The differences in the two will be size, of course, number and scope of available courses and activities. And also level of difficulty, quite probably. But also highly regional vs much more national, in both student body and, probably, recruiting. And types of fellow students attending (engineers are only about 1/5 of student body at Cornell IIRC). And recognition, and alumni reach and functions, which I have enjoyed since I graduated from Cornell.
Thing is, good chance you won’t get into Cornell, maybe ??
If you go to Clarkson for free and do very well there, there’s a good chance IMO, that afterwards you may get into a Master’s of Engineering program at a bigger school with broader recruiting. Like Georgia Tech, as mentioned above. Or Cornell. That’s assuming you don’t get what you want right out of undergrad. Which you may very well.
If you don’t do well there that’s another story. If I’m not going to do that well, I’d rather not have done that well coming from Cornell. But that’s me.
But again. there’s a good chance you wont get into Cornell, just given their acceptance stats. Maybe you school’s guidance dept and Naviance says something different about that.
I personally feel college is a unique experience that is about more than the money.
My own D1 turned down a free ride a a state U to go nearly full pay at an LAC. But she felt strongly about that choice, and we had the money. Money aside, it seems you don’t even feel strongly about the choice.
In another thread you mentioned having 3.6 UW GPA, which may drop due to failing some AB calc exams. And an expected combined SAT score 100 points lower than the 25th percentile for Cornell engineering, I am not big on using stats to estimate admission, but with these stats and the B or C in calc, admission to Cornell engineering is far from a slam dunk. This is especially true for an unhooked male. Last year the admit rate for males applying to engineering was only 6% compared to 16% for women, so admission may be tougher for males than the overall averages . I am assuming unhooked since skiing is a student run club sport at Cornell, rather than a varsity team. If the above is accurate, I think it’s likely that you won’t need to choose between Cornell and Clarkson. It sounds like you are favoring Clarkson over Cornell with good reason, so Cornell admission may be a non-issue.
Regarding the general big fish small pond, it depends on the student, making it difficult to generalize. Some students thrive as a big fish in small pond and struggle when a good portion of the class is composed of stellar students; while others do not reach their potential in an environment where they are not as frequently challenged or do not have as many academic peers. I expect most students will do well in either environment. I expect the vast majority of students who are accepted to Cornell engineering, would have a great outcome had they attended Clarkson instead.
Unlike most HYPS… .type colleges, Cornell engineering doesn’t appear to have a lot of different sequence options for slower pace courses or for courses for students with weaker academic backgrounds. For example, Cornell’s handbook lists 3 starting math options – taking calculus for engineers (1910) which is a 2nd course in calc that assumes knowledge from HS calc, skipping to multi-variable calculus (1920). or in rare cases skipping both to differential equations. There appears to be just one math sequence 1910 → 1920 → 2930.
In contrast, Harvard offers any of the following starting points and sequence options – Math Ma,b; 1a,b; 19a,b; 20; 21a,b; 23a,b; 25a,b; and 55a,b. The lowest level (MA) is a half normal speed calc/pre-calc type class, while Harvard’s website describes math 55 as “probably the most difficult undergraduate math class in the country”. Very few students attempt to take math 55, and most students who do attempt it drop out to a slower/easier math sequence by the end. However, top math students, such as IMO participants do tend to take it, so other students won’t see IMO level math students in their intro math classes. Unlike Cornell, there appears to be several sequence options and a placement test to help decide, which of those sequence options is most appropriate.
FWIW, I doubt Harvard engineers are encouraged to take any math class whose level is lower that Cornell’s engineering math sequence. Cornell the university offers a number of intro math courses/ sequences, or it did at least. My D filled her math requirement with a stats course offered by its ILR college. Cornell engineers would not take that course.
It appears that Cornell engineering expects entering frosh to have completed calculus 1 or calculus AB while in high school, since the expected first math course MATH 1910 is essentially what is called calculus 2 at most colleges. Cornell engineering frosh not ready for calculus 2 are expected to take MATH 1110 at Cornell or a calculus 1 course elsewhere during the summer.
Cornell’s first math course recommendations for students in general (not just engineering students) are given here; these show a wider range of entry level math placement for non-engineering students:
Harvard students take a math placement test and has math placement advisors, which helps to decide which math starting point and sequence is most appropriate. They make it sound like it’s uncommon to override the placement test recommendations. So if a prospective engineer scores low on the placement test, he is absolutely encouraged to take the slow pre-calc/calc Ma course, which sounds like it is lower level and slower than any courses offered at Cornell Engineering.
Harvard has a special emerging scholars program for kids scoring at the Ma level who want to go in to engineering or other STEM, implying it is possible to do so, even if it isn’t common. They mention a few kids starting at this level have even gone on to become math majors and math professors. I expect Harvard does this to support students with weaker HS backgrounds, giving them a chance to catch up to students from stronger HS backgrounds, and giving them a better chance to complete a STEM degree, including one in engineering.
However, after completing the Ma → Mb/1a → 1b sequence, prospective engineers would probably be expected to go to one of the math 20 sequences – math 21 (standard), math 22 (more rigorous version), math 23 (more rigorous + proofs), or math 25 (more rigorous, more theoretical, and faster pace). This differs from Cornell Engineering, which appears to only offer one version of the class.
I was referring to the math sequence at Cornell Engineering, not the math graduation requirement for students at other Cornell schools. Cornell Engineering appears to just have the one math sequence, which ucbalumnus linked to above.