<p>Honestly, we shouldn’t force our MIT craze. MIT is awesome, the students are truly inspiring, amazing, and crazy smart, but it is also a very peculiar institute. If you are looking for top notch engineering/science research opportunities, with connections with top professors, and a student body that makes you feel dumb (trust me, it’s beautiful to be able to feel like we are not the smartest person around) MIT is the way to go.</p>
<p>But MIT is also really harsh. the courses don’t baby you, and if you are looking for an easy/relaxed undergrad career, I don’t think it’s the right place.</p>
<p>i truly don<code>t think that I am misusing objectivity here.
I am not trying to convince people that I don</code>t like and that I am right in that either.However, I truly think that way. MIT is gorgeous from what I heard in term of academia and all that stuff around.I mean it is such a temple of knowledge but can I make the best of it? is everybody making the best? that is what I am wondering right. </p>
<p>Concerning Rose and Harvey Mud, I think the location of Harvey makes it more known for its programs.Though, I think Rose-Hulman and Harvey mud are of the same caliber.
Now, my point is not to compare MIT prestige rank to that of Rose but rather I am hoping for an relative examination to find out which one is better. I know about Rose but since I haven`t visited MIT, I want to hear you.</p>
<p>On what though? I’ve read through this thread and it still doesn’t seem very clear what is your primary concern or query about MIT.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think this is very true. I actually feel a lot of students go to HYPMSC without really knowing WHY they are going to those schools. I am willing to wager for a huge portion of matriculates it’s purely the brand name and the prestige. (I’ll admit it - for me back in senior year out of all the colleges I was admitted into Stanford and MIT clearly stood out above all else, just because of the cultural conditioning I’ve grown up in)</p>
<p>“On what though?”
On envisaging Rose over MIT for a BACHELOR degree. Again I am not sure I would take advantage of the research opportunities. </p>
<p>Now if you disagree, which is totally normal as it is your opinion, why do you think so? Do you think that I might regret a Rose-Hulman education?</p>
<p>I think if you dont want to do research, then MIT is a MUCH MUCH MUCH better place to be. First of all, when you dont do research after graduation it will be easier to get a job. Also, unlike RHIT it is a very well rounded institute of technology; it has top programs in business and economics for example. </p>
<p>Other than that:</p>
<p>Rose Hulman
SAT Critical Reading: 550 - 660
SAT Math: 620 - 720
SAT Writing: 530 - 640
ACT Composite: 26 - 31 </p>
<p>MIT
SAT Critical Reading: 660 - 760
SAT Math: 720 - 800
SAT Writing: 660 - 750
ACT Composite: 31 - 34</p>
<p>The scores only overall at the boundary.</p>
<p>Also, MIT has 45% girls and Harvard whereas RHIT is 20%. </p>
<p>Also, Boston > Terre Haute.</p>
<p>Now dont get me wrong, RHIT is a good school and is a great way of obtaining an education. But there really isnt any reason to choose it over RHIT except for fit, and since you have not visited MIT you really cannot compare fit.</p>
<p>It is insane to assume you will get into MIT for your masters or Phd. It’s possible, but the same is true for all of the other applicants (who cannot possibly all be admitted). You already got into MIT! Why risk it for a school that is 80% male and 88% white in the middle of Indiana?</p>
<p>How about this: Go to MIT for undergrad, and be surrounded by smart people from diverse backgrounds. Then be a part of the excellent graduate placement by getting your grad degree at Stanford or Berkeley or… MIT.</p>
<p>Hum I see. thats interesting to see those stats but I want to say that Rose has the ability to turn average-fairly good student to real efficient engineers. isn`t that amazing?</p>
<p>So the US News rankings are based entirely on peer review, not even close to objective in any way. Regional superiority is a big plus in that case, but I wont go any further other than to suggest that you should think about looking outside the ranking.</p>
<p>Also, regarding the posting about rankings, I DONT trust any metric that puts Olin college down so low. It shows a large flaw somewhere. </p>
<p>btw, are you actually looking for peoples opinion on your choice or are you here to say “Im choosing RHIT over MIT, I feel special” because I am getting a bit of vibe at this point to the latter.</p>
<p>I don’t think everyone should go to MIT. Actually, I actively discourage people from attending if it’s obvious that they will have a bad time here. I agree w/ all of your objectives: I agree that some people make terrible college choices based on prestige alone; I agree that there’s a growing trend of people making minute distinctions in terms of which college is “better” than another to the point of absurdity. But this point is absurd in the other direction. I agree with what you’re trying to do, but now you’re just making up facts to support an outcome you like. </p>
<p>No college is better than another? Good luck trying to defend that. I’m curious, did you two come up with this ideology before or after you enrolled at MIT? :P</p>
<p>One of my best friends goes to Rose, and is very happy there. From last time I spoke with him, it sounds like the classes are very tough – one of his assignments was to write a spreadsheet with a long feature list in under a week.</p>
<p>In comparison, the mother of a freshman at Harvey Mudd told me “the homework’s not tough, but there’s a lot of it” – a very bad combination, IMHO.</p>
<p>(MIT has a ton of advantages, but I think the person who called MIT’s the prettiest campus is experiencing a severe case of the halo effect. I’ve seen 16 campuses [University of Washington, Reed College, UC Berkeley, Stanford, Caltech, Harvey Mudd, Missouri University of Science and Technology, Wash. U., Univ Mo St. Louis, Univ Mo Columbia, Webster University, Saint Louis University, Cornell, MIT, Worcester Polytechnic Institute, Brown] and I’d rank most of what I saw (namely, everything but the dome) at bottom in terms of prettiness. Well, maybe above UM-STL, but below everything else, easily.)</p>
