<p>Yes, but notice that the ranking you provided is based on the percentage of the students who went to graduate school, not on the actual number of students. Berkeley is significantly larger school than Mudd, so it could very well be that Berkeley sends more number of students to graduate school than Mudd. </p>
<p>The ranking you provided does not indicate that "Berkeley is more for jobs than Mudd"; observe that small liberal art schools are way overrepresented than larger schools: Carleton, Swarthmore, Haverford are ranked higher than Cornell, Berkeley, Stanford. Would you say that it's better to go to Carleton than Stanford if your goal is graduate school?</p>
<p>I agree that Mudd is an excellent school on par with Berkeley in many respects and that there are many reasons to go to Mudd over Cal, but wanting to go to graduate school should not be one of those reasons in my opinion.</p>
<p>Percentage is all that counts to a HS student. She doesn't care if 50 of 1000 succeed if her chances of being in the 50 are small. Better to be 25 of 100 (Mudd's PhD rate). But hardly any HS students have a PhD as their goal.</p>
<p>You're right; the ranking shows that Mudd is more for grad school, research and academia. It says nothing about Cal. There are plenty of big schools in those PhD lists, so size isn't always a detriment.</p>
<p>"Would you say that it's better to go to Carleton than Stanford if your goal is graduate school?"</p>
<p>Yes, good example. Stanford is a world-class grad school (2/3 are grad students). Carleton profs are hired specifically for their undergrad teaching skills, there are no TAs, and classes are tiny in comparison. The hand-holding really does pay off; every student has numerous personal full-professor mentors who have the time to develop each student's strengths.</p>
<p>Surely you've heard the jokes about LAC grads trying to get jobs and driving cabs. The LACs have their strengths, and the big schools have theirs. We just try to steer HS students according to their goals.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Percentage is all that counts to a HS student. She doesn't care if 50 of 1000 succeed if her chances of being in the 50 are small. Better to be 25 of 100 (Mudd's PhD rate). But hardly any HS students have a PhD as their goal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't agree with your last statement "But hardly any HS students have a PhD as their goal" and I don't see its relevance. We are debating whether it's better for a HS student who wants to get a PhD to go to Cal or Mudd.</p>
<p>With the assumption that the HS student is aiming for a doctorate, the percentage of (# of students who is going for PhD) / (# students total) is not what the student should care about. Instead, the actual ratio of interest is (# of students who is going for PhD) / (# students WHO WANTS PhD) since presumably, the HS student wants to go to the college that best increases his/her chance of getting into a top PhD program. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, good example. Stanford is a world-class grad school (2/3 are grad students). Carleton profs are hired specifically for their undergrad teaching skills, there are no TAs, and classes are tiny in comparison. The hand-holding really does pay off; every student has numerous personal full-professor mentors who have the time to develop each student's strengths.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is a good point. However, if the student goes to Berkeley, he/she has exposure to state of the art research and can get letters of recommendation from world-renowned researchers. Those two factors help a lot for graduate school admissions also.</p>
<p>Look, if people are going to make completely blanket statements like "Go to school X if you want grad school, go to Y if you want a job," I mean...how could there POSSIBLY be truth to that when X and Y are both great schools. Math grad students come from many places, I know...and while we're at it, we can take them as an example, given how superselective math Ph.D. programs are. </p>
<p>It is only true that a higher PERCENTAGE of Mudd undergraduates will want to go to grad school. Not that Mudd is better. Mudd attracts a higher percentage [in its self-selected group] of very academic math and science students. Berkeley, on the other hand, has a range. Same with Stanford, Harvard, MIT, Princeton. All of these large schools easily are exceptional places for students wishing graduate school.</p>
<p>If the small, concentrated LAC atmosphere helps Mudd students + their curricula is on average more rigorous, well guess what - large schools have arguably unparalleled resources to give classes; they have especially elite faculty [heck, Mudd students can ASPIRE to the graduate schools of the likes of the above, because there are such faculty to work with!]. Those who do make use of such schools' resources when considering grad school have the entirety of the resources of an already top program in the field...that isn't to be taken lightly.</p>
<p>My good friend has proved to me that letters of recommendation from top faculty at schools like Berkeley carries <em>incredible</em> power. It can make the difference between where two academically brilliant students get in. This guy started off in something like precalculus in college. When he transferred here as a junior, he made such good uses of the faculty + resources that <em>Berkeley admitted him to their program very recently</em> - not many undergraduates from Berkeley can even semi-dream of getting back into the grad school! Now imagine someone who had Berkeley at his disposal for 4 years, starting somewhere other than precalculus AND made as good use of the resources as this friend did. Brilliant prospects. </p>
<p>Similar remarks hold for EECS. I know quite a few theoretical CS types around who'd be stunners for almost anyone. </p>
<p>I'm sure there are great students at both schools is the bottom line, and we certainly have the resources to get students to grad school IF THEY WANT IT. Perhaps more Mudd students <em>want</em> grad school.</p>
<p>The point is, we have the rigorous coursework to give [for those who want to take it], elite faculty - some of whom are really for the students, and will go out of their way to make it happen for a talented one [the top senior from last year in mathematics was informally <em>guaranteed</em> admission to Berkeley very early, before he even was considering other schools....his choices? UChicago, Princeton, and MIT grad school.]</p>
<p>Oh and BTW that top math senior switched majors midway through school, and had mostly CS courses for 2 years. AND STILL made it to Princeton, generally the hardest math Ph.D. program to make it into. </p>
<p>I think people need to preface anything they say about Mudd students wanting grad school + experiencing a rigorous curriculum by the simple terms "on average," acknowledging that there are great academic students all over the place.</p>
<p>Last semester (as a freshman) my classes were 500, 800, 300, and 30 people.
