<p>How does having a diploma or resume with Georgia Tech on it look to potential employers or for applications to Graduate programs in other universities?</p>
<p>Thanks! Trying to decide where to go this fall. :D</p>
<p>My dad has told me that its one of those schools where a degree in almost any department looks good because of the quality of the school.</p>
<p>there a thread a few weeks ago with the most desired degrees.</p>
<p>GT was 4th. in the nation. think about all of the Unis in the nation, then put GT at #4</p>
<p>Employers know that people who chose GT and graduated with a decent GPA and reasonably on-time can knock out the work, prioritize, work with others, etc. Employers love GT graduates!</p>
<p>One thing the GT name does do is make people think of you as being highly technical. This is obvious for degrees like engineering and CS, but even social science and humanities are affected. Psychology majors are hired for mathematical psychology and psychometrics, finance majors are hired basically as economists, marketing majors are hired to do more mathematical modeling of marketing issues, etc. The top employer of English majors (call STAC majors at GT) is CNN, who uses them to update and manage the website.</p>
<p>It’s one of the best engineering school in the world. Looks pretty good to me.</p>
<p>^then how come people clamor over MIT, Stanford, CalTech, and Cal and not GaTech?</p>
<p>In my opinion, the biggest factor is location. Stanford, CalTech and Cal are all in California (no explanation necessary) and MIT is in Boston (seen by many as a cultural and intellectual center). In contrast, a lot of people have an anti-southern bias. Being a southerner all my life, I’ve come to accept this.</p>
<p>MIT is the top engineering research school in the world, so there’s no real comparison there.</p>
<p>Stanford is Harvard of the West Coast - it’s the top overall school. So even if Tech is better in some areas on engineering, Stanford’s overall quality causes a buzz (much like Harvard’s engineering program).</p>
<p>CalTech and Berkeley don’t get too much “clamoring” (at least not much more than other similarly ranked schools) outside of California. The thing is that 1 out of every 8 Americans live in California. So on a site like this, that means you hear a lot about the California schools. GT is ranked higher than CalTech and is just one space (3 vs 4) behind Berkeley.</p>
<p>On the graduate level, Georgia Tech is close to the same level of those schools. But on the undergraduate level, Georgia Tech will probably never approach those schools. Stanford, MIT and Caltech afterall are private schools and they restricted number of students who can enroll those schools. Georgia Tech, on the other hand, is state school and is subject to state charter. Georgia Tech undergraduate level should be compare more favorable with UCLA, Michigan of world. Since most folks seems to care more about undergraduate reputation, that’s why those schools are better known than Georgia Tech.</p>
<p>A GT - Michigan comparison isn’t even fair. You can compare them in terms of engineering programs, but in terms of overall quality, there’s no real argument there. There’s a reason Tech is #35 overall. </p>
<p>The problem with GT is that it’s a very focused Institute. To compare to a school like Stanford overall, Tech would need to add some top-notch non-technical programs. </p>
<p>GT can’t add programs because the Board of Regents does not like to have competing programs in the state at the same level (Research Institute, State Institute, Regional Institute, etc). This means that GT can’t add a professional school that UGA or the Georgia Medical College already have, with the exception being an MBA program (Tech had to fight tooth-and-nail for 30 years to get an MBA program in 2002). </p>
<p>If Tech added a Medical School or Law School (or both), and drove either one into a top tier program (which it would - the Business School has jumped from 100+ to Top 25 in just 5 years, BME jumped to Top 3 in the first 5 years, etc), that would make it an elite school, up there with a Michigan or UVA. </p>
<p>Of course, the USNews bias towards private schools means Tech would have trouble breaking the Top 10, but a top law or medical school could easily get it to Top 15.</p>
<p>GTech is a public school, so a certain amount of in-state students need to be admitted. Stanford, MIT, CalTech are private and do not need to fulfill any requirement for in-state students, meaning they can pick the most qualified students. This is probably the biggest difference</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’ve had several professors that got their bachelors and master from MIT. Across they board they said there is no difference between GT and MIT for undergrad. Graduate school is where MIT separates itself from the rest.</p>
<p>Yeah and to agree with G.P. Burdell. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There’s a lot of politics amongst the Georgia University system about added other professional school programs like a med school or education school program. Just adding the school of business was politics enough, because UGA and Georgia State (who already had b-school programs) wouldn’t allow it. But when they did, Tech’s b-school student shot up and outranked them. I heard the same thing went on when Tech thought about adding an education program.</p>
<p>^ The same thing happen when UGA wanted to add a medical school. MCG fought it.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And that’s the problem with the University System of Georgia. They create a monopoly in the state, which breeds mediocrity. The goal shouldn’t be to funnel all GA residents to one school, it should be to create a university system that pulls heavily from outside the state. To do that, you need to create many programs that are competitive with each other.</p>
<p>Rather than hiring GT, UGA, GA State, etc graduates as regents, they need to turn around and hire outsiders with no loyalty and experience in building top notch programs.</p>
<p>Creating competition is all that’s needed to get GT to Berkeley’s level in overall rankings, and to get UGA to UNC’s level.</p>
<p>There were talks of consolidating UGA and GaTech at an assembly held recently on campus. The criticism was a resounding “hell no” from GT. Really, I think we should just privatize. Sure, we’d have to raise tuition and wouldn’t get that state funding anymore. But, we have a large enough endowment to do it, not to mention we get lots of outside contracts supporting the school. And we wouldn’t have to deal with regent politics.</p>
<p>I have a question, just to get back to the name thing as a whole. How is GT as a name in the business world? they say within the school of management that the job search isn’t too bad and that most grads get really good jobs, so I’m just curious. Maybe it goes back to this whole competition deal.</p>
<p>GT Management majors do surprisingly well at graduation compared to other business schools - low 50’s in salary right now with 60% placement at graduation (which is biased, MGT has many very low GPA students that were former engineering students). </p>
<p>This doesn’t really compare to the engineering students (low 70’s in many fields, and 75-80% placement), but you’re comparing the #4 school in the country to the #35 school in the country, which is a big difference.</p>
<p>As for on-campus reputation… the management school for undergraduates is considered the home of athletes and engineering drop outs. The students over there even have a music video about being on the m-train:</p>
<p>[YouTube</a> - “M-Train” Rap Music Video - The GTGs, GA Tech’s gtg491y and gtg562h](<a href=“http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NzNKKrYHqY]YouTube”>http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=0NzNKKrYHqY)</p>
<p>what G.P.Burdell said has some truths, but I am not sure that’s complete true anymore.</p>
<p>Department of management used to belongs to College of liberal art. So it has stereotype associated like he mentioned. But about five years ago, it formed its own college and has its brand new building across the bridge. It raised its profile quite a bit since then. Its incoming freshman SAT has over 1300.</p>