Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA surpasses MIT in most cases and is tentatively less hard to get into, though in many cases is actually harder to get into for certain majors and when taking into account admissions for particular schools.

WTF??

Was that what you said when you opened the letter from Charlottesville to find that you were on the receiving end of a summary rejection from UVA?

The UVA boosting on this thread is weird. UVA is a solid state school, nothing more. But the point of this thread is to help OP find a school that's like MIT, the top STEM school in the world, but that is easier to gain acceptance.

I would argue that to a lot of people, UVA is more prestigious than MIT, Harvard, Stanford, etc. Just because you can't recognize the fact that UVA is superior to most every other school in this country doesn't mean that others don't. Take your vicious summary reject recipient jealousy elsewhere, thanks.

Trolling not funny anymore. We get that you're mocking UVA. Try harder.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA surpasses MIT in most cases and is tentatively less hard to get into, though in many cases is actually harder to get into for certain majors and when taking into account admissions for particular schools.

WTF??

Was that what you said when you opened the letter from Charlottesville to find that you were on the receiving end of a summary rejection from UVA?

The UVA boosting on this thread is weird. UVA is a solid state school, nothing more. But the point of this thread is to help OP find a school that's like MIT, the top STEM school in the world, but that is easier to gain acceptance.

I would argue that to a lot of people, UVA is more prestigious than MIT, Harvard, Stanford, etc. Just because you can't recognize the fact that UVA is superior to most every other school in this country doesn't mean that others don't. Take your vicious summary reject recipient jealousy elsewhere, thanks.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary
U Chicago
Harvey Mudd
Carleton
Cal Tech
Case Western
CMU
Georgia Tech
Embry Riddle
RPI

Caltech is equally as impossible as MIT. William & Mary and Carleton are good for science, but don't have engineering.

The ones that have that engineering/technical bent in things they do that come to mind are:

Georgia Tech
Purdue
RPI
RIT
CMU
Harvey Mudd
Colorado School of Mines
NJIT
Rose Hulman
Stevens
Virginia Tech

You do realize Georgia Tech is close to impossible to get into out of state don't you? Just checking in. Georgia Tech and CMU should not be with the others you have above. Just sayin.

Yep.
"Across the Regular Decision and Early Action applicant groups, almost 67,000 students applied for admission into Tech’s Fall 2025 first-year class, with more than 8,500 receiving admission offers. Overall, the Fall 2025 admit rate for Georgia residents is 30%; it is 9% for nonresidents." The acceptance rate for OOS students for Engineering is even lower around 6 percent.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary
U Chicago
Harvey Mudd
Carleton
Cal Tech
Case Western
CMU
Georgia Tech
Embry Riddle
RPI

Caltech is equally as impossible as MIT. William & Mary and Carleton are good for science, but don't have engineering.

The ones that have that engineering/technical bent in things they do that come to mind are:

Georgia Tech
Purdue
RPI
RIT
CMU
Harvey Mudd
Colorado School of Mines
NJIT
Rose Hulman
Stevens
Virginia Tech

You do realize Georgia Tech is close to impossible to get into out of state don't you? Just checking in. Georgia Tech and CMU should not be with the others you have above. Just sayin.

Anonymous wrote:Rose hulman

As a woman, I wouldn’t go though. It’s mostly neurodivergent men

Cal Poly SLO (like all the UC's) is getting much harder to get into out of state, but worth a shot. Rochester is great, but if money is an issue, they give very little, if any, merit.

Cal Poly SLO -- incredible undergraduate STEM programs that are some of the highest ranked nationally (they don't compare them to MIT in rankings because they are undergrad focused). Huge school spirit and great career opportunities.

CMU SCS (School of Computer Sciense) is just as impossible to get into as MIT, Stanford and Cal Tech.

Applied Math and Sciences outside of the CS and Engineering track is less impossible:

IS was easier a few years ago but has become extremely competitive as most see it as an alternative to CS’ 4-6% admission rate.

Anonymous wrote:William and Mary
U Chicago
Harvey Mudd
Carleton
Cal Tech
Case Western
CMU
Georgia Tech
Embry Riddle
RPI

Caltech is equally as impossible as MIT. William & Mary and Carleton are good for science, but don't have engineering.

The ones that have that engineering/technical bent in things they do that come to mind are:

Georgia Tech
Purdue
RPI
RIT
CMU
Harvey Mudd
Colorado School of Mines
NJIT
Rose Hulman
Stevens
Virginia Tech

Similar Spirit: Rochester, Rensselaer, Carnegie Mellon, Harvey Mudd, Rice, JHU, Wellesley College and cross register at MIT for classes

Realistically, though, straight As and 1520 PSAT aren't MIT admittance material unless paired with winning national science and math competitions or first gen or exceptional in some other way than academics. Look at your SICOR/Navaiance and see where kids with a similar profile are getting in.

Are the straight As in AP classes exclusively with 5s to back up the As? This is a real question, as everyone at our MCPS seems to have straight As, which is why no one can get into college anymore, so much grade inflation.

I would look at LAC with a strong science department, maybe Tufts, Swarthmore, Davidson etc., or schools like BC, BU, and see if those are feasible based on your school data. Then ED to one of those if you are full pay.

Carnegie Mellon? WPI? RIT?

As another approach, perhaps consider colleges without core or distribution requirements, at which your daughter could take virtually all of her courses in fields such as the natural sciences, mathematics and computer science, such as Amherst, Hamilton, Smith, Brown and, to a lesser extent, Grinnell.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UVA surpasses MIT in most cases and is tentatively less hard to get into, though in many cases is actually harder to get into for certain majors and when taking into account admissions for particular schools.

WTF??

Was that what you said when you opened the letter from Charlottesville to find that you were on the receiving end of a summary rejection from UVA?

The UVA boosting on this thread is weird. UVA is a solid state school, nothing more. But the point of this thread is to help OP find a school that's like MIT, the top STEM school in the world, but that is easier to gain acceptance.

Anonymous wrote:

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.

+ 1 million.

I would encourage a kid who liked science and math but also was just a generally curious person to get a liberal arts education. Cross-disciplinary thinking is not just good for the brain, it's also good for developing skills used in research and STEM job fields. I'd argue it's even better than an umpteenth upper level class whose content you can learn later.

UNC, but be warned that OOS is....challenging to say the least.