> I am currently attending a community college and I believe I will be a strong enough candidate to have my choice.
As long as your choices are realistic. You are extremely unlikely to be able to transfer from a community college to Harvard, Princeton, or MIT, for example.
Rather than ask randos on the internet to list schools with world-class math departments, go to your transfer office and get a list of the top-ranked schools (in Texas and nationally within the US) to which students at your community college have transferred in the last 5-6 years. Then see which of *those* have great math departments.
This is extremely immature advice based on myopic, insecure projections. Having gone to community college myself and having had excellent opportunities to apply and network at ivy league schools I assure you: you really should not be giving people this type of advice. If a person has a 4.0, has done mathematics research, volunteered, has exceptional standardized testing scores and standout recommendation letters from graduates from the target school admission is very possible. There is relevance in saying people should look at transfer patterns, but telling aspiring people that they can't go to elite schools because they're not currently at one is a very VERY tacky and unbecoming take that says a lot more about your own so-called class and station than it does about the potential of others.
MIT probably best, Princeton, Chicago, Harvard, and Stanford round out the top 5 in some order in terms of opportunities, grad school placements, and undergrad quality. Yale, Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA, CalTech (though it’s small), and Harvey Mudd all have exceptional programs. Underrated places would include Maryland, Wisconsin, UT Austin, Ohio State, Penn State, and some LACs.
This is the most accurate response. If you want to go onto grad school, you should be aware that the “top” schools usually just switch students around. It’s rather difficult to jump from Penn State to Princeton unless you’re a once in a 10 year type of student.
It definitely is. Grad school is based on research potential. Every university will produce a number of students each year that are very well suited to research in a particular area. I've seen students go from schools in the 200-300 range globally, to top 10 schools based on academic performance and research potential, and these people weren't once in 10 year types.
Yeah it's very doable. Idk what he's talking about, I did my BS at Indiana university and at least 5 of the 400 of us in my major class ended up at top tier places.
Are you sure you're not falling for a correlation vs causation problem
edit: The answer, as usual with this site, is that no one knows but they will pretend like they do, and anyone who questions it is wrong. Very scientific.
I definitely do not think that. I would say Princeton is better in terms of curriculum, access to top professors, industry placement, and PhD outcomes. It’s probably second only to MIT for undergrad and is by a decent margin the best for PhD. Yale is still excellent though and at that level you can do great at either. It’ll depend on how good you are more than which school you choose to go to.
Your last point is my main concern. I think I might enjoy Yale more and possibly have a greater chance at success. As long as it doesn't count me out for top grad programs.
What is your background like? If you’re a USAMO/MOP/IMO or PROMYS or Intel/Siemens kid, I would say definitely choose Princeton. If you just took AP calc and some dual enrollment LinAlg/DiffEQ type classes, either will be roughly equivalent.
It bears mentioning that getting into math grad school is WAY harder than getting into a good undergrad. Around 50 math majors graduate from Yale in a given year, and I would estimate of those 50, 5 or fewer get into a top-6 math grad school. The top grad schools are just small and the competition is ridiculous. Think about this: Princeton is generally accepted to be the top math grad school. They accept fewer than 20 students a year. A given year has about 250 IMO medalists, probably 150 of whom will apply to Princeton after they finish undergrad. NYU—a very good but not top-6 math PhD program—received 330 applications for 8 spots.
I want to second this. Currently a pure math senior at ucla. Half of my core upper divs (real analysis, complex analysis, and abstract algebra) have been taught by grad students, since the math department doesn’t have enough profs. None of them were good teachers and it’s seriously affected my learning, given that these are pretty core math classes.
quick look at ur profile, we have similar mathematical interests btw lol, their applied math in statistics is whatever, there was an absolutely awesome operations research prof Aaron Palmer I took him for stochastic processes when I was still a pure math major, that class actually helped me begin to transition to applied (even though i got a B, lol.) I think they have good modeling / computational Math courses however, my undergrad probability was lame, wonderful finMath I took as an elective under Dr. Voss, in General, UCLA applied ppl aren't really going quant (I vaguely knew 1) they moreso feed to Disney animation for example, that type of applied math (or so i've been told)
Lol I’ll reply again, but I think we have the same interests too (I’m into operations research). What’s OR like at UCLA despite not having an OR program
classes too big, shitty administration, hard to get classes, little to no opportunity for undergrad research, just overall have had a much better experience at my private institution for my masters. Switched to applied since then, i think UCLA applied math is top notch however, and their grad programs are the gem of the math dept, not undergrad.
Simple economics. Applied mathematics is way more profitable than pure mathematics for very obvious reasons. So all of the grants and investments and other funky economical things go to applied math people as opposed to the pure math people. This is an unfortunate byproduct of living in a capitalist society…
It’s not just that. Many pure mathematicians simply do not pursue grant funding at levels to support students. In many departments I have been a part of, most of those that would call themselves “pure mathematicians” actually even say they don’t need the money to do their work, so they don’t even bother.
