Bit about me:
-Interested in engineering.
-Would like to have a versatile degree and want to either work in finance, tech, or a mixture of both.
I applied ED to Cornell’s College of Engineering - I’m interested in their Operations Research and/or Information Science, Systems & Technology majors (anyone know anything about these?). However, I still have time to withdraw and possibly apply ED1 to Harvey Mudd, where I’m a recruit. At Mudd I’d do either Engineering or the CS/Math joint major. Cost is not a factor.
I like the different engineering options at Cornell, the option to transfer to a different college (Dyson, CALS, etc.) in case I don’t like engineering and the wide alumni network (both in NYC and Silicon Valley – how is Silicon Valley placement from Cornell?). On the other hand, Harvey Mudd is more guaranteed, better for engineering in Silicon Valley (?) and has nice weather, though doesn’t offer as much flexibility / versatility in terms of working in finance and/or NYC. A bird in the hand is worth two in the bush?
Would appreciate any advice, as I only have 1 day left to decide! Thanks.
I’m sorry, but unless Mudd has some rule of their own, then no, you don’t have to apply ED to a school in order to be recruited there. Many recruits throughout the country don’t choose their school until the spring and spend a lot of time visiting different schools. This behavior is incompatible with the core concept of ED.
Also, to be honest, the “boost” given by applying ED is overblown. The acceptance rate to those schools might be higher for ED applicants, but ED applicants are also, on average, of higher quality. It’s not like they are suddenly going to lower their standards just because you applied early. ED programs benefit exactly one party, and that is the school. All it does to students is limit their options.
My understanding from your other thread is that these are already schools you applied to and were accepted and deferred to prior to your gap year. Why now the talk of ED?
@eyemgh I never applied to Cornell last year, and while I did apply RD to Mudd and got waitlisted, the coach talked to admissions and said if I apply ED my chances are very strong.
@boneh3ad My bad, I misspoke. I didn’t mean that Mudd is “forcing” me to apply ED, I meant that for D3 recruiting, generally coaches have the most weight in the ED round. Amherst for example has slots ED, and then no support RD. So, if I’m pretty happy with the thought of going to Mudd, it’d make the most sense to get that boost and apply ED. I agree with you that ED’s advantage is overblown, though.
Re#3, OP should do own research about this, as it applies to his/her situation specifically.
It is my understanding that at Cornell recruited athletes are expected to apply ED. But I may be wrong.
Also I well remember a Cornell CAS information session where the adcom, in responding to a question, said that they rarely defer ED applicants to RD. Because, to paraphrase “if they can’t even make it in ED, they certainly won’t make it in RD”. Meaning, quite clearly, that RD admission was tougher. I’ve read or heard similar comments from other adcoms, elsewhere. I haven’t seen any statistics that would disprove their comments. Though clearly it seems to make little or no difference at some schools and more at others.
One thing is eminently clear…these aren’t your only options. They might be your only ED choices, but you should definitely expand your search and determine how important swimming is to your collegiate experience. I’m assuming finances aren’t an issue or you wouldn’t be looking at a DIII program.
@eyemgh Well, apart from a Canadian university that I’ve already been accepted to, they are my only US options, as my parents won’t pay unless it’s an engineering degree from a respected college/university (I can’t apply to MIT or Caltech since my grades aren’t high enough, and I already applied to lots of other schools in the past that weren’t successful int he end).
If your grades and test scores are good enough for Cornell Engineering and HMC, they’re good enough to at least have a chance at every school, including MIT and Caltech. That said, no GPA and score combination is good enough to guarantee admission to any of those. There are LOTS of good engineering programs, both in the US and in Canada that you would be competitive at IF indeed you are competitive at Cornell and HMC. Where were you rejected from? Where do you have acceptances thus far?
@eyemgh Rejected from 5 top Ivies, Stanford. Waitlisted Chicago and Vanderbilt last year. Got a pre read cleared by Amherst, though ultimately didn’t apply. Am accepted into U of Toronto for Chem.Engineering. Thought that by applying to Cornell and doing ED I could boost my chances, compared to my past Ivy fails.
To give you a better sense, 34 ACT, 800 Math II, 710 Chem, ~3.65 unweighted GPA with junior year downward trend (killer here, graduated from a rigorous prep school like Andover, Exeter, etc. but have a few Bs in my transcript, though rebounded Senior spring). I’m international Canadian, but I’m not asking for financial aid.
The problem is, you could have your stats, but with a 4.0 and still be rejected from all of those schools. There’s no prospective way to be certain you’ll get in regardless of your stats. In fact, odds strongly favor that you won’t, even with top stats. There are simply too many strong candidates applying to too few schools.
Even if you had perfect stats, and you dont, you need a broader list. If you go into this year with HMC, Cornell and Toronto as your only options, the first two are possible, but long shots. Be prepared to go to Toronto.e
On the other hand, there are lots of great Canadian and US schools that would still be matches.
Why Chem E at Toronto, OR or IS at Cornell, and presumably General Engineering at HMC? What do you want to do careerwise?
@eyemgh I’m not sure, to be honest. I want to get a versatile engineering degree that can be used in either finance or tech-- hoping I’ll discover which route I’d like to go in college. Obviously Cornell would be much better for finance (and possibly just as good for tech) compared to Mudd, but my odds are lower…
@boneh3ad In my case, it’s either a top undergrad engineering program (Mudd) or top 10 overall engineering program (Cornell). I already have University of Toronto in my pocket, which is better than close to all state schools & most US privates, so there’s no need to apply to those.
Relying on rankings whose methodologies are specious at best has left you in the situation you are in, three radically different schools, that you have no idea about other than some random web page deemed them prestigious. Is class size important to you? Job placement after graduation? Weather? Location? Non-academic opportunities? Breadth of Engineering options? Facilities? (among the dozens of other questions you could ask). Rankings answer absolutely none of these vitally important questions.I
Mudd, Cornell and Toronto aren’t even in the same ranking list.
@eyemgh Totally understand what you’re saying. I’m in sort of an unusual situation though-- since I’m Canadian, US schools are very expensive and as I already have U of T, my parents have a “top program or bust” mentality. I do prefer smaller class sizes, which is why Mudd (and Cornell, at least relative to U of T) are my 2 favorites. I feel like all of them of good job placement, especially the former two. Obviously I like Mudd’s weather, but I prefer the wider alumni network / “easier” ability to work on either coast with Cornell. To be honest, I’m sort of undecided on how I feel about Mudd’s general engineering degree vs. Cornell/Toronto’s different specializations… I’ve seen different LinkedIn profiles of Mudd engineering grads with jobs that interest me so I don’t think it should be a hindrance. And I’m not knowledgeable enough to comment on facilities… I’m assuming all their facilities are more than advanced enough for me, as I don’t envision myself doing sophisticated research 24/7 in college. Unless you could provide with more top, [private] US engineering options that don’t include Ivies, Stanford, MIT or Caltech & are better than the University of Toronto, then I’m basically stuck with these 3 options.
I’ve never understood this idea that a larger school = a better alumni network. The network is larger because more students have graduated from the school but there are proportionately more students looking to leverage that network.
My point is that your “top program” definition needs some work. The University of Toronto might honestly be the strongest engineering program you’ve listed so far. There are a large number of US public schools that would be described as “top” as well. I don’t understand the fixation on private schools here.