best undergraduate engineering school

<p>Son accepted to CMU and HM. Chose CMU because 1) Bigger school for eng and sciences and humanities with culture of cross disciplines. 2) Has well known graduate school. 3)Degree in specialized engineering (ME) rather than general engineering degree at HM. 4) Further from home. 5)Recruiters flock to CMU.</p>

<p>Son's cousins have different reasons for attending a particular school. They want Division 1 schools because they are athletes.</p>

<p>Your particular reasons may differ. Good luck.</p>

<p>Additional comments to Rogracer:</p>

<p>I have a very close relation who was a department head of a national research laboratory. He himself graduated from State Ag U with BS. I asked him very similiar questions that this thread raises. </p>

<p>His reply: His best performer has an AS degree. His other people came from all types of schools, backrounds, degrees and majors. What was common between all of them was that they liked what they were doing, focused and dedicated. </p>

<p>As for our son- We cared only if he would be happy with the school of his choice. His reasons to attend his school is more in line with questioners to this thread.</p>

<p>I have a close friend that graduated from Rose-Hulman. We have worked together for years. He is one of the best software and systems engineers we have. Another very good small school is LeTourneau University in Longview, TX. We take a lot of engineers from there and they are all well prepared.</p>

<p>< b u m p ></p>

<p>
[quote]
For someone who is serious about determining the relative quality of undergraduate engineering programs, the ABET criteria provide a useful starting point. They provide a rational and systematic basis for evaluating the quality and adequacy of undergraduate engineering programs. These are the criteria that are important to the engineering educators themselves. According to Narayana Rao, Ph.D., Professor and Associate Department Head Electrical and Computer Engineering at the University of Illinois Urbana-Champagne, the recent UIUC ABET re-accreditation process "shattered the myth that highly-reputed, large, research-intensive departments do not pay serious attention to the importance of ABET evaluation".

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, I don't know about that. As a case in point, Berkeley's materials science and bioengineering programs are not ABET accredited. Stanford's materials science program is not accredited. But materials science at Michigan Tech (not MIT or Michigan State, but Michigan Tech) is accredited. Bioengineering at the University of Toledo is accredited. I think very few people would contend that mat sci or bioE at Michigan Tech or Toledo are better than Berkeley or Stanford just because they're accredited. </p>

<p>Instead, accreditation has to be looked at in the light of whether it actually matters to the field in question. As far as I know, there are no state procedures to accredit Professional Bioengineers or Professional Materials Scientists, and even if they were, most employers probably wouldn't care anyway. Similarly, while there is a system to oversee EE's or ME's, again the vast majority of EE or ME employers don't really care. For example, when Intel manufactures microprocessors, Intel doesn't really need to have Professional Electrical Engineers oversee the process, and similarly GM doesn't really need to have a Professional Mechanical Engineer overseeing the manufacture of its vehicles. Being a PE might be a filip that garners you an advantage in terms of hiring, but you don't really need it to do the job. </p>

<p>Accreditation seems to be most important in CivE.</p>

<p>Number of National Academy of Engineering (NAE) members on faculty</p>

<p>NAE membership is the highest academic honor an engineer can obtain, so it's a good proxy of the overall faculty quality</p>

<p>MIT 107
Stanford 84
Berkeley 72
UT-Austin 48
Caltech 29
Georgia Tech 25
Illinois 25
UCSB 25
Cornell 23
Michigan 21
Columbia 20
Carnegie Mellon 19
Princeton 19
U Southern California 19
Texas A&M 19
Minnesota 18
Northwestern 18
UCLA 17
UCSD 16
Wisconsin 16
Purdue 15
Harvard 14
Rice 13
Washington 13
Maryland 12
Rensselear 11
Colorado 10
Arizona 10
Va Tech 10
Case Western 9
Johns Hopkins 9
Penn 9
Virginia 9
NC State 8
Utah 7
Florida 6
Houston 6
UC Davis 6
UNC 6
UC Irvine 5
Rochester 5
Yale 5
Brown 4
Dartmouth 4
Kansas 4
U Mass 4
Pittsburgh 4
Duke 3
Tennessee 3
New Mexico 2
Notre Dame 2
Tulsa 2</p>

<p>source <a href="http://www.nae.edu%5B/url%5D"&gt;www.nae.edu&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>sakky-
You are probably correct about the significance of receiving ABET accreditation. In the passage you quoted, I was arguing that the ABET criteria are useful for evaluating the quality of a particular engineering program. To the extent that programs meet or exceed the criteria, they are effectively training engineers. I don't think I was trying to say that accreditation itself was a pre-requisite for quality. Excellent programs may not be accredited. I don't think the Cornell Applied and Engineering Physics program is accredited but it has been ranked #1 by US News.</p>

<p>ABET has general criteria for engineering education and then specific criteria for each engineering discipline.</p>

<p>Here is a link.
<a href="http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2007-08%20EAC%20Criteria%2011-15-06.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.abet.org/Linked%20Documents-UPDATE/Criteria%20and%20PP/E001%2007-08%20EAC%20Criteria%2011-15-06.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I don't know whether the results of an ABET evaluation are available to applicants, but it can't hurt to ask.</p>

<p>You guys are all talking about universities with grad schools. I thought the original question had to do with undergrad.</p>

<p>USNews has a ranking of their opinion of the best undergrad engineering schools. #1 Rose-Hulman, #2 Harvey Mudd, #3 Cooper Union, #4 Cal Poly and the Military academies. </p>

<p>For what it's worth, my dad was an engineer for AT&T/Lucent. He loved to hire Renssalaer Polytech grads. He told me he would automatically interview anyone who graduated from RPI, because every engineer he hired from there knew their stuff.</p>

<p>Just because a school has a grad component does not mean they don't do a good job with ugs too. </p>

<p>Penn St seems to be missing from the list of top schools by NAE members.</p>

<p>Lafalum, you missunderstand the USNWR rankings. The USNWR ranks two sort of undergraduate programs:</p>

<p>1) Those that are in universities that have a graduate program, like MIT or Caltech.</p>

<p>2) Those that are in universities that do not have a graduate program, like HMC and Cooper Union.</p>

<p>But in both canses, the USNWR is measuring the quality of undergraduate education.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Penn St seems to be missing from the list of top schools by NAE members.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, according to the site it should be 10. So that part of the list should be:</p>

<p>Arizona 10
Colorado 10
Penn St 10
Va Tech 10</p>

<p>And as an aside, Princeton now has 21 according to the same site. That is VERY impressive given its size!</p>

<p>According to U.S News Rankings</p>

<p>Top undergraduate engineering programs
1.MIT
2.Stanford
3.Berkely
4.Caltech, Illinois</p>

<p>Top graduate engineering programs:
1.MIT
2.Stanford
3.Berkely
4.Gatech
5.Illinois
6Carnegie Mellon University
7.Caltech, USC
9.Michigan
10.Cornell</p>