Haha, true, I did take some huge lecture classes, but it's definitely not uncommon for intro classes to be 300+</p>
<p>I have a DD who is a senior at Berkeley, science major and a DD who is a junior at a small private.</p>
<p>By the end of her first term private school DD knew more profs well than senior DD at Berkeley. However, DD at Cal knows enough profs to get good letters of rec for grad school.</p>
<p>Berkeley DD came from a small HS and did have to work diligently to make Berkeley small for her- sports, Greek, campus job, clubs, etc. She tried many things to find her niche. </p>
<p>You should visit both and go with your gut.</p>
<p>Certainly Berkeley has a more established reputation nationwide and worldwide, but HMC probably has a great reputation in SoCal (hard for CC people to know how the average person sees schools since the average person is so uninformed, but you really care what other engineers thing, not the average person)</p>
<p>Do you want to have your hand held and a small school or not. DD had an opportunity to go to Vassar, small school, hand holding, etc, but she decided to stretch herself in the big pond. It has been work, it has not been easy. For example, any attempt at pre-med advising at Cal is cookie cutter and no help for any one who does not fit the mold, but we had CC to guide us. If you can be proactive and not need GCs to help you, you can have a great experience.</p>
<p>Cal DD has had science classes with hundred of kids per section and the curve covering 1200 kids from multiple sections. Private DD is seeing 10-25 kids per class</p>
<p>"You should visit both and go with your gut."</p>
<p>Yeah I can't agree more. Though, the gut shouldn't be based solely on the visit -- also generally on the objective considerations of "big public school with elite faculty vs. small private school with brutal, great academic curriculum," along with all accompanying nuances. </p>
<p>Thanks for your words, somemom, was good to read.</p>
<p>I also had this type of decision. Ended up picking Berkeley over Reed (didn't apply to HMC). While it was difficult I spoke with many faculty in the fields I was interested in they said that Berkeley was a fairly clear choice over a LAC college. Ironically one of my professors went to Reed so it's definitely true that people out of there are successful.</p>
<p>If you want all your classes to be under 30 people don't go to berkeley. It just won't happen. It is true though that you can go to office hours whenever you want so you'll have access to professors who are doing more ground breaking research in their field (though this doesn't mean they are always better teachers).</p>
<p>It is certainly true that you'll get more personal attention automatically at smaller colleges. If this is a major issue for you it'd likely be best to just go to the smaller college and realize that you'll have to make a larger effort doing research in order to get into the top grad programs.</p>
<p>I will say one thing about the higher % thing though. It is true that a number of people from LAC colleges get phds. It is also true however that if you truly want to go to grad school in a given field it isn't terribly hard to get into A grad school, it's hard to get into an excellent grad school. We don't know how that same group of people would have done if they had gone to a larger school. They might have had more access to research and been able to get into an even better grad school.</p>
<p>I guess I'd have to say that if you truly want to go to grad school it would be a clear choice in favor of berkeley if you are self motivated and able to make opportunities for yourself. The ability to do real research at berkeley is simply not matched by smaller LAC colleges. Research is singularly the most important thing you can do as an undergrad to get into a top grad school in the sciences. Also if you truly want to figure out how large research universities work (and you'll have to eventually) you might as well go to one for undergrad. It would be nearly impossible for you to feel limited by the course offerings at berkeley and that's less true at smaller colleges (though the consortium does help HMC). I guess I'd say that overall Berkeley gives you many more opportunities. The only question is if you think you're up for the challenge and ready to make the most of them.</p>
<p>You will have huge classes at Berkeley. Some will have 400 students. Whether or not that is a problem is up to your personal preference. Can you afford a private college education? Do you want to go to Berkeley because it is a "better value"? If these are the reasons, they're actually pretty good ones - technically, statistically speaking, a Berkeley education is an amazing value and a great education at a great price. However, we all know that "technically" and "statistically" don't always cut it.</p>
<p>If you've been in a private school your whole life, you may be a bit intimidated by Berkeley. While they may have a seemingly good student/faculty ratio, you have to remember that Berkeley is a huge research institution where many many MANY faculty are involved almost exclusively in research. This skews the ratio ridiculously. As far as housing goes, Cal has a huge housing shortage, and only about 35% of students even live on campus. I know freshman who were denied housing.</p>
