<p>Cre8tive,
Your link redirected me to the Harvey Mudd CS department. Where did it compare the Harvey Mudd undergrad program to Stanford, UCB and Caltech?</p>
<p>If I want to major in CS and minor in music or piano performance: Duke or CMU?</p>
<p>CMU -- also look at the Claremont Colleges where Harvey Mudd is since you can take advantage of the music programs at Scripps & Pomona.</p>
<p>Ah, it's been a while since I posted here but I bored at work. </p>
<p>I'm a current student at Carnegie Mellon, I'm a CS major. </p>
<p>I've noticed some posts saying that math aptitude doesn't have much to do with success in computer science, let me make on thing clear.</p>
<p>Computer Science is all about discrete mathematics.</p>
<p>You don't have to be amazingly good at it, I'm not, but you have to have a certain level of math aptitude demonstrated by SAT's/Grades and have to have some level of interest in it to succeed in this field. Math majors deal with continous math, we deal mostly with discrete mathematics that involves optimization and algorithm design. Math skills are invaluable.</p>
<p>Sakky,</p>
<p>I agree that the comparison isn't fair because there are more students in UIUC. However, UIUC lacks grade inflation and I doubt there would be many with GPA around/lower than 3.0 (which is a sizeable number because of lack of grade inflation) applying to Stanford. Also, im_blue did mention about the rigor of of Duke's program not being on par with UIUC, MIT, CMU, and Berkeley. Based on my very superficial knowledge about the field and intuition, it looks to me CS is one of those fields where there can be quite a bit of disparity between different programs. I took intro to C at Stanford and it was hard. Your first assignment isn't gonna be writing "Hello, World!" at Stanford!!! CS is one of the majors for which you are not gonna get a break from grade inflation at Stanford. Your codes either work or don't and the assignments aren't easy. CS is not about studying books; it's kinda about talent also and I see the talent level at Stanford is very high. Maybe for many fields, you learn just about the same stuff no matter where you go. But for CS, I can see how someone not trained rigorously before can have a hard time at top CS grad schools such as Stanford.</p>
<p>I'll let im_blue answer this one definitely, but from what I can tell, whether a school has grade deflation or not doesn't really matter for the purposes of Stanford PhD EE admissions. This is not like med school or law school. The PhD adcoms actually care about where you got your grades and how solid they are. They are not going to be fooled that you want out and racked up easy A's in Rocks for Jocks the way that law school and med-school adcoms often are. This is why it is far more common to see a guy with modest grades (but demonstrates excellent potential for research) beating out people with strong grades in getting into top PhD programs than to see a guy with modest grades beating out guys with better grades in getting into top law schools. </p>
<p>However, none of that is here nor there. This whole digression started because we started talking about how Harvard does not have a highly ranked CS program, whereas Illinois and CMU do, and hence it was asserted that if you want to eventually get into a top-ranked CS graduate program, you should turn down Harvard in favor of Illinois or CMU (although whether anybody here would truly turn down Harvard for Illinois or CMU for undergrad seems pretty dubious to me). I would argue that if I was faced with that scenario, I would go to Harvard and major not in CS, but rather in math (or perhaps I would double in CS and math). After all, as I had shown in my other post, many of the most prominent computer scientists in the world majored not in CS for undergrad, but rather in math. You clearly don't need a CS bachelor's to get into a CS graduate program - a math bachelor's works just fine. And I think we can all agree that the Harvard math program is extremely rigorous and strong. If you can do well in the Harvard math program, then I think it's safe to say that you can handle the rigor of a graduate CS program.</p>
<p>
[quote]
whether a school has grade deflation or not doesn't really matter for the purposes of Stanford PhD EE admissions. The PhD adcoms actually care about where you got your grades and how solid they are.
[/quote]
IMO, this is precisely why it often makes sense to turn down a better overall school for a better program, if you're aiming for grad school. Perhaps not as extreme as UIUC over Harvard, but taking UIUC over Northwestern or Duke makes a lot of sense for CS/Engineering, especially if the latter would cost you a lot more money. Graduate schools know that highly ranked programs have more rigorous classes and labs and expect more from their students.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I would argue that if I was faced with that scenario, I would go to Harvard and major not in CS, but rather in math (or perhaps I would double in CS and math). You clearly don't need a CS bachelor's to get into a CS graduate program - a math bachelor's works just fine.
