Georgia Tech Engineering cost vs Vanderbilt

Colleges and Universities A-Z Vanderbilt University
21

@monydad : I agree with some except for the “stats of incoming students”. I never hear of faculty saying: “oh wow, SATs and class ranks of the only 25% that reported have sure gone up from their already high levels, maybe I should change the syllabus or put significantly harder problems on my exams”. You can actually access course websites from an instructor and notice that many are nearly at the same level before and after a period of time in which their was/is a huge change in admissions selectivity (what may happen is the averages for the exams go up over time). Unless there is some big (usually external) change, things don’t change drastically or at all. I could actually demonstrate this using the course websites of a faculty member for w/e staple course at both of these schools and some others, but I won’t waste my time.

I think simply looking at the course work if available is the best indicator when comparing two high caliber academic institutions and also tells a student what they may be getting into (ideally, you can get multiple sections/faculty if a course isn’t standardized across sections). I suspect that class sizes, some minimum threshold of selectivity/stats that indicates “generally high achievers go here”, and investment (some schools have a track record of seeking large grants for this purpose) in reforming STEM education predict how challenging the courses will be and what style of challenge a student will receive. Unfortunately, once the school is already highly selective, whatever the admissions office is doing to help even further increase those stats (mainly to hopefully increase the rank) will not really transfer to what happens in STEM classrooms, or really any classrooms.

Most elite schools will have a good baseline of rigor in STEM though, but stats can hardly predict the better among them especially after admissions offices deliberately change their strategies and focus for who knows what reasons (let us not pretend that all the new Harvard level SAT/ACT schools just suddenly became that way organically). For example, Stanford STEM must have become less rigorous than Vanderbilt, Rice, Hopkins, and many other top private schools who, in the past 5 years have decided to focus more on the SAT/ACT ranges in admissions and have thus surpassed Stanford in at least the bottom quartile and maybe even both the bottom and top quartile (note that class ranks at Stanford are very high, but what does that mean when 20-30% report each year?). And now, you have a larger number of schools below 10 in USNWR with nearly identical (or higher) SAT/ACT ranges versus Harvard, Princeton, Yale, and MIT, so we must thus assume that because of this change, that their STEM curricula evolved to, on average, catch up to or surpass those places. I’ve seen some of the courses, and this just isn’t the case. It also basically says, “Chicago must be way more rigorous today than 20 years ago when it was less selective than its close ranked peers”. It just doesn’t work.

In general, one should just assume that they will be challenged and stressed as an engineering major at any school designated (and has been for a decade at least) as “very selective” or “most selective” no matter if students from one school shout their difficulties on top of a mountain more than others.

22

GT student here, I am sure you are pretty biased toward GT. I am sure that GT is harder than other Universities with similar ranking because I transfer to GT from UofI, which has a strong engineering program as well. However, it is veery easy to get good grade in UofI because the courses will curve and the grading system includes A- and B+, while in GT the courses do not curve at all and a 89 means a ‘B’, which is really miserable.

23

@jkkhgfvwwhsvvsgy : That doesn’t work. Vanderbilt is NOT the University of Florida. I can not have a bias (If you think I have a bias, take it up with the grading data on course critique, seriously) and have the common sense to know that on average, Vanderbilt engineering is more likely to be more similar to Georgia Tech than Florida. You can also just go look at the course materials AND the grades. Also, some Tech courses “curve” too, much like other elite and much less competitive institutions. 89 is a “B” only in courses that have a certain course average to begin with. If it falls too much lower, they re-center the average to a B- or B. Yes I know Tech doesn’t have +/- but it works out the same. If a course has a 2.6-2.9 GPA, there are mostly Bs and several people with Cs and maybe some D/F grades or some combination that yields 2.6 and the professor can do what they want within reason. Has very little to do with a “school”. STEM almost everywhere has adopted certain norms for grading.

Either way, we can see the grades of courses here. Data is better than anecdotes

https://critique.gatech.edu/

A syllabus of a STEM course at STEM:
https://www.chemistry.gatech.edu/sites/www.chemistry.gatech.edu/files/CHEM%202312_syllabus_1.pdf

Notice how it says a certain cut-off “guarantees” a certain score. That suggests that if the grade distribution falls below a certain point that they likely adjust UPWARDS.

