<p>Just curious about your opinions on the EE programs at Cal (Berkeley), UCLA, and UCSD? (preferably thoughts from current students, but I will read all opinions).</p>
<p>USNEWS.com (Colleges2006) site has certain rankings and ratings, which I have read and find somewhat valueable. However, it is also good to hear from the horse's mouth (so to speak). </p>
<p>Thanks.</p>
<p>Cal is the best, by far, but I heard it is VERY cut throat. Students will sabotage your project in order to get a higher grade, even more so, students (in the library) will tear out pages out of books which are helpful. UCSD will very good too, it ranks above LA. UCSD is by far the best campus, and also has a very good engineering program.</p>
<p>I go to Cal, and those rumors are so far from the truth. I have never seen it happen, and neither has my roomate who is premed, taking classes that are notorious for weeding out students. In fact, in engineering, a lot of people work in groups b/c the problem sets are so time consuming.</p>
<p>Cal is the best by far. They're very well represented at top graduate programs.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Cal is the best, by far, but I heard it is VERY cut throat. Students will sabotage your project in order to get a higher grade, even more so, students (in the library) will tear out pages out of books which are helpful.
[/quote]
I hope you're joking...</p>
<p>and the point is. </p>
<p>I am asking a serious question about if there is/are any substantial differences (in Electrical Engineering) between the campuses. USNEWS.com (a very reputable site) rates them all quite high. Yes, I know that Berkeley is rated above the other two, i can read. I am asking for real substantive thoughts. </p>
<p>thanks.</p>
<p>I don't think anyone has gone to all three. Realize that most posts on this website are garbage from anxious high schoolers. Is this substantive?</p>
<p>berkeley's program is top notch. like, mit cmu cornell eecs notch. ucsd and la are close, not as highly regarded, but still quite well known.</p>
<p>curriculum wise, i'm not too sure it's different. yes, b is on the semester system while la and sd are quarter schools. this might play into your consideration. however, they're all uc schools, and thus, likely all have the same curriculum.</p>
<p>as for the sd campus being the best, well it's all relative. however coming from someone who spent 15 years near uc b and now goes to ucsd, ucb campus > ucsd campus...but ucsd weather > ucb weather.</p>
<p>Cal, like most top Engineering programs, is indeed cutthroat. But the nightmare stories about students sabotaging each other are blown out of proportion. Sure it happens once in a very rare while, but that happens everywhere. I have known several engineers at Cal, and none of them ever had any problems. In fact, they really enjoyed their experience, even if it was a lot of work.</p>
<p>Karthikkito, I attended Georgetown Prep in Rockville back in the late 80s. I loved it there.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I am asking a serious question about if there is/are any substantial differences (in Electrical Engineering) between the campuses
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I suppose that really depends on what you mean by 'substantial'. The truth is, undergrad engineering education anywhere is basically the same. The textbooks are largely the same, the curriculum is largely the same, the labs are largely the same. And yes, the salaries tend to be largely the same. Berkeley EE's don't make starting salaries substantially more than the national average for EE's, once corrected for cost-of-living. Berkeley EE's do start out making 20% more than the average EE does nationwide, but I'm quite certain that the SF Bay Area is far more than just 20% more costly to live in than the national average. </p>
<p><a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/EECS.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/EECS.stm</a>
<a href="http://money.cnn.com/2004/02/05/pf/college/lucrative_degrees/%5B/url%5D">http://money.cnn.com/2004/02/05/pf/college/lucrative_degrees/</a></p>
<p>But Sakky, how many top firms recruit aggressively at Cal and what percent of Cal graduates get several good offers from those companies by the time they graduate? If you compare those numbers to those at an average Engineering program, I am sure the difference would be substantial. Also, a significant portion of Cal graduates get top jobs with IBanks and MCs...you cannot say that of most Engineering programs in the nation. Finally, if a student wishes to go for a graduate degree in Engineering, it is easier to get into a top program when graduating from Cal then when graduating from an average program.</p>
<p>This said, UCSD and UCLA are not average...they are excellent in their own right. But I think it is important to stress that the quality of the Engineering program does make an impact on one's future.</p>
<p>i don't know specifically about EE, but i can talk about engineering in general. </p>
