<p>In this economy, engineering is the better option. With more ivy league engineers actually entering engineering fields it will be interesting to see if they’re worth their salt. The engineering world is a lot different the the financial worlds they are used to entering. I wonder how the education holds up.</p>
<p>Japher, you mean in engineering they won’t get to make valuable societal contributions like naked shorting and unregulated credit default swaps?</p>
<p>I would imagine engineering grads from Ivy schools would be better suited to enter engineering then finance…</p>
<p>To answer the original question of the thread in part: it matters, but maybe not as much or for the reasons people might think.</p>
<p>It matters a bit if your want to go to grad school, but it matters substantially less than how well you do. Also, if you can get yourself into a good graduate school and graduate with a degree… nobody will care about where you went to undergrad ever again. In some circles, going to an unknown undergrad school and getting a graduate degree from a well-known school is better than if both schools are well known. It’s often assumed that, if you got from a no-name school to a really good one… you did so because of talent alone. </p>
<p>It matters a bit if you don’t want to go to grad school, but probably less. It’s been my experience (working as an applied scientist in industry and academia) that companies are more than willing to hire local grads at the bachelor’s level, even if they don’t come from the world’s best known engineering program. In that sense, you’re probably better off finding an undergraduate school near the place you’d like to work if your intention is to stop with a bachelor’s. It’s been my experience that it’s on the rare side for companies to interview bachelor’s level candidates who aren’t local, unless they’ve had tons of experience.</p>
<p>
Newsflash: Berkeley is very good.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Newsflash: you took my words out of context. I was comparing Berkeley relative to the top private schools. The truth of the matter is, Berkeley, for undergrad, is simply not as good as schools like Stanford or the top Ivies. </p>
<p>However, my real point is that Berkeley could be much better, in particular, if they were to get rid of stupid policies like impaction.</p>
<p>Now by saying “simply not as good as schools like Stanford or the top Ivies.” are you talking about in terms of overall brand name?</p>
<p>I think he’s talking in terms of undergraduate student experience, since i know he’s talked a lot about his bad experiences there. I’ve heard similar stories from people that felt it was a great school, but it’s just very difficult to have that great “college” experience that you wanted.</p>
<p>Sakky, but compared to the top privates Berkeley is still very good. You said it has the potential to be very good. Sorry about your bad experiences with Berkeley engineering. I had a much different experience.</p>
<p>
No, he’s talking about handholding. Look, top privates are like 5-star full service restaurants. Berkeley is a buffet. Lots of opportunities and endless variety, but you have to serve yourself.</p>
<p>But I hate buffetts though. Lots of food but usually poor quality compared to traditional restaurants. :)</p>
<p>^ Ha, yes, I do too. But Berkeley’s offerings are among the best.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually, I’m not even really talking about myself. After all, whatever else may have happened, at least I graduated. That’s far more than a lot of other people I know can say. Plenty of people I know didn’t even graduate. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Depends on what you call ‘handholding’. Is the ability to try on and switch among different majors freely a matter of ‘handholding’? I think that should be an uncontroversial right. Let’s be honest: most incoming freshmen don’t really know what they want to major in. Hence, they should be allowed the freedom to try different majors. </p>
<p>But at Berkeley, you can’t always do that. For example, if you come in as a mechanical engineering student and find out that you’d rather do EECS, you can’t just switch over. You have to request to switch, and that request is far from automatic. I know quite a few people who made such requests (i.e. from one engineering major to another) and didn’t get it, and hence were stuck in a major they didn’t really want. In other words, you - as a high school senior interested in engineering - are forced to declare - before you’ve even arrived on campus - what engineering major you want, with no guarantees that you will be able to switch out later if you find out you don’t like it. It’s like not only having to marry somebody before you’ve even met them, but also not even being sure you can get a divorce later.</p>
<p>^ Your criticisms are valid, Sakky. </p>
<p>I read an article that Berkeley has top academic programs but with a street-tough swagger. I agree that Berkeley should soften its policies, especially with regard to changing majors. However, engineering is very popular with a lot of demand and they don’t want to have students “testing the waters” and taking up space for “more serious” engineering students…that’s why I think Berkeley has some tough policies in place.</p>
<p>My cousin failed out of Berkeley and he wasn’t even an engineering student.</p>
<p>I read through this entire thread. (Yes, I’m that bored. That’s what physics and classical literature homework does to you. ;))</p>
<p>This is a really interesting topic, keep it up guys!</p>
<p>UCB, didn’t you receive a D+ in one of your classes at UCB and had to retake at a community college. That was good experience to you?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the actual policies don’t even conform to the notion of ‘taking up space’ for the ‘serious’ engineering students.</p>
<p>Let me give you an example. Student X is in the college of Letters and Science. But he wants to switch into engineering. So he takes some of the early engineering courses, and while he doesn’t get great grades, he does decently (GPA in the low 3’s). Nevertheless, his request to switch into engineering is denied because his engineering GPA isn’t high enough.</p>
<p>Student Y is in the College of Engineering. However, he does poorly and is put on academic probation because his GPA is below a 2. He hates engineering and wants to switch to L&S. But he can’t. Why? Because requesting to switch to L&S is not assured. You need a decent GPA to be approved, and his GPA is clearly quite poor. The result: his request is denied and he is forced to stay in the engineering school. </p>
<p>The upshot is that one student who is in engineering and desperately wants to leave is forced to stay, and another student who wants to get into engineering and is performing decently (or at least, better than the other student) is not allowed in. In other words everybody loses. Both students are stuck in majors they don’t really want. Honestly, why can’t you let them swap places? You’re not taking up any additional space in engineering. Student Y is already taking up space. Why can’t the students just exchange places? Then both students would be allowed to major in what they want. No extra spaces would have to be created. You’re just using spaces that were already created. Everybody would win. Instead, everybody loses. </p>
<p>Note, this is an actual, real-world example. I actually know who students X and Y are. What makes the situation even more sad is that student Y eventually flunked out, because he was continually forced to take engineering courses in which he was clearly not interested in and not good at. If Y had switched to L&S, he almost certainly would have a degree now (for, after all, he actually did well in his L&S classes, just not in engineering classes). But as it stands now, he ended up with no degree at all. Student X did graduate, but in a major that he didn’t really want.</p>
<p>Well, sakky has certainly helped to put a certain UCB GPA into perspective. I used to interview/hire a UCB graduate with 3.75 GPA. I thought he was smart but now in restropect, I should have laid down the red carpet or bowed down to him. :D</p>
<p>
Uh no. I never took a class at a community college. I retook the math class at UCB during summer session.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You’re not factoring in the administrative cost of allowing students to switch majors, even if they’re just swapping places. Unless things in the UC system have changed, costly administrative overhead is one of the things that the UC system tries to minimize (perhaps because they don’t feel they have the resources), so they limit departmental transfers, readmits, etc. This is in contrast to places like MIT, where one can easily switch majors, there is a much more liberal policy towards readmits, etc.</p>
<p>If this is one of the things that is discouraging students from majoring in engineering, perhaps the companies who are complaining the loudest about this should subsidize the administrative overhead to keep students there.</p>
<p>As an aside, some people like the fact that it’s necessary to “tough out” one’s major in the UC system. It’s worn like a badge of honor. It makes some people feel as if they’re superior to MIT students who get to switch majors virtually anytime.</p>