Best Schools for Computer Science

College Search & Selection
21

<p>
[quote]
Nevertheless it is a tier I school in the list. I cannot understand why any company would prefer Brigham Young graduate over Caltech, Harvey Mudd, Duke, Harvard or other excellent schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Maybe people in the "know" about computer science don't care much about USNews BS, just maybe they have a different perspective... my friend was in the BYU CS program for 2 semesters when Microsoft came calling and lured him to Seattle as a Software QA engineer and a salary of $55K. BYU has a special niche in a lot of ways in that they attract students who could easily blow the doors off of a CalTech, MIT, Harvard, etc, but have a specific religious priority so choose BYU instead. Just my .02 as a Utah native.</p>

22

<p>thanks everyone. waffles, thanks for the info</p>

23

<p>Caltech and Harvey Mudd aren't heavily recuited in Computer Science? :rolleyes:</p>

24

<p>The long list provided by one of the posters is simply a list from an intern at a single company. It's a sample size of 1. It shouldn't be deemed a list that comprehensively lists desirable schools for interns for the majority of software development companies. A number of the schools listed as tier 3 and 2 certainly aren't considered that low by many companies.</p>

25

<p>I would also point out that companies are not always interested in "quality" the way that word is usually defined. What companies are really after is a combination of quality + hireability + cultural fit. Depending on the company in question, the last 2 traits can easily dominate the first one.</p>

<p>I'll give you an example. I was talking to the recruiter of a large Fortune 500 auto-parts supplier that shall remain nameless. He basically said that his company does not like to actively recruit, for management positions, people from schools like Harvard Business School, MITSloan, Stanford, and the like. Instead, they strongly prefer to recruit MBA's who come from local no-name schools. </p>

<p>Why is that? Simple. It's not because those people from those top-tier B-schools are no good. It's almost because they're "too good". First off, those students tend to ask for far more salary than the company is willing to pay. Basically, the company knows that it simply can't match the high salaries that other companies will offer them. Furthermore, the company knows full well that it also can't match the glamour factor and career-acceleration that, say, a major consulting firm or an investment bank can offer. The company knows full well that somebody who gets an offer from this company and also from McKinsey/Goldman Sachs is almost certainly going to take McKinsey/Goldman Sachs. Furthermore, let's be perfectly honest, it's not exactly easy to convince somebody who's lived in the Boston area or the SF Bay Area to move to Detroit. That's a pretty hard thing to sell. To anybody from Detroit out there reading this, I understand that that's a harsh thing to say, but come on, guys, let's be honest, you know what I'm talking about. Detroit is not exactly the most glamorous city in the world. </p>

<p>Even in the rare cases where they are able to nab one of those top B-school grads, they would often times come to the company and get frustrated with the culture and quit. The company is not one in which you can just come in and rocket your way to the top. Things happen slowly, there is a lot of bureaucracy, promotion is often times done via seniority not merit, so talented young people can easily get frustrated and decide that there is better opportunity elsewhere. </p>

<p>The point is, the company is frustrated by the ability to recruit and keep grads from those schools mentioned, so much so that they've decided they're better off just hiring from local no-name schools. Grads from these schools won't ask for unmatchable salaries. They already live in the area so they're no issue with trying to sell Detroit to them. They don't have to complete with the glamorous consulting or banking firms for these students. And they'll probably fit in the company culture. Hence, these students are better for the school, nor really because they truly are of higher 'quality', but because they are better for the company. There's no point in trying to recruit somebody who you can't get and keep.</p>

26

<p>Many recruiters that I have talked to like to hire people from no-name schools because they are actually just as good as people from name schools, without the arrogance. They also work harder.</p>

27

<p>Yes, dstark has a point...and I could see that being the case. Humility and appreciation go a long ways in corporate culture and hireability. An aura of entitlement is almost always a major turn off for most employers.</p>

<p>
[quote]
The point is, the company is frustrated by the ability to recruit and keep grads from those schools mentioned, so much so that they've decided they're better off just hiring from local no-name schools.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I probably wouldn't go so far as to say the company is "frustrated" as in they keep trying and just can't get their way... to some companies, like sakky's example, the "elite" grads are those from a pool of non-USNews recognizables. Some schools are even certain corporation's factories per se, and essentially become that corporations #1 ranked school... meaning anything else plays second fiddle (even Harvard).</p>

28

<p>Debating general rules of thumb for application to specific situations is an exercise in futility. </p>

