<p>"Isn’t that axe sharp enough yet? The grinder’s starting to wear down… "</p>
<p>From my standpoint, all of these are true:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>I do have an axe to grind against Williams, that comes from my strong dissatisfaction with Williams.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams is a high-risk place for those interested in careers that are GPA dependent.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams does state that they recruit impressive, highly talented students. Still, in some areas they prefer to support the weeder course approach that the we support your goals approach. Consequently, many students are forced to change their intended majors. </p></li>
<li><p>Williams does prefer to stick with the old ways, even though the world and the laws are changing. The “we are a top school” is used to defend decisions that go against current US Higher education law.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams does have faculty serving in their committees who are not fully informed about current US Higher Education law.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams does find it easier to recruit students than faculty, thus if a conflict arises they are in dubio pro faculty.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams has horrible advising, and advisors can mislead students to make wrong decisions. </p></li>
<li><p>Williams does not give any reprieve if a student ends in a difficult situation due to a direct recommendation by an advisor. Again, the “we are a top school” is a justification for not granting any reprieve.</p></li>
<li><p>Williams Adcoms do like to state that they support students so that students “do not fall through the cracks”. If they do have measures to prevent students falling through the cracks, I do not see much of it. </p></li>
<li><p>Williams clearly state in their Students Handbook that students are subjects to all Federal, State, and Local laws, while Faculty is subject to Anti-Discrimination laws (shouldn’t Faculty also be subject to all Federal, State, and Local laws?)</p></li>
</ul>