<p>I'm interested in finding an extremely supportive environment for my S who is interested in CS mainly. He said that he "likes" SD Mines. That's great. Similar schools are NM Tech, CO Mines, Missouri Tech. Other schools that seem supportive are WPI and UMBC for nerdy CS types. Here's my concern: He's very smart, very nerdy in a complementary way (in that if he could do well in a nurturing environment, he's a natural for research; he's very intellectual); and loves nerdy humor. I'm also considering Clarkson U., Rose-Hulman, Grinnell and several other LACs with interesting CS depts., like Bard (more deeply intellectual than straight tech). Here's a twist, he socially can be quirky, has lots of friends, but he is definitely that sci-fi guy who just wants to talk about that stuff. He's very smart, but is super slow in doing any work (LD tested that his processing speed is about 1/3 of most people's) so no Harvey Mudd, No MIT for him. RH has the same level of academics, but I'm attracted because of the cozy feel of RH.</p>
<p>Question for the forum is: What am I overlooking? Are NM TEch, SDMines, CO Mines supportive or are they sink or swim? I am weeding out any and all weeder schools. Thank you!</p>
<p>CS, engineering, and most of the sciences have an inherent weeder effect in frosh/soph courses. These courses are important prerequisites for other courses, so a minimum level of rigor is required, which “weeds out” students who cannot handle the rigor of those courses. In general, the less selective the school is, the lower the retention rate in engineering (or the entire school if it is an engineering-focused school).</p>
<p>Does your son do programming in school or on his own? How fast or slow is he with that in particular (as opposed to general school work)? In CS, being slow at programming and problem solving may lead to struggles in school and a short career (if any career) in the computer industry.</p>
<p>On the plus side, he would definitely fit in at Missouri S&T. On the down side, it’s 1.5 hours to anyplace resembling a normal college campus or even a medium size city. And there’s a definite shortage of women. But both of those can be turned into pluses, as there’s little to distract you from your homework.</p>
<p>Thank you for your ideas. My impression was that RH, for example, with its 80% retention rate, doesn’t have weeder classes. WPI seems also more hands on and nurturing of its students. Berkeley is notorious for weeder classes, however, for a counter example, and giving students numbers (and the calling them by their numbers rather than their names)–and so the weeder rate of many of its sciences is closer to 45-50%. I’m looking for schools that don’t explicitly weed (like Berkeley) but offer support (maybe like Rose-Hulman and WPI) so that a greater number of students are successful. </p>
<p>I hear your concern about being slow and therefore not being employable. I find that when he’s interested in something, he focuses better (as we all do) and that brings up his speed. </p>
<p>What are the prerequisites for CS?</p>
<p>I’m hoping to find a way for him to be exposed to the prereqs before college so that he isn’t surprised and can do better. I’ve checked local universities for summer courses for high school students, but haven’t had much luck.</p>
<p>Rose Hulman is much more selective than SD Mines* or NM Mines, so the higher academic preparation of the students allows it to have an 82% six year graduation rate (versus 46% at SD Mines). As far as Berkeley is concerned, it has an 80% graduation in engineering rate for frosh engineering majors, and over 90% six year graduation rate overall, so it is not like “weeding” is any more severe there relative to its selectivity.</p>
<p>Colleges tend to have varying organization of introductory CS courses for CS majors. However, they will generally be fairly rigorous at any worthwhile school for CS, so an inherent “weeding” effect will occur. CS majors will also have to take math (calculus, linear algebra, and discrete math). If CS is in an engineering division, or the student wants to go into patent law, physics is typically needed.</p>
<p>I think all engineering type schools you talked about are self-weeding. (I know your son is looking at CS, but it’s pretty much the same thing.) It’s just the nature of the subject matter, I don’t think the schools do it intentionally. A tremendous number of students like the idea of being an engineer/CS, but when they hit the coursework, they quickly discover it’s not for them. They either hate it or find themselves terribly overmatched by the courseload and/or the course content. It’s just a difficult subject. Pre-med is pretty much the same thing, only no one majors in pre-med, so we don’t see the stats as readily as engineering/CS.</p>
<p>Even nearly 60 years ago, this was the case. My dad still tells the story of his first day of orientation at OSU. They told everyone to look to their left and to their right. They then told them that at the end of four years, only one of you would still be there, in engineering.</p>
