It’s possible that his credentials could make Waterloo a pretty sure bet; I’m just not informed enough about Canadian admissions to say. I was hoping someone in the know would chime in and clarify what he could expect, and if there are particular hoops he could jump through to nail down that option (like the Canadian math contests).
I think Mudd is looking for “fit” - they don’t track “demonstrated interest” but they do take the “why Mudd” essay seriously. As your friend’s experience shows, these things are just hard to predict. (And yes, ED helps - he could consider ED2 there if EA at MIT doesn’t pan out.)
Interesting Many majors don’t require prestige. And some under the radar names appear even for math. But what are the career outcomes for those under the radar grads ?
Groundhog’s post 21 has a link to a report ranking the number of phd’s produced by institutions, by area of study. CalTech and Mudd are top ranked in many stem areas, some by a big margin.
That’s a metric often brought up that is mistaken as a proxy for quality. It is really more about the philosophy of the institution.
The majority of students do not go to graduate school for Engineering and CS because they are practical fields. A graduate degree is not necessary to make a good living. Those that do choose that route because they want to delve deeper. That drive is nurtured more by some institutions than others.
New Mexico Tech is always the first public on that list, but very few would say it’s the best public for engineering, CS and physical/earth sciences.
I’m in no way saying any of them, including NMT, are bad schools.
Yes, it’s a shame that Wesleyan isn’t better recognized for its strength in undergrad math and science (a by-product, IMO, of its splashier, artsier prominence.) But, it’s the only LAC in the country that regularly teaches its own doctoral students in math and cs. They are always looking for serious, potential science majors.
I agree - the practical v academic nature of engineering as a field is a constant. It is what it is. So then the interesting thing about the list are the outliers. CalTech and Mudd are clear outliers in how many students go on to get PhDs (go academic v industry). That is pretty consistent with their reputations. Other well-known schools you would expect to be very low on the list because they skew more industry. I bet Olin would go that way, but the report too old to really capture Olin data. It isn’t better or worse, it is different.
Those rankings tell the story to me that a phD reflects the personal choice of a student-no matter where they go to undergrad. A couple of schools draw a higher number of future academics. The schools don’t turn people into academics. And quantity of academics is not a measure of quality.
I agree with you that pursuit of a PhD is primarily a personal choice. For many of them, they wanted the challenge before even they set foot on the college campus. For example, practically all the winners in all the major national/international HS Olympiads pursue PhDs (and interestingly, almost none of them major in engineering because it’s perceived to offer less of a challenge). However, what a college does may help encourage its students to long for a deeper understanding of their chosen subjects. Caltech, for example, generally puts greater emphasis on the understanding of theoretical underpinnings and the “whys”, which, I believe, motivates more of its students to pursue PhDs.
Your son sounds like he is an excellent student and will have a great shot at getting into MIT.
Because he is so advanced in math, he will end up taking advanced math classes with primarily graduate students and I bet the will end up hanging out with them as well.
Personally, I think any large state Flagship school that has a PhD program in Math, AI, complex systems, CS would be a good school for him. I would have your son select a safety by reading through the course catalogue of some of the flagship state schools and seeing what advanced courses he would like to take and read through the research profiles of the faculty in departments he is interested in and decide where he feels the faculty/grad students are doing the most interesting research , then pick by location/size of University. A talented student will get opportunities to work in labs and do research almost anywhere.
The balance of PhDs in academia and industry is about equal these days. In order to really know more, you’d have to know where they ultimately work.
I agree with @1NJParent that for some the die is cast before they set foot in the door. For others, it changes. That change is often based on the culture of the school.
Regardless, we are talking about a substantial minority of students. Even at Caltech, 90% do not go into doctoral programs.
I believe there AMC 12 will be in November this year. MAA can be quite slow with scoring, but there is a chance that students will have scores before RD.
Realistically, I don’t think that an AMC-12 score will move the needle much at this time unless it is top 1% or so.
The student has attended some of the most competitive admit math summer camps, and his reaches will know what they are. That, and the research paper are the most distinctive part of the application.