“…do you think Cornell’s high placement is due to the fact that they have the most undergrads of any Ivy, or are the programs that good?”
The firms I worked for recruited at campuses where they expected to find a lot of qualified and capable applicants who might want to work for them. Then, from that pool, consisting of multiple schools, they hired the best people they could. They didn’t have specific per school quotas or anything. If the applicants from Cornell weren’t good enough, compared to that pool of all applicants from all schools, they wouldn’t be hired.
So (almost)all of the above is true. Size is relevant in attracting recruiters in the first place. Based on the amounts hired they obviously are finding useful people there. Finding enough of them at one place relieves them from having to go to every place.The takeaway should be that if you are good enough and fit you can wind up there too. Which is I thought what you were concerned about.
Except one thing. It has nothing whatsoever to do with being an “Ivy”. IMO. The tech companies hire lots of people from Stanford, Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, MIT, none of which are Ivies. the Ibanks hire lots of people from places like Duke, Georgetown, MIT, etc, who are not Ivies. These industries are too competitive, they are not social clubs. They try to get the best people who can do the work.
“I’ve heard engineering is pretty competitive/cut throat there.”
A lot of courses are curved*. Just like at most other engineering schools I’m familiar with. It is tougher to beat the curve when your fellow classmates are very smart and highly motivated. Cornell students fit that description. No moreso than the students at about two dozen other institutions, if not more. But still, they fit. It is tough.
That does not make it “cut throat”. You need to study to do well, but it’s not like people are going to steal your lab report or anything. When I was there, in my dorm, freshman engineers formed study groups to study together for their physics exams.
From everything I’ve read, Harvey Mudd is probably a lot tougher. They have really smart students taking courses that, by reputation, are taught at an abnormally high level. More like Cal Tech or MIT. I’d be more worried about that, personally.
- at least in the core courses the first two years. A lot of elective courses taken as upperclassmen were also co-registered as grad school courses, and the grading for those was a lot easier. When I was there.,
. The students I knew went to financial, consulting and manufacturing jobs.