<p>Down to these 2 colleges, and I'm having a really hard time deciding. What do you guys think?? I'm considering the Math program in both. Thanks a lot.</p>
<p>I am not a student at either, but I have given (well I’ve had to) a fair bit of thought to mathematics programs. What is your goal with a degree in mathematics? </p>
<p>Immediate observations:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>double majoring with mathematics and something else at UCLA will be easy for a strong student. Quite not the case for a Harvey Mudd student, because their core is more intense, and they also run harder classes on average. This means, I get the feeling, that if a HMC student is majoring in a given discipline, that student probably really, really wants to be in that discipline, whereas you’ll find mathematics majors at UCLA who just are tacking it on in addition to engineering or something.</p></li>
<li><p>if you already have a feeling you love analysis, there is an obvious reason UCLA could win some brownie points. </p></li>
<li><p>you’ll find almost all of HMC has some academic intensity. You’ll find a balance of people whose life does not revolve much at all around education at a school like LA. </p></li>
<li><p>HMC professors are both very intelligent and capable at research and are expressly hired only if they’re extremely good at instructing undergraduates</p></li>
<li><p>in a science/lab-based discipline, a big school might have some advantage in terms of diversity of facilities, but HMC is a terrific science school, so it compensates; you’re doing mathematics, so all this goes out the window for you - the ability to get research experience will probably be greater at HMC. HOWEVER, you should know that most mathematics research (if not applied) at the undergraduate level is just a taste, and it isn’t even close to essential to have it in order to get into a good graduate program, if that’s a concern for you.</p></li>
<li><p>HMC probably is harder to get a good GPA at by a large margin than UCLA (at least, so says someone with experience in UCB’s mathematics program)</p></li>
</ul>
<p>The environments are very different. UCLA is a huge school and you would have a lot of large lecture classes in your first year or two. OTOH, UCLA has more to offer in terms of clubs, activities, and a general student body population-more “diversity” to choose from, as it were.</p>
<p>You would get to know your professors at Mudd easily and you would know the other 199 students in your class by name most likely, at UCLA, probably not.</p>
<p>UCLA has more of a name recognition elsewhere in the US (besides Ca.) but Mudd has a strong reputation with companies and STEM grad schools.</p>
<p>Thanks for your comments and suggestions ! appreciated !
Both UCLA and HMC are good schools, if I want to study math for mater and PhD not matter if it is pure or applied, which one should I go ?</p>
<p>It entirely depends on what you want to do as a career. The differences between Pure and Applied at the undergraduate level are going to be relatively minimal, so you can really decide after you apply to grad school (pure vs applied really won’t affect your grad school chances, it’s really just personal preference about a few of the courses you take). If you can’t decide between the two, you can just be a General math major.</p>
<p>What I’m trying to say is that you have plenty of time to decide - you won’t have to declare a major for a couple of years, and even after that, you will only have to decide when you choose which graduate programs to apply to.</p>
<p>Thanks,I mean which school I should go</p>
<p>Are finances an issue? Which school is less expensive? What environment do you see yourself in? What type of student do you see yourself surrounded by? Maybe answering those questions will help you decide.</p>
<p>Have you visited both? The environments are entirely different. Mudd is very intense, with a consistently heavy course load (five courses rather than four) and a large core. It’s very small , and with a strong tendency toward cooperative activity.</p>
<p>Thanks a lot</p>