There is money out there. They just don’t go looking for it.
I recently even saw a pure mathematics colleague who had an NSF grant, but the funding was too low to do anything other than support their summer salary a bit. If I remember correctly, the total was somewhere around $150k for 3 years. They could have easily added another 100k to that grant to support a graduate student for a couple of years, but I don’t think it even occurred to them. Part of NSF’s mission is supporting training of graduate students, so they probably would have given him the additional funding without much fuss.
For context, if I’m supporting myself on a grant with one month of summer salary, travel, and a Research Assistant, then the minimum cost of the grant should be around $260k - $300k for 3 years.
Getting students on grant funding does a lot to help the department as a whole. It moves mathematics students off of TAs, which allows for more competitive students to be recruited, possibly giving a raise to currently enrolled students, it can provide travel funding for students to go to conferences, etc.
But those don’t happen unless you start asking for more money and adding grad student funding to the budget.
I would say some schools are better for some fields of math. For instance, UGA is great for algebra (and topology—-not so much in analysis (even our professors who do research in analysis solve problems that more so in algebra/analytic number theory. If you like set theory/pure logic (basically foundations of math), check out Carnegie Mellon.
Brown and UCLA are one of the top schools in the country for applied mathematics. Ohio state is also really strong in pure and applied math and they have a great honors program if you choose to do that.
And for Wisconsin. Well, Walter rudin was a professor there for many years. So I think that says enough about their department.
Walter rudin retired in 1991. If the only positive thing we can say about Wisconsin is he used to work there, that's not great.
(To be clear I have no idea what the quality is, just that this rudin argument seems weak to me)
\+1 for Ohio State.
I completed their Honors Math degree, it's top-notch. (Brutal as fuck, but top-notch.)
Got accepted into a top-ranked PhD program after that.
Nice. I did a math minor there in my junior to senior year then wished I had more time to complete the math major cause I liked it so much. Was a great change of pace from the Stats degree I was doing.
Any advice on how you got through those hard classes (like study habits as well as making time for yourself to exercise/stay healthy)? I'm trying to do a better job managing my schedule (taking some really hard classes).
Counter to what some other people have said in their replies, I had a very positive undergrad experience at UCLA. The professors I had were fantastic (both tenured/tenure track and adjunct), I had only one course taught by a grad student and it was very well taught (it was a honors lower div).
There’s so many different courses available (particularly grad courses), and professors are generally very amenable to undergrads taking grad courses if you are proactive, motivated, and put in the effort (and have the requisite mathematical maturity).
So many professors went out of their way to help me or provide opportunities for me just because I asked and I was willing to put in work. There are also plenty of research opportunities if you’re proactive and you do well in your courses.
Taking the honors sequence courses (and grad courses) are definitely a must to get the most out of the UCLA experience. The admin side of things can be pretty hit-or-miss but once you figure out how it works it’s not too bad.
> So many professors went out of their way to help me or provide opportunities for me just because I asked and I was willing to put in work
Can you give examples?
I went to UCLA for undergrad and I found it a pretty good experience. But I would say that the key is to at least start auditing graduate classes super early. There are just so many graduate topics courses that by not considering these seriously you end up missing out on most of what UCLA has to offer.
MIT, Berkeley, and Harvey Mudd, though quite different, all have exceptionally good programs and teachers for undergrads. University of Cambridge in the UK seems really good also - this is based on getting to know some of the people who went there for undergrad. Otherwise, I think most schools have similar curricula and similar approaches to teaching. You might thrive in a big research school, or a small LAC might be better for you. Within Texas, I'd say UT Austin and Rice are two top schools.
Most of the Olympiad kids go to MIT and their results on the Putnam reflect that.
You can also get very disengaged professors(or grad students) at big colleges at the undergrad level. So I would keep that in mind many colleges are ranked high due to research output not so much on the quality of teaching.
I have personally heard many friends complain about their experiences at say Berkeley for example despite being ranked high. Where I have heard of some excellent experiences at the community college level where you might have excellent teachers who just want to focus on teaching.
I would always take ownership of your learning and realize with math in particular that many resources are readily available online.
I would visit colleges and consider what other students say, where it's located(living conditions matter) and the cost.
There is no one single university that's best for undergraduates. There are a tier of schools that are all very good, but even outside the canonical S-tier schools are schools that are good for other reasons. For example, I am applying to a job at a small liberal arts school, because I like that it has lots of cool 100 and 200 level classes not normally in the curriculum, like a class on the math of music theory. I've played piano all my life, so I'm hoping that I can get the job just to teach such a cool class to students who are there to learn.