[/quote]
Yes, you can get into CS grad programs with a BS in math, but doing so would put you at a disadvantage. Everyone else with a CS degree will jump right into the graduate CS courses and start doing their research, while you'll have to waste time catching up to them. They'll only need to take a couple of refresher courses to pass their PhD Qualifying Exams, while you'll need to quickly get up to speed. Sure, a Harvard BS in Math shows that you have the capability, but you still don't have the necessary background. Why start out grad school a step behind everyone else if you don't need to? Also, many CS graduate programs explicitly state that they will not consider applicants who have not taken X, Y, and Z CS courses. If they're going to be funding you for several years, they want you to be able to jump right in and produce.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yes, you can get into CS grad programs with a BS in math, but doing so would put you at a disadvantage. Everyone else with a CS degree will jump right into the graduate CS courses and start doing their research, while you'll have to waste time catching up to them. They'll only need to take a couple of refresher courses to pass their PhD Qualifying Exams, while you'll need to quickly get up to speed.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hey, it obviously didn't hurt all those Turing Award winners too badly. They were able to finish their CS doctorates just fine despite only having a math background. </p>
<p>While I don't know how things are run at Stanford, I can say that at MIT, to complete a PhD in EECS (emphasis on CS), you have a choice of which qualifying exams you want to attempt. Obviously a guy who comes from a math background would probably choose to do the qualifying exams that tested math concepts. </p>
<p>In fact, I look at the subject listings for the MIT CS TQE's (the Technical Qualifying Exams), and I see that many of them are cross-listed with math courses. For example, one of the qualifying exams would be on the Theory of Computation, and it covers the material covered in class 6.840, where the 6 means an EECS class. Well, guess what, 6.840 is also known as 18.404, which is a math class. It's the same class, just with two different designations. And in fact, the professor who teaches that course at MIT is not a CS prof, he's a math prof, and the website of the class is run off a server in the MIT math department. </p>
<p>The same thing can be said for a number of the other qualifying subject areas. They're basically math classes. Distributed Algorithms, Randomized Algorithms, Cryptanalysis - come on, those are math classes. In fact, I would argue that a math guy at either Harvard or MIT or anywhere else who had never done CS before in his life, but who knew these math topics, would come close to passing the MIT CS TQE. He probably wouldn't be able to completing all of it, but I would argue that he'd come pretty close. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Sure, a Harvard BS in Math shows that you have the capability, but you still don't have the necessary background. Why start out grad school a step behind everyone else if you don't need to? Also, many CS graduate programs explicitly state that they will not consider applicants who have not taken X, Y, and Z CS courses. If they're going to be funding you for several years, they want you to be able to jump right in and produce.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, now I think you're just being unfair. I'm not just talking about any old Harvard math student. I'm talking about a Harvard math student who knows he has an interest in going to a graduate CS program, and would therefore be tailing his undergraduate curricula accordingly. Hence, I would surmise that he would in fact be also taking CS coursework on the side, either at Harvard, or cross-reg'ed at MIT. After all, if you know you want to get a PhD in a particular field, it behooves you to be conscientious about taking undergraduate coursework that will prepare you for it. If you're not doing that, then you're probably not serious about getting the PhD anyway. </p>
<p>After all, think of it this way. How many doctoral students, in any field, did the absolute bare minimum undergraduate coursework necessary for that field? I would argue probably pretty close to none. Most doctoral students did ** extra ** undergraduate coursework not only to boost their chances of admission, but to get the tools they needed to do their research. For example, a guy who majors in CS for undergrad and wants to go to CS graduate-school to do research in algorithms or complexity theory would be doing extra undergrad math coursework. Hence, I would argue that a Harvard math guy who was serious about CS grad-school would have gone out and corrected whatever CS deficiencies he has in order to do the kind of CS research he wants, either through coursework, or self-study, or whatever. (If he hadn't, then he isn't being serious anyway, so it's a moot point). Hence the notion of being a step behind everyone seems like a red herring to me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm not just talking about any old Harvard math student. I'm talking about a Harvard math student who knows he has an interest in going to a graduate CS program, and would therefore be tailing his undergraduate curricula accordingly. Hence, I would surmise that he would in fact be also taking CS coursework on the side, either at Harvard, or cross-reg'ed at MIT. After all, if you know you want to get a PhD in a particular field, it behooves you to be conscientious about taking undergraduate coursework that will prepare you for it. If you're not doing that, then you're probably not serious about getting the PhD anyway.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with you on that, but I still wonder why that person would not just get a BS in CS to begin with. If you're going to be a math major but still take all the CS classes on the side, then for all practical purposes you are a CS major. Would you not be an official CS major just because Harvard has a weak CS department, and because you believe that a BS in Math would look more credible?</p>
