Schools similar to MIT (but less impossible)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

If a student would like a chance of winning, say, an Apker, I'd argue that any of Williams, Hamilton, or Reed would represent at least the equal of MIT.

because they’re competing against other undergraduate only institutions. They’d get curb stomped by any actual research institution. What, is Pomona like MIT now for having two recent winners? What a ridiculous, idiotic take

[Anonymous]

Williams math alum and wouldn’t describe my experience as anything like MIT. Such an odd comparison.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

A number of LACs offer a theory-heavy education with excellent research opportunities. That research may not be as likely to be published in Nature or Science, but it might be more likely the undergraduate leads the work, which grad schools also care about.

MIT is pretty unique, but OP is looking for good but “less impossible” options, many of which are indeed universities, but many of which are LACs.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Williams math alum and wouldn’t describe my experience as anything like MIT. Such an odd comparison.

+1, I wouldn’t describe any liberal arts college as comparable to MIT. They’re radically different experiences.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

A number of LACs offer a theory-heavy education with excellent research opportunities. That research may not be as likely to be published in Nature or Science, but it might be more likely the undergraduate leads the work, which grad schools also care about.

MIT is pretty unique, but OP is looking for good but “less impossible” options, many of which are indeed universities, but many of which are LACs.

There's a lot of distance between MIT and William or MIT and Reed. Like sure there's a strenuous connection one can make, but answers like WPI, Gtech, even Harvey Mudd are quality answers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

A number of LACs offer a theory-heavy education with excellent research opportunities. That research may not be as likely to be published in Nature or Science, but it might be more likely the undergraduate leads the work, which grad schools also care about.

MIT is pretty unique, but OP is looking for good but “less impossible” options, many of which are indeed universities, but many of which are LACs.

There's a lot of distance between MIT and William or MIT and Reed. Like sure there's a strenuous connection one can make, but answers like WPI, Gtech, even Harvey Mudd are quality answers.

Not so much distance in undergrad education for the programs they offer. OP said she was less likely to be interested in engineering.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Looking for a school for a student who particularly excels at STEM but also wants a strong academic experience all around. Loves learning, loves a challenge, and possibly wants to go to grad school for academic research so undergrad research opportunities are important. She would love to be around other students who are enthusiastic and passionate about science. So far she has all A's, 1520 PSAT, will be maxed out on math/science courses at her school. Very involved in music oriented extracurriculars and would want to continue these in college for fun. If she could pick the school of her dreams, it would be MIT for sure, but she not have national/international level recognition or research experience. I am hoping to steer her towards schools with a similar "spirit" but which are less selective and more achievable. Any suggestions for schools to focus our search? We will likely be full pay. I think the school community and academic strength would be top priority for her rather than the setting of the school.

Rice is what you're looking for. But I'm not sure it's more achievable than MIT these days.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

If a student would like a chance of winning, say, an Apker, I'd argue that any of Williams, Hamilton, or Reed would represent at least the equal of MIT.

because they’re competing against other undergraduate only institutions. They’d get curb stomped by any actual research institution. What, is Pomona like MIT now for having two recent winners? What a ridiculous, idiotic take

DP. No, they would not. But the real measure is STEM PhD matriculation, where there are many LACs that do very well, in a few cases better than all research universities except Caltech and MIT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Harvey Mudd is not less impossible. No false hopes, please.

13% to 4%. Not easy and still a reach, but less impossible.

Gender matters with Harvey Mudd. Admit rate is 21% for women and 9% for men.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

If a student would like a chance of winning, say, an Apker, I'd argue that any of Williams, Hamilton, or Reed would represent at least the equal of MIT.

because they’re competing against other undergraduate only institutions. They’d get curb stomped by any actual research institution. What, is Pomona like MIT now for having two recent winners? What a ridiculous, idiotic take

DP. No, they would not. But the real measure is STEM PhD matriculation, where there are many LACs that do very well, in a few cases better than all research universities except Caltech and MIT.

They are. They do not have quality faculty in STEM, hence working for a liberal arts college. This is very obvious, and I'm not sure why this needs explaining. Do you work in a STEM field?

[Anonymous]

I’d check out the honors programs at LAC with solid math/science departments and state universities. Honors programs can be like a school within a school with smaller classes, separate housing, and special opportunities. While the school’s name may not be as prestigious as MIT, she may have opportunities as one of the high-flyers in an honors program that she wouldn’t as just another student at MIT, while still having a peer group of other smart, studious kids.

Ultimately, I think most schools can provide a motivated student with more opportunities than they can take advantage of, and that what a student does at school is more important than which school they attend. The key element is to find the school that excites your child and makes her want to dive in. The “best” school for one person isn’t necessarily the “best” school for the next.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

A number of LACs offer a theory-heavy education with excellent research opportunities. That research may not be as likely to be published in Nature or Science, but it might be more likely the undergraduate leads the work, which grad schools also care about.

MIT is pretty unique, but OP is looking for good but “less impossible” options, many of which are indeed universities, but many of which are LACs.

There's a lot of distance between MIT and William or MIT and Reed. Like sure there's a strenuous connection one can make, but answers like WPI, Gtech, even Harvey Mudd are quality answers.

Not so much distance in undergrad education for the programs they offer. OP said she was less likely to be interested in engineering.

There's a substantial difference studying physics at Williams and studying physics at Berkeley or MIT. I don't understand how someone can have such an uninformed opinion.
Look at course availability alone: https://physics.williams.edu/programs/courses/
MIT:https://catalog.mit.edu/subjects/8/

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’d check out the honors programs at LAC with solid math/science departments and state universities. Honors programs can be like a school within a school with smaller classes, separate housing, and special opportunities. While the school’s name may not be as prestigious as MIT, she may have opportunities as one of the high-flyers in an honors program that she wouldn’t as just another student at MIT, while still having a peer group of other smart, studious kids.

Ultimately, I think most schools can provide a motivated student with more opportunities than they can take advantage of, and that what a student does at school is more important than which school they attend. The key element is to find the school that excites your child and makes her want to dive in. The “best” school for one person isn’t necessarily the “best” school for the next.

Most LACs do not have honors programs. Only 1 top lac has an honors program-Swarthmore.

[Anonymous]

If you’re the MIT type, a liberal arts college is not where you wanna spend 4 years.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:For a few ideas that aren't like MIT, but which would be excellent for physics and mathematics, look into Williams, Hamilton and Reed.

None of these are anything like MIT. The whole point of MIT is a theory-heavy research-heavy environment for science for social good. Look at research universities with a good campus culture.

If a student would like a chance of winning, say, an Apker, I'd argue that any of Williams, Hamilton, or Reed would represent at least the equal of MIT.

because they’re competing against other undergraduate only institutions. They’d get curb stomped by any actual research institution. What, is Pomona like MIT now for having two recent winners? What a ridiculous, idiotic take

DP. No, they would not. But the real measure is STEM PhD matriculation, where there are many LACs that do very well, in a few cases better than all research universities except Caltech and MIT.

They are. They do not have quality faculty in STEM, hence working for a liberal arts college. This is very obvious, and I'm not sure why this needs explaining. Do you work in a STEM field?

The LAC profs work at an LAC because they want to teach and mentor undergraduates, which is a valuable focus at that stage of development. There’s a reason why many university faculty send their own kids to LACs; similarly, there’s a reason they do so well at PhD production.

I have worked at a top STEM research university. So have multiple other family members.