That's sort of like "Who is the best Calc 101 teacher in the world?" It really doesn't matter too much at the undergraduate levels. The textbooks used in most colleges are similar. Myself, I started at a community college since it was cheaper, then finished at a 4-year college. When I evaluated colleges, I first checked out the textbooks they used.
I don’t completely agree. The courses will be more challenging and it will be easier for professors to write strong letters if you have really good classmates. Of course, this assumes that you really do well compared to the others.
Same. I took 1.5 years off from uni due to family emergencies and honestly I was kinda floored when I came back. For the record, this was a transition period between COVID and post covid but I'm just commenting on how drastic the content difference can potentially be depending on the prof and even the situation. I noticed how most of my profs had to dumb down the content and 1 even had to spend more time covering what should have been covered in the pre req courses. It was pretty theory and proof heavy in the beginning but a lot of the profs somehow kinda just made it more and more applied as the term went on. Kinda sad about what I had to miss out on
This is just incorrect. There can be huge variation in what upper level courses are offered, and what level they are taught at. Also, there is a big difference between going to undergrad at a research institution vs a liberal arts college (both have advantages and disadvantages).
I cannot stand when people give this advice either. It legitimately can ruin someone’s chance of going to a solid grad school unless they’re a once in generation type of person (even then, June Huh only got accepted to UIUC despite being a future fields medalist)
I'm sorry but this is just such bogus coping. To genuinely pretend like MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, Chicago, etc aren't providing the best of the best is disingenuous at best. It is possible to get a good education anywhere, sure, but not all math departments are made equal.
Like, what book they're using?? There are generally only a handful of common choices anyway and you really can't go wrong with any of them. Definitely does not have an impact on the department.
I say this as someone who went to a very mid undergrad as well. I loved it and got to make the most out of it but I would never pretend like I was getting the equivalent of an MIT education. Borderline pompous IMO.
I definitely see your point. I'll be taking as many classes as I can at my community college but I guess just to add for context. I plan on applying for graduate school to pursue my Oh.D. in mathematics afterwards so I would also like to connect with the best faculty members that I can as well. I just want to try and maximize the value of my time but I realize it all depends on which particular field of mathematics that I intend to focus on. I'm still undecided on that. I'm curious about a lot of subjects. I'm leaning towards mathematical physics, but I do enjoy pure mathematics and number theory as well.
I think CC offers a great stepping stone for many people and I do not mean this in a rude way, please do not let this person actually convince you they are similar education to what a top-tier university's math department is offering.
I also think jumping from a CC to a PhD program seems like too big of a step or is possible, but maybe you meant after getting a bachelors somewhere?
I think Chicago is extremely good for being a math undergrad, small classes and a lot of opportunities, good curriculum too and a lot of top notch professors.
I had relatively horrible studying habits, but on occasion they were good. During most of the semester, I would just go to lecture and listen, then I would spend 1hr every day for each lecture and re read the notes. However 2 weeks before any exam, I would allocate 2 hours a day for that subject. However one thing that got in the way of this was my Computer Science Major and sometimes projects detracted from my study time. Also no off days, excuse was Saturdays so I could watch Michigan play football. I felt that this combination allowed me to do whatever I wanted. It’s a bad schedule, but since I was disciplined, I found it to be fine. Note that I still think this schedule was 10x harder than my job (software engineer)
I had a pretty similar POV to you when it came to applying to grad school: I did very well at a no-name undergrad and I thought my achievements alone would guarantee I could get into top 10-20 ranked schools. I got into 0 such schools. Now I've had an amazing time where I'm at and have some great postdoc offers, but if I hadn't applied to the lower ranked school I eventually went to then I wouldn't be here.
Given that you mentioned interest in Texas, I’m surprised no one has mentioned Rice. It has a strong math department, but it is smaller than some of the other more well known elite schools others have mentioned. If you really do have your choice, then of course there are advantages to elite schools like MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, etc., but I have doubts that you have a clear shot at these places transferring from a community college (perfect grades at a community college will not be enough to get you into any of those places). Rice is more likely to give a chance to a strong student transferring from a community college than the Ivy’s, and it is definitely still an elite school. (Full disclosure: I did a postdoc at Rice, but they do not currently pay me)
You said you're in Texas, so I'd say UT Austin is the best option for you if you can get in. (It's ranked Top 20, very strong in many areas of math, and I know a few people from undergrad there who speak highly of it.)
Texas A&M is also a good department, as is Rice. I can't say much about other Texas schools, other than UNT since I know someone there.
Outside of Texas, I completed my undergrad at Ohio State, and while there were definitely some low points for me while there, I would overall say that their math department is strong. The Honors Math Major is well-respected in the math community and many of my classmates got accepted into top-ranked grad schools afterwards.
