<p>I've been accepted to both and time is running short. I'm a prospective mathematics major and wish to hear other people opinion.
I could most likely thrive at either place, but I don't know where to go.
Help.</p>
<p>Well, I'll tell you: If your leaning towards engineering then MiT is the better place.</p>
<p>If you wanna explore more then I'd say Princeton.</p>
<p>Agree with the above poster that MIT is generally a better choice for engineering. For math, though, they are so close that other factors, such as location, type of student body, etc. come into play. What is your emphasis? Congrats on your great admissions!</p>
<p>Have you read about these two young women? <a href="http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2006/02/14/news/14452.shtml%5B/url%5D">http://prince-web1.princeton.edu/archives/2006/02/14/news/14452.shtml</a></p>
<p>Both are excellent schools, but if you are a prospective math major, then there is no better place to be than MIT.</p>
<p>The top 5 in the USNews departmental rankings:</p>
<ol>
<li> Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5.0</li>
<li> Harvard University (MA) 4.9
Princeton University (NJ) 4.9
Stanford University (CA) 4.9
University of CaliforniaBerkeley 4.9</li>
</ol>
<p>a highly subjective claim, "substantiated" only by graduate rankings, which in any event have the schools only a hair apart. perhaps we should let the debate at the undergrad level be settled by this year's putnam results, which should be released any day now. last year, princeton and MIT came in second and fourth as teams, despite MIT having three of the top six scorers.</p>
<p>edit: looks like that last sentence actually summarizes THIS year's results, even though they have not been officially released yet.</p>
<p>Who finished first in the Putnams this year, scottie? </p>
<p>I know Harvard won last year, and has won far more often than any other school, to the extent you feel Putnams are a reliable indicator of math department quality.</p>
<p>"I know Harvard won last year"</p>
<p>harvard did NOT win last year - they did not even make the top five. the OP, in any event, is not even considering the place.</p>
<p>[url=<a href="http://www.unl.edu/amc/a-activities/a7-problems/putnam/-html/putnam2005results.html%5DScores%5B/url">http://www.unl.edu/amc/a-activities/a7-problems/putnam/-html/putnam2005results.html]Scores[/url</a>] haven't been officially released yet?</p>
<p>MIT came in fourth this year because of an unfortuante choice in competitors. (They would have trounced Harvard otherwise, Byerly!) Note that their top three scoreres are all fellows.</p>
<p>Unless you plan to make the most out of Cambridge (max out the curriculum at Harvard and MIT), go where you "fit" best. Hacks? MIT. Rolling lawns? Princeton.</p>
<p>thanks, sonar, i had only checked the official site. btw, point noted about MIT's choice of team members this year. it does seem silly that teams have to be set before the competition begins.</p>
<p>So I'm confused; who one in the most recent Putnam competition? </p>
<p>Scottie says it's the key factor in measuring the quality of college math programs ... more important than the reputation of the faculty, apparently!</p>
<p>funny that your eyesight and reading comprehension should fail you now, after serving you well your first six-plus decades. i did not say that this year's putnam results were any "key factor." my point was rather that, if we're using arbitrary statistical measures to distinguish two fine programs (and graduate ones at that), we may as well use another to break the perceived "tie" at the undergraduate level. princeton, incidentally, "one" that tiebreaker i posited. and actually, MIT probably had the stronger overall performance, despite its "mere" fourth-place finish. not that any of this means anything; it was always just an exercise.</p>
<p>Hmmm... what "tiebreaker" are you talking about, lad?</p>
<p>As I understand your view, the USNews peer survey for faculty quality is a "highly subjective claim" and presumably of limited significance, and that "perhaps we should let the debate at the undergrad level be settled by this year's putnam results."</p>
<p>Well, now: how has the debate been "settled" based on those "putnam results"?</p>
<p>"perhaps we should let the debate at the undergrad level be settled by this year's putnam results." this is getting really silly.</p>
<p>I know some kids who have been rejected by HYP and accepted to MIT who would give their "proverbial right arm" to go one of the other three. Laying aside the previous posts regarding math rankings (they are very similar) one should consider quality of life issues at both schools.
Princeton will prove to be rigorous but opportunity for fun is unsurpassed.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ordoludus.com/9.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ordoludus.com/9.html</a></p>
<p>That stuff is based on 5 yr old data, selected in an odd fashion, although it is even odder that you ignored the academic ranking, in which MIT edged out Princeton.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.ordoludus.com/2.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.ordoludus.com/2.html</a></p>
<p>Can we get an MIT expert on this thread?</p>
<p>I can give u a well-balanced AA advice: If you are a math girl, go to Pton. If youre a math boy, MIT is the one</p>
<p>Byerly...nothing is odder then the amount of time you spend on this board every year in April. How much does Larry stipend you for this:)</p>
<p>I never questioned the academic ranking as I will usually trust your links when numbers come in play. My concern was more big picture as giving up the chance to go to Princeton for any other school other then HY is short sighted. I could better understand making a decision for Amherst or Williams where some kids might enjoy the smaller class size then choosing MIT. I want to be very clear I am not bashing MIT as a friend's kid is matriculating there this fall. My son has a few friends who were admitted their last year who are enjoying life this year in the "orange bubble".</p>
<p>Aislynn, what are your other interests apart from mathematics? What other kinds of things would you like to try in college? Princeton and MIT are both legendary in math -- it's your other interests that are going to break the tie.</p>
<p>Oh, Byerly, you should learn how the Putnam works!</p>
<p>A school chooses 3 people to represent it. MIT was unfortunate in that one its choices didn't make the top 100 (if I remember correctly). Overall, MIT did extremely well and "deserves" the first place. Unfortunately, the institution's "picks" are part of the battle. Too bad this isn't cross country!</p>