Columbia or Harvey Mudd?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pros of Columbia:
- Ivy league school with worldwide recognition
- Major research university with top of the line professors and opportunities
- Endless range of events featuring the brightest minds
- In the heart of NYC, tons of internships available and easy to participate in the cultural richness of the city
- Strongly emphasizes the liberal arts with a global focus
- More balanced experience; can major in something else if one decides not to do STEM

Cons:
- Didn't connect as well with the student body
- Not undergraduate focused; couldn't feel a great sense of community among students or professors
- Stressful culture- administrators and support networks aren't very good. No hand holding (independence can be a pro too)
- Expensive (full cost)

Pros of Harvey Mudd:
- Received full tuition merit aid scholarship
- Highly distinctive computer science program and major pipeline into Silicon Valley
- #1 for return on investment based on starting salaries of grads
- Professors genuinely seem to care for students & the community is close-knit; inclusive vibe for women
- Warm weather, better food and dorms, seems to have a better quality of life/happier students
- Nearby Claremont Colleges expand opportunities, course options, friends, and social life so it isn't too small

Cons:
- Ugly campus
- Ehh college town, LA is not too accessible. Not a life in the city (can be a pro to be in a peaceful college town, too)
- Rigid required STEM and humanities core; less flexibility to explore than at Columbia. Only offers STEM majors
- Poor name brand on the east coast and as a whole compared to Columbia
- Grade deflation, very intense workload

When I read the thread's title, I thought it was a joke.

So there's a college somewhere called Harvey Mudd?

Jokes on you. It's like saying you haven't heard of Harvard. Where you've been? Harvey Mudd is for people in the know. It's amazing how people boast their ignorance and don't even know it.

nope it's not like saying you haven't heard of Harvard. in fact you say so much yourself - "mudd is for people in the know". but Harvard isn't... everyone everywhere has heard of it. as an immigrant from Europe i assure you there are no more than a few dozen people in my whole country who have heard of it. but pretty much everyone has heard of Harvard and most people have heard of Columbia as well.

Unless you are paying OP's child's tuition, most people don't care what an uneducated European immigrant thinks.

I am a Harvard phd, bigot. what non-Americans think about your children's education is increasingly relevant in a modern world. if you don't realize that you are a fool but then, we know this already.

That wasn't bigot. Typical Americans don't know Harvey Mudd. And neither do the people from the poster's country. But I bet at Oxford and Cambridge, Claremont College consortium graduates are well represented and well respected.

PP absolutely is a bigot - she called me uneducated based on nothing more but the fact that i am an immigrant.

and while there must be HM graduates at oxbridge (there are also harvard professors with degrees from alabama, not to mention many foreign schools) having one's degree widely recognized still confers an advantage and flexibility. you child's next boss could some form literally anywhere in the world; she could marry a foreigner and live abroad; she could change fields mid-career where fewer people will be aware of niche excellence; also reputation for more obscure schools is more variable over time etc . to outright dismiss all these scenarios and lecture more worldly people that "you just need to be better educated about mudd" (newsflash: if you need to teach others that your degree is valuable you arelady have a problem) is just stupid.

PP - thanks for enlightening us most dumb Americans that there is a whole world out there. However, the point is that the typical Americans, as typical foreigners, do not know Harvey Mudd. This is totally irrelevant because hiring managers and grad schools here - and abroad - are very familiar with Harvey Mudd.

this is absolutely not true. very few hiring managers abroad are familiar with harvey mudd. you clearly don't get just how obscure this school is.

Typical Americans don't factor in reputatation among foreigners. It's just logistics. Americans tend to stay in the USA. The USA is still a great country - the most powerful country on the planet. Foreigners still come to the USA.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:That's a lot of folks working for the West Coast. I'd be concerned about the national/global reach of Harvey Mudd if anyone wanted to work elsewhere. Clearly, it's a STEM powerhouse, but it seems to be a regional one.

