<p>How do you compare the quality of graduate electrical engineering program at Gatech to other top schools such as Berkeley, Stanford, Cornell, University of Illinois, University of Texas (Austin) and etc. ? Does Gatech really offer a comparable engineering program? The reason that I am asking this question is because I've noticed a lot of top graduate applicants prefer these other schools to Gatech even though they're all ranked as top 10 graduate schools in engineering? The other reason for this question is that it seems like Gatech is less known in society for quality of its engineering comparing to these other schools? Any thoughts on this?</p>
<p>Georgia Tech is an amazing engineering school, it’s maybe just due to location. Austin, Bay Area, etc. maybe be more desirable places to live depending on the person. More so if they are coming from the east or west coast.</p>
<p>GT is a great EE school - I know a few grads and they have all been fantastic engineers. I would consider it slightly below MIT, Stanford, and Berkeley, and on a par with UIUC and CalTech - by general reputation only, of course, as the strength of individual subfields varies wildly. I have never heard of anyone dropping an admit to GT for any other school - neither Cornell nor UT, both admittedly fine schools.</p>
<p>The only real explanation I can give for anyone doing so is that those other schools have either a broader reputation for excellence (such as Cornell) or a wider reputation due to size (like UT) - GT’s excellence is mostly confined to engineering, and it is not a gigantic school. Contrast this with the phenomenon of people passing up highly regarded engineering or science schools in favor of Ivy League (or similar) schools with lesser science and engineering programs.</p>
<p>My advisor considers Georgia Tech second tier, below the schools you listed above (at least in the energy/nanotechnology/applied physics sides of EE). Take this data point for what it’s worth.</p>
<p>I know people in nanofab who passed up gatech for Cornell and for Caltech. I think both have stronger reputations in this subfield than Georgia Tech does, and I also think the location is a turnoff for some. </p>
<p>I applied to Georgia Tech as an undergrad, and didn’t like the location enough that I didn’t apply at all for my EE PhD.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know much about Caltech’s research in the area, but you’re right that Cornell is top notch for materials research (David Mermin wrote THE condensed matter physics textbook, for example). I’ll agree also that most people, especially from other parts of the country, would prefer not to live in the heart of Atlanta. On top of that, GT’s good reputation outside the South is somewhat recent (about two decades, or so). I also suspect that their relative undergraduate reputations, however silly that might be, might play a role also.</p>
<p>That isn’t to say GT doesn’t have great research programs in nanotechnology. They just recently opened the largest cleanroom in the southeast that draws all kinds of industry professionals to use the tools there, and the BME department has something like 3 NIH centers dedicated to medical nanotechnology research (which is apparently a unique accomplishment). But anyway, that’s not really relevant to this thread and so I’ll can the rest of that talk.</p>
<p>OP, what are you interested in?</p>
<p>I don’t disagree that GT has great nanotech research. </p>
<p>If you’d like to know more about Caltech’s research in nanotech, see: </p>
<p>Axel Scherer (co-inventor of the VCSEL)
Yu-Chong Tai (one of the founders of MEMS)
Amnon Yariv (pretty big dude in Quantum Electronics)
Harry Atwater (one of the leaders in cheap photovoltaics, involved in making “black” silicon)</p>
<p>just to name a few. Not to say Georgia Tech doesn’t have awesome faculty too.</p>
<p>I will say that every single prof I met on grad school visits was very aware of my mentor at Caltech (one of the people in that list).</p>