<p>Rose Hulman and Harvey Mudd tied in USnews for best undergraduate engineering at non-doctoral engineering schools. </p>
<p>My question is: if USNews sees both programs as being equal academically, then how come Harvey Mudd has so much higher SAT scores and GPAs on average?</p>
<p>Having had experience with both programs, there's noooo waaaaay that they're equal...</p>
<p>I think this is just another indication that the rankings are fairly bogus.</p>
<p>And your inclination is that which is better? (Harvey Mudd or Rose)</p>
<p>A good question, and one that is not asked frequently enough. There are significant idiocies in how USNews does it's rankings.</p>
<p>Really, the only things that matter are student quality, student success after school, cost and maybe some professor quality metric.</p>
<p>Mudd's better, in my experience... I have lots of experience with Mudders and they've all been ridiculously amazing at what they do, and I have a little experience with Rose-Hulman grads. RH is good, but it's not Mudd.</p>
<p><em>sigh</em>... USNews rankings.... <em>sigh</em>.....</p>
<p>Why are they good? Because of the education? I doubt it.</p>
<p>They most likely were freaking amazing before they got in. In fact, that's why they got in.</p>
<p>It's a little of both, really. They can do the ridiculously rigorous curriculum <em>because</em> they were freaking amazing before they got in, but I was first in line to be skeptical about an engineering program that's not the typical "general engineering" program, but is literally an engineering program where you learn <em>all engineering</em>... I begrudgingly had to change my mind and decide that they actually <em>do</em> learn <em>all engineering</em>. It's a ridiculous program, filled with ridiculous students. Mudd takes the right people and puts them through the right program.</p>
<p>*caveat: proud older sister speaking.</p>
<p>Yeah but one could say that your education quality is higher because you're surrounded by freaking geniuses (I'd dispute that actually, in my experience working with regular people who might not be math geniuses, but great artists or communicators, is a useful talent). </p>
<p>I really don't get the USNews rankings that much. If two schools have absolutely identical classes, except one is full of geniuses, the later school will obviously do better on USNews - but I'd question if it really gives a superior education. </p>
<p>I was at a Rose Hulman info session for accepted students, and I considered asking why their average SATs were so low given their recognition by USNews, but I didn't because I realized that it would make me look mean. </p>
<p>It's possible that Rose Hulman students are hard-workers, but put an emphasis on hard-work over pattern recognition, making them arguably on par with a school like Harvey Mudd, but with lower SATs.</p>
<p>Or it might be because RH is in Terra Haute, IN, while harvey mudd is in california. Where would you go? The location might play a big factor in why RH has to take in students with lower SAT's.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's possible that Rose Hulman students are hard-workers, but put an emphasis on hard-work over pattern recognition, making them arguably on par with a school like Harvey Mudd, but with lower SATs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah... and then you get into the debate as to whether hard work or pattern recognition makes for better engineering training. I have my own (probably rather apparent) opinions as to who turns out more rockstars, and who I'd want to put in the office next to me.</p>
<p>Rankings are weird and sometimes seemingly baseless... Ultimately, I typically coach people to look for best <em>fit</em> for their individual case. Maybe Harvey Mudd <em>does</em> cater to geniuses. If you're a genius, it would follow that you'd become the best engineer you can be if you go to Mudd. If hard work is more your style, Rose-Hulman might challenge you in <em>that</em> regard, and would make you the very best engineer that you can be from <em>that</em> standpoint.</p>
<p>Basically, what I'd come away from the rankings with is the idea that both schools are really pretty good. Go to whichever one matches you best in terms of fit and finance.</p>
<p>Ninja edit: ooh. Good call on the Terre Haute vs. Claremont... Claremont's kind of desert-y, and the Mudd campus is kind of... architecturally challenged... but you've got the mountain backdrop and the 75-degree weather year-round, and my brother typically spends most of his time on the Scripps campus, anyhow, which is really gorgeous and right next door. Terre Haute is kind of like Chambana... cornfield/truckstop/snow.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Rankings are weird and sometimes seemingly baseless... Ultimately, I typically coach people to look for best <em>fit</em> for their individual case. Maybe Harvey Mudd <em>does</em> cater to geniuses. If you're a genius, it would follow that you'd become the best engineer you can be if you go to Mudd. If hard work is more your style, Rose-Hulman might challenge you in <em>that</em> regard, and would make you the very best engineer that you can be from <em>that</em> standpoint.
