Harvey Mudd vs. Caltech?

<p>I think a good answer to this question was given by Mudder's_Mudder, who is the mother of a recent HMC graduate (class of '07). A student inquired with regards to HMC and MIT/Caltech, and she gave an eloquent response that I think anyone considering the schools should read. So I am going to post it:</p>

<p>"Qwertz82, the answer to that will depend entirely on the individual student. The question is a little like asking why someone chose a kumquat instead of an apple or an orange. The nature and structure of the institutions are not the same, nor are the missions. Caltech and MIT are research unis. HMC is a LAC. Therein lies the essential difference.</p>

<p>My S is a rising senior at HMC. He knows a number of Mudders who faced the choices you outlined in your question. The three schools have surface differences that matter to some people: climate, social scene, geographic location (East vs. West, urban vs. suburban), gender balance, ECs like performing arts or music or sports. He knows kids who made the choice based on one or more of all those factors. Some kids got exceptional merit aid. I can think of one young man, accepted at all three, who picked Mudd because he thought it would be the easiest (to the everlasting detriment of his GPA, alas). Some chose HMC for the LAC environment, knowing they would apply to Caltech and/or MIT again for grad school. I can think of a couple who just didn't like something about the feel of the other two schools.</p>

<p>Some people know, the minute they step on a campus the first time, they've found a good fit; it's a feeling that's difficult to quantify. Kind of like Justice Stewart's famous dictum about pornography: you know it when you see it.</p>

<p>Now these superficial and sometimes indefinable qualities are all fine and good and worthy of consideration, but we are talking about education here, aren't we? Your post begs the question: Is there a discernible difference in the quality of education at the three institutions? My informed answer is... that depends. For certain programs and certain majors, I could build a case that any one of the three is the best (e.g., all else being equal, econ/management majors and future linguists should go to MIT) or, conversely, all three are comparatively equal. My S is a science major, and I can state without hesitation that he has received at HMC as fine an undergraduate education in his discipline as he would have gotten anywhere, in line with his goals. (He is planning to apply to one of the other two for grad school.)</p>

<p>If you're a prospective college student trying to figure out where to apply, try to start by doing an honest self-assessment. Are you the big-city type who wants to get lost in a crowd? If so, then Caltech and HMC are probably not for you. Is widespread name recognition of utmost importance to you? If so, then HMC is probably not for you. Are you intimidated at the prospect of long, gray winters in the Northeast? Then MIT is probably not for you. Recognize also that every school has its pros and cons, its own quirks and personality that will never be posted in public on these boards (although you will undoubtedly find plenty of shills who will praise their own institutions to the high heavens for their own reasons). Check out lots of places. Visit as many as you can, and try falling in love with at least a few. Then you can start sweating the big stuff, like whether or not your parents can afford to pay for the courtship."</p>

<p>"I just said that between the two of them -- Caltech is the better university, and I believe most, if not all professors, college deans, admission deans, school presidents and even an ordinary guy on the street would tell you I am right."</p>

<p>I would disagree with that. For example, a math professor at Cornell, Dr. James R------, said Harvey Mudd students were among the best prepared students he had ever mentored as grad students. He vehemently wanted his son to go to HMC (which is how I know he said this, having met his son and spoken with him about it).</p>

<p>HMC's president, Maria Klawe, used to be the Dean of Engineering and Applied Science at Princeton. She reports that at Princeton, as well as at many other large research universities, the faculty believe Harvey Mudd students are possibly the best prepared students with the greatest love of learning as they enter graduate school. She says this was one of the reasons she decided to leave Princeton and become HMC's president. Of course, she is biased, but you should take her words and where she comes from into consideration.</p>

<p>Also, consider a post by a certain dr_reynolds, a professor of engineering at the University of Arkansas at Fort Smith, in this thread: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=124028%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=124028&lt;/a>. He says, "In my opinion, Harvey Mudd and Rose Hulman are superior in undergraduate education when compared to any school in this country."</p>

<p>I could go on and on, and I'm sure you could find professors and deans who disagree, but my point is that it is not so black and white, and that there are professionals and experts who do not automatically assume that Caltech > HMC.</p>