<p>I suspect that the OP needs a LOT of education on tough-to-get-into majors in many universities. That almost always includes nursing, drama, musical theatre, screenwriting, studio art, animation; frequently includes engineering, music, and sometimes chemistry, biology, economics, computer science, business, and accounting. Even at very expensive private schools, students can’t always switch into some majors. You may be paying big bucks to go to Yale, but it doesn’t mean that if you decide that you want to major in Drama that they’re going to make an opening for you.</p>
<p>Perhaps I didn’t explain my D’s objection clearly. At this point she is interested in a double major of physics and math or perhaps a physics major, with a math minor. Engineering came up because she’s interested in learning more about this field and is interested in taking a few classes.</p>
<p>At the smaller highly selective schools such as Harvey Mudd and Caltech, students take several terms of each of the above. And that interests her. This clearly isn’t the case at
UCSB or any of the other UC campuses, which is exactly why we’re touring campuses, so she can see the differences for herself. </p>
<p>My disappointment was at the unprofessional and poorly prepared and executed information session and the attitude of the young woman conducting the presentation. I certainly didn’t expect the warm welcome we received at the smaller campuses, but I did expect a more positive environment than the one we experienced.</p>
<p>Did you share your complaints with the school?</p>
<p>Reeinaz – No I didn’t. Even if I had been inclined to do so, the young women who gave the presentation seemed to be the only “official” person in the office. There are plenty of students who want to go to UCSB and if judging by the hands in the room and the number of liberal arts majors (78) most are not STEM students anyway. </p>
<p>It was a valuable reality check for D who used to believe she wanted to go to a big school. UCSB seems moderately sized compared to UCLA, USC and Cal.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A possibly uninformed-about-the-desired-majors tour guide is probably not the best source of course and curriculum information – the best source would be start at the web site before the visit, then go to the department on the visit to ask any remaining questions. Caltech and Harvey Mudd tour guides are likely to be more informed about the majors in question, because few or no students attend those schools to major in humanities and social studies majors.</p>
<p>A physics and math double major could fit some engineering and other courses around her schedule (and would likely have the prerequisites since most of the prerequisites are physics and math).</p>
<p>D & I both looked at UCSB’s website, which is why we chose to visit. I was very impressed with the physics department. It is unfortunate that we visited during spring break. I urged D not to discount UCSB based solely on the presentation but it seems it’s off the list for now. She may change her mind down the road. </p>
<p>At this point, we won’t be encouraging further visits to public California colleges. The OOS tuition is ridiculous and we are concerned about the financial state of this state. There are so many other excellent colleges out there and I’m sure she’ll find the right one for her.</p>
<p>Yes, UCs are expensive, but CSUs (including Cal Poly) are less so. But many of the same issues with changing majors and curricula in engineering, physics, and math are not unique to UCSB – they are common in a lot of universities.</p>
<p>Based on posts from OP, the info officer did an outstanding job. She didn’t say what OP wanted to hear, but delivered a much needed reality check. For a math, physics, or engineering major, and forget about double majors, you NEED to start taking math and physics classes from the freshman year. It won’t be any different at Caltech or Harvey Mudd.</p>
<p>Chas – she DIDNT do an outstanding job. If you read my OP you’ll see she gave a poor presentation, wasn’t able to answer non-run of the mill questions and seemed to discourage STEM majors. </p>
<p>The fact that one had to declare an engineering major at application time was a further strike as far as D is concerned.</p>
<p>Taking a heavy course load is not an issue or a problem for D – graduating in 4 years is something her father and I prefer, especially if we were to pay a private college rate for a public university.</p>
<p>And according to Mudd & Caltech it IS different. They take a broader approach to the sciences and students take numerous terms in all three , plus other sciences. I spoke directly to the physics head and was told that double majors in math and physics are not uncommon at Mudd.</p>
<p>TO CLARIFY: I started the thread to vent my surprise and dismay at a less than stellar information session and underwhelming ac at a good California university NOT to debate whether switching STEM majors is doable.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That is not unusual – it is actually likely to be the most common situation.</p>
<p>Caltech and Harvey Mudd are different in a lot of ways. One is that they are very small and have extremely competitive admissions. So your daughter will have to find some other schools for safeties (not necessarily UCSB), which are likely to have freshman applicants to engineering declare a major at application time.</p>
<p>Double majoring in physics and math is not especially difficult schedule-wise at most universities.</p>
<p>UCB–finding a safety she’s thrilled with will be her challenge. D understands that both Mudd & Caltech are reaches. She’s leaning toward smaller schools and naturally loved, loved, Caltech and really liked Mudd. They’re her peeps and I’ve assured her she can find her tribe at other locations as well.</p>
<p>We have two more schools to look at this trip: Santa Clara and Stanford.</p>
<p>UC Santa Cruz may be worth a look as a less selective school good in physics while you are in the area, but (like other UCs) it will be expensive for out of state. Of course, Berkeley is in the area as well, but it should not be considered a safety.</p>
<p>Besides Stony Brook as mentioned in another thread, consider whether the following schools may be suitable as safety candidates: Minnesota, Penn State, Rutgers, Maryland, Washington. Smaller schools may be harder to find that are both low enough selectivity to be safeties while having top end physics and/or math departments. There are some smaller less selective STEM-oriented schools with Mines or Mining in their names (in CO, NM, and SD), but their emphasis appears to be mainly engineering and mining, rather than physics and math.</p>
<p>Having a difficult time feeling the love for high tuitions for any UC except Berkeley :). By Washington do you mean Wash U St. Louis or UW? She’s also considering U British Columbia.</p>
<p>University of Washington (WUStL does not seem to be as highly regarded for physics, and is not really a safety for anyone)</p>
<p>Among universities in Canada, also consider University of Toronto and McGill University. No idea how selective they are in admissions, especially if she does not have Canadian citizenship.</p>