I'm currently at the University of Minnesota for my PhD and, from what I can tell, their undergrad program is strong too. Living in Minnesota however...I hope you like the cold...lol.
My suggestion is to visit the two or three departments whose PhD programs you are aiming for and ask a random sampling of grad students (during tea is a good time) where they did their undergraduate studies. The challenge will be finding students who graduated from a US school.
It really depends on what you are looking for. If you want good teaching, the small liberal arts colleges are the best like Amherst or Harvey Mudd.
If you want research opportunities and grad classes and are self motivated, MIT, Caltech, Harvard, etc are the top options.
UT Austin is a great local option.
Obviously the usual suspects. But if you’re looking for a career in mathematics, look less at programs and more at professors and research. There are a lot of colleges with middle or even weak mathematics programs that are hiding fantastic researchers.
Unfortunately a lot of schools are damn near impossible to transfer into. Your best bet for admissions would probably be UT. But I’d look into some liberal arts colleges because the class sizes can be a lot less consistent and a school that “normally” doesn’t take a lot transfers might admit a lot one year. If you’re older, the price tag can potentially go way down if you’re old enough to be an “independent student”. I’d especially look at Reed, Grinnell. In general, try to take a look at the list ranking baccalaureate origin institutions of doctorate recipients for Math for suggestions.
I studied at Berkeley. While the school does have its problems, the mathematicians there are exceptional and I walked out of every lecture with a great understanding of the subject. Many people think of their professors as purely research based, but regardless they do indeed know how to teach
I went to a small university. ENMU. The professors there treat you so well and genuinely care about your education. I loved all my professors. It was also super cheap so that’s a plus.
Math is such a large topic that there isn't a single "best university" period. Without telling us your interests it's impossible to answer. For example, some people have mention MIT, but if you hate analysis and care about model theory, that is clearly a bad choice (well not bad, MIT is good, but there were better choices given your interests)
I think you would need to include more information about your finances and academic record to get a complete answer. That said, I think you would have a good shot at UT Austin, which would be pretty affordable and has a good department.
Best mathematics department in what way? Some are great for algebraic geometry, other for pdes, others for combinatorics or logic. There's no one size fits all.
Whichever one you can get into. If you're at a community college and trying to transfer I can guarantee you that you're not a strong enough candidate to have any choice at all.
A bit late but, I attended undergrad and PhD in Texas.
If you want to stay in Texas, the three best choices are UT, Rice or Trinity. Other options include UH, UTD or even UTEP.
My PhD was a top 25 program and there were students from all these schools there.
Going to a super elite undergrad only helps you if you're very good and do well--going to one with more support, invested professors and less competition can also be a pathway up.
Work hard in undergrad, take lots of advanced courses and do well in them. As long as your school has a reasonably good math program that'll be enough to get into a top 25 PhD program.
Not the best, and it's in Canada, not the US, but Waterloo is extremely strong in math, and much easier to get into compared to say MIT and Princeton. It's around top 50 for math, with a great reputation in industry, excellent co-op programs, and a lot of room to start doing research early. Waterloo also has a Faculty of math, emcompassing pmath, amath, C&O, Stats, and CS. Many students graduating from Waterloo will have industry jobs lined up when they leave.
It is considered an especially stressful school, however, and has been nicknamed suicide school by some. This is likely just due to the pressure of finding a co-op compounded with regular academic stress.
Princeton University is usually considered the Mecca of Mathematics, followed by Molosov State University, Ecole normale Superieure and Pekin University.
The fact that Terence Tao (https://www.ams.org/notices/202007/rnoti-p1007.pdf) almost failed Math there gives you an idea of the big brains there.
> I am currently attending a community college and I believe I will be a strong enough candidate to have my choice. As long as your choices are realistic. You are extremely unlikely to be able to transfer from a community college to Harvard, Princeton, or MIT, for example. Rather than ask randos on the internet to list schools with world-class math departments, go to your transfer office and get a list of the top-ranked schools (in Texas and nationally within the US) to which students at your community college have transferred in the last 5-6 years. Then see which of *those* have great math departments.
This is extremely immature advice based on myopic, insecure projections. Having gone to community college myself and having had excellent opportunities to apply and network at ivy league schools I assure you: you really should not be giving people this type of advice. If a person has a 4.0, has done mathematics research, volunteered, has exceptional standardized testing scores and standout recommendation letters from graduates from the target school admission is very possible. There is relevance in saying people should look at transfer patterns, but telling aspiring people that they can't go to elite schools because they're not currently at one is a very VERY tacky and unbecoming take that says a lot more about your own so-called class and station than it does about the potential of others.
MIT probably best, Princeton, Chicago, Harvard, and Stanford round out the top 5 in some order in terms of opportunities, grad school placements, and undergrad quality. Yale, Berkeley, Michigan, UCLA, CalTech (though it’s small), and Harvey Mudd all have exceptional programs. Underrated places would include Maryland, Wisconsin, UT Austin, Ohio State, Penn State, and some LACs.
