<p>How good are these programs?</p>
<p>Is it worth staying 5 years (as opposed 4 for just a BS) for it? Or nah? I was just wondering because, depending on where I go, I may be able to cash in on a lot of credits, and I was thinking I could even try to do such a path on 4 years.</p>
<p>Hmm, I interested in hearing about this too.</p>
<p>An MS in engineering doesn’t add much value on the job market compared to a BS (literally a few thousand difference in starting salary for an extra year of college). If you’re interested in a PhD instead industry, that would be a different situation since most BS/MS programs have a thesis option. </p>
<p>I wouldn’t choose a lower-ranked school because of a BS/MS program. But if you’re already in a school and you have the option for an MS, it’s a personal choice. In a bad economy, I’d probably go for the MS because of the depressed job market (waiting a year and hoping things rebound). In a good economy, probably not.</p>
<p>If you’re coming in with a ton of credit, then you stand a decent chance of being able to do a BS/MS in four years. One of my friends managed it without too much extra hassle (and even picked up a minor or two), and I could have swung it if I hadn’t graduated early. I didn’t get the MS since I knew I was going to grad school, and had heard from most of my professors that most grad classes (and degrees) won’t transfer across institutions. Instead I just worked for one of my professors after finishing undergrad, then going off to grad school at the normal time.</p>
<p>One of the main reasons I am so interested in RIT is because of their dual degree BS/MS option; the other reason is because of their co-op program.
It doesn’t seem like you can beat a BS/MS and a couple years of work experience under your belt after five years.</p>
<p>I am also interested in reasons for not going into the dual degree program so I will be watching this thread! ^.^</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What? Degrees obviously transfer (if you have an MS, you’ll likely get to skip some coursework in the PhD), and some programs allow other things to transfer (if you’ve passed comp in a different school, they won’t make you retake it, etc).</p>
<p>The thing about a doctoral program is that it isn’t a set curriculum. In an undergraduate program, you need XXX number of hours to graduate. In a doctoral program, you just take classes that you and your advisor think you need. One student could take 10 courses, another student in the same department could take 20. It just sort of “works out”.</p>
<p>As for reasons against it - I don’t think there are many other than that it probably adds a year on your degree. I guess you could say that it’s a wasted opportunity, though. MS programs are MUCH easier to get into than BS and PhD programs for engineering (they’re not that value-added, so people who want research skip them, and people who want industry positions stick with the BS). So, even if you couldn’t imagine getting into MIT for a BS, you might have a good shot to get an MIT MS.</p>
<p>Actually looking at Marquette because of this option. You can do a BS/MS in five years. You can do a BS with coop in five years. Or you can do a BS/MS and coop in six years.
We’re looking at the six year route.</p>
<p>Son’s game plan is to get married and have children immediately upon graduation, so I’m hoping he’ll do the six year plan. So hard to go back to school once you get married, have kids.</p>
<p>This is really funny, though, because son doesn’t have a girlfriend, has gone to all boys schools since fifth grade. He figures he’ll meet his future wife in college and be set for life. </p>
<p>Oh, the dreams of the young.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That sounds really good except I hope he doesn’t get sick of college after 6 years (granted part of the time will be spent co-oping).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I know a few people that came in with a MS and they only managed to get out of, at best, three of our 15 classes. Guess it might depend on the program you’re in. I know the curriculum of MSE programs at every school varies quite widely, so that might be why they’re less prone to give credit for coursework done elsewhere.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This also varies from program to program. I know at my undergrad school in my department, graduates had to take four classes the first term (all the same), and then over the course of the rest of their PhD they had to take 4-6 more depending on their interest. At UCSB there’s only 3-4 required courses, but have a similar total number of courses required. Here, we have to take 15 classes minimum in the first two years (within very strict guidelines). In the Chemistry department, they’re only required to take something like five classes total.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>For some programs, notably the top private colleges, sure, it is probably easier to get into the MS program than the BS program.</p>
<p>But if the school is a low-tier, no-name college, it is almost certainly false, not because MS admissions are that hard (they aren’t but because BS admissions really aren’t that hard. Let’s be perfectly honestly. Even somebody who barely graduated from high school can still get into a no-name college at which he could then declare an engineering major. That’s not to say that he would necessarily be able to complete the engineering major, but he could still get into the major. And - let’s face it - most colleges are low-tier, no-name colleges.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Since you seem to want to speak about MIT and equivalent schools, I would argue that a MS from those schools can be supremely value-added, depending on what you are looking with your career. I know quite a few people who leveraged their MS engineering programs at MIT to get jobs in management consulting, investment banking, private equity, or venture capital. One of them even candidly explained his career strategy when he started his program: his undergrad school, a relatively low-ranked school, simply didn’t attract recruiters or have a strong alumni network from those sorts of industries that he wanted, and he was not satisfied with the types of jobs that were available upon graduation, even the jobs available to the top graduates (as he was). So he decided to go to MIT to access the types of job opportunities that he did want. Now he’s a consultant at McKinsey. I’m sure he would say that getting his MS from MIT was by far the best career decision he ever made, for otherwise he would probably just be working as an average engineer job at an average company, which he did not want. </p>
<p>Another strategy that I’ve seen works regards entrepreneurship. Schools such as Stanford and MIT are prominent entrepreneurship hubs, and successful entrepreneurship - and especially the venture capital fund raising process - is highly predicated by social networking. I know many people who have entered MS programs at MIT/Stanford with the express intention of either founding a company, or if they’ve already founded one, with leveraging the MIT/Stanford brand name to attract funding and business partners. {One interesting quirk about the VC community is that they seem to be quite willing to take meetings with students from their old alma maters, which often times means Stanford or MIT.} </p>