[/quote]
You are so diplomatic.</p>
<p>If you're a genius you can succeed at any school. At some schools you might be 50th percentile though.</p>
<p>If you're dumb (relative to your peers) be very careful about what school you choose. It can be very demoralizing to study 40 hours a week and pull a 2.5. Be realistic with where you are in comparison to the student body you will be competing with. And yes, it is a competition.</p>
<p>I think you're doomed to fail if you see life as a competition. You'll never be good enough. Just my take...</p>
<p>Mr. Payne enjoys competition (see "Engineering to IBanking?" thread). =)</p>
<p>
[quote]
I think you're doomed to fail if you see life as a competition.
[/quote]
One of those trite sayings that has no meaning?</p>
<p>Ummm, actually it has a lot of meaning. If you see life as a competition with others, you're never going to see yourself as a success since there will always be someone who is better than you. </p>
<p>But if you see life as a cooperative effort, with humans working together to improve everyone's standard of living and wellness - you'll be content even if you're not the best. </p>
<p>You should be happy with your accomplishments because they help others and allow humanity to accomplish great things, not because they make you better than other people. </p>
<p>Just my opinion.</p>
<p>If you want a traditional BS in a specific engineering discipline, Rose Hulman is the school for you. </p>
<p>Harvey Mudd takes a more broad-based, general engineering approach.</p>
<p>Select based on what will suit your needs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ummm, actually it has a lot of meaning. If you see life as a competition with others, you're never going to see yourself as a success since there will always be someone who is better than you.</p>
<p>But if you see life as a cooperative effort, with humans working together to improve everyone's standard of living and wellness - you'll be content even if you're not the best.</p>
<p>You should be happy with your accomplishments because they help others and allow humanity to accomplish great things, not because they make you better than other people.</p>
<p>Just my opinion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't need to be the best, I just need to be good enough to secure my goals. Life requires some effort, and hard work (regardless of what is driving it) tends to have results.</p>
<p>I suspect most people operate like this, whether they have provided some moral philosophy to back up the actions, I don't know.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Or it might be because RH is in Terra Haute, IN, while harvey mudd is in california. Where would you go? The location might play a big factor in why RH has to take in students with lower SAT's.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a ridiculous argument based on ignorance. You're saying that people with near-perfect SAT scores are choosing Mudd over Rose because of the location. Yet, the smartest students generally will go anywhere they can get a stellar education. Absolutely no one I know here came here for the location. They came here for the education.</p>
<p>By the way, not all of California is on the coast. We're 50 miles inland in an boring retirement city. We're surrounded by cities like Pomona and Chino, which aren't exactly known for being great either.</p>
<p>Why does everyone try to rationalize why our SAT scores are so high? Is it really that impossible for us to just be good??</p>
<p>I suspect genetics are why your SAT scores are that high. Nothing brag worthy, certainly.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You're saying that people with near-perfect SAT scores are choosing Mudd over Rose because of the location.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm saying that all else being equal, yes, some people probably do choose Mudd over Rose because of the location. The difference in opinion lies in the fact that I'm operating under the assumption that the two schools are similar academically, and you believe HMC is far better than Rose. I don't know enough about either school to make a judgment, so I went by the U.S. news ranking that they are equal academically.</p>
<p>It certainly is possible that your school is just that good, but I don't see where I implied that it wasn't. Am I ignorant because I believe location plays a factor in college selection for most people? Do you want 20 degree winters or 60 degree winters? I definitely don't know anybody who would choose the former with all else being equal.</p>