Georgia Tech has a very active reddit and students refer to curves happening and not happening under certain conditions. Just go type in “curves” on there, and then look at all these biased Georgia Tech students talking about what their final course grade was and what letter grade it corresponded to. I assure you it wasn’t always a direct correspondence between their numerical score and a traditional grading scale. Guess they are all lying.

I mean this isn’t hard to figure out. The fact is, since VU and Tech are very selective, it takes a higher level of difficulty to yield grades that are low enough to justify any significant curve. However, both schools have many courses where the cutoffs do get lowered which is a curve.

You will likely eventually experience courses hard enough to justify a curve. Also, Georgia Tech ENGINEERING departments should not be conflated with its overall USNWR ranking. For one, it is substantially more selective than most publics ranked similarly, and for two, most of its undergraduate engineering programs are top 5 or 10. This means that basically anyone in engineering programs and some others is getting a very comparable or, (in some instances, more intense than) education to those who do STEM at schools, like Vanderbilt, that have a substantially higher overall rank. Most of the schools it ranks closely to are comprehensive and one should not compare their experience in engineering to that. A “strong” engineering program at UF probably won’t compare as favorably to programs that more heavily select into engineering (most elite privates with engineering) or a Georgia Tech engineering department like BME.

Again, most schools have STEM professors who give hard enough assignments and exams to warrant a curve. This includes MIT, Caltech, Differences only occur in what each student body would find difficult to the point where the section scores lower than standard averages. This isn’t a new concept and Tech is not some exception to this.

Hopefully this clarifies what I’m saying and gives you more insight (assuming you haven’t graduated yet) on what you may eventually in a STEM course at Tech. Not all professors will end up using the standard grading cut-offs because they want to challenge their GEORGIA TECH (so not UF) students in a way that will yield sub-standard averages. And indeed, most schools have tough professors that are willing to flunk more students than average, but the current grades at Tech don’t suggests that it has that many of these folks anymore.

24

@bernie12 I may not be 100%, but it looks like the other poster was referencing U of I, not FL

25

@cltrising : Could be, but the point is that Georgia Tech uses curves, so saying it is harder based upon the fact that they took uncurved courses is just incorrect. They can say that “so far, I have struggled more at Tech because the courses I take here are more competitive and don’t get curved”. It is very likely that they’ll hit curved courses at Georgia Tech. In addition, it depends on when they transferred. They could have taken the introductory STEM courses that were before the actual engineering courses (again, many engineering courses tend to weight components outside of quizzes and exams much higher than basic sciences, so grades tend to be higher, and won’t justify a curve). Those aren’t particularly impressive anywhere and have been curved at Georgia Tech by some instructors. In the case of Urbana-Champagne, the difference in said courses may have been minimal (I know that Urbana-Champagne actually has harder chemistry courses for example. Haven’t looked into physics or math). The actual engineering courses can’t be compared to basic sciences courses directly even at a single school, so doing it between schools within having taken or seeing materials in both is useless. Either way, there is more to “difficulty” than just grading, and without contexts, you can’t make that type of claim, especially if it is Urbana-Champagne we are comparing Tech to.

26

I like examples:
VU ochem: https://as.vanderbilt.edu/chemistry/Rizzo/Chem220b/ex3dist.htm Okay, a 71% here was curved to a B-
Harvard ochem: http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chem27/lectures/2006Lectures/Lecture_10_Feb_27_2006.pdf
http://sites.fas.harvard.edu/~chem27/lectures/2006Lectures/Lecture_21_Apr_3_2006.pdf

One exam had a 40% average and the other had a 64% average, much lower than a 71% between the two and I doubt the final course average will be 71%, but Harvard apparently also curves to B.

Georgia Tech for the same course in 2009:
http://ww2.chemistry.gatech.edu/collard/CHEM2312/index.htm

Yields a 3.48 average

https://critique.gatech.edu/prof.php?id=COLLARDDAVIDM#CHEM2312

Is Harvard easier because it has a bigger curve? I mean, compare the exams.

Is Georgia Tech’s ochem rendition harder than both VU and Harvard BECAUSE, unlike the other two, it is unlikely that these exams ended up warranting a curve? BTW, I think Tech has higher ranked engineering programs in areas shared by VU and Harvard.

