<p>I think the best two undergraduate engineering schools that provide the best combination of engineering education, campus environment, faculty attention, and reputation are Stanford and Cornell. The public ivies such as Berkeley have excellent resources but there is a wider range of student selectivity at the public universities overall and they are perhaps too large to give individualized attention. The Tech schools like Caltech, MIT, Carnegie Mellon, Georgia Tech seem to be too narrow in focus and therefore the overall college experience is less rich and not as enjoyable. That is MY rationale, anyway.</p>
<p>Stanford, yes. Cornell, no. </p>
<p>Cornell is affiliated with student suicides, bad weather, horrible location, tedious coursework, and an overall unhappy student population as well as social life. </p>
<p>The aforementioned are not what I would list as indicators of a good "overall college experience" especially when you are putting Cornell ahead of the college experiences and academics at MIT/CMU.</p>
<p>collegehelp, I'd add Princeton to your short list of Stanford and Cornell. Even though it might not be top 10 (it's close) if you can get into Princeton for engineering it would be hard to pass up.</p>
<p>Also add Olin to Alexandre's list of non-research meccas, probably in the tie for #1 spot.</p>
<p>Time to bury that "suicide" canard yet again. Read 11th paragraph, starting "Cornell University..."
<a href="http://www-tech.mit.edu/V120/N6/comp6.6n.html%5B/url%5D">http://www-tech.mit.edu/V120/N6/comp6.6n.html</a></p>
<p>The weather is wonderful, IMO, except in the winter. And I found Chicago to be a lot worse in the winter than Ithaca was, when I lived in these places. In the Fall Ithaca is one of the most beautiful places I've ever been. </p>
<p>Location desirability depends on your preferences. It is located in the finger lakes and between a number of great state parks; areas with tremendous natural beauty. It is not NYC, but Ithaca is a large college town and I found plenty to do there.</p>
<p>The workload, now that's another story....</p>
<p>2331clk- Yes, you're right. Princeton should be in the same company with Stanford and Cornell for undergrad engineering. Princeton would be a wonderful place for an undergraduate to study engineering for all of the reasons I named.</p>
<p>acceptedtocollegealready-I am not sure how those misconceptions about Cornell got started but they are not true (except the intensity of the work is definitely true). Cornell has very few suicides compared to other colleges. I think MIT has more per capita. When students commit suicide it is because they are clinically depressed. It is always a tragedy, especially shocking for young, healthy, intelligent people with a bright future. </p>
<p>Winter is the season everyone loves to hate but it is beautiful after a fresh snow. The cold is something familiar to the northern half of the continent. I don't even notice the cold. Put on a jacket...it is that simple. Without winter, we would not have our absolutely gorgeous fall and spring.</p>
<p>Students at Cornell are VERY happy to be here, despite the workload and high grading standards. The graduation rate for students who start in Engineering and graduate from Engineering is about 88%. For those who start in Engineering and graduate from somewhere at Cornell, the graduation rate is 95%. There are a few other Engineering who can boast of such high graduation rates, but not many. If students were so unhappy, wouldn't they go elsewhere? </p>
<p>Ithaca is a great small city. It has two fine colleges and the culture of the academic world filters into the community. There is plenty of outdoor recreation available. Good theater and music. Good restaurants. Too bad students don't have more time to take advantage. I spoke with a graduate of Cornell Law School who said he didn't even have time to see the Cornell campus while he was here, let alone Ithaca and the Finger Lakes region.</p>
<p>Though I will yield on the suicide issue, the rest of your post has been purely opinion. I would much prefer almost any location over the nowhere that is Ithaca. That is not to say that Cornell itself is not a good university.
