<p>hi everyone,</p>
<p>i'm debating between going to cmu for electrical engineering and columbia for applied math/financial engineering and maybe a minor in EE. i know companies like google recruit on each campus, but which school would be easier for a quantitative finance career? i'm thinking that after a few years in that industry, i'll go on to a masters in comp sci or engineering. would this be easier from cmu or columbia? pros/cons would be appreciated. thanks!</p>
<p>finance? most definitely columbia.</p>
<p>why would you want to get a masters after working? most eng masters are 1 additional year of school and it hardly seems the work experience would get you much....in that case tho, either school will get you into good grad programs</p>
<p>Finance is unquestionably better at Columbia. It's one of the strongest programs in the country and you'll have tons of job opportunities just because your already in New York. </p>
<p>Engineering in general is better at CMU, but on the undergrad level, there isn't much of a difference between schools, since you won't be studying at a high enough level for the differences to present themselves.
That said, both will get you into great grad programs. It'll be much more about how you do in college than which one you go to since they're comparable schools.</p>
<p>For engineering in general, CMU is better than SEAS, however if your goal is a finance job then Columbia is second only to Harvard and Wharton. At the end of the day though, SEAS will set you up for engr grad school just as well as CMU would; the undergrad experience, like s snack said, isnt that much different.</p>
<p>
[quote]
the undergrad experience, like s snack said, isnt that much different.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>what? nyc is completely different than pittsburgh</p>
<p>I think he meant the undergraduate experience in terms of curriculum.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Engineering in general is better at CMU,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
For engineering in general, CMU is better than SEAS,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is the conventional wisdom, but it's pretty meaningless. What is "engineering in general"? You'll get a better education? You'll have a higher paying job? Employers will be more impressed with your degree? Your professors get more grant money? Your school's grad program gives out more degrees</p>
<p>I dont think anyone disputes that CMU engineering is more engineering-intensive than SEAS, and that CMU is perceived as being a better school for those who plan to pursue engineering further.</p>
<p>look, i went through the whole SEAS engineering curriculum. The guys coming out of CMU and even places like Drexel are working much harder and learning a greater span of engineering methodologies and subject areas. that's just a fact, their "engineering" curriculum is harder. so to answer the question, if i were going to go work at a Boeing or ExxonMobil or HVAC consultancy, i'd do much better at another school.</p>
<p>But Columbia isn't a trade school. In terms of a well-rounded education, i could give you chapter and verse on why columbia was a fantastic value for my money. and the list would start with the people, who are (by and large) tremendously smart and intellectually curious and push you to stretch your level of thinking, etc.</p>
<p>As for computer science, i've known a number of CS or math guys who ended up at Google, ebay, microsoft, and startups. Even as a mere CS minor, I just cleared the first two rounds of Google interviews without breaking a sweat (don't have an offer of course, but my point is i'm not hugely disadvantaged here).</p>
<p>If you have your heart set on a career in mechanical engineering or environmental engineering, sure it's more of a toss-up. If you want to be a computer programmer for 40 years, CMU has some of the best connections and recruiting in the country. but if you want a great education and a great variety of opportunities, Columbia does much better overall. Plus, you know, we rock at placing people into finance positions. One of the (very) few things our career office does very well at.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I dont think anyone disputes that CMU engineering is more engineering-intensive than SEAS, and that CMU is perceived as being a better school for those who plan to pursue engineering further.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't dispute the first half of this sentence -- that's a specific statement, and it's true that the curriculum is more focused on hardcore engineering than SEAS.</p>
<p>However, for the second half of the sentence, I cannot blindly accept that broad proposition and think you need to ask the more specific questions -- are you better prepared to have the skills you need to work as an engineer coming out of CMU than SEAS? are your chances of getting a good job in industry better simply by having the CMU name / connections over that of SEAS? are your chances of getting into a good engineering grad program better from CMU over SEAS?</p>
<p>Another way to look at this: are you at a disadvantage coming out of SEAS as opposed to other engineering institutions like CMU, in terms of knowing what you need to know to do your job or in terms of getting the job you want in the first place, based on the fact that you've had less of a hardcore engineering curriculum? It's not easy to answer this question.</p>