<p>if i remember correctly from when i was deciding between schools last year, Berkeley's engineering programs were in general more flexible (with more electives and fewer required core classes) than UCLA's and UCSD's. That probably has something to do with the the semester system, and something to do with some of berkeley's engineering programs not being ABET accredited, which I'm told isn't a big deal. also, ucsd made it sound like it was literally impossible to transfer into the impacted majors like bioE and CS, while at berkeley it's officially possible, but hard. </p>
<p>I bet that you'd end up learning more or less the same stuff at all three colleges. Personally, i vote for berkeley because 1) i go there, 2) there's more flexibility, and 3) i like the slower pace of the semester system. </p>
<p>Oh yeah, we also have a better football team. UCLA's win was a fluke, and I mainly blaim Ayoob.</p>
<p>
[quote]
ucsd made it sound like it was literally impossible to transfer into the impacted majors like bioE and CS, while at berkeley it's officially possible, but hard
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's possible, but there are two problems. First, the demand for it is very high so the %age of kids who get in very low. Second, bioe's have a second quarter seminar they're required to take before all other engineering courses which typically begin during sophomore year; students transferring will be pushed back over one year if they switch in.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But Sakky, how many top firms recruit aggressively at Cal and what percent of Cal graduates get several good offers from those companies by the time they graduate? If you compare those numbers to those at an average Engineering program, I am sure the difference would be substantial. Also, a significant portion of Cal graduates get top jobs with IBanks and MCs...you cannot say that of most Engineering programs in the nation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that prestigious "top" employers tend to gravitate towards Berkeley (and MIT and Stanford, and schools of that caliber).<br>
The same is true of MC and IB firms.</p>
<p>But then you look at the salaries that the Berkeley (and Stanford and MIT) engineers and you realize that they aren't getting paid significantly more than the grads of lesser schools. </p>
<p>Take a gander at the engineering salaries garnered from the grads from Berkeley and Stanford, and compare them to the salaries garnered from the engineering grads from San Jose State. They're not very different. </p>
<p><a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CDC/surveys/0304/engineering.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.stanford.edu/dept/CDC/surveys/0304/engineering.html</a>
<a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/EECS.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/EECS.stm</a>
<a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/MechEngr.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/MechEngr.stm</a>
<a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/ChemEngr.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/ChemEngr.stm</a>
<a href="http://careercenter.sjsu.edu/download/SJSU%20NACESalary%20Survey%2004%2005.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://careercenter.sjsu.edu/download/SJSU%20NACESalary%20Survey%2004%2005.pdf</a></p>
<p>For example, the 2004 Berkeley ME's got about 55.8k. The 2005 SJSU ME's got 56.7k. The 2004 Stanford ME's got about 52.6k. Yes, the data isn't totally comparable because the Berkeley and Stanford data is only 2004 data, whereas the SJSU data is 2005 data, but the point is, the salaries are basically the same.</p>
<p>Or take EE. SJSU in 2005, got 56.4k. Berkeley in 2004 was 59.6k. Stanford in 2004 was 52.6k. The point is, it's roughly the same. </p>
<p>Or take ChemE. Here I agree that SJSU is lagging. SJSU in 2005 got 48.2k. Berkeley in 2004 got 56k, Stanford in 2004 got 56k. However, note that that the average ChemE starting salary in 2005 was 53.6k. </p>
<p>Compare that to the salaries earned by the eng grads of New Mexico Tech, who in 2004, earned about 55k. </p>
<p>Compare that to the salaries of the engineers coming out of Kansas State. Keep in mind that you'll be living in Kansas, where things are a lot cheaper than the SF Bay Area. </p>
<p>The point is, while I agree that Berkeley will attract a lot of 'prestige' employers, these prestige employers apparently don't pay significantly more than unprestigious employers do. The starting salary premium for a Berkeley engineering degree is pretty small. You would think that if Berkeley engineers were really getting lots of great jobs, then that fact would be shown in the salary data. It isn't.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I have a few friends in GPrep who really enjoy it. I went to Richard Montgomery (and graduated this past spring) , just a few miles north.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Man that brings back memories! LOL GP was indeed a lot of fun. Where are you now Karthikkito?</p>
<p>Right now I'm at UCSD studying aerospace engineering.</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Great place to spend 4 years. One of my good friends was a professor at Michigan but left to join UCSD. His name is Gabriel Rebeiz. He is a professor of Electrical Engineering. The guy is a genius. He completed his PhD at Caltech at the age of 23 and was a tenured professor at Michigan by the age of 30!</p>