Huge disclaimer here, I have never attended any undergraduate university so everything I say here is second hand and anecdotal. With that out of the way, I was

Huge disclaimer here, I have never attended any undergraduate university so everything I say here is second hand and anecdotal. With that out of the way, I was under the impression that there are some rather significant differences in the depth, breadth, and rigor between courses of study even at the undergrad level, at least in certain majors. For example, I've often heard that Harvard's undergrad math course is considered especially challenging. Is it really the case that an undergrad education at a place like MIT in math/physics, or some other STEM field, is without any differentiation from a similar major at Tufts or BU? I find that somewhat hard to believe. I'm sure there are brilliant students at less prestigious institutions, as I'm sure there are not so brilliant ones even at places like MIT, but I would expect an undergrad math class at MIT would be somewhat different than one at BU. Am I wrong here? On occasion I work with a rather brilliant engineer from Caltech and in talking with her she has relayed to me that one of the unique aspects of Caltech's undergrad education is that all students, regardless of major, must take a certain number of college level math and physics courses. That alone seems like a pretty big differentiator to me. This isn't to say that we as a society don't perhaps put too much emphasis on the notoriety of big name schools, but I still find it somewhat unlikely that there really is zero difference in the degrees offered. Of course, I'm very often wrong so there's that.