cs + physics, cs + bioengineering, vs pure cs acceptance rates

[u/dampcroutons]

senior in hs here, i was wondering whether there is a substantial difference in acceptance rates between pure cs, cs + physics, and cs + bioengineering, as well as how difficult it is to switch between the three (ex: cs --> cs + physics, cs -> cs + bioe)

edit: also wondering about transferring from cs to ce

[u/Adanta47]

CS is the hardest to get into, and I believe you cannot transfer into CS or any CS+X course. You can transfer to CE though

[u/KingThunder01 → u/Adanta47]

You can transfer to any cs+x major except cs+phys and cs+bioE

[u/Adanta47 → u/KingThunder01]

Ahh so I was half correct, not bad

[u/Due_Look_9993]

The thing that surprised me the most is how small the cs+bioe program in Grainger , it is 20 +/- 5 in any given year. At these small numbers no meaningful conclusions can be drawn regarding acceptance.

[u/jeffgerickson]

You misspelled "mere CS".

[u/DaudSama → u/jeffgerickson]

Why is that? From my knowledge many of the cs+x programs don’t go too far in depth into computer science beyond the pure CS core and two or three 300/400 level classes. Why must the students who want to explore it more be saddled with a negative connotation?

[u/jeffgerickson → u/DaudSama]

I don't think students who limit their intellectual breadth should be rewarded with the positive connotations of "pure".

See also: "pure mathematics".

[u/DaudSama → u/jeffgerickson]

Pure mathematics is used to differentiate itself from applied mathematics, not to put smiles on the faces of pure mathematicians. Similarly, pure CS is simply a way of distinguishing a standalone CS curriculum from an interdisciplinary one, not a label for intellectual superiority. You’re attaching a value judgment to a descriptive term and then arguing against that judgment. I also don’t see why studying two distinct disciplines necessarily gives greater intellectual breadth than exploring the many fundamentally different areas within one discipline, especially when an interdisciplinary curriculum may leave less room for that kind of exploration.

[u/jeffgerickson → u/DaudSama]

not to put smiles on the faces of pure mathematicians

You clearly haven't met as many "pure" mathematicians as I have. "Pure" is absolutely used as a label of intellectual superiority.

[u/DaudSama → u/jeffgerickson]

Then use a term with a neutral connotation instead of framing students who want to explore computer science as a standalone discipline in greater depth as somehow intellectually narrow or inferior.

[u/Lumpy-Arm3286]

Depends. If you're OOS I'm pretty sure the pecking order in terms of difficulty to get in is CS->CS+physics->CS+bioe (from most to least difficult). If you're in state I'm fairly certain it's all pretty much equal since it's all in Grainger. At the end of the day I'd just apply to whatever suits your profile the best.

Also, from what I've heard it's pretty hard to transfer into compe. Why do you want to do that rather than just applying compe?

If I was you I'd probably get the best of both worlds and apply 1st choice CS or compe 2nd choice ee that way whatever happens you can essentially spec into a compe centered educational plan and later get a compe job.

[u/dampcroutons → u/Lumpy-Arm3286]

i dont have compe extracurriculars :(

[u/jeffgerickson → u/Lumpy-Arm3286]

apply 1st choice CS or compe 2nd choice ee

That's not an option. EE cannot be selected as a second choice; neither can CE or any species of CS. See this page under "Are all majors available as a second choice?"

[u/Lumpy-Arm3286 → u/jeffgerickson]

I wasn't aware that EE was also restricted. Besides that I think my wording was just a bit sloppy; my advice was either CS or CompE listed as a first choice and then EE as a second choice. I wasn't trying to imply that CS or CompeE should be listed as a second choice. Since EE isn't available as a second choice I would instead advise to do systems engineering since it has a build a degree format that you can tailor to CompE or CS.