You normally work for 1 company. It's not like you are going to marry 100 women - or even 5. You just need one dream wife. You just need one dream job at a great place to live. Silicon Valley, Los Angeles, Orange County aren't too shabby.

but your "one dream wife" might not be from the west coast while your actual dream wife who lives in UK might not pay attention to you.

you are clearly way invested into this school to be able to think about it rationally. implication that level of brand recognition is irrelevant because "all you need is one" is beyond preposterous.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Pros of Columbia:
- Ivy league school with worldwide recognition
- Major research university with top of the line professors and opportunities
- Endless range of events featuring the brightest minds
- In the heart of NYC, tons of internships available and easy to participate in the cultural richness of the city
- Strongly emphasizes the liberal arts with a global focus
- More balanced experience; can major in something else if one decides not to do STEM

Cons:
- Didn't connect as well with the student body
- Not undergraduate focused; couldn't feel a great sense of community among students or professors
- Stressful culture- administrators and support networks aren't very good. No hand holding (independence can be a pro too)
- Expensive (full cost)

Pros of Harvey Mudd:
- Received full tuition merit aid scholarship
- Highly distinctive computer science program and major pipeline into Silicon Valley
- #1 for return on investment based on starting salaries of grads
- Professors genuinely seem to care for students & the community is close-knit; inclusive vibe for women
- Warm weather, better food and dorms, seems to have a better quality of life/happier students
- Nearby Claremont Colleges expand opportunities, course options, friends, and social life so it isn't too small

Cons:
- Ugly campus
- Ehh college town, LA is not too accessible. Not a life in the city (can be a pro to be in a peaceful college town, too)
- Rigid required STEM and humanities core; less flexibility to explore than at Columbia. Only offers STEM majors
- Poor name brand on the east coast and as a whole compared to Columbia
- Grade deflation, very intense workload

When I read the thread's title, I thought it was a joke.

So there's a college somewhere called Harvey Mudd?

Jokes on you. It's like saying you haven't heard of Harvard. Where you've been? Harvey Mudd is for people in the know. It's amazing how people boast their ignorance and don't even know it.

nope it's not like saying you haven't heard of Harvard. in fact you say so much yourself - "mudd is for people in the know". but Harvard isn't... everyone everywhere has heard of it. as an immigrant from Europe i assure you there are no more than a few dozen people in my whole country who have heard of it. but pretty much everyone has heard of Harvard and most people have heard of Columbia as well.

Unless you are paying OP's child's tuition, most people don't care what an uneducated European immigrant thinks.

I am a Harvard phd, bigot. what non-Americans think about your children's education is increasingly relevant in a modern world. if you don't realize that you are a fool but then, we know this already.

That wasn't bigot. Typical Americans don't know Harvey Mudd. And neither do the people from the poster's country. But I bet at Oxford and Cambridge, Claremont College consortium graduates are well represented and well respected.

PP absolutely is a bigot - she called me uneducated based on nothing more but the fact that i am an immigrant.

and while there must be HM graduates at oxbridge (there are also harvard professors with degrees from alabama, not to mention many foreign schools) having one's degree widely recognized still confers an advantage and flexibility. you child's next boss could some form literally anywhere in the world; she could marry a foreigner and live abroad; she could change fields mid-career where fewer people will be aware of niche excellence; also reputation for more obscure schools is more variable over time etc . to outright dismiss all these scenarios and lecture more worldly people that "you just need to be better educated about mudd" (newsflash: if you need to teach others that your degree is valuable you arelady have a problem) is just stupid.

PP - thanks for enlightening us most dumb Americans that there is a whole world out there. However, the point is that the typical Americans, as typical foreigners, do not know Harvey Mudd. This is totally irrelevant because hiring managers and grad schools here - and abroad - are very familiar with Harvey Mudd.

this is absolutely not true. very few hiring managers abroad are familiar with harvey mudd. you clearly don't get just how obscure this school is.