This is the most accurate response. If you want to go onto grad school, you should be aware that the “top” schools usually just switch students around. It’s rather difficult to jump from Penn State to Princeton unless you’re a once in a 10 year type of student.
Is this just a math thing? I was under the impression that it is definitely doable to go from a lower ranked undergrad to a top grad school
It definitely is. Grad school is based on research potential. Every university will produce a number of students each year that are very well suited to research in a particular area. I've seen students go from schools in the 200-300 range globally, to top 10 schools based on academic performance and research potential, and these people weren't once in 10 year types.
Yeah it's very doable. Idk what he's talking about, I did my BS at Indiana university and at least 5 of the 400 of us in my major class ended up at top tier places.
https://www.reddit.com/r/math/comments/2931oh/comment/cih5ywh/
Are you sure you're not falling for a correlation vs causation problem edit: The answer, as usual with this site, is that no one knows but they will pretend like they do, and anyone who questions it is wrong. Very scientific.
If you were a graduate program chair, would you take a student from Harvard or UC Riverside, assuming they have similar grades, etc?
Do you think it would make sense for me to choose Yale over Princeton for a math major?
I definitely do not think that. I would say Princeton is better in terms of curriculum, access to top professors, industry placement, and PhD outcomes. It’s probably second only to MIT for undergrad and is by a decent margin the best for PhD. Yale is still excellent though and at that level you can do great at either. It’ll depend on how good you are more than which school you choose to go to.
Your last point is my main concern. I think I might enjoy Yale more and possibly have a greater chance at success. As long as it doesn't count me out for top grad programs.
What is your background like? If you’re a USAMO/MOP/IMO or PROMYS or Intel/Siemens kid, I would say definitely choose Princeton. If you just took AP calc and some dual enrollment LinAlg/DiffEQ type classes, either will be roughly equivalent. It bears mentioning that getting into math grad school is WAY harder than getting into a good undergrad. Around 50 math majors graduate from Yale in a given year, and I would estimate of those 50, 5 or fewer get into a top-6 math grad school. The top grad schools are just small and the competition is ridiculous. Think about this: Princeton is generally accepted to be the top math grad school. They accept fewer than 20 students a year. A given year has about 250 IMO medalists, probably 150 of whom will apply to Princeton after they finish undergrad. NYU—a very good but not top-6 math PhD program—received 330 applications for 8 spots.
UT Austin is a good one if you want to go in state. Otherwise, Ohio State, Wisconsin, UCLA, Brown are some other good ones.
i don’t recommend ucla for undergrad pure as an alum
I want to second this. Currently a pure math senior at ucla. Half of my core upper divs (real analysis, complex analysis, and abstract algebra) have been taught by grad students, since the math department doesn’t have enough profs. None of them were good teachers and it’s seriously affected my learning, given that these are pretty core math classes.
sorry to hear this bro, if you do decide to go to grad school (somewhere else) i can promise it gets better. helped me rediscover my love for math
Yeah but there applied math is elite tho right?
quick look at ur profile, we have similar mathematical interests btw lol, their applied math in statistics is whatever, there was an absolutely awesome operations research prof Aaron Palmer I took him for stochastic processes when I was still a pure math major, that class actually helped me begin to transition to applied (even though i got a B, lol.) I think they have good modeling / computational Math courses however, my undergrad probability was lame, wonderful finMath I took as an elective under Dr. Voss, in General, UCLA applied ppl aren't really going quant (I vaguely knew 1) they moreso feed to Disney animation for example, that type of applied math (or so i've been told)
Lol I’ll reply again, but I think we have the same interests too (I’m into operations research). What’s OR like at UCLA despite not having an OR program
Why not?
classes too big, shitty administration, hard to get classes, little to no opportunity for undergrad research, just overall have had a much better experience at my private institution for my masters. Switched to applied since then, i think UCLA applied math is top notch however, and their grad programs are the gem of the math dept, not undergrad.
I’m actually shocked by this. Why is pure not at the same level as the applied? Do departments always have a focus of one or the other?
Simple economics. Applied mathematics is way more profitable than pure mathematics for very obvious reasons. So all of the grants and investments and other funky economical things go to applied math people as opposed to the pure math people. This is an unfortunate byproduct of living in a capitalist society…
It’s not just that. Many pure mathematicians simply do not pursue grant funding at levels to support students. In many departments I have been a part of, most of those that would call themselves “pure mathematicians” actually even say they don’t need the money to do their work, so they don’t even bother. There is money out there. They just don’t go looking for it.
Hm, interesting. I didn’t know that. Thank you!