<p>Thank you, Mrmom62 and ucbalumnus–My 45% to 50% Berkeley weeder rate came from a professor at Berkeley, who was kind enough to speak with me on the phone. He said that this was the normal rate for Berkeley, even with the high level of students coming into the programs, because of the various factors that I mentioned. He told me this just a few weeks ago. However, he also told me that number was mitigated by the fact that Berkeley had instituted a mentoring program. He mentioned that finding such a program within a DEPARTMENT was a key factor in finding a non-weeder program. At Berkeley he said that this accounted for a significant drop in students with high potential from being weeded out–from 50% (about) to 80-85% (about). We understood that a 15% accounted for students who simply found themselves in the wrong major. He spoke specifically with me about the premed program, the weeder and nonweeder schools, as my daughter thinks at this point she may be premed. My son is a very good student but it comes from grinding his way through things. He’s still young, just a sophomore in high school and carefully teaching himself better study methods and time management. He liked SD because he’s been there. Based on his grades, and the several policies for open doors on the corridors and other individualization of R-H, I think he would do well there. R-H’s policy of non-weeding accounts for their high grad rates while taking students who have lower SATs than places like Harvey Mudd. WPI also has hands-on work and has worked actively to overcome the high rates of weeding that many engineering (and premed) programs take to be the norm and unavoidable. It’s precisely those schools who feel that weeding is the norm and unavoidable that I want to avoid. I’m looking for more schools beyond this short list. I know that SD Mines has a low retention rate, but from my research it’s Partly because it attracts not simply low scoring students, but ones going part time. They have to work while trying to keep up with their programs. Also since it’s a specialty school, if someone wants to change majors, they must also change schools. NM Tech suffers this same problem. My son would be a very smart, highly intellectual student who may benefit from the one-on-one attention he MAY receive at such a small school. NM Tech for example offers about 80% of its undergrads (maybe even freshmen, but I’m taxing my memory here) paid research opportunities. Many people who graduate from that school continue on to receive a Ph.D. Because I’ve been working and saving for 17 years, we fortunately can afford most colleges at this point, if nothing bad happens to me. So cost is not an issue. Because my husband and I both came from Ivies, we also understand the limitations of Ivy education, and don’t find it an overly compelling draw either. As I said, the only important thing is whether I can find decent programs that are ideally small, and that have a non-weeder philosophy and supportive programs in place.</p>
<p>Pre-med is a weeder everywhere. Unless the school has enormous grade inflation, relatively few students will get the 3.5+ college GPA that (along with a good MCAT score) makes applying to medical school worthwhile. And the schools with the highest grade inflation tend to have the most competitive students (e.g. Brown, Stanford, Harvard).</p>
<p>I would say to be strong in and and enjoy math. I think it is a good idea to take calculus in high school before selecting a college based on a CS major. If you prove to be hopeless, then you aren’t locked into that college. Not that you can’t keep working on your math if you really enjoy programming, and even repeat your calculus course in college (to really nail it down.) But you will want to like it as you will be taking Linear Alg, Discrete Math and likely some probability/statistics.</p>
<p>You are looking at specific colleges really early! I think he is likely to find at least some of that nerdy type in any CS dept, really.</p>
<p>I suppose if you are selecting a college purely for the major, you might want to test the waters in an intro CS course or AP CS. There are away summer programs if you can swing that. Also look at robotics and if his school has any related clubs where kids work on projects. He might want to do online courses over summer if you can’t find some program. Check out khanacademy.com new computer online learning that takes a fresh approach, it’s free.</p>
<p>My daughter didn’t take anything until her intro sequence at Brown, and it is famous for drawing people in to the major (CS170/180). It is an integrated approach where you take a year long sequence and there is much focus on analysis while you pick up several languages. work is collaborative. There is also a track for those testing the waters (and non majors take that too), and an advanced one semester intro.</p>
<p>I hesitate to mention Brown (gotta go with what I know) because of the admit rate, but if you have stats for Grinnell (my daughter applied there too), you might have stats for Brown. But it is a non weeder (not to say it is easy by any means) program with a lot of support, close relations with professors and if you want to do research you will be able to do it, no question. My daughter’s graduating class was 45, so the department is intimate.</p>
<p>I know kids who have attended both NM Tech and CO Mines.</p>
<p>Mines will not be a supportive, nurturing environment. Academically it’s pretty much sink-or-swim and quite fast-paced. </p>
