQ easy no matter who you are) and the teacher (British Literature can be made incredibly easy, or impossibly difficult at the whim of the professor). The institution at which the course is taken is usually not a reliable indicator of how hard the class will be.</p>
<p>Amazing, how the pull to create rankings asserts itself even at the Claremont Colleges! That can’t be good for campus morale if every other person you meet thinks of themselves as a “Pomona reject.”</p>
<p>There certainly is a pull for rankings, but the good news is that I don’t know anyone (even those who were rejected by Pomona, or any other of the schools) who does think of him or herself that way. You’ll see Claremont students on CC vehemently attempt to dissuade students from applying to one Claremont as a “backdoor” into another because no…as you say, it would be awful.</p>
<p>Students615, I finally had a couple minutes to read your essay you wrote above. You’re totally right. Thanks for that post.</p>
<p>Not everyone at the other four schools is a Pomona reject, most people I know at the 5-C’s applied and were accepted to only one of the Claremont colleges (I probably wouldn’t know them if they didn’t get in). Most people don’t use the other schools as a backdoor to Pomona, but rather, apply to them for the amazing things that each offers individually.</p>
<p>Also, once your at college, few people give a damn where else you applied, were accepted, were rejected, were waitlisted, considered, whatever. What matters is that you are there, and little else. The admissions process, and all the things that come with it, (as important as it all seems now) becomes completely irrelevant once you matriculate at the school of your choice.</p>
<p>When I was applying to colleges I interviewed at CMC and was interviewed by the then president of their student senate. He did a good job of trying to convince my as to why Pomona was far inferior to CMC, and gave me one good statistic in responce to the Pomona taunt at sporting games of “Back-up School”: only 20% of CMC applicants cross apply between CMC and Pomona. I think that’s a good sign as to how the schools attract different types of people. Oh, and don’t get riled up about the taunt, my post would be deleted if I told you what CMC shouts at Pomona.</p>
<p>Tell! Tell! COme on, we can all take this in good spirit, and anyway since I’m almost certain of trying for PP sports, I want to have a taste of what it’s gonna be like =p</p>
<p>The athletic rivalry between CMC and Pomona exists but an academic rivalry (from what i can tell) does not. There is much respect over academic institutions- they just go nuts (“overboard” may be a good word). And DT, CMC shouts Puck Fomona. That’s exactly what they yell. And Pomona replies. Though it gets annoying, it is fun to be on the 5Cs were there is such athletic spirit at D3 schools. I think this is a thread all in itself though.</p>
<p>great response student 615</p>
<p>whats a sporting event without a little inebriated jawing between vaunted rivals? come on people!!</p>