<p>For undergrads,
which undergrad. has better engineering school?
Also whats their acceptance rate for ED?
I want unbiased comments plz.</p>
<p>Penn and Columbia's engineering programs are pretty balanced overall. IMO, Penn is stronger in bioengineering, materials science and nanotechnology. I've also seen somewhat dated rankings (NRC for example) which place Penn's chemical engineering in the top 10-12. Columbia seems somewhat stronger in electrical engineering and mechanical engineering. Penn has systems engineering and Columbia has operations research (I think).</p>
<p>Columbia gets more research funding per faculty member, but Penn's engineering undergrads are stronger students (SATs, etc.). Also, Penn Engineering is a larger school, and arguably more integrated into the rest of the university than Columbia SEAS due to Penn's One University policy.</p>
<p>Overall, neither school makes the guys in Palo Alto, Pittsburg or Cambridge loose any sleep at night.</p>
<p>Also, C SEAS is definitely considered a step child to Columbia College. At Penn, SEAS is overshadowed by Wharton and not as chic as the College (SAS). But students from both schools are as well placed, if not better positioned, to get top jobs at elite firms; and by this I mean investment banks and consulting firms (which is where a huge percentage of these SEAS students actually go post-graduation).</p>
<p>I'm went to C SEAS eons ago. I agree with R&B that both are good schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, C SEAS is definitely considered a step child to Columbia College
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I have never gotten that impression. Do you go to Columbia?</p>
<p>I never got that impression too when I went to SEAS. Not sure what it's like now. The beauty of both SEAS is being able to take the liberal arts courses that would not be available at a pure engineering school.</p>
<p>I agree that Penn and Columbia's engineering programs are pretty balanced, but i feel red and blue's opinions are partly how they used to be relative to each other and partly inaccurate, not how they actually are now. I'm at fu and my brother went to penn engineering and he approves of this: </p>
<p>penn engineering apart bioengineering, is not better than seas (not sure penn has a strong materials science/ nanotech base either), penn's engineering program by itself is not that strong, it is lifted by joint degree programs like the jerome fisher programme in management and technology which attract some of the smartest applicants and enrollees in the country. mechanical and electrical are not columbia's strongest programs, they're good but not up there. Columbia has very strong earth and environmental engineering and financial engineering departments. the rest are all solid. a large proportion of grads from both schools go onto to wall street (and are quite well placed). </p>
<p>"Penn's engineering undergrads are stronger students (SATs, etc.)"</p>
<p>do you know this red and blue? I don't think it is the case, to talk statistics (which i don't find particularly useful) fu has become far more competitive than it used to be, over three years acceptance rate has gone from 25 to 22 to 18%, according to collegeboard average SAT scores are 1390-1540, MIT (not mit engineering) are 1380-1560. I don't think penn engineering's are even equal let alone better.</p>
<p>"Penn Engineering is a larger school, and arguably more integrated into the rest of the university than Columbia SEAS due to Penn's One University policy"</p>
<p>as the other people said, columbia has that one university policy, that aside though after being at columbia (and you can read numerous threads about it), i feel there is no distinction whatsoever between seas and CC, in the beginning CC kids are a little caught up in their super low acceptance rate a few weeks into freshman year though, they find out that their SAT scores are a good deal lower, realize that fu kids are exactly the same, with similar interests and just as smart (often smarter :P). in fact fu kids often help out CC kids with sciencey stuff, and CC kids help fu kids out with humanity stuff, writing papers etc. no distinction, both realize the resource in the other. there is quite a bit of seas pride at columbia :).</p>
<p>I agree that interms of pure engineering neither makes the top ranked schools lose sleep at night, Fu is slowly beginning to poach some of their acceptees (i and many others turned down carnegie i know a few that turned down mit, caltech), and penn's M&T programme has over years taken away acceptees to those schools, but those are not so much because of their raw engineering programs.</p>
<p>If you ask me, i think Fu has the edge unless you want to do something like an extra degree from wharton (which many penn seas kids try and often end up doing), or bioengineering. But really the schools are comparable on a number of levels.</p>
<p>Please be aware that red&blue is a penn student (or alum?) and he will always be biased towards penn. then again, anyone else who posts here will most likely be biased towards columbia....</p>
<p>Yes Skraylor is correct i am a proud Penn alum. I don't let it cloud my statements on these threads however.</p>
<p>Re the Columbia College issue, I'm basing that statement on posts from Columbia students who always quote the admit selectivity, rankings, etc of that portion of Columbia's undergrad program. Even Columbia (until recently) would quote stats for CC, excluding SEAS. That silly trend is reversing itself, but only slowly.</p>
<p>And finally, Penn is stellar in the areas I mentioned (bioE, nanotech) per US News, Small Times, etc. I thought Columbia was strong in EE and MechE; if not, then I don't know where their strengths are. Anyone care to add details in that regard. </p>
<p>While both schools are roughly balanced, Columbia SEAS does seem to have slightly more momentum on the whole. Today, they're equal. In 5-10 years, Columbia may have a decided edge...time will tell.</p>
<p>Columbia is strong in earth & environmental engineering and CS too - they've got a lot of AI research going on, and their CS grads go on to a wide variety of interesting places.</p>
<p>Red & Blue's analysis is pretty fair, although i'd like to see a link to something describing Penn's BioE and Nanotech as first-rate (just so we know what we're talking about).</p>
<p>The relationship of SEAS to Columbia College is pretty equal. Both have access to the same sets of jobs after graduation (and are treated with equal respect), you share dorms, dining halls, administration, and lots of classes. CC kids make jokes about SEAS kids being geeks who can't get laid, SEAS kids goof on CC about soon-to-be-unemployed liberal arts majors, and so on. Any distinction that gets drawn is superficial and there's no us-vs-them mentality.</p>
<p>and I agree with r&b's larger point that, as engineering schools, neither school is spectacular. Both are great places to get an education while majoring in an engineering subject, but the depth of placement in traditional engineering roles probably isn't as good.</p>
<p>I think engineering rankings are far more program/department specific than the arts and sciences (colleges) of universities. Though SEAS doesnt have the engineering reputation of MIT, Caltech, etc, its Financial Engineering program is considered one of the best, if not the best, with Berkeley.</p>