<p>Students at Mines do have have a high nerd factor, but they are also outdoorsy and somewhat jock-y. (Kayaking in the creek that runs thru campus, riding the bike paths everywhere, climbing Golden mountain every August to refurbish the giant M is freshman orientation activity every year. Plus there are all the nearby CO ski resorts.) </p>
<p>Academically NM Tech is going to more supportive than Mines, but Tech is in a small town that’s fairly isolated. (ABQ is about 75-90 minutes north up Interstate 25.) There’s less to do in Socorro than there is in the Denver suburbs where Mines is located. Tech tends to be pretty closed society–students and town don’t mix much. Tech students do alot of gaming. And play golf–since the school has its own golf course. (Socorro has 2 more public golf courses. It’s Nancy Lopez’s hometown.) </p>
<p>Tech is smaller than some of the schools on your list. There are only 1400 students. Tech’s low graduation rate is partly due to the number of academically underprepared students that enroll. (NM offers free in-state college tuition for all high school grads who have 2.5 GPA.) Also because kids from the ABQ-Santa Fe-Los Alamos corridor find Socorro too “small-town” for them and transfer to UNM.</p>
<p>BTW, if your son has any interest in radio-astronomy, Tech shares its campus and facilities with the Very Large Array/National Radio Astronomy Observatory.</p>
<p>With all respect, I need to point out that the idea of weeder classes <em>is</em> falling ever so slowly by the wayside. The idea that classes that cull 50% through competitive attrition must produce the “best” students. The new idea is that there is a lot of good talent that gets weeded out with the mixed-metaphor bath water. And the people who stay in through the weeding don’t necessarily have the people or cooperative skills that are prized in the current economy.</p>
<p>I was right that UC Berkeley has one program to help, as described above. Here is an article about how UT Austin is trying to eliminate the huge loss of talent. Then there’s the Harvey Mudd and Olin model. Some have dismissed their high rates of graduation just on the fact that they attract high scoring students. That is somewhat of a fair point, and Rose Hulman is also attempting to lower attrition. The article describes how school are waking up to the fact that a low SAT score does not necessarily indicated a person not cut out to do chemistry or calculus at a competitive level. In fact, they may have more grit than the wealthy kid who has cut their teeth on good study skills. Given the right social support and study skill mentorship, the low SAT students (who were good students in their high schools) perform at the same level as the kids with the high SAT scores. Why I’m interested in this is that my lovely child inherently doesn’t feel that sense of entitlement that seems to power some of these kids through difficult programs, that plus good study skills. Maybe he will build this uber-confidence, but it’s not clear that this will happen, and so I’m afraid that he will be part of the 20% with high SATs and high grades and highish income and still not make it. I want a supportive environment for him. It’s not too much to ask for, I think. Here is the article. If CC doesn’t allow me to post the link, you may look it up in the New York Times, from May 15 2014, WHO GETS TO GRADUATE. <a href=“Who Gets to Graduate? - The New York Times”>Who Gets to Graduate? - The New York Times;
<p>Graduation rates generally do tend to strongly correlate to admissions selectivity. Of course, high school grades and SAT/ACT scores are imperfect predictors of college grades and graduation, so there will always be individual exceptions. But the general trend that if you start by admitting better students, you will have better graduation rates.</p>
<p>South Dakota School of Mines & Technology offers all kinds of support to students. The culture at the campus is one that very much wants and expects the students to succeed. But rigor is not sacrificed. The workload is heavy and students need to be diligent. It’s friendly competition among students. There’s little in the way of a cutthroat atmosphere.</p>
<p>Since OP’s son is reported to process information slower, does it mean that he also has difficulty in the areas of executive functioning? </p>
<p>If OP’s son’s school offers AP classes in calculus BC & computer science, it might be worth taking them to test the level of rigor that he can expect to see in college level courses. It will also either affirm (or not) his interest in pursuing computer science in college.</p>
<ol>
<li> OP’s son may be interested in pursuing informatics at smaller/medium size schools that also offer computer science.</li>
</ol>
<p>“If you study informatics, you’ll explore computer systems with a focus on how people and organizations use these tools. You’ll examine systems – both natural and artificial – that store, process, and communicate information. You’ll learn how to analyze and design information systems, and study human-computer interaction, telecommunications structure, and information architecture and management”
<a href=“College Majors – BigFuture | College Board”>College Majors – BigFuture | College Board;