<p>The first thing I would point out is that the vast majority of people don't know what they are going to major in when they first step foot into college, and most don't even know if they are going to go to graduate school at all, setting aside the question of what they will be doing while they're in graduate school. Even those people who think they are going to major in X often times eventually decide to switch to Y. Hence, I think it's a false assumption to make that somebody would just confidently know that they should be getting a BS in CS right from the get-go, and certainly not with enough confidence to turn down Harvard for a place like Illinois, or even CMU. What if you do that, and then later find out that you no longer want to major in CS? You'd probably be feeling pretty darn foolish for turning down Harvard. </p>
<p>Secondly, I'm not saying that the Harvard guy in question would take ALL the CS classes on the side. He would just be taking the CS classes that he believes would be helpful to him. </p>
<p>The fact is, even a CS graduate student who did CS in undergrad isn't going to use all the things he studied in undergrad. There are going to be certain CS undergrad classes that, in retrospect, just turned out to be a big waste of time for him, because he ends up never using them ever again in his life. If you take an undergrad computer database course, and your future research has nothing to do with databases, then that was just a waste of time for you. </p>
<p>So take this hypothetical guy at Harvard who realizes that he now wants to get into CS graduate school. He could major in CS at Harvard. However, I am pointing out that he could also major in math at Harvard, and pick up whatever other CS background he would need on the side - perhaps not the point of getting a fullblown CS degree, but enough that he would be armed with what he needed to know to pass his qual's and do the research that he wants to do. </p>
<p>My real point is that I don't see what is so bad about going to Harvard, even for a student who wants to pursue CS graduate work. While Harvard's CS department might not be the best, Harvard's math department arguably is. So a Harvard student who's truly worried about deficiencies in the Harvard CS department could just take more Harvard math courses. Or take CS courses at that 'other' school in town. Whether he ends up with a CS degree or a math degree is, at the end of the day, irrelevant. What really matters is whether he is has the tools to succeed in a CS graduate program. I don't think this is going to be an issue for that Harvard guy, if he's serious. As seen from all the Turing Award winners, plenty of people carve out monstrously successful careers in computer science academia armed with a math bachelor's, but no CS bachelor's. </p>
<p>What I'm really asking is, how bad could a CS education really be at Harvard? Not the CS department, but the overall CS education? With a math department as strong as it is, with a highly flexible cross-reg policy with that 'other school', I think that a Harvard student who wants to get into academic CS could prepare himself just fine.</p>
<p>CMU is the best for comp sci, its also ranked #1 for jobs.</p>
<p>Why would anyone want to do computer science though?</p>
<p>I'm thinking about going to grad school for Computer Science, although admissions directors defeinitly take into account the quality of your undergraduate program, it will not hurt you if you go to Harvard over CMU. The undergraduate coursework will be just as deep and the profs will be just as good. </p>
<p>CMU is ranked #1 because of it's strong graduate program, although it's undergraduate is also very strong (I like to think best in the country) the overall quality of the Harvard student body and education outweighs CMU's strength in a single major.</p>
<p>
[quote]
whether anybody here would truly turn down Harvard for Illinois or CMU for undergrad seems pretty dubious to me
[/quote]
I'm going to CMU for CS (starting next month), and I've met several others who turned down higher-ranked overall schools like Princeton, MIT, Caltech, Rice, Northwestern, Cornell, etc. for CS at CMU. I considered applying to Harvard and was qualified (though I probably wouldn't have been accepted, statistically speaking), but I didn't like the elitist atmosphere or the lack of respect for technical subjects that I perceived when I visited the campus. </p>
<p>I think a lot of people oriented towards CS and engineering (and who are actually interested in working in these subjects, not just as a route to "I-BaNkiNg!!1" and such things) would prefer to be immersed in a strongly focused research-oriented environment than a liberal-artsy we're-so-great type of thing. Financial considerations like merit scholarships can also play a role. Thus I think turning down HYP for something like CMU SCS is understandable even if HYP people are almost equally competitive for top grad schools.</p>
<p>That's a good point sabertooth Tiger. If you are very interested in pursuing a research career in Computer Science (PHd perhaps) then the oppurtunities at CMU are amazing. You'll research in computer science being done at Carnegie Mellon is not only greater in quantity than at HYP but also in quality. </p>