<p>Anyway, yeah. That's Berkeley. It's a great school, but it sounds like you should look into it more and try to figure out what you really want before you choose. In reality, both Berkeley and Harvey Mudd are excellent schools. (About Harvey Mudd...my sister goes to Pitzer, so I hear stories...apparently Mudders do study a lot, but they also throw some of the best parties on the 5-Cs campus. So they aren't just bookworms!)</p>
<p>I think both schools have their pros and cons which have already been outlined. I agree with most of what mathboy98 said. I have sat through classes/labs at both schools extensively (Mudd alum, gf BS and now PhD at Berkeley) and I would say that the curriculum is similarly difficult (in EECS at Berkeley anyways). </p>
<p>In GENERAL, you will get more attention at Mudd. That doesn't mean you won't get attention at Berkeley; you just have to be more proactive about looking for it.</p>
<p>"In GENERAL, you will get more attention at Mudd. That doesn't mean you won't get attention at Berkeley; you just have to be more proactive about looking for it."</p>
<p>Right, although I will confess that as a Berkeley Ph.D. student, you kind of may be treated better [I guess for good reason] than undergraduates will. I guess the deal is that in intro courses, you should hope for a good GSI if you want good review + a nice resource. They probably remember the material better than professors do anyway. The nice thing about Mudd is that the professors are apparently selected [rocket's words] based on their ability to teach, so I imagine they're pretty good at what they do! </p>
<p>Note -- for upper division courses, increasingly it is becoming the norm not to have GSI's, and professors end up doing stuff themselves. It's not so bad, unless you're afraid of talking to professors [who're there primarily to do research]. I went to zero professor office hours my freshman year, but started going this year. Generally, unless they have a reputation for being mean, these guys are helpful, and their office hours aren't that crowded.</p>
<p>"the professors are apparently selected [rocket's words] based on their ability to teach"</p>
<p>This seems to be the primary distinction between an LAC and a big U. Some poke fun at the LAC hand-holding, but the benefit is real. The big U has its benefits as well. The vastly differing environments alone are often enough to steer a prospie one way or the other, based on personal preference.</p>
<p>"^ An even better metaphor with one car having manual transmission!"</p>
<p>I'll have to agree =] though to take it farther, perhaps a car with a well known brand name and extremely reliable service provider, with manual transmission!</p>
<p>... while my post may come off as touting my own school, I'd like those considering HMC to really consider what they are getting themselves into before enrolling.</p>
<p>If anything, my words are damaging to the numbers. I think a lot of things are messed up here and I've been pretty vocal about it on the campus.</p>
<p>Sure, that's a noble goal -- I myself try to tell people that they're much better off, if unsure, not going to HMC, and instead attending a larger school [given I once made a choice not to attend HMC...though my reasons were slightly different], where at least there ARE easy majors and even the hardest majors don't force you to do quite as much, regardless of what is available.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you don't want to be just another number, I'd probably go with Harvey Mudd. Engineering here can be pretty relentless at times. (Take a gander at the topic "Is It Hard to Graduate From Berkeley")
And as aforementioned, your required classes (esp. as a freshman) will be much bigger than 30 people. (You do have smaller discussion sections, but depending on your GSI, the section may or may not be helpful at all.)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How sure are you that the problems one would encounter at Berkeley aren't the same problems one would encounter at many elite privates?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Would you consider EECS at Berkeley to be one of the hardest engineering majors? If so, a good friend of mine is a senior in EECS and we've compared class material. She admits that HMC engineering is insane compared to her EECS major. (I also have talked with friends in PreMed, Business, Computer Science...)</p>
<p>I've also sat in on a few classes at Berkeley (spent almost a week on campus) and I have to say that academics are much more grueling at HMC. I also have to say that it appears that you don't know what you're talking about.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I keep hearing that Mudd is harder than Berkeley for engineering... Well, who would really know?
I just hope that these people don't mean Mudd is better than Berkeley for engineering because that would be totally insane!</p>