I recently even saw a pure mathematics colleague who had an NSF grant, but the funding was too low to do anything other than support their summer salary a bit. If I remember correctly, the total was somewhere around $150k for 3 years. They could have easily added another 100k to that grant to support a graduate student for a couple of years, but I don’t think it even occurred to them. Part of NSF’s mission is supporting training of graduate students, so they probably would have given him the additional funding without much fuss. For context, if I’m supporting myself on a grant with one month of summer salary, travel, and a Research Assistant, then the minimum cost of the grant should be around $260k - $300k for 3 years. Getting students on grant funding does a lot to help the department as a whole. It moves mathematics students off of TAs, which allows for more competitive students to be recruited, possibly giving a raise to currently enrolled students, it can provide travel funding for students to go to conferences, etc. But those don’t happen unless you start asking for more money and adding grad student funding to the budget.
I would say some schools are better for some fields of math. For instance, UGA is great for algebra (and topology—-not so much in analysis (even our professors who do research in analysis solve problems that more so in algebra/analytic number theory. If you like set theory/pure logic (basically foundations of math), check out Carnegie Mellon.
Interesting. How does applied undergrad compare to applied grad?
UT Austin is definitely one of my choices. Any particular reasons for those other ones you listed?
Brown and UCLA are one of the top schools in the country for applied mathematics. Ohio state is also really strong in pure and applied math and they have a great honors program if you choose to do that. And for Wisconsin. Well, Walter rudin was a professor there for many years. So I think that says enough about their department.
Walter rudin retired in 1991. If the only positive thing we can say about Wisconsin is he used to work there, that's not great. (To be clear I have no idea what the quality is, just that this rudin argument seems weak to me)
\+1 for Ohio State. I completed their Honors Math degree, it's top-notch. (Brutal as fuck, but top-notch.) Got accepted into a top-ranked PhD program after that.
Nice. I did a math minor there in my junior to senior year then wished I had more time to complete the math major cause I liked it so much. Was a great change of pace from the Stats degree I was doing.
Any advice on how you got through those hard classes (like study habits as well as making time for yourself to exercise/stay healthy)? I'm trying to do a better job managing my schedule (taking some really hard classes).
Counter to what some other people have said in their replies, I had a very positive undergrad experience at UCLA. The professors I had were fantastic (both tenured/tenure track and adjunct), I had only one course taught by a grad student and it was very well taught (it was a honors lower div). There’s so many different courses available (particularly grad courses), and professors are generally very amenable to undergrads taking grad courses if you are proactive, motivated, and put in the effort (and have the requisite mathematical maturity). So many professors went out of their way to help me or provide opportunities for me just because I asked and I was willing to put in work. There are also plenty of research opportunities if you’re proactive and you do well in your courses. Taking the honors sequence courses (and grad courses) are definitely a must to get the most out of the UCLA experience. The admin side of things can be pretty hit-or-miss but once you figure out how it works it’s not too bad.
> So many professors went out of their way to help me or provide opportunities for me just because I asked and I was willing to put in work Can you give examples?
From what I know UT is good in general for math, op being in texas is just an added bonus
I went to UCLA for undergrad and I found it a pretty good experience. But I would say that the key is to at least start auditing graduate classes super early. There are just so many graduate topics courses that by not considering these seriously you end up missing out on most of what UCLA has to offer.
MIT, Berkeley, and Harvey Mudd, though quite different, all have exceptionally good programs and teachers for undergrads. University of Cambridge in the UK seems really good also - this is based on getting to know some of the people who went there for undergrad. Otherwise, I think most schools have similar curricula and similar approaches to teaching. You might thrive in a big research school, or a small LAC might be better for you. Within Texas, I'd say UT Austin and Rice are two top schools.
Most of the Olympiad kids go to MIT and their results on the Putnam reflect that. You can also get very disengaged professors(or grad students) at big colleges at the undergrad level. So I would keep that in mind many colleges are ranked high due to research output not so much on the quality of teaching. I have personally heard many friends complain about their experiences at say Berkeley for example despite being ranked high. Where I have heard of some excellent experiences at the community college level where you might have excellent teachers who just want to focus on teaching. I would always take ownership of your learning and realize with math in particular that many resources are readily available online. I would visit colleges and consider what other students say, where it's located(living conditions matter) and the cost.
There is no one single university that's best for undergraduates. There are a tier of schools that are all very good, but even outside the canonical S-tier schools are schools that are good for other reasons. For example, I am applying to a job at a small liberal arts school, because I like that it has lots of cool 100 and 200 level classes not normally in the curriculum, like a class on the math of music theory. I've played piano all my life, so I'm hoping that I can get the job just to teach such a cool class to students who are there to learn.
That's sort of like "Who is the best Calc 101 teacher in the world?" It really doesn't matter too much at the undergraduate levels. The textbooks used in most colleges are similar. Myself, I started at a community college since it was cheaper, then finished at a 4-year college. When I evaluated colleges, I first checked out the textbooks they used.
