My kid at Mudd is currently doing Physics research on a project her prof is doing with Los Alamos labs. Remember that at a school like UCLA, a lot of the research is done and/or led by grad students. Undergrads are scrapping for time with the professors and responsibility in the labs with the grad students. Also, I think the playing field is very level in CS research – CS research isn’t mostly about having huge facilities. Every prof at Mudd researches, and they have a vested interest in getting their students up to speed to support their research. Juniors and seniors in particular can have a lot of lab responsibility if they are interested in that.
Mudd does nothing but STEM education, research, and placement. No insult to UCLA, but Mudd students have higher test scores coming in; your kid will meet a lot of brilliant people there. The profs are focused on teaching and research with undergrads.
The general ed requirements aren’t that onerous. Your kid will have a lot of humanities courses with a STEM bent to pick from in the Mudd humanities department if that is his preference. The whole Claremont consortium is available for cross registration if he has other interests, too.
These are both very good schools for CS. But they are distinct. You’ve probably gotten the impression from so many of the responses, Mudd is a special, serious, intense place – for the right type of person. But if your son was accepted there – and even that he applied there in the first place – he likely knows something about it, is ready for it, and can handle it.
My suggestion: Don’t worry so much about the gen ed/humanities requirements. Have your son think about what makes Mudd different/special – as many of the responses have pointed out – and then he’ll know whether it’s for him. If your son is a serious student, and he’s looking for the most challenging STEM environment, he’ll likely say it is.
Harvey Muddy students essentially function at graduate student level by junior year. Their research opportunities are great starting freshman year and when we say 'research’we don’t mean menial tasks, but meaningful work. At UCLA, there are too many students for professors to devote any time to any of them before, perhaps, senior year, and graduate students will always have priority for research.
UCLA will be more competitive between each other (lots of people, fewer resources) but the classes will be easier. For instance, Harvey Mudd is one of only two colleges in the country that requirescalculus from all applicants. If you didn’t take it, don’t bother applying. Admitted students typically have way more than that. They start in calculus ‘1’ -keep in mind that "1"isnt what is called thus elsewhere- and their class is as theory -heavy as what you’d see for second year math majors, and they cover much, much more ground/go into more depth than in calculus 1&2 at UC 's. There’s no equivalent to their math sequence at UCLA because it’s high-intensity and basically designed for kids who are gifted at math, something a public university can’t assume or offer.
Harvey mudd students handle very complex tasks very early on.
However if your child shies away from other forms of complexity -that present in art, humanities, social science - HM may not be the right choice. Be aware though that even at UCLA about 1/4 of his work will involve subjects other than stem, because otherwise he wouldn’t really be ‘educated’ and his education wouldN’t prepare him for the complexities of task that can be assigned to him (especially with regards to understanding of humans, diverse perspective, backgrounds and mechanisms to take into account, communication, etc.)
What did your son decide? My D applied to both as well, but fell in love with Mudd. We went twice over the fall and it only made her want to go there more. Unfortunately, if she doesn’t get a scholarship we won’t be able to afford it. Harvey Mudd is her #1 choice, even though she grew up wanting to go to Harvard - which she also applied. HMC just seems like her perfect fit.