<p>Lol, I'm actually writing this from my summer internship at an Ibank...for a job like this I don't think it matters too much although you'll definitley see recruiters from the more tech heavy firms (Google, Microsoft) at CMU more often than HYP. </p>
<p>But I think CMU SCS is a great school and I think I made the right choice, I chose it over Columbia. What CS class are you starting out with?</p>
<p>Heh, sorry, no offense intended with the i-banking comment ^^;</p>
<p>I'm starting with 15-211. What's your minor/double major?</p>
<p>Right now, my minor is comp finance. But after my experience this summer and taking 15-213 I'm don't think I want to go into the financial industry.</p>
<p>So I might switch it to HCI, International Relations, something I'm into.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I've met several others who turned down higher-ranked overall schools like Princeton, MIT, Caltech, Rice, Northwestern, Cornell, etc. for CS at CMU.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What I meant to say is that only a minority of people would turn down Harvard, or another highly ranked school, for a place like Illinois or CMU without extenuating circumstances (like merit scholarships). Or, put another way, I would argue that there are probably more people at CMU, even in SCS, who would rather be going to Harvard but didn't get in, than there are people at Harvard who would rather be at CMU (even at SCS). Or, if right now, I offered a free transfer to Harvard to some CMU SCS people, I think a lot of them (not all, but a lot) would take it. If I went to Harvard and I offered them a free transfer to SCS, I don't think as many people would be taking it.</p>
<p>sakky,</p>
<p>I am a little confused with what your position is? Are you just merely describing what happens in reality or are you supporting it? Yes, I guess there are many people who can't resist the prestige of Harvard. But that's not necessarily the best way to go about picking college--such as trying to major in CS which CMU is amazing but pick Harvard instead because of prestige.</p>
<p>Earlier you said picking GA Tech over Duke is like picking Harvard over UIUC. Well, not quite. First of all, Duke, while pretty prestigious, is no Harvard. There's "H-bomb" but not "D-bomb" you can throw around, LOL! Conversely, GA Tech is definitely more prestigious in the engineering circle. Even with BME, GA Tech is ranked higher in the 2006 graduate ranking. For all other engineering disciplines, GA Tech is ranked pretty high while Duke isn't. While in reality, still more perspective engineering majors may pick Duke over GA Tech, I can totally see how many would do otherwise. It's also a lot cheaper to go to GTech. But for those that aren't sure about engineering and may switch to humanities/social science..etc, Duke is probably a better choice because it's more well-rounded.</p>
<p>When did I say that picking GATech over Duke is like picking Harvard over UIUC? I think you either have me confused with somebody else, or you have misread one of my posts. </p>
<p>First off, I am not talking about those people who are absolutely 100% sure, 'nothing but hell or high water will stop me from getting a CS phD' kind of people. For these extremely rare people, sure, pick the very best CS undergraduate program you can get into. I have never disputed this. </p>
<p>What I am really asking is, how many people are really like this? How many people are absolutely, 100% sure they know exactly what they want to study the moment they walk into college? I remember back in the day, plenty of people who said they were sure ended up changing anyway, either because they found something more interesting to do, or they found out that it was a lot more work than they thought. You must admit that you would feel pretty damn foolish turning down Harvard for CMU because you were sure you want to do CS, only to find out that you no longer want to do CS. </p>
<p>Hence, what I am saying is that Harvard is a very good way of hedging your bets. What if you later find out that investment banking sounds more interesting than you thought it did? Or you find out that you might want to try medical school? Harvard is therefore the SAFER choice. From what I have seen, very few 18 year olds are sure they know exactly what they want to do with their lives, and even of those who think they're sure, most of them end up changing their minds. </p>
<p>Furthermore, as I have pointed out, even if you go to Harvard and you want to go to CS, you can still cobble together a program that will be extremely competitive to get into CS graduate school. It's not like by going to Harvard, you are consigning all hopes of ever getting into a top-ranked CS graduate program away. Far from it. Major in math, with a sidedish of CS. Plenty of people do just that and turn out to be brilliant CS academics. Look at all the Turing Award winners.</p>
<p>I agree with your argument in post 57, but I think you can substitute any school in the US (except 4 or 5) for CMU and you still would be correct. I think the same would be true if you asked students in the most highly ranked programs at Rice, Cornell, Duke, Georgetown, Chicago...if given the chance I think even at these schools most would be at Harvard if they could. And the Harvard kids wouldn't be hankering to transfer to Duke, Chicago, Cornell, etc. The exceptions would be kids at Yale, Princeton, MIT and Stanford, that's about it. </p>
<p>Plus I don't think there's much application overlap between CMU (even CS) and Harvard.</p>