Mathematics LACs

[Anonymous]

CMC for math = joke
Harvey Mudd is the only option worth discussing among the 5Cs

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CMC for math = joke
Harvey Mudd is the only option worth discussing among the 5Cs

Ridiculous nonsense. Pomona and Mudd are great at mathematics and feeders.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:CMC for math = joke
Harvey Mudd is the only option worth discussing among the 5Cs

You sound emotional. What does CMC lack?

[Anonymous]

The Princeton Review (book) includes a sampling, "Great Schools for Mathematics & Statistics Majors," that suggests LACs such as Haverford, Bryn Mawr, Amherst, Williams, Bowdoin, Hamilton, Harvey Mudd, Pomona, Reed, Carleton and St. Olaf.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're all great options. Really can't go wrong with any of them. I'd recommend shifting your thinking from looking for the "best" to looking for the place where your kid is most likely to bring their best.

When you apply to graduate school, they will be demarcating who is from the "best" however. A Williams student will be looked upon much more favorably than a Harvey Mudd student than a Carleton student.

lol no, the only schools getting a boost are the likes of UChicago, MIT, Princeton, Caltech, Cambridge etc. In particular, students without a solid graduate level math background leaving undegrad are going to have a hard time handling the much harder PhD level courses and doing research. Most LACs, with a few exceptions, aren't going to be able to equip their students with such a background.

Problem is that they prove you wrong every single year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:They're all great options. Really can't go wrong with any of them. I'd recommend shifting your thinking from looking for the "best" to looking for the place where your kid is most likely to bring their best.

When you apply to graduate school, they will be demarcating who is from the "best" however. A Williams student will be looked upon much more favorably than a Harvey Mudd student than a Carleton student.

lol no, the only schools getting a boost are the likes of UChicago, MIT, Princeton, Caltech, Cambridge etc. In particular, students without a solid graduate level math background leaving undegrad are going to have a hard time handling the much harder PhD level courses and doing research. Most LACs, with a few exceptions, aren't going to be able to equip their students with such a background.

Undergrad is undergrad for a reason. If you’re taking a bunch of grad courses, what’s the point of the masters portion of your PhD?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:How would you rank the top LACs for mathematics. Here's mine
1) Carleton
2) 3Cs (Claremont Mckenna, Pomona, Harvey Mudd)
3) Williams
4) Wellesley College
5) Reed
6) Haverford
one should consider course availability, outcomes, and quality of instructors.

Ok

[Anonymous]

If you want to do mathematics and you want to be any good, just go to a university, but if you’re obsessed with the idea of an LAC, Harvey mudd is a good choice.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replace Wellesley with Swarthmore and Move it up to first, 6th should be Vassar

+1 . Got a very talented kid doing advanced Math at Swat. It is outstanding.

I concur.
Tenure Track Faculty At Swat: 18
Tenure Track Faculty At 3Cs: 38
Tenure Track Faculty at Williams: 12
Swat has invested heavily into a premier math program.

No grad level courses, excessive prerequisites for real analysis (typically the first distinctive math course taken - the earlier the better). Not impressed.

Williams, Mudd, and Reed are better in my opinion.

Williams Real Analysis Pre-Reqs: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics (or two semesters of Calc 3)
Swarthmore pre-reqs: Linear Algebra, Calc 3 (one semester)
Harvey Mudd: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics
Reed: Calc 3, Introduction to Analysis, Linear Algebra
So...you just lied?

Reed just requires calc 3 and permission of the department, HM just requires discrete math as far as I can tell.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you want to do mathematics and you want to be any good, just go to a university, but if you’re obsessed with the idea of an LAC, Harvey mudd is a good choice.

"any good" is too low of a bar - the university advantage is only for those sufficiently advanced to be taking many graduate courses in undergrad.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replace Wellesley with Swarthmore and Move it up to first, 6th should be Vassar

+1 . Got a very talented kid doing advanced Math at Swat. It is outstanding.

I concur.
Tenure Track Faculty At Swat: 18
Tenure Track Faculty At 3Cs: 38
Tenure Track Faculty at Williams: 12
Swat has invested heavily into a premier math program.

No grad level courses, excessive prerequisites for real analysis (typically the first distinctive math course taken - the earlier the better). Not impressed.

Williams, Mudd, and Reed are better in my opinion.

Williams Real Analysis Pre-Reqs: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics (or two semesters of Calc 3)
Swarthmore pre-reqs: Linear Algebra, Calc 3 (one semester)
Harvey Mudd: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics
Reed: Calc 3, Introduction to Analysis, Linear Algebra
So...you just lied?

Reed just requires calc 3 and permission of the department, HM just requires discrete math as far as I can tell.

These classes have pre reqs…

[Anonymous]

Harvey Mudd would have to be at the very top.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Replace Wellesley with Swarthmore and Move it up to first, 6th should be Vassar

+1 . Got a very talented kid doing advanced Math at Swat. It is outstanding.

I concur.
Tenure Track Faculty At Swat: 18
Tenure Track Faculty At 3Cs: 38
Tenure Track Faculty at Williams: 12
Swat has invested heavily into a premier math program.

No grad level courses, excessive prerequisites for real analysis (typically the first distinctive math course taken - the earlier the better). Not impressed.

Williams, Mudd, and Reed are better in my opinion.

Williams Real Analysis Pre-Reqs: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics (or two semesters of Calc 3)
Swarthmore pre-reqs: Linear Algebra, Calc 3 (one semester)
Harvey Mudd: Linear Algebra, Discrete Mathematics
Reed: Calc 3, Introduction to Analysis, Linear Algebra
So...you just lied?

Reed just requires calc 3 and permission of the department, HM just requires discrete math as far as I can tell.

Just checked the websites. The prerequisite for Real Analysis is Math202 (Vector Calculus-which is not calc 3 btw) and has prerequisite math 201 (Linear Algebra) and Math 112 (Introduction to Analysis). The highest placement a student can have is into Math 201, but advanced students with calculus work are placed into Math 112.


Harvey Mudd’s Mathematics Analysis 1 required Math 55 (Discrete Mathematics) which requires Math 73 (Linear Algebra) which requires Math19(Single and Multivariable Calculus). You are able to place out if you can pass a mudd exam (which typically have high failure rates, so good luck with that).

[Anonymous]

Evergreen reminder of a principle that's perfectly illustrated in this thread: The more confident and categorical an opinion is on DCUM, the less likely it is to arise from meaningful data or analysis.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Be careful in this thinking. I know that we overemphasize the importance of SAT results, but at least for math-section the SAT scores need to be looked at.

Most LAC's have very low SAT scores so the chances that your talented math kid will be sitting next to someone who couldn't break 720 on the math SAT is quite high! He might not enjoy that very much.

Have you looked at a Common Data Set recently? Even the 25th percentile math SAT at many of the LACs that have been discussed here.lands above 720.