Are these schools good for math (pure, or applied)?

[Anonymous]

Unless SLACs are particularly appealing I’d take off Swarthmore and Williams. For applied, not sure why MIT, Stanford and CalTech aren’t on the list - they are top 10. I’d swap Michigan for UCLA and Berkeley if looking for a large public school. Willing to go overseas - Cambridge in the UK. If also interested in Pure math - MIT, Stanford, UCLA, CalTech, Chicago, Berkeley and HYP. Cambridge and CMU as well.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Unless SLACs are particularly appealing I’d take off Swarthmore and Williams. For applied, not sure why MIT, Stanford and CalTech aren’t on the list - they are top 10. I’d swap Michigan for UCLA and Berkeley if looking for a large public school. Willing to go overseas - Cambridge in the UK. If also interested in Pure math - MIT, Stanford, UCLA, CalTech, Chicago, Berkeley and HYP. Cambridge and CMU as well.

I would put Michigan over UCLA for math. Their honors math sequence is better.

[Anonymous]

And Warwick is a good backup for Cambridge

[Anonymous]

Yes

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although I'm not a particular fan of this site, it may offer you some ideas:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-mathematics/

As a suggestion on LACs, if you have an interest in applied math, consider those with an available major in data science.

Applied math isn't data science. Statistics isn't data science either. They're different fields.

It is if you incorporate computer science into the curriculum. My son took Applied Math at ND and is now a data scientist working on defense intelligence right out of college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although I'm not a particular fan of this site, it may offer you some ideas:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-mathematics/

As a suggestion on LACs, if you have an interest in applied math, consider those with an available major in data science.

Applied math isn't data science. Statistics isn't data science either. They're different fields.

It is if you incorporate computer science into the curriculum. My son took Applied Math at ND and is now a data scientist working on defense intelligence right out of college.

If someone gets a job in finance after a degree in history, that doesn't make finance a subfield of history.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU
Johns Hopkins
Rice
Harvey Mudd
UMich - I heard their Math Honors track is good?
Williams
Swarthmore
CMU

My kid is into math - likes both pure and applied. Qualified for USAJMO & USAMO and has a few other activities/achievements in math. Objectively would be among the top 50-100 students for their grade in math.

No, the MOPers would be top 50-100. Each year around 500 qualify for USA(J)MO, and that's not counting the similarly talented students who focused on learning advanced undergrad math rather than math competitions.

There are not many in this small group at places like UMD and UVA - certainly not enough to fill a class so the professor can go at a pace and depth that challenges them. At a place like that, their best option is begging to skip into real analysis/algebra for a challenge.

Given that UMD finished top 10 in Putnam for the last 3 years, I don't think this is correct.

The Putnam team is the top 5 students. That's not nearly enough for a full class.

Top 3 students!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU
Johns Hopkins
Rice
Harvey Mudd
UMich - I heard their Math Honors track is good?
Williams
Swarthmore
CMU

My kid is into math - likes both pure and applied. Qualified for USAJMO & USAMO and has a few other activities/achievements in math. Objectively would be among the top 50-100 students for their grade in math.

No, the MOPers would be top 50-100. Each year around 500 qualify for USA(J)MO, and that's not counting the similarly talented students who focused on learning advanced undergrad math rather than math competitions.

There are not many in this small group at places like UMD and UVA - certainly not enough to fill a class so the professor can go at a pace and depth that challenges them. At a place like that, their best option is begging to skip into real analysis/algebra for a challenge.

500/4 =125 MO/JMO per grade. Qualifying for both is rarer, suggesting higher level. Getting honorable mention or higher would solidify further. (PP didn’t mention). MO students are all doing advanced undergrad math in addition, with few exceptions.

MOP is “top” 15 per grade. 60 students across 4 grades.

Top math students at state schools will find themselves in classes with older students, but that’s not terrible. They can also take more courses per term, or attempt the harder problems in their textbooks, to increase pace and depth. They will also have plenty of research opportunities because their classmates aren’t interested. They will also find an extra $300k in their pocket, which isn’t bad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take NyU off and add some ivies and uchicago

Really? Ever hear of Courant? NYU is very good at math.

That's at the graduate level, though. I don't see any evidence of their undergraduate program being particularly rigorous.

Who said this is just about undergrad? Why do you make the rules?

And how do you determine if an undergrad program is rigorous? One of the smartest mathematicians I have ever met went to a completely random school for undergrad, mainly for financial reasons. They were highly motivated and did the work to get into an elite PhD program and went from there.

So we should just conclude that every college has a good math program since there’s always going to be an incredibly intelligent student who can make it work? What a useless comment.

I'm saying that it is very hard to differentiate between these schools at such a granular level and most people who are capable of doing so are likely doing better things with their lives than posting here. And that most people doing so might be doing it based on one or two data points, so I am pre-emptively shooting all of that down by providing a contrarian data point.

There are a handful of kids in America for whom the nuanced differences between different math departments truly matter. These kids are off the charts. You know them when you meet them (and you probably haven't met them). Skippy or Sanjay or Hong taking Calculus at TJ or Stuy as a freshman or sophomore does not qualify him in this group.

On the contrary, that elite group is the best equipped to make a random school work for them by impressing professors to get research opportunities, skipping prerequisites, taking grad courses first year even if that's against department policy, etc.

