<p>
[QUOTE]
But why is this meaningful? I could have said if some XYZ community admits just two people, its average SAT score is as high as Harvard.</p>
<p>HMC actually admitted higher percentage of applicants than Berkeley did. The fact that HMC still has significantly higher average means its applicant pool is very strong whereas Berkeley's pool has larger variance in terms of caliber.
[/QUOTE]
I was just using that example to illustrate how y2kwizard's point was logically valid. It is conceivable a smaller school could have higher average scores than a larger school just by virtue of the size difference. Applying this to HMC and Rose deviates from some of the assumptions that are necessary for the analysis to work well (the things you mentioned, similar applicant pools, similar yields, etc), which is why I said I don't necessarily think that it explains the score difference in this situation.</p>
<p>I just used Berkeley as a comparison because that is part of the example that atomicfusion used - I have no idea about Berkeley's actual admissions statistics. That is my fault...I was going strictly theoretical and using real college names to illustrate my point was a poor choice.</p>
<p>Wow, this turned into a much bigger flame-fest then I expected. </p>
<p>Pretty much, the conclusions I've found are: </p>
<p>-Rose Hulman and Harvey Mudd have roughly equal facilities</p>
<p>-Rose tends to have a less selective applicant pool, so they select students who show an ability to work hard, even if they lack a certain amount of general intelligence (as in, they're above average, not perfect)</p>
<p>-Rose Hulman offers a career oriented education while Harvey Mudd offers preparation for graduate school</p>
<p>-Harvey Mudd is near other elite schools, so they have a larger and more competitive applicant pool than Rose Hulman</p>
<p>I personally applied (and was accepted) to Rose Hulman. I had considered Harvey Mudd college, but decided against it because I live on the east coast.</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Wow, this turned into a much bigger flame-fest then I expected.
[/QUOTE]
This is pretty tame as far as online forum flamewars go :). Haven't even put on a flame suit yet.</p>
<p>But, if I have gotten heated, I apologize. atomicfusion: I don't think any of us meant to belittle HMC or its student body, so hopefully it didn't come across that way.</p>
<p>Anyway, the reason why I don't think y2k's point was valid is that we don't have 10,000 people applying to Mudd and we don't see just 5000 people applying to public U either for obvious reasons. Mudd doesn't offer a wide range of disciplines like other schools; it's a small school with smaller range of programs; it has smaller number of applicants because Mudd doesn't offer the kind of majors many other people want. But it also admits smaller number of applicants. That's why I disagree with people who change one variable (#admits) while holding other constants (# programs offered or if it's private or public) to make comparison. Most things work in proportion and in the end, the SAT correlates best with the strength of the applicant pool.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Anyway, the reason why I don't think y2k's point was valid is that we don't have 10,000 people applying to Mudd and we don't see just 5000 people applying to public U either for obvious reasons. Mudd doesn't offer a wide range of disciplines like other schools; it's a small school with smaller range of programs; it has smaller number of applicants because Mudd doesn't offer the kind of majors many other people want. But it also admits smaller number of applicants. That's why I disagree with people who change one variable (#admits) while holding other constants (# programs offered or if it's private or public) to make comparison. Most things work in proportion and in the end, the SAT correlates best with the strength of the applicant pool.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Excellent points. Hypothetically if Mudd increased its student numbers to 1500 applicants, there would be a slight decrease in SAT scores. But, Mudd would also have twice the amount of money from students paying tuition. Conceivably, we would hire twice as many admissions officers, be able to disperse twice as many pamphlets, visit twice as many high schools, have twice as many facilities to attract new students, etc etc. So after just a few years our admissions rate would drop back down to right around where it is now. Students would have the same average SAT scores again.</p>
<p>It's absurd to say that if Mudd increased its student numbers then its SAT scores would go down in the long run. </p>
<p>Over the last 20 years we have doubled student numbers. Our student quality hasn't gone down. We're actually getting more prestigious, attracting better students, and increasing our SAT score average.</p>
<p>The size of Mudd is always used as a cop out when people compare other schools to it. In reality, normalizing things by population is almost always the best way to go. That's why when you see rankings of "highest phd production" and "blah finalists" they're done as percentages of the school's total students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
This is pretty tame as far as online forum flamewars go . Haven't even put on a flame suit yet.</p>
<p>But, if I have gotten heated, I apologize. atomicfusion: I don't think any of us meant to belittle HMC or its student body, so hopefully it didn't come across that way.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, I don't really think this is a flame war at all.</p>
