Computer Science Undergrad Programs

College Search & Selection
21

<p>Speaking to some CMU students/faculty on a visit there, they seem to give the impression that people tend to significant overrate the <em>computer science</em> (not the overall education!) program of ivies. From what I was told, Harvard, Yale, Penn pale in comparison to CMU's program for undergraduates. Furthermore they seemed to be particularly harsh vis-a-vis Columbia's CS program. </p>

<p>All in all if you had to draw up a top tier on the basis of undergraduate CS program. What would it look like?
I get the impression it would look something like this:
"Tier A": CMU, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Cornell, Princeton, University of Maryland College Park? (in my mind I would categorize Maryland as perhaps a tier B school, but it did graduate Sergey Brin and apparently is an undergraduate feeder school to Google of CS majors)</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
From what I was told, Harvard, Yale, Penn pale in comparison to CMU's program for undergraduates.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>True. Then again, CMU is pretty amazing in CS, so it's difficult to measure up.</p>

<p>
[quote]
CMU, Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, Cornell, Princeton, University of Maryland College Park?

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I wouldn't put UMCP up with the others -- it's definitely "Tier B" for CS. In the NRC ranking, for instance, Harvard is even put ahead of UMCP.</p>

23

<p>NRC is very old now (1993) for something as dynamic as CS. Also UM has put lots of $$$ into certain areas including CS.</p>

24

<p>^^ I thought NRC was 1995. And I don't think departments will change drastically in the new one. It's possible, I suppose, but schools change slowly, even within fields, even within "dynamic" ones like CS. I daresay the top CS schools will still be the top CS schools.</p>

25

<p>U Maryland College Park is ranked 13 for their GRADUATE comp sci program by US News and their UNDERGRAD SAT scores are just a little below UNC Chapel Hill and UVA. Their undergrad comp sci is probably pretty decent.</p>

26

<p>It was published in 1995 but I believe the survey behind it was done in 1993. Either way it is getting out of date.</p>