Skippy, Sanjay, and Hong need a school with a strong official math track that will challenge them without also requiring them to fight their way through red tape at the same time. Not to mention the social benefits of having a cohort of students at the same level as you whom you can bounce ideas off of and, yes, even learn from. And they stand a good chance of running out of math at a LAC, considering they could be taking analysis junior year.

Junior year? Analysis is a first or second year course for students who take MVC in high school. It is the standard honors freshman math class for the top tier of incoming math talent/preparation. Over 50 students per year take analysis as their first math course at a top school. The only prerequisite for analysis is MVC or Calculus and familiarity with proofs. (Or, the rare student who is extremely comfortable with abstract proof math but hasn’t bothered to learn calculus)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless SLACs are particularly appealing I’d take off Swarthmore and Williams. For applied, not sure why MIT, Stanford and CalTech aren’t on the list - they are top 10. I’d swap Michigan for UCLA and Berkeley if looking for a large public school. Willing to go overseas - Cambridge in the UK. If also interested in Pure math - MIT, Stanford, UCLA, CalTech, Chicago, Berkeley and HYP. Cambridge and CMU as well.

I would put Michigan over UCLA for math. Their honors math sequence is better.

Frankly, one has Terrance Tao

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Although I'm not a particular fan of this site, it may offer you some ideas:

https://www.collegetransitions.com/blog/best-colleges-for-mathematics/

As a suggestion on LACs, if you have an interest in applied math, consider those with an available major in data science.

Applied math isn't data science. Statistics isn't data science either. They're different fields.

It is if you incorporate computer science into the curriculum. My son took Applied Math at ND and is now a data scientist working on defense intelligence right out of college.

Stats as a subject relies on coding, but academic stats is nothing like industry data science. Probably different for applied math.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NYU
Johns Hopkins
Rice
Harvey Mudd
UMich - I heard their Math Honors track is good?
Williams
Swarthmore
CMU

These will all be good. But if a truly gifted student - Rice, Harvey Mudd, and Williams. A math undergrad will get a lot more opportunities there than at Michigan, CMU, and JHU.

Completely wrong! Caltech if truly gifted and ready for research if you need a small college. Out of that group, really only Harvey Mudd has the course availability and research depth/clout to accelerate you, but you’ll be spending A LOT of time not doing math to finish their core.

Top undergrads in math at research universities get red carpet service and work with amazing professors early on. For special attention, I’d look at UCSB CCS.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Unless SLACs are particularly appealing I’d take off Swarthmore and Williams. For applied, not sure why MIT, Stanford and CalTech aren’t on the list - they are top 10. I’d swap Michigan for UCLA and Berkeley if looking for a large public school. Willing to go overseas - Cambridge in the UK. If also interested in Pure math - MIT, Stanford, UCLA, CalTech, Chicago, Berkeley and HYP. Cambridge and CMU as well.

I would put Michigan over UCLA for math. Their honors math sequence is better.

to
Frankly, one has Terrance Tao

As great as that sounds on paper, it really doesn't affect the undergraduate experience as his only teaching is a graduate complex analysis course

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Take NyU off and add some ivies and uchicago

Really? Ever hear of Courant? NYU is very good at math.

That's at the graduate level, though. I don't see any evidence of their undergraduate program being particularly rigorous.

Who said this is just about undergrad? Why do you make the rules?

And how do you determine if an undergrad program is rigorous? One of the smartest mathematicians I have ever met went to a completely random school for undergrad, mainly for financial reasons. They were highly motivated and did the work to get into an elite PhD program and went from there.

So we should just conclude that every college has a good math program since there’s always going to be an incredibly intelligent student who can make it work? What a useless comment.

I'm saying that it is very hard to differentiate between these schools at such a granular level and most people who are capable of doing so are likely doing better things with their lives than posting here. And that most people doing so might be doing it based on one or two data points, so I am pre-emptively shooting all of that down by providing a contrarian data point.

There are a handful of kids in America for whom the nuanced differences between different math departments truly matter. These kids are off the charts. You know them when you meet them (and you probably haven't met them). Skippy or Sanjay or Hong taking Calculus at TJ or Stuy as a freshman or sophomore does not qualify him in this group.

On the contrary, that elite group is the best equipped to make a random school work for them by impressing professors to get research opportunities, skipping prerequisites, taking grad courses first year even if that's against department policy, etc.

Skippy, Sanjay, and Hong need a school with a strong official math track that will challenge them without also requiring them to fight their way through red tape at the same time. Not to mention the social benefits of having a cohort of students at the same level as you whom you can bounce ideas off of and, yes, even learn from. And they stand a good chance of running out of math at a LAC, considering they could be taking analysis junior year.

Junior year? Analysis is a first or second year course for students who take MVC in high school. It is the standard honors freshman math class for the top tier of incoming math talent/preparation. Over 50 students per year take analysis as their first math course at a top school. The only prerequisite for analysis is MVC or Calculus and familiarity with proofs. (Or, the rare student who is extremely comfortable with abstract proof math but hasn’t bothered to learn calculus)

read the next comment. The only prerequisite for analysis is calculus.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone explain why nearly all the Putnam top 100 scorers are from MIT? Why aren’t the top students more evenly distributed among Princeton, Harvard, Chicago, Caltech, etc?