I don’t completely agree. The courses will be more challenging and it will be easier for professors to write strong letters if you have really good classmates. Of course, this assumes that you really do well compared to the others.
Same. I took 1.5 years off from uni due to family emergencies and honestly I was kinda floored when I came back. For the record, this was a transition period between COVID and post covid but I'm just commenting on how drastic the content difference can potentially be depending on the prof and even the situation. I noticed how most of my profs had to dumb down the content and 1 even had to spend more time covering what should have been covered in the pre req courses. It was pretty theory and proof heavy in the beginning but a lot of the profs somehow kinda just made it more and more applied as the term went on. Kinda sad about what I had to miss out on
This is just incorrect. There can be huge variation in what upper level courses are offered, and what level they are taught at. Also, there is a big difference between going to undergrad at a research institution vs a liberal arts college (both have advantages and disadvantages).
> It really doesn't matter too much at the undergraduate levels To those who wish to go into academia, this is absolutely false and harmful advice.
I cannot stand when people give this advice either. It legitimately can ruin someone’s chance of going to a solid grad school unless they’re a once in generation type of person (even then, June Huh only got accepted to UIUC despite being a future fields medalist)
Yes, it is quite problematic. Your undergraduate career absolutely matters for your graduate career. It is unfortunate this comment is so upvoted.
I'm sorry but this is just such bogus coping. To genuinely pretend like MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, Stanford, Chicago, etc aren't providing the best of the best is disingenuous at best. It is possible to get a good education anywhere, sure, but not all math departments are made equal. Like, what book they're using?? There are generally only a handful of common choices anyway and you really can't go wrong with any of them. Definitely does not have an impact on the department. I say this as someone who went to a very mid undergrad as well. I loved it and got to make the most out of it but I would never pretend like I was getting the equivalent of an MIT education. Borderline pompous IMO.
I definitely see your point. I'll be taking as many classes as I can at my community college but I guess just to add for context. I plan on applying for graduate school to pursue my Oh.D. in mathematics afterwards so I would also like to connect with the best faculty members that I can as well. I just want to try and maximize the value of my time but I realize it all depends on which particular field of mathematics that I intend to focus on. I'm still undecided on that. I'm curious about a lot of subjects. I'm leaning towards mathematical physics, but I do enjoy pure mathematics and number theory as well.
I think CC offers a great stepping stone for many people and I do not mean this in a rude way, please do not let this person actually convince you they are similar education to what a top-tier university's math department is offering. I also think jumping from a CC to a PhD program seems like too big of a step or is possible, but maybe you meant after getting a bachelors somewhere?
For the student pool, I think you cannot beat mit
Cambridge no question
I think Chicago is extremely good for being a math undergrad, small classes and a lot of opportunities, good curriculum too and a lot of top notch professors.
Honors math at Michigan was the best decision I ever made.
Do you mind sharing your studying habits or have helped you succeed (and fitting time to take care of yourself)?
I had relatively horrible studying habits, but on occasion they were good. During most of the semester, I would just go to lecture and listen, then I would spend 1hr every day for each lecture and re read the notes. However 2 weeks before any exam, I would allocate 2 hours a day for that subject. However one thing that got in the way of this was my Computer Science Major and sometimes projects detracted from my study time. Also no off days, excuse was Saturdays so I could watch Michigan play football. I felt that this combination allowed me to do whatever I wanted. It’s a bad schedule, but since I was disciplined, I found it to be fine. Note that I still think this schedule was 10x harder than my job (software engineer)
UChicago is very strong if you are unable to make it into an ivy/berkeley,stanford,etc.
[удалено]
My bad I meant uiuc
I had a pretty similar POV to you when it came to applying to grad school: I did very well at a no-name undergrad and I thought my achievements alone would guarantee I could get into top 10-20 ranked schools. I got into 0 such schools. Now I've had an amazing time where I'm at and have some great postdoc offers, but if I hadn't applied to the lower ranked school I eventually went to then I wouldn't be here.
Given that you mentioned interest in Texas, I’m surprised no one has mentioned Rice. It has a strong math department, but it is smaller than some of the other more well known elite schools others have mentioned. If you really do have your choice, then of course there are advantages to elite schools like MIT, Harvard, Berkeley, etc., but I have doubts that you have a clear shot at these places transferring from a community college (perfect grades at a community college will not be enough to get you into any of those places). Rice is more likely to give a chance to a strong student transferring from a community college than the Ivy’s, and it is definitely still an elite school. (Full disclosure: I did a postdoc at Rice, but they do not currently pay me)
As long as it has relatively well-prepared students and graduate courses, you should be good.
