<p>Yeah, but is that b/c of the curriculum or the students (or the fact that they even apply)? UGA does have a lot of Rhodes Scholars. And that should be the case if the student body is 15-20K strong and the school has every dept. under the sun. Non-engineering top public schools should be doing well. Also I don’t know how Rhodes is determined. Perhaps it’s easier for a stellar student to stand out at UGA as opposed to here or Tech, and that could get them recognition/attention that indeed sets them up for success. However, Emory hasn’t had any lately (as in, in like 10 years), but that doesn’t mean the quality of the programs have decreased. If anything, the student body is perhaps far more pre-professional driven than in say 2000 and many are also less inclined to even try for Rhodes. I know some Goldwater and Bobby Jones Scholars though. I also know several people who have matriculated to prestigious med. schools like Duke, Yale, and Harvard (and one recently got into WashU). Given that so many people here have extremely high grades and good ECs, that doesn’t really reflect upon the curriculum or the schools as a whole. It does reflect that those students did something really awesome to make themselves stand out from those with seemingly similar track records. </p>
<p>Basically going to “X” school w/X amount of “Y” does not increase the chances that you will be able to get it yourself. Just as going here will not increase your chances of going to Harvard grad/prof. school or becoming w/e scholar, going to UGA (even in an honors program/fellowship) will not increase chances of getting Rhodes. Going to Tech will not increase chances of some student winning some prize for an invention (though it will better facilitate the attempt). I just really hate it when we say/imply things like such and such school “produces” X amount of Y as if the school essentially made or broke them as if the effort is completely one-sided(and subsequently implying that only “X” school affords this oppurtunity, when in fact, it often isn’t completely true). Many of these people would be extremely successful no matter where they went anyway, Rhodes Scholar or not.</p>
<p>Again, despite this criticism, I would guess that UGA is doing something to set/introduce very successful students to such opportunities. They have to be doing something right, but is it more so curriculum or advising because we honestly know that Tech has very good and rigorous curriculum in science and math, admittedly moreso than UGA. The question is: outside of humanities/social sciences where the liberal arts approach is strong, does UGA offer any advantages (especially if said student does not get into honors/fellowship) or does Tech rule?</p>
<p>Economics is very small at Tech and isn’t even ranked. Most of the Economics in the school are done through ISyE, particularly the EDA research and the Quantitative and Computational Finance program (which is among the top in the country).</p>
<p>That said, UGA isn’t exactly a top Econ school. It’s ranked #65 in the country, tied with Georgia State and does not break the top 15 in any specialization.</p>
<p>Yeah, but it’s pretty hard to rank high in things like law, medicine, public health, or any social science humanities based fields (B/C every school has it. Not every school has engineering programs, and those that have an engineering school definitely don’t even try to offer or pump up the array of programs that predominantly engineering school does). I think top 25-35 is respectable for such fields. As awesome as Tech is, it is a complete engineering school so we expect it to make about top 10-15 in every category (mostly engineering) offered. It is more impressive that places like Berkeley and Stanford rank so high (yes they have lots of money, but their focus is not engineering. Harvard has lots of money too and does have some engineering, but doesn’t compare to its cross-town counterpart. Stanford and Berkeley did well. However, they have more incentives to be doing well, silicone valley). </p>
<p>As for econ., I know we aren’t ranked (I think they are trying to get better, but…) so if someone is doing that and wants to stay in Georgia, UGA is probably a good bet despite the rank you cited. It still ranks better than both of us, is not expensive, and is probably an overall better/more academic (can’t believe I’m saying that) than GSU.</p>
<p>In terms of students quality, GaTech definitely has stronger math students. In terms of rigor, it’s difficult to assess, depending on how hard u want to make it. UGA math can be really easy if u want to take regular calc sequence, but it can very hard if u take the honors calc with theory sequence that emphasizes proofs and mroe concrete math foundation. The course is modeled after Spivak textbook, which is used by many other top schools (Stanford, Vandy, UChicago etc) for advanced classes.
[who</a> wants to be a mathematician? - Page 3](<a href=“Should I Become a Mathematician? | Page 3”>Should I Become a Mathematician? | Page 3) post 36</p>
<p>I don’t know much about the quality of the research of both departments, but GaTech seems more into applied math, while UGA is more theoretical. For a math major, I think u can’t go wrong with either one: it all depends on ur ability to succeed.</p>