<p>...is it really below that of, say, Cornell or even Brown? Where does Fu stand in the hierachy of top engineering schools?</p>
<p>and does CU's political science programme involve IR?</p>
<p>Don't listen to the hodgepodge regarding Fu and its "insuperiority". It is in fact a great school for engineering and applied science. No, it is not as reputable as MIT, Caltech, Stanford etc, but in the same regard it is still very well respected and the curriculum is challenging and well suited to apply to top grad programs or go into industry. If you ask me, its better than a lot of other programs (Harvard, Upenn, Yale included) that people don't notice because these schools don't contain separate engineering admissions stats and info, different than the rest of the school's majors (humanities, business, pure sciences etc). </p>
<p>The program draws less applicants because Fu takes applications separately, and only offers engineering and applied science majors; its applicants are considered in a separate stack than those of CC. The acceptance rate is thus a little higher (25% range), but by no means easy. The students at SEAS are still top-notch. There are many 1600s that have attended Fu, and also a good number of people who turned down schools like MIT to go there. Columbia is more known for its liberal arts curriculum and its astronomically low admissions rate (10.4%). As a result the applicants to Fu are a self-selective pool. They still tend to be highly qualified, and have achieved higher numerical averages (SAT's, rank, etc) than the College applicants (I am not saying they are better, but rather have better numbers; I am sure the CC students are unique, accomplished, and diverse in their own regard). Columbia University as a whole still boosts a depressing 12.4% acceptance rate with Fu included. They also inflate the avg SATs of Columbia University which has some commercial weight in displaying the image of the school as a whole.</p>
<p>I am pretty sure Cornell has a better ranked program, but Cornell is also huge, and overall as a school is not as versatile as the curriculum offered by Columbia SEAS. Don't get me wrong, Cornell is top-notch in engineering. You can't go wrong with applying to Fu if you are looking for a well-rounded education, smaller environment, good research, and a city of wonders to take advantage of. After all, it is Columbia.</p>
<p>OK, but why would somebody with the qualifications for MIT choose Fu?</p>
<p>The City and well reputed link to industry. The well-rounded multidimensional students and the core Curriculum. The smaller classes. There are a good number of factors. MIT wins in prestige, but that may not be a student's driving motive when choosing a school.</p>
<p>MIT also has a disgusting campus, quoth my friend who turned down Dartmouth and MIT for Haverford College. Score one for Columbia, which has a stunning campus.</p>
<p>plus why would you want to go to a school that has a bunch of geeks that build robot girlfriends and sing songs about integrals? jk </p>
<p>The Columbia student body is well rounded and the school aims at producing leaders and thinkers who can write and communicate effectively. Couple the liberal arts curriculum with the technical scientific training and research offered by Fu (as well as a world-class med school) and it is apparent that the education tiptoes on the tight rope of multidimension.</p>