Are Rice and Carnegie Mellon similarly selective for undergraduate admission?

Rice is typically a bit more selective in the overall undergraduate admissions picture, but both Rice and Carnegie Mellon are highly selective reaches for nearly every applicant. The difference is not large enough to treat one as “easy” relative to the other, and an applicant who is competitive at one may still be denied by either.

Rice’s overall selectivity reflects its relatively small undergraduate class and broad, university-wide appeal across science, engineering, humanities, social sciences, and pre-professional interests. Its residential college system also makes community fit, collaboration, and contribution to campus life meaningful parts of the review, rather than admission being driven solely by a proposed major.

Carnegie Mellon’s selectivity varies more sharply by undergraduate college. Programs in computer science, engineering, design, drama, and some other specialized areas can be exceptionally difficult to enter because applicants are reviewed in the context of the school or program they select. Some CMU colleges have a somewhat different level of competition than its most in-demand technical programs.

For an overall comparison, Rice may have the tighter university-wide admissions profile, while Carnegie Mellon can be equally selective or more difficult for particular majors, especially computer science and certain arts-based programs. Treat both as reaches and evaluate CMU through the specific college you would apply to, not only through its university-level reputation.