Besides, you are comparing Ithaca vs the #1 and #2 largest college cities in the U.S. (Boston/Pittsburgh). </p>
<p>Lastly, Cornell and Upenn have the largest spots for transfers out of the Ivies.</p>
<p>"I think the best two undergraduate engineering schools that provide the best combination of engineering education, campus environment, faculty attention, and reputation are Stanford and Cornell. "</p>
<p>Engineering education: MIT wins
Campus Environment: MIT wins again, Boston >>>>>>> Ithaca
Faculty attention: MIT wins
Reputation: MIT wins</p>
<p>acceptedtocollegealready-
MIT and Caltech...they are the best engineering programs in many ways. It would be a real honor to be accepted there and a privilege to attend. They have the smartest student bodies in the world.</p>
<p>Yes, it is my opinion that Stanford, Princeton, and Cornell are the best overall for UNDERGRADUATES based on the criteria I gave. It is a matter of taste. MIT and Caltech and Carnegie Mellon would be great for grad school, but I think the three I named are best for undergrad, overall. </p>
<p>Not everybody needs to be near a large city in college. During the 95% of the time you are on campus, you wouldn't know the city existed.</p>
<p>In Princeton Review 2005 Edition, the "profs interesting" rating at Cornell is about 10 points higher than at MIT and Caltech. The "profs accessible" rating is also 10 points higher at Cornell. This year the graduation rates at MIT and Caltech are unusually high. On average the grad rates at MIT and Caltech are lower than at Cornell. </p>
<p>At Cornell, professors are in their offices a lot and the door is open to undergrads. Grad students hold review sessions and provide help with assignments.</p>
<p>Fine let's do this for undergrad.</p>
<p>Campus doesn't change, as Boston >> Ithaca (jobs). Dude you must really hate cities. I visit Pittsburgh more than I stay on campus (downtown is a few blocks away). I DEFINITELY know it exists and benefit from the activities available in the city. I can only imagine how much more Boston students gain from their city. </p>
<p>You really think MIT reputation for Ugrad is less than Cornell? Again, MIT wins in academics and education. MIT probably has better faculty too (though this is arguable as I do not attend either schools even though I did research on Cornell and was accepted to Cornell). "
At Cornell, professors are in their offices a lot and the door is open to undergrads. Grad students hold review sessions and provide help with assignments." I'm pretty sure this is true at MIT though I can't really say since I do not go there. Just looking at "profs interesting" rating does not really prove how GOOD the faculty is and how much an individual would benefit from the faculty.</p>
<p>So I guess for Ugrad it goes:
Engineering education: MIT wins
Campus Environment: MIT wins
Faculty attention: Unknown because I do not know much about MIT's faculty.
Reputation: MIT wins</p>
<p>Not much of a difference...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Many individuals would choose a prestigious school or one whose overal engineering department is ranked far higher than another, even if the other schools area of study of the applicant, ie. electrical engineering or bio engineering, is ranked slightly higher in that one area.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with you on that. But USC/UCSD aren't ranked where they are because of prestige. The peers' assessment and recruiters' assessment scores for both are lower than many ranked below them. That's what people need to know about this "overall" ranking. I'd already commented on the ranking methodology in one of my previous posts.</p>
<p>Faculty attention at MIT is not a problem -- undergraduate research is extremely common (about 80% of undergrads participate), so students get extremely close to their faculty supervisors and advisors.</p>
<p>Not only are faculty helpful and available for class help and career advice, they spend time with undergrads outside academic settings -- for example, my boyfriend and his best faculty buddy (aerospace engineering) often go out to fly remote control airplanes together.</p>
<p>I also definitely disagree that the proximity to a city is unimportant -- many MIT kids go into Boston every weekend, and a hefty percentage even live in Boston.</p>
<p>Thanks to monydad for dispelling the (obnoxiously persistent) MIT suicide urban legend.</p>
<p>Any top school that has engineering will provide you with a fine undergraduate engineering education. Go somewhere where you feel comfortable and where you'll have good options if you don't decide to major in engineering.</p>
<p>acceptedtocollegealready-
There is a different campus climate and culture at the Ivies and at Stanford versus the Techs. I do not think MIT necessarily "wins" in the campus environment category, although MIT has by far the highest average graduation rate among the Tech schools. You are thinking of Pittsburgh and Boston. I am thinking of on-campus life.</p>
<p>Don't you think there is a difference between Stanford/Princeton/Cornell and the Tech schools in campus culture and climate, the cities aside?</p>