Typical Americans don't factor in reputatation among foreigners. It's just logistics. Americans tend to stay in the USA. The USA is still a great country - the most powerful country on the planet. Foreigners still come to the USA.

omg some of you are just too dumb for this discussion. yes foreigners do come to the US - which is an even bigger problem for mudd graduates and the like. because you will have actually hiring managers in american companies who have never heard of mudd, especially if they came here recently (i personally know several!).

and it's not just mudd... lacs are not a thing abroad - they have very little recognition. most foreigners would prefer a respectable state school to some 300 student college which focuses on "quality education". american universities are respected abroad because of their research, things like nobel prizes, famous scientists, not because of great college experience and small class sizes. those are completely foreign concepts to most foreigners and also most immigrants (not the dish washing kind you are accustomed to but people who start at well paid professional jobs and rise up quickly).

[Anonymous]

Why should they place emphasis on what those short-sighted immigrants or international audiences have to think? The students at those top LACs are not only getting an outstanding undergrad experience, they're getting into the top grad schools and top job opportunities in the US. This is well-established. Look up LinkedIn, look up grad school destinations, you'll see that the top LACs match the top universities for outcomes. So why does it matter so much what you and others have to think? The proof is in the pudding that grads go to great places from them.

[Anonymous]

Ok, so it seems, go to Mudd if you don't really need all the "wow" attention, domestic or foreign. If you are the type that constantly need a pat on the back just for going to Columbia, then choose Columbia.

[Anonymous]

A lot of LAC grads end up at the Ivies and similar schools for graduate studies. I believe the numbers were that 85% of Swarthmore students attend grad/professional school, and so do 80% of Williams students- within 10 years of graduation. It's not like you're locked out of international prospects entirely or certain name-based jobs. Get the best undergrad experience at the LAC and then get a more specialized, name brand education at Ivy/Stanford. Best of both worlds.

[Anonymous]

You might want to read this from the Harvey Mudd school paper on grade deflation - http://tsl.news/news/7542/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You might want to read this from the Harvey Mudd school paper on grade deflation - http://tsl.news/news/7542/

Average 3.3 GPA is low compared to a typical liberal arts college. However, it is higher than average STEM majors which hover around 2.9-3.2 GPA. This should be similar to Columbia SEAS, MIT, and CalTech.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:You might want to read this from the Harvey Mudd school paper on grade deflation - http://tsl.news/news/7542/

The average engineering GPA is 2.9 so Mudd GPA is relatively high.

Average GPAs for Different Majors, Highest to Lowest

Major Average GPA
Education 3.36
Foreign Language 3.34
English 3.33
Music 3.30
Religion 3.22
Biology 3.02
Psychology 2.98
Economics 2.95
Engineering 2.90
Math 2.90
Chemistry 2.78

[Anonymous]

I would pick Columbia over Harvey Mudd - how amazing to be in NYC. Columbia campus is lovely. Right next to Riverside Park. It is secluded from NYC but the city is right there if you want to go have fun or explore. Harvey Mudd has nicer weather but boring suburban location. Also, Columbia has the name recognition.
Harvey Mudd is a great school though and I would be thrilled if my kid got in. Harvey Mudd almost feels more exclusive though like a small elite club that not many people know about.

[Anonymous]

If you are a vapid front-runner you should definitely pick Columbia.

[Anonymous]

I can’t imagine answering “I went to Harvey Mudd” when you could say “Columbia” for the rest of your life.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I would pick Columbia over Harvey Mudd - how amazing to be in NYC. Columbia campus is lovely. Right next to Riverside Park. It is secluded from NYC but the city is right there if you want to go have fun or explore. Harvey Mudd has nicer weather but boring suburban location. Also, Columbia has the name recognition.
Harvey Mudd is a great school though and I would be thrilled if my kid got in. Harvey Mudd almost feels more exclusive though like a small elite club that not many people know about.