<p>I know you didn't mean to belittle Mudd or anything. I just don't agree with the logic that posters were using and I think that the difference in size of Mudd vs. Rose and their different locations aren't big factors when comparing student quality. </p>
<p>The core curriculum at Rose is set by each department, not the school as a whole. So the required courses really do vary depending on what you want to do. This reflects the fact that Rose works to specialize you in your field a bit more than give you the really huge overview that Mudd does. Neither is better...just different.</p>
<p>I'm a EE and therefore only have extensive experience with my core. Below is a list of courses that we must take that aren't EE-specific. This is a typical core for most engineers. Note that we're on the quarter system: 4 quarters = 1 calendar year, with almost all students and faculty taking summer quarter off to do internships (so 3 quarters is considered an academic year).</p>
<p>3 quarters calculus
3 quarters physics
2 quarters of DE
1 quarter Chemistry
1 quarter science elective (usually Bio)
1 quarter math elective (usually lin. alg)
1 quarter probability
1 quarter economics
5 quarters engineering science (Electrical Systems, Fluid/Thermal Systems, Mechanical Systems, Conservation and Accounding Principles, Analysis and Design of Engr Sys)</p>
<p>From here, there are 17 required courses that specialize in electrical engineering, and then a number of electives. We also require 8 humanities courses.</p>
<p>Here's my conclusion from comparing the two curricula: Mudd has a better general science program for engineers than Rose does, but Rose has a much wider offering of specialized engineering courses. This is exactly what people have been saying for a long time, and it pretty much sums up the difference between the two. Neither approach is better. They're just different.</p>
<p>Mudd's core seems to be more extensive and difficult than Rose's. This might mean that students here have to spend more time in the core and not be able to take as many classes in engineering as Rose students. </p>
<p>Every student at Mudd must take:</p>
<p>1.5 semesters of calculus (calc (> than calc bc), mv calc I, mv calc II)
1 semester of DE
1 semester of lin al
.5 semesters of probability and stats
3 semesters of physics (special relativity, mechanics and waves, EM)
2 semesters of physics lab
2 semesters of chemistry
2 semesters of chem lab
1 semester of CS
1 semester of bio
1 semester of systems engineering
12 semesters of humanity courses</p>
<p>Our engineering core seems pretty similar, but Mudd's still seems larger too.</p>
<p>We only get AP credit for a 5 on calc bc and a 5 on stats. Most of our core classes assume that the students have taken the AP (or comparable) classes in chem, physics, bio, calc, etc.</p>
<p>Rose's is pretty standard. Mudd's is a bit larger but actually not as big as I'd expect. What actually surprises me is the 12 semester of humanities!</p>
<p>They have a thing where you more or less have to get a minor in a particular humanities field. One of my high school friends did German as a minor, my brother's doing a minor in vocal performance.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Rose's is pretty standard. Mudd's is a bit larger but actually not as big as I'd expect. What actually surprises me is the 12 semester of humanities!
[/quote]
</p>
<p>How could it be even larger? Caltech's is basically the same size, but I don't think there is a school with a larger core in the entire country.</p>
<p>edit: our first physics class is actually "special relativity and quantum mechanics"</p>
<p>
[quote]
They have a thing where you more or less have to get a minor in a particular humanities field. One of my high school friends did German as a minor, my brother's doing a minor in vocal performance.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It actually comes out to more than a minor. It's in between a minor and a major. We take 6-8 courses in one area, but there are extra requirements (upper level, seminar, etc)</p>
<p>No one has claimed, or even implied that HMC isn't an excellent school. If you go back to the original post, it's actually this discussion that's closer to veering off topic (not a criticism, as the comparison is an interesting one...just a clarification).</p>
I agree with y2kwizard here. Mudd seems to have broader general science requirements, while Rose has more engineering requirements.</p>
<p>One of the main reasons I chose to attend Rose was the relatively light requirements for humanities and other core courses. I don't want to pay $40,000 a year to waste my time with courses that don't interest me and won't necessarily help me become a better engineer/scientist. Others may disagree with me on that....different strokes for different folks.</p>
<p>I agree with aibarr and Student615. Atomicfusion, please stop this mess. It is getting annoying, and I must say you are coming off as rather elitist and arrogant. It is making Harvey Mudd look bad. Please don't hijack threads in this way.</p>
<p>
[quote]
One of the main reasons I chose to attend Rose was the relatively light requirements for humanities and other core courses. I don't want to pay $40,000 a year to waste my time with courses that don't interest me and won't necessarily help me become a better engineer/scientist. Others may disagree with me on that....different strokes for different folks.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I had the same mindset as you when I was picking colleges, so you're not alone in thinking that. I was looking for schools that offered a lot of courses in the engineering discipline that I liked, so HMC was not on my list despite it being a superb school.</p>