<p>MIT may be the best of the Techs, but my original point was that I prefer the engineering schools at places like Stanford, Princeton, and Cornell to the Tech schools for the reasons I cited above. Over the past 16 years or so, the average graduation rate at Stanford/Princeton/Cornell is about 14 percent higher than at the Techs (e.g. MIT, Caltech, Carnegie Mellon, Georgia Tech, Harvey Mudd) even though student ability is about the same. This is a clear indication that there is something negative about the Tech schools, with the possible exception of MIT. Students vote with their feet. </p>
<p>You might attribute the large difference in graduation rates to the difficulty of the engineering curriculum at the Techs but I do not think that is the explanation. At Cornell, Engineers have one of the highest graduation rates. I imagine this is also true at Princeton and Stanford.</p>
<p>MIT is about the best tech school I know of, but a reasonable person may still prefer a different environment. </p>
<p>IF you're also interested in the liberal arts, the non-tech schools might be preferred. Or if you're interested in having people around you who are not just techies. In my day the liberal arts colleges had a more wholly coeducational environment, which was of interest to me at the time. Don't know about now.</p>
<p>I understand that the architecture at MIT is rather sterile. Cornell's campus is gorgeous. You feel good just walking to class in the morning through all that scenery.</p>
<p>From what I've heard, getting through MIT must be incredibly grueling. Cornell is quite tough, but I believe MIT is one of the few places that might be tougher. That's not necessarily a plus; depends how you do there for one thing.</p>
<p>Re collegehelp's post #32 --</p>
<p>I'd be interested in seeing graduation statistics by major for various schools -- I suspect that the lower graduation rates of the primarily engineering schools are due to students dropping engineering (and, consequently, switching schools since there are fewer non-engineering majors at the primarily engineering schools). Those students would be "hidden" at non-tech schools, since they could switch to underwater basketweaving and graduate in four years.</p>
<p>I additionally suspect that MIT's high graduation rate relative to the other engineering-heavy schools is due to MIT having the Sloan business program, which is respectable enough for failed engineers to switch into without having to leave MIT.</p>
<p>The "engineering" graduation rates at schools like Stanford/Princeton/Cornell, therefore, would not represent all engineers, but engineers who stuck with engineering long enough to be counted in the final engineering population. The graduation rates at the tech schools are a more accurate reflection of the number of students who drop engineering, rather than the number of students who don't graduate per se.</p>
<p>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute needs to added to any list of best UG engineering schools (first U.S. college to grant degrees in engineering).
Amazing new biotech center. <a href="http://www.rpi.edu/research/biotech/index.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.rpi.edu/research/biotech/index.html</a>
One of the best in the world.</p>
<p>molliebatmit-
I understand your point about the lack of options at some Tech schools for students who change their mind about engineering. If students want to change from engineering to math/science, they are ok because places like Harvey Mudd and Caltech have math and sciences. But, if they want to switch to business or English, they are out of luck, and so they have to transfer to a different college.</p>
<p>I don't know what the graduation rates are at other schools for students who start in engineering and finish in engineering, but at Cornell the rate is 87-88% compared with 95% who graduate from anywhere at Cornell. In other words, about 7-8% of the engineering students at Cornell transfer to a different major at Cornell and graduate. I imagine it is roughly the same at Stanford and Princeton.</p>
<p>The percent of students who graduate in engineering/science/math/computer might be a measure of how many options are open to students who change majors.</p>
<p>The 87% graduation rate for Cornell engineers who stay in engineering is still higher than the 79% and 82% average graduation rates at HM and Caltech where 95% of the degrees are restricted to engineering/science/math/computer majors. </p>
<p>MIT and Georgia Tech both graduate about 75% enginering/science/math/computer majors and their graduation rates are very different from each other. The 16-year average at MIT is about 90% while at Georgia Tech it is about 64%. I think MIT attracts a somewhat higher caliber student than Georgia Tech but I don't think that accounts for the 25% difference in graduation rates. </p>
<p>Cornell and Carnegie Mellon both graduate about 48% engineering/science/math/computer majors but the average graduation rate at CMU is 14% below Cornell. How do you explain that difference? The options for internal transfer are evidently about the same at Cornell and Carnegie Mellon yet the Cornell grad rate is substantially higher.</p>
<p>The overall graduation patterns at MIT are similar to Stanford/Princeton/Cornell (SPC). I don't have specific GRADUATION rates in engineering/science for MIT and SPC but I have the freshman to sophomore RETENTION at MIT in engineering/math/science/computer majors.