Columbia campus lovely? Just no.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I have always though Mudd seems a lot like going to TJ. It’s an amazing education— but only if you are going for the hardcore STEM experience. I would send my hardcore STEM TJ kid to Mudd over Columbia in a heartbeat. The merit money is an added bonus. I think the Mudd name is as strong as or stronger than Columbia among people in engineering, who make decisions on grad schools and hiring. Especially since Columbia is not a T10 Engineering school (Mudd is ranked separately from Columbia by US News because no doctoral program. It is first in its category).

Interestingly, Mudd has the “Wow” factor at TJ among the students. Getting in is considered to be very impressive. But the parents may be a different story— see below. For engineering, Mudd is perceived as stronger than Columbia Engineering, which comes in behind CMU, U. Illinois, GA Tech, Perdue, UT Austin, some of the UCs, etc. in rankings.

Also Mudd only takes a handful of TJ kids. Since their freshman class is only 200 students, they want diversity. Last year, Mudd had 11 applicants from TJ, took 4 students (impressive for a school with a 12% admit rate), and 2 enrolled. Everyone accepted had a 4.35 & 1500 or higher— often much higher.

For contrast (and to provide info on where top engineering students from the DMV are admitted and are headed), some of the T10 engineering schools: applied/ admitted/ attended numbers from TJ last year were:


MIT: 93/10/8
Illinois: 68/48/11
Michigan: 135/62/17
CMU: 140/36/15
Cal Tech: 26/4/1
Berkley: 97/34/11
Purdue:71/46/7
GA Tech: 111/35/1 (not sure what’s up here)
UT- Austin: 28/9/1
USC: 40/12/4

Stanford and Columbia both have lots of kids apply and attend something other than engineering. And Naviance does not separate out acceptances on applications for the engineering schools vs Arts and Sciences. So, it is much more difficult to get a handle on their engineering numbers than it is for the schools above. But, to fill out out the picture:

Stanford: 121/7/5
Columbia: 90/9/4

I am the poster who said Mudd does not have the name recognition among Asians, and I should clarify. I agree that Mudd has a lot of Asian students. But, if TJ is any indication, among the 1st gen Asian parents at TJ, it just does not have name recognition it deserves. I would guess that a lot of the strong Asian applicants are probably kids from the West Coast, where it is better known or have parents who are now t 1st Gen. First Gen Asian parents at TJ with kids who have the stats to get into Mudd are pushing the Ivy’s and UCs instead, apparently because of name recognition and perceived prestige. At least some of the parents really want their kids at colleges that impress relative back in their native country.

Agree that for a kid who is certain they want STEM, Mudd is a no brainer. A kid who does well there will be able to get into Columbia— or better— for grad school. And will have excellent job placement choices. They will be taught by full professors who know their name, not have to compete with grad students for research opportunities, and have to take some humanities classes to graduate (which I view as a positive— I think a well rounded education is a strong education).

Two things to watch though. First, Mudd is known for being very difficult and stressful, and for resisting grade inflation. Their was some type of large student protest about these issues this year. You can google and get the details.

Plus, Mudd only offers a limited number of STEM majors. If your kid is on the fence about math, engineering, etc., and might change their mind, they should go somewhere else where they have more of an ability to change their mind. The CMC schools give you some flexibility in course scheduling, but you can’t just transfer between the schools or take all of your classes at a different school or get a major not offered by your school, in most cases. And you would probably lose the merit aid if you transferred between schools. .

Good luck.. for the right kid, Mudd could be awesome. Just make sure it is right for your kid.

GA tech gives terrible merit and financial aid. Same with UT- Austin. That is why very little matriculate there.

This is true. DS got in for aerospace engineering but no aid at all. Expensive for OOS.

Both GA Tech and UT Austin are oversubscribed with qualified in-state kids, and their in state tuition is relatively cheap. They take out of state kids for revenue. UT Austin has a cap (something like 10-15%) on out of state students by state law, so they need those that come to be full pay.

[Anonymous]

I don't understand this TJ talk in a Columbia v. Harvey Mudd thread. And what is TJ? in Southern Cali, TJ refers to Tijuana, MX.