<p>I've heard on this website that Harvard has more of a focus on the sciences than Yale. Is this true? And if so, in what way?</p>
<p>In 2007, Yale purchased the Bayer HealthCare complex and turned it into their West campus which expanded their science and medical facilities: <a href=“http://westcampus.yale.edu/about/history”>http://westcampus.yale.edu/about/history</a>. So, some might say Yale is on par in the sciences with Harvard right now. Yale Admissions has also been pretty upfront about recruiting students interested in the sciences: <a href=“Science recruitment goal attained - Yale Daily News”>http://yaledailynews.com/blog/2013/01/18/science-recruitment-goal-attained/</a></p>
<p>There’s some truth to the rumor, but I think it starts out the other way around. Harvard is more focused on sciences than Yale, because Yale has some real advantages in the humanities, and tends to be especially attractive to people who are humanities-focused. There are probably more students at Yale than at Harvard whose lives revolve around literature, theater, art, or music. There is lots of music, art, and theater at Harvard, but even more at Yale, and Yale has leading graduate programs in those fields that Harvard lacks. So by default that makes Harvard more science-focused than Yale. </p>
<p>To be honest, too, there are some important STEM areas where Harvard is traditionally a little stronger academically than Yale, including mathematics and physics. So there is some pull of those students towards Harvard.</p>
<p>Keep in mind that Yale and Harvard are far more similar to one another than different, really two peas in a pod. The differences between them are marginal differences, not major ones. Harvard is a great college for humanities students, as Yale is for science students. And at both colleges the social sciences attract far more majors than either humanities or hard sciences.</p>
<p>*After writing the foregoing, I checked the NCES statistics on graduates. As of the date of those numbers, which is probably the class of 2013, Yale and Harvard had almost exactly the same number of students graduating with some kind of humanities major (in which I am including history). Due to their different class sizes, however, at Yale that represented about 1/3 of the class, while at Harvard it was a little less than 1/4. Hard science and math majors at Yale were just under 1/4 of the class, and at Harvard they were almost 1/3, with a large difference in absolute numbers – almost twice as many at Harvard. And of course that means that both schools had about 45% social science majors. </p>
<p>Harvard actually had a few more literature majors than Yale – the same number of English majors, but more majors in foreign languages and literature. The percentage of class at Yale is higher, but barely. Harvard had three times the number of math majors, and twice the number of physics majors. Both colleges offer a variety of biology majors, and at each more students have some kind of biology major as their primary major than any other subject, with economics coming in a very close second. At Harvard, however, that represents about 14% of the class, while at Yale it’s 11.5%. Yale had 150% as many art/music/theater majors (about 6% of the class at Yale, and 2.5% at Harvard).</p>
<p>JHS, do you know which Ivy League schools put the most emphasis on the sciences? Also, on a semi-related note, would you say Penn puts the most focus on pre-professional type studies? </p>
<p>@Notebook90 - I am a bit baffled at the point of your question. You are hoping to be an undergraduate at one of these schools, correct? At the undergraduate level, you will find no discernible difference in any of these schools in the scope and quality of their science educations. I mean even using the term science is overly broad. One could, in theory, have some slight advantage in chemistry over the other while it could be reversed for physics, but frankly for 99.99% of undergraduates these things will be irrelevant. Now grad school is a completely different thing. But that is not what we are talking about here.</p>
<p>First, of course, you will be fortunate to get into either school. This could all be quite moot. But let’s say the best of all things happens and you get into 3 or 4 Ivy schools as well as some other fine institutions that focus heavily on sciences (are you really ruling out MIT, Cal Tech, etc.?). You would then be well served to change your mindset from your current narrow focus on a major field and instead decide on a school based on which one seems to have the best overall atmosphere for you, personally. Location, overall feel, best financial package if that is a factor, etc. But to think there is any real difference in getting an undergraduate degree in chemistry, for example, from either of these schools (or dozens of others for that matter) is pretty much nonsense.</p>
<p>fallenchemist, you have a good point. Really, all the Ivy Leagues are terrific schools. </p>
<p>Wouldn’t some Ivys make undergrad research more available than others? I don’t know which ones, but since there is wide variation in undergrad research at other colleges, one would also expect that to be true at the Ivys.</p>
<p>My bet is with Harvard. Checking the list of top 1% research that was posted by CC, Harvard was on the list. I don’t remember seeing Yale.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t worry about undergraduate research opportunities at any of the Ivies. I don’t have hard numbers to back it up, but I have never heard of anyone who wanted to get involved in research and was willing to put in the time who has been unsuccessful at finding a slot. And not just the Ivies – really at any major research university, although maybe at places like Berkeley or Michigan there is some competition (but also an incredible amount of activity and opportunity). If you are lucky enough to go to a “top” college (and that includes LACs, too), you will have no trouble getting involved in research that interests you. That’s not something that’s very useful for distinguishing one college from another.</p>