At MIT it is about 97-98% (freshmen who continue in these disciplines as sophomores). If the overall grad rate at MIT is similar to SPC then perhaps the freshman to sophomore retention rates are similar also.
At Caltech the eng/sci retention is 95%.
At Carnegie Mellon it is 93-95%.
Harvey Mudd 94-95%. </p>
<p>MIT seems to have somewhat higher freshman-sophomore retention in engineering/science/math/computer. I would guess that Stanford/Princeton/Cornell would be similar to MIT.</p>
<p>The freshman to sophomore retention in engineering/science/math/computer can dip as low as 75% in second-tier Tech schools.</p>
<p>I don't have complete information, but there is the suggestion that Tech schools, except MIT, have more trouble keeping students than Stanford/Princeton/Cornell and that this difference can't be completely accounted for by the more limited options for majors at the Techs. </p>
<p>Sorry if this was hard to follow.....</p>
<p>I just find it weird that you can comment on Cornell > MIT for overall undergrad engineering experience without knowing how MIT operates. Different people have different opinions and that is fine. You like Cornell's college experience more, another person may like MIT's college experience more. Many people may find Cornell's workload easier.</p>
<p>However, you allowed personal opinion to become false fact when you posted "best combination of engineering education, campus environment, faculty attention, and reputation"</p>
<p>MIT is better in reputation and also probably better in faculty/education. You are free to give your own opinion but there is a fine line between that and false information. </p>
<p>PS: I didn't feel like going to MIT's website and looking up the recognition their faculty and professors have received but I'm sure it's very impressive to say the least.</p>
<p>Is Carnegie Mellon mainly focused on computer science and computer engineering only? I see that there is no electrical engineering course. Would it be wise to do double mechanical/electrical engineering at Carnegie Mellon, or would I be better off (in terms of quality of education ONLY) at other well engineering rounded schools ie. umich, ut-austin</p>
<p>Posted by collegehelp:</p>
<p>"the average graduation rate at CMU is 14% below Cornell. How do you explain the difference?"</p>
<p>I don't know because your numbers are off. Using the Common Data Sets pinned on the top of this "College Search and Selection" page these are the numbers I get:</p>
<p>CMU 6 year graduation rate 84.8%</p>
<p>Cornell 6 year graduation rate 92%...</p>
<p>that's 7% not 14%. Yes it's a difference but not nearly as high as you posted.</p>
<p>Also please note these are for the class entering in 1998---- when comparing graduation rates you aren't able to take into account any efforts the college has taken to increase this number for 7 or 8 years which is a long time. Just mentioning because CMU's graduation rate was below 80% just recently, it's risen >5% in less than 5 years, so it won't be till 2013 or 2014 till you see what % of this year's class eventually graduates.</p>
<p>I understand your point about Cornell, Stanford and Princeton though. I'd put S and P possibly in a separate category from Cornell, great as Cornell is. To me, if you are able to get into P or S, you will do what it takes to get a degree from there, since it doesn't get any better. It's virtually unheard of to transfer out of S or P, but you do hear of occassional transfers out of Cornell, like here on CC.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I additionally suspect that MIT's high graduation rate relative to the other engineering-heavy schools is due to MIT having the Sloan business program, which is respectable enough for failed engineers to switch into without having to leave MIT.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ouch. That's harsh.. What about failed engineers who decide to switch into BCS?</p>