<p>I don’t see what the big deal is. Research RH and MIT on the internet, and decide for yourself. Almost everybody here is defending MIT, because we’re fans, but why don’t you post on the Rose-Hulman board and ask students there for their opinions? </p>
<p>Personally, I feel that MIT is on a completely different level than RH, in terms of faculty and student body. The education (read: many hours/pset) will be rough, but at least I’ll get the bang for my buck. I expect to do research, because otherwise it would be a terrible, terrible waste of getting in contact with some of the most brilliant minds out there. Besides, I can’t comprehend why an MIT education will be worse (if not better) than RH. What exactly does “undergraduate focus” mean between the two schools?</p>
<p>Still, it’s your decision. Since you don’t plan on doing that much research, then maybe MIT really isn’t for you. I don’t know enough about you to judge your fit.</p>
<p>“btw, are you actually looking for peoples opinion on your choice or are you here to say “Im choosing RHIT over MIT, I feel special” because I am getting a bit of vibe at this point to the latter.”</p>
<p>No at all. In fact, I am trying to see an exterior point of view other than that of my immediate environment. It never hurts to have other opinion. Also, I am heading to Rose-Hulman that is not my final decision yet and since I am in the incapacity to visit MIT, I am relying on the resources found here and there and this thread is one of them.</p>
<p>My feeling is that it does strongly matter where you go to undergrad, because the goal of an undergraduate education is not just to stick you in a box for four years. </p>
<p>Your choice of undergraduate institution will not only influence your ability to get a great job or get into a great graduate program, but it will influence the way you think and the way you see the world. In this regard, I found it useful to surround myself with some of the best undergraduates, grad students, and faculty members in the world. This has had a huge influence on my abilities as a scientist, and not because of anything so narrow as “prestige”.</p>
<p>My overall opinion, which I have stated here before, is that people pick academically less-challenging schools over academically more-challenging schools every year. And some of them end up working really hard in undergrad and make good and end up in superb graduate programs and/or jobs. And most of them don’t.</p>
<p>If somebody handed me a winning lottery ticket, I’d cash it in. I wouldn’t wait for the next one.</p>
<p>Yeah, obviously “no college is better than any other” is not a valid statement, if I said that I certainly didn’t mean it. But I’m not sure I’m making up facts anywhere. I haven’t even presented many facts either, I’m just making logical arguments.</p>
<p>When I was a high school senior I pretty seriously considered Case Western Reserve. In the end it was probably my second choice. By the time decisions rolled around I was pretty in love with what I knew about MIT, so it wasn’t much of a contest at that point, but I never really got into the frenzy of college admissions.</p>
<p>And I’ll still maintain that very few people on this thread are giving anything remotely related to good advice. “Boston is better than Terre Haute,” “Rose is in the middle of Indiana,” “MIT has more girls” …the first one is completely an opinion and matter of preference and the other two might be true but also come down to preference and have absolutely no bearing on the quality of the school. MIT has far more girls than Caltech, but no one would argue that it’s not even worth considering Caltech over MIT based on that alone. So why is that suddenly an important factor in THIS argument?</p>
<p>So who exactly is just picking the facts that support the outcome they want? I’m just trying to make some objective points in a discussion where most people seem more interested in gushing about their school than anything.</p>
<p>regarding the post above, I think its a bit too late to give quality advice since the proper advice would have been “visit both and see what you like.” Probably the only thing one can do legitimately is to remind the OP to give the OP things to think about, such as school location and M/F ratio which might or might not be important. Bad things that I DO see happening are people giving individual anecdotes which really tell you nothing about anything.</p>
<p>Yeah, freshman homework isn’t tough, especially when your first semester is pass/fail. Once you get out of core and start getting into upper level classes, the homework is insane. I guarantee you that Mudd has some of the hardest homework out of any school in the country. At least with the engineering major, a lot of the homework and lab problems for the core engineering classes are upper-division level. The upper-division level classes have homework comparable to that of early graduate level classes. </p>
<p>Please, you have no idea about the rigor of Harvey Mudd. Don’t spread completely false information based on anecdotes.</p>
<p>lol, that’s me. Of course I’m going to get heat for saying that, but I’ve seen way more than 16 campuses and I’m going to stick by my word on that one :P</p>
<p>Yeah well I think it just really depends on perspective. IMO, MIT looks like a factory while BC has the most gorgeous campus around here (especially during the summer!)</p>
<p>True, some parts of campus are atrocious. It’d be nice if they spaced out the buildings a bit more in some places. But what would you rather have? Trees and grass shipped in to an urban campus to dupe you into thinking you’re in some kind of fantasy forest land instead of a research powerhouse? The popular campus “aesthetics” is so overdone and people fall for it too. Trees and grass = pretty for the first month or so, after that, they become obstacles that block your most direct route to class. :P</p>
<p>I know what you’re thinking, and you’re wrong. I actually am a huge admirer of nature and natural beauty. I just don’t need someone to CREATE the impression of it for me.</p>