<p>hey, so im in a bit of a pickle, and i want to know what other people think:</p>
<p>gonna be a senior in high school next year, and just planning out my order of preference for schools. I want to major in engineering (computer) and business. I always knew that harvey mudd was amazing at engineering, but i feel as if the name is not very well known. the same applies for CMC in the business sense - that it is very good yet not well known.</p>
<p>At USC, you get a very good school, for both business and engineering. plus, USC has a combined major to fit both (titled Computer Science/Business Administration) which can be completed in 4 years. Harvey Mudd and CMC offer a similar degree (the 3+2 program) which can be completed in 5 years.</p>
<p>So (putting cost of tuition/living aside, that doesn't play a factor for my college education/experience), which would other people consider to be a better choice? from what i hear, HMC and CMC are AMAAAAAAAAAZING at engineering and business, but is that true (or is it at least better than USC)? and how is the quality of life at such a small LAC? Also, whenever i think that HMC and CMC are not as well known as USC, i think, "the people who matter know that HMC and CMC are better than USC". is that true? don't you NEED a well reputable school for business (especially a school like USC considering i live in SO CAL and plan on living/doing business here my whole life)? which school would u guys choose and why? (take quality of the education received, as well as social life/quality of life at each school. For example, i like a school who KNOWS what their students want/how to take care of them and pamper them).</p>
<p>let me put it this way:
on average, only one student per year at hmc is able to double major in engineering and something else. typically, this major is somewhat related (physics, comp sci, bio). this is not because mudders are lazy (we are actually some of the hardest workers at any school in the usa) but because mudd engineering is very rigorous.</p>
<p>in my personal opinion, i do not find it feasible to come into mudd thinking that you are going to do engineering and business. in order to ONLY get a degree in engineering you have to average a minimum of 16 credits for four years. many of these classes take much more time than the number of credit hours received. for instance, in the experimental engineering class i just took, the hours we had to put in to finish was equivalent to a 5 or 6 credit course. we only received 3 credits. this type of high expectation and work ethic only compounds the difficulties of mudd.</p>
<p>i suggest you visit mudd and usc and talk to students at both. usc does have a great engineering college... in my opinion their mechanical and aerospace departments are most notable.</p>
<p>as for the "well known" factor, PM me and i'll give you a link to my resume. you'll find employers have no trouble finding me at mudd. (i currently am working 1 full-time research job at mudd, a part-time associate engineer job at an aerospace engineering firm, and a consulting job for jpl/caltech in a hypervelocity impactor lab. the latter two came to me with offers and i'm trying to fit them in) i find that in the engineering fields i've encountered (mostly prototype and cutting-edge aerospace) mudd is known, along with its reputation of producing very competent engineers.</p>
<p>EDIT AND NOTE: and i've only been at mudd two years.</p>
<p>i figured that dual majoring in engineering + anything else would be difficult, especially at a school like mudd. but is that still applicable with the 3 + 2 program? </p>
<p>i mean, thats wut the program is designed for, students who want to dual major in engineering and business. I don't know a whole lot about the program, but i have heard of it from HMC students and also it was noted in a HMC brochure that i recieved. This is what the HMC brochure states:</p>
<p>"3-2 PROGRAMS IN ECONOMICS AND ENGINEERING. Two ways to get a degree in engineering from us-and an outstanding liberal arts degree from our friends in The Claremont Colleges. The Scripps College 3-2 Engineering Degree and the Claremont McKenna College (CMC) 3-2 Degree in Economics and Engineering work like this: you'd attend Scripps or CMC for three years, taking mathematics, science, and general eduaction courses; at the end of your junior year you'd transfer to us and complete our requirements for general education and the engineering degree. Five years, two degrees."</p>
<p>well, id haveta go to CMC cuz im a guy (LOL). Does anyone no more about the 3-2 program? I find it hard to beleive that you can receive a full degree in engineering in only 2 years.</p>
<p>the dual program would take 5 years at least.</p>
<p>the reason why it would only take an extra 2 years is because before you would get to mudd you would have completed virtually all of your non-engineering classes like hum/soc math, physics, comp sci, and chemistry. you'll then take e4 (which i think you can take while at cmc), e8, e59, e80, e82, e83, e84, e85, e101, e102, e121, e122, e123, 124, e111, e112, e113, e106, , and a few tech electives.</p>
<p>four of the above classes are seminar so that's not a big deal (pass/fail by watching presentation every week for no credit). that leaves 18 classes spread over 4 semesters. that is averaging 4.5 classes a semester or 13.5 credits minimum...which is not too bad.</p>
<p>I go to CMC, and I know people who are management engineering majors (which I believe is what the 3-2 program is called) and plan on going to Mudd when they complete their requirements at CMC. </p>
<p>It's very difficult. I believe that they have to overload on classes (taking 5 in a semester instead of the usual 4) for almost their entire time at CMC. And remember that as hard as engineering is at Mudd, econ at CMC is no breeze either. That being said, it is an established program, which a decent number of people manage to complete each year-- so it's not impossible.</p>
<p>And I do think that CMC and Mudd are well known and respected by "people who matter." Sure if you asked random people on the street, more of them would recognize USC than the Claremont colleges, but how much of that has to do with USC having a just slightly better football program than Claremont-Mudd? For the majority of jobs, I would bet that what matters most is your work experience, your interview, and your level of education (but not necessarily where you went to school). For more competitive jobs and for grad school, the quality of your undergrad school will come into play. And those people will know about CMC and Mudd.</p>
<p>Pomona has the same 3-2 track with Caltech</p>
<p>could you provide more info regarding the pomona/cal tech program? links or anything? thanks!</p>
<p><a href="http://www.pomona.edu/academics/SpecialStudies/Coop.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://www.pomona.edu/academics/SpecialStudies/Coop.shtml</a></p>
<p>Pomona appears to have 3-2 programs in engineering with both CalTech and WUSTL. There may be more, but this is the brief overview turned up by searching "engineering" on the Pomona website.</p>