<p>I assume GPA, GRE, LORs and SOP all remain important for a non-thesis M.S. in engineering. Anything else? Undergrad research? Is strong industry/internship experience really helpful or almost expected?
Also, if I had done research as an undergrad, maybe even got published, would the admissions people be raising their eyebrows at why I'm applying for a non-thesis?</p>
<p>Thanks</p>
<p>bumppppppp</p>
<p>Undergrad research not so much. I had absolutely none of it (not even close), but I didn't have any problems getting into any schools. GRE's are not too important either, as long as you do well on the quantitative portion. Industry experience is always a plus, especially since non-thesis master's are usually geared towards those people, and not academics.</p>
<p>I highly doubt that having prior research will hurt you. Why would it? </p>
<p>The thing to be cautious about is that you should not expect much funding (if any) for a non-thesis masters.</p>
<p>I know some PhD's who work in industy. Is this unusual? Is it a waste of time to get a PhD if you aren't working in research? Might it be a better use of time to get MS + MBA?</p>
<p>PhD's can work in industry. It's definitely a possibility. I will say (with experience and hearsay), that industry often find PhD students overqualified so to say. Meaning, they have to compensate PhD grads better than MS grads. Therefore they're a little less willing to hire a PhD student. This is not the rule by any means, but it's just what I've heard and something that a few colleagues of mine have experienced. I personally think the MS + MBA track is the way to go if you're interested in working in industry. MS certainly suffices for working in industry, and the MBA will also help you to advance in your career. This is the track I took.</p>
<p>i agree completely with hencoup. PhD's are found in every high-tech company out there. they are usually hired for their technical expertise, since companies need a few employees with heavy research experience in the field that relates to the company. they will usually hold positions like "Senior Scientist III" or "Director of Fermentation" etc etc. that's why it's also sometimes harder for PhD's to find jobs immediately out of school, since there are so many PhD's coming out and so few of those positions at each company. this is not to discourage anyone who wants to get into industry from getting a PhD however. the potential for advancement and starting salary are both very attractive for PhD's (granted you are willing to wait 4-5 years to graduate)</p>
<p>HenCoup, did you think it would be better to get the MBA directly or to work in engineering for a while? Do you think the MBA makes a new engineer more employable or less employable?</p>
<p>Gimp, do PhD's who land a job in industry make substantially more than those with an MS? Is their potential for advancement much greater?</p>
<p>And here is probably the toughest question of all: if a person wanted to guide the direction of a company in a big way, from which background can an engineer affect the most change? Or, do management and science just travel on their own paths?</p>
<p>lkf,</p>
<p>It really depends on the person. Working before getting an MBA is helpful to get into an MBA program. MBA programs put a strong emphasis into work experience in their admissions process. They like to know that you've already succeed in real world experiences. However, if you have a strong enough undergrad background (all the normal, gpa, test scores, recs, etc), or if you already have an MS and have a good background, it might not be necessary to work for a few years to get in your MBA program. </p>
<p>Another matter you may want to consider is that master's engineering programs rarely give any funding. If you're financially strapped, from undergrad or masters, then you may want to work before you get an MBA, as MBA degrees do not provide any funding either, and you will mostly be required to pay a hefty sum. </p>
<p>I really can't say if an MBA makes a new engineer more or less employable. The MBA degree will open more opportunities for you. You will have access to management positions, leadership roles, etc...However, if you're specifically going for a research oriented job, and don't want to be part of any leadership or management role, then the MBA is not needed at all.</p>
<p>I also forgot to mention that many schools offer dual degree programs where you can get your MS and MBA concurrently in about 3 years. You should check with the schools to find out. The only thing is you don't apply for the MS/MBA program, you have to apply for an MS and MBA separately, and if admitted to both, you can enter into the program. So you would still have to meet admission standards of each program individually.</p>
<p>Thanks HenCoup, I really appreciate your advice and the benefit of your experience! :)</p>
<p>hencoup: if you don't mind me asking, did you get a thesis or nonthesis M.S., and in what engineering field?</p>
<p>also, i am about to pursue a thesis MS in the fall in chem E, but I would like to work in management after a few years (perhaps even do a startup). do you think the prestige of the school itself or the prestige of the program more important for job opportunities after graduation? ie a very wellknown school with a solid but not great chem E program vs a less known school with a better program.</p>
<p>Gimp: I got a non thesis MS, as I obtained a dual degree (the MS/MBA option) from Georgia Tech with my masters in biomedical engineering. </p>
<p>Are you speaking about prestige in terms of MS in engineering? or MBA? or in general? As far as that is concerned, there really is no telling what will open up more opportunities. I tend to think the prestige of the school is more important, as employers really don't know specific rankings of programs, rather they know more about the prestige of a school. However, this could depend on the type of job you're looking for as well as the company. It's really hard to give definitive answers on opportunities, as each company/each person who hires looks for different things. </p>
<p>I do think however that having a good resume (having good recs, good work/research experience) is just as important. </p>
<p>Are you seeking an MBA as well? </p>
<p>If so, and if you are planning on becoming a manager or leader, I would say that the prestige of the MBA is really the deciding factor as to the opportunities. I've had friends from my graduating class that got degrees (both BS and MS) in engineering, and have went on to consultant jobs with a variety of companies. If you go into a management position, you're really not utilizing your degrees in engineering. There's very little that I deal with in terms of a really technical aspect. That's not to say they're worthless, because they're not. Having those degrees will actually open up more opportunities than people with an MBA degree who come from most other backgrounds, because the company knows you can succeed in a rigorous and technical field (especially chemE).</p>
<p>hencoup: thanks for your response. </p>
<p>i am interested in consulting or any field where i don't have to do 'typical' engineering work (ie sit in a cubicle and run computer simulations all day long) but can use it as more of a tool. so for example, being a consultant for a company that manufactures medical devices. i'm assuming for this type of career, the prestige of the university is slightly favored than the prestige of the program? </p>
<p>as for the mba, i'm not entirely sure yet if i will do it since i've heard all kinds of stories about people who succeed and become managers and leaders without one.</p>
<p>Hencoup
Do you think going to a prestige university that has one of the top ranking engineering and mba programs to obtain my ms in engineering will help me get into the school's mba program later on?</p>