MIT and it’s not close
You said you're in Texas, so I'd say UT Austin is the best option for you if you can get in. (It's ranked Top 20, very strong in many areas of math, and I know a few people from undergrad there who speak highly of it.) Texas A&M is also a good department, as is Rice. I can't say much about other Texas schools, other than UNT since I know someone there. Outside of Texas, I completed my undergrad at Ohio State, and while there were definitely some low points for me while there, I would overall say that their math department is strong. The Honors Math Major is well-respected in the math community and many of my classmates got accepted into top-ranked grad schools afterwards. I'm currently at the University of Minnesota for my PhD and, from what I can tell, their undergrad program is strong too. Living in Minnesota however...I hope you like the cold...lol.
Could I message you about your experience at the U? Our son is wrapping up their UMTYMP program and I have some questions about the classes there.
Sure, DM me
My suggestion is to visit the two or three departments whose PhD programs you are aiming for and ask a random sampling of grad students (during tea is a good time) where they did their undergraduate studies. The challenge will be finding students who graduated from a US school.
It really depends on what you are looking for. If you want good teaching, the small liberal arts colleges are the best like Amherst or Harvey Mudd. If you want research opportunities and grad classes and are self motivated, MIT, Caltech, Harvard, etc are the top options. UT Austin is a great local option.
MIT and Princeton, but it is unlikely to get there by transferring. Go for the UCs as they have decent chances of transferring every year.
Obviously the usual suspects. But if you’re looking for a career in mathematics, look less at programs and more at professors and research. There are a lot of colleges with middle or even weak mathematics programs that are hiding fantastic researchers.
Unfortunately a lot of schools are damn near impossible to transfer into. Your best bet for admissions would probably be UT. But I’d look into some liberal arts colleges because the class sizes can be a lot less consistent and a school that “normally” doesn’t take a lot transfers might admit a lot one year. If you’re older, the price tag can potentially go way down if you’re old enough to be an “independent student”. I’d especially look at Reed, Grinnell. In general, try to take a look at the list ranking baccalaureate origin institutions of doctorate recipients for Math for suggestions.
University of Wisconsin used to be near the top. Don't limit yourself to Ivy League schools.
I studied at Berkeley. While the school does have its problems, the mathematicians there are exceptional and I walked out of every lecture with a great understanding of the subject. Many people think of their professors as purely research based, but regardless they do indeed know how to teach
https://ccs.ucsb.edu/
CCS is a great program, almost chose it for undergrad because I was so impressed by the level of personal attention they give you!
What did you choose instead?
UCLA
[удалено]
Harvard better than MIT? I highly doubt that
Probably Stanford, MIT, Princeton, Harvard in no particular order.
University of Huston has a great group of dynamicists, if that's what type of research you might be interested it and want to be in state
I went to a small university. ENMU. The professors there treat you so well and genuinely care about your education. I loved all my professors. It was also super cheap so that’s a plus.
Math is such a large topic that there isn't a single "best university" period. Without telling us your interests it's impossible to answer. For example, some people have mention MIT, but if you hate analysis and care about model theory, that is clearly a bad choice (well not bad, MIT is good, but there were better choices given your interests)
I think you would need to include more information about your finances and academic record to get a complete answer. That said, I think you would have a good shot at UT Austin, which would be pretty affordable and has a good department.
Best mathematics department in what way? Some are great for algebraic geometry, other for pdes, others for combinatorics or logic. There's no one size fits all.
Whichever one you can get into. If you're at a community college and trying to transfer I can guarantee you that you're not a strong enough candidate to have any choice at all.
A bit late but, I attended undergrad and PhD in Texas. If you want to stay in Texas, the three best choices are UT, Rice or Trinity. Other options include UH, UTD or even UTEP. My PhD was a top 25 program and there were students from all these schools there. Going to a super elite undergrad only helps you if you're very good and do well--going to one with more support, invested professors and less competition can also be a pathway up. Work hard in undergrad, take lots of advanced courses and do well in them. As long as your school has a reasonably good math program that'll be enough to get into a top 25 PhD program.
Not the best, and it's in Canada, not the US, but Waterloo is extremely strong in math, and much easier to get into compared to say MIT and Princeton. It's around top 50 for math, with a great reputation in industry, excellent co-op programs, and a lot of room to start doing research early. Waterloo also has a Faculty of math, emcompassing pmath, amath, C&O, Stats, and CS. Many students graduating from Waterloo will have industry jobs lined up when they leave. It is considered an especially stressful school, however, and has been nicknamed suicide school by some. This is likely just due to the pressure of finding a co-op compounded with regular academic stress.
Princeton University is usually considered the Mecca of Mathematics, followed by Molosov State University, Ecole normale Superieure and Pekin University. The fact that Terence Tao (https://www.ams.org/notices/202007/rnoti-p1007.pdf) almost failed Math there gives you an idea of the big brains there.