<p>Couple that with the fact that the many VC’s hang around the campuses of those schools looking for ideas - with some of them even serving as (adjunct) faculty - which means that being a student at those schools can be viewed as one big funding opportunity which also happens to confer upon you a degree at the end. Noubar Afeyan, Managing Partner and CEO of Flagship Ventures, is also a senior lecturer at MIT and teaches a graduate course on how to found a startup. The class also brings in lots of other venture capitalists as guest speakers. Many people take that course with the express intention of obtaining pitching their own startup ideas, or at least building a professional network of VC’s that they can return to later for funding once they’ve founded their startup. Similarly Jonathan Fleming teaches a course on Biomedical Firm Strategy. He also just so happens to be Managing Partner at Oxford BioSciences Partners. Stanford has a course on Entrepreneurship and Venture Capital course co-taught by Pete Wendell, MD and founder of Sierra Ventures, Andy Rechleff, founding GP of Benchmark Capital…oh, and also Eric Schmidt, CEO of a little company called Google. Basically, these courses can open the doors to a wide range of startup funding and networking opportunities that you would have never had any other way. </p>
<p>So it all gets down to what you really want out of your career. I can agree that if you just want to embark upon the standard engineering career path, then the MS - even from a top school like MIT or Stanford - may not be highly valuable. But if you’re looking to do something else - such as launching your own tech startup - then that may be a different story.</p>
<p>“An MS in engineering doesn’t add much value on the job market compared to a BS (literally a few thousand difference in starting salary for an extra year of college).”</p>
<p>Is this true with M. Eng’s too? I thought those added $10k+ to a starting salary.</p>
<p>sorry to bother but is it really that easy to get into a MS program in MIT? if so, y?</p>
<p>its not EASY. its just (arguably) not as hard as getting into the PhD program.</p>
<p>Sakky or GP</p>
<p>When you say that an MIT MS degree is easily accessible compared to a BS or PhD from MIT - what exactly do you mean? I looked at some of the MS programs at MIT and it seemed like the ones that I looked at required fairly substantial work experience. Specifically, I looked at the MLOG program, the Systems Design and Management program, and Leaders for Manufacturing - all of them seemed to say that work experience was more or less expected - plus, the average test scores for the MLOG program were still very high, I dont know about the others. On top of this, the whole prospect seemed like a fairly bad use of ones time, I believe that the MIT website said that the average MS degree garnered only 66,000$ - not exactly what I want to be making with years of work experience and a degree from MIT.</p>
<p>Anyway, I was interested in what sakky said about the networking opportunities of an MS at MIT - seemed like a good idea However, with an average GMAT score(for MLOG you can choose either the GRE or GMAT) of 710 - which, if Im not mistaken is actually higher than the average GMAT for a Sloan MBA, and an average starting salary of about half of an MBA with similar work experience and test scores - what gives?</p>
<p>Did you mean specifically for engineering fields such as EE, ME, ChemE etc. I am in Industrial Engineering and the ESD(engineering systems design) which encompasses the programs I mentioned above, is pretty much the only option in the IE field.</p>
<p>bump on the M. Eng question. Will it add more salary wise than an MS would?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>No. A master’s degree will not add much salary in engineering unless you’re going to a much better school.</p>
<p>Purduefrank, I think you should be doing your research more carefully. Much of the information you have cited is erroneous, and you could have easily checked it yourself. I don’t mind discussing MIT, but I think it’s fair that people should put in a bit of time to do some basic background research. I don’t think I should have to do that for you. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wrong. The average MIT bachelor’s degree recipient in 2008 made 66k. </p>
<p>In 2008, the average non-MBA master’s degree graduate at MIT made somewhere from 79k-85k, depending on whether we’re talking about the MS (actually the ‘SM’ in MIT parlance) or the MEng. </p>
<p><a href=“http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/graduation08.pdf[/url]”>http://web.mit.edu/career/www/infostats/graduation08.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those are all Sloan master’s programs. Sloan is a business school, hence work experience is paramount. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Those with work experience will make far more. For example, in 2008, the SDM grads (almost all of them with significant experience) made an average starting salary of 121k, and that doesn’t even count the bonuses, which can be large. But of course you have to keep in mind that the average incoming SDM student is 35 years old and has 10 years of work experience.</p>
<p><a href=“http://sdm.mit.edu/docs/sdm_employment_report08.pdf[/url]”>http://sdm.mit.edu/docs/sdm_employment_report08.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>First off, if you want a Sloan MBA, then apply to the Sloan MBA program. GMAT is a poor indicator for management knowledge of job-hunting success. </p>
<p>Secondly, in 2007, the average Mlog starting salary, not including bonus, was 104k.</p>
<p>Third, you should also bear in mind that the Mlog program is a one-year program, whereas the Sloan MBA, like almost every other US MBA program, is 2 years long. </p>
<p>[MIT</a> MLOG - Recruitment](<a href=“Move your career—and the world—forward at MIT. - SCM”>Move your career—and the world—forward at MIT. - SCM)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Or the SM program in the MIT Operations Research Center.</p>
<p>[MIT</a> ORC - SM Program](<a href=“Operations Research Center”>Operations Research Center)</p>
<p>"No. A master’s degree will not add much salary in engineering unless you’re going to a much better school. "</p>
<p>Hmm this is contrary to what I’ve heard before. From all of the data I’ve seen a BS in Chem Eng averages around $64k starting salary, while an M. Eng puts you into the low $70k. If there’s no significant salary boost, what is the benefit of an M. Eng?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You can get a better type of job, i.e. a job with a role that you may find more interesting. Desirability of a job isn’t measured by salary only. For example, having an MEng may provide you with an advantage if you want to get a job in R&D or product design. </p>
<p>But generally, I agree with GPBurdell that an MEng is often times not highly advantageous.</p>