<p>As somebody who has spent the past 20 years working with technology companies, especially computer industry firms, in staffing and organizational design roles, I don’t think generalizations can be applied with any certainty. There are some companies who have very specific biases – and this is demonstrated by where they spend their recruitment budget. As well, some companies have established ties with a given school. Example: Google’s founders first met at Stanford, and that wasn’t too long ago. There are still established ties between Google and Stanford. In some cases, collaborative relationships have developed between university research groups and industry groups/companies. Then again, I know of desperate hiring managers who are just looking for any warm body.</p>

<p>There’s no doubt that a strong academic background from an acknowledged Top 10 or 12 C.S./Applied Math program commands attention. Arrogance has nothing to do with it. Most all of the graduates I’ve met with undergrad degrees from MIT are hardly arrogant. But… a degree, from any school, is only the beginning. Recent grads are evaluated for their potential success, and each company has a different way of evaluating this potential. The methods can range from “gut feel” to extensive technical screening/testing. Once a professional, say a software developer, has gained some years of experience, the individual will be viewed more for what s/he has accomplished than by the school behind the degree. Is there a link between academic preparation and career success? Sure. Does academic preparation at select schools always translate to professional success? Nope.</p>

<p>If you graduate with a C.S., C.E. or C.S./E. degree from a Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, Cal Tech, UIUC, you have a head start, but once the race has begun, if you don’t maintain your lead, you will surely be passed.</p>

29

<p>
[quote]
If you graduate with a C.S., C.E. or C.S./E. degree from a Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Carnegie Mellon, Cal Tech, UIUC, you have a head start, but once the race has begun, if you don’t maintain your lead, you will surely be passed.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Especially in computers... since there are plenty of "computer geeks" who have never stepped one foot in a college class, but can write software like it's going out of style, and you name the server/network they'll build it, maintain it, and secure it before you can say Dr. Watson.</p>

30

<p>311Griff, actually Thomas J. Watson never had a formal college education, and I'm fairly certain that he never knew what a "server" is, other than somebody who brings the food to the table. His son, "Terrible Tommy, Jr." was only a bit better... taking 3 high schools and over 6 years before he graduated. Rumor had it that he wouldn't have graduated from Brown either without the kind help of a sympathetic professor. </p>

<p>Of course, the world has become much more competitive, and you can't measure today against yesterday's benchmarks. In many ways, it's a steeper climb for students today.</p>

31

<p>For completeness, here are the top 50 CS PhD programs ranked by US News:</p>

<ol>
<li>Carnegie Mellon University (PA) 5.0
Massachusetts Institute of Technology 5.0
Stanford University (CA) 5.0
University of California–Berkeley 5.0</li>
<li>Cornell University (NY) 4.6
University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign 4.6</li>
<li>University of Washington 4.5</li>
<li>Princeton University (NJ) 4.4</li>
<li>University of Texas–Austin 4.3
University of Wisconsin–Madison 4.3</li>
<li>California Institute of Technology 4.2
Georgia Institute of Technology 4.2</li>
<li>University of California–San Diego 4.0
University of Maryland–College Park 4.0</li>
<li>Harvard University (MA) 3.9
University of California–Los Angeles 3.9
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor 3.9</li>
<li>Columbia University (NY) 3.8
Purdue University–West Lafayette (IN) 3.8
University of Pennsylvania 3.8
Yale University (CT) 3.8</li>
<li>Brown University (RI) 3.7
Rice University (TX) 3.7
University of North Carolina–Chapel Hill 3.7</li>
<li>Duke University (NC) 3.6
University of Massachusetts–Amherst 3.6
University of Southern California 3.6</li>
<li>Johns Hopkins University (MD) 3.5</li>
<li>New York University 3.4
Rutgers State University–New Brunswick (NJ) 3.4
University of California–Irvine 3.4
University of Virginia 3.4</li>
<li>Pennsylvania State University–University Park 3.3</li>
<li>Ohio State University 3.2
SUNY–Stony Brook 3.2
University of California–Santa Barbara 3.2
University of Chicago 3.2
University of Colorado–Boulder 3.2
University of Minnesota–Twin Cities 3.2</li>
<li>Dartmouth College (NH) 3.1
Northwestern University (IL) 3.1
University of Arizona 3.1
University of California–Davis 3.1
University of Rochester (NY) 3.1
University of Utah 3.1
Washington University in St. Louis 3.1</li>
<li>Indiana University–Bloomington 3.0
North Carolina State University 3.0
University of Florida 3.0
Virginia Tech 3.0</li>
</ol>

32

<p>what about the rankings for undergrad?</p>

33

<p>No such thing.</p>

34

<p>are you sure?</p>

35

<p>Yes.................................................Except for the old Gourman stuff from 1995 or so.</p>