It looks like Harvard wrote the tough exams and that VU and Tech were more similar, but VU’s average fell below a certain threshold so VU re-centered the letter grade to the median. What if the Urbana-Champagne instructors they chose actually gave harder exams than the Tech instructors most students take? We don’t know any of that. We just know that they think Tech is harder because they took classes in whatever without a curve. The counter point is that Georgia Tech courses get curves. Regardless of what school they are talking about, the logic doesn’t work based upon what is known. It also spreads the ideas that certain schools are special and have absolutely no curving going on in STEM departments, perpetuating a de facto “grade deflation” (I view it as STEM everywhere is just “less inflated”) narrative that is untrue. That isn’t okay. Tech students are not the only ones who peddle that.

27

Vanderbilt Engineers don’t have any problems finding jobs and compete well against schools like GT. I recommend using LinkedIn, select Alumni and Mechanical Engineering and/or Electrical and Electronics Engineering. You’ll see where many Vandy engineers work and live.

If Intel hires an engineer from Vandy and another from GT, they would be offered about the same starting salary.

Other than $, we’re talking about an elite private school vs a top public university. You get more advising, smaller classes, better food, etc, at Vandy vs GT. Four years at Vandy is going to be a very different experience.

However, at GT, you would have more options. Vandy is limited in the BS degree’s it awards (Mechanical, Electrical, Comp Eng, CS, Civil and Engineering science). They don’t off the same engineering breath or depth as GT’s much larger college of engineering. If you want to study Industrial Engineering, Vandy isn’t the best option.

28

Take the Vandy scholarship and run!!! Congrats!

29

You can get great engineering jobs from any quality program. Now, a $102,000 loan will cost you $200,000 in after tax dollars to pay off. So you will need to earn an extra $400,000 to break even. Debt will affect the size of home you buy (or where you rent), your cars, vacations, relationships, cloths, and possibly your credit rating should you fall behind. Debt creates stress. Some people are comfortable with debt and others have trouble with it.
Would you take a job that payed $102,000 less ($200,000 less pre-tax) for 2 years?

30

@matchatea555 what is the very good scholarship at Vandy? Did he actually get the scholarship. They have 3 very good ones - Cornelius Vanderbilt, Ingram and Chancellors. If it is one of those I would advise to take the scholarship and go to Vanderbilt. Vanderbilt is an amazing school with many kids that major in engineering. Trust me, they are all getting amazing jobs.

31

Quickly run a search on LinkedIn, the difference is quite noticeable

Gatech: 147,462 alumni
Where they work:
1,026 Google
829 Amazon
786 Intel Corporation
566 Boeing
106 Morgan Stanley
109 Goldman Sachs

Vanderbilt University: 77,689 alumni
Where they work:
202 Google
140 Amazon
65 Intel Corporation
44 Boeing
132 Morgan Stanley
120 Goldman Sachs

32

@PeterPerr Vanderbilt is less than half the size of GT and the % who study engineering is much less. So these numbers aren’t an accurate reflection of the school’s quality, more just the number of students each spits out.

33

^ those linkedin numbers aren’t necessarily reflective of engineering jobs. A Vanderbilt grad is more likely not to be an engineer. Google, Intel… hire HR, marketing and sales people too.

34

@PeterPerr : That mainly just says that Georgia Tech has more engineering/ STEM students and that said students tend to stick to their guns on pursuing things in said area. I’m willing to admit that Tech has strong placement power to certain places, but LinkedIn is not sufficient to indicate this.

What I will say is that prospective students, when chasing a sort of USNWR and lay person prestige, may be missing out on blessings. They assume that chasing that type of prestige leads to better placement in whatever prestigious area, but it may not. Other high ranked, but not quite as high overall may design their programs and resources better to access such things, yet said schools get overlooked or put on a backburner for consideration because they “don’t seem as fun” or “I won’t get random people and family members to praise and pat me on the back as much for attending that place”. It’s weird. Overall, I think the main problem is that we just don’t know how to measure quality or don’t care to truly research things about placement and academic quality. We are willing to settle for rankings and hearsay. I guess it saves time, but it leads to use of weird logic when choosing schools.

35

Thanks for your comment. What is your opinion about an engineering degree from a non ABET institution like Washington & Lee for example?

36

Non-ABET depends on the discipline. I wouldn’t do it for civil, but for chemical it is probably okay. Stanford is phasing out the ABET accreditations but Stanford can do anything it wants to do.

37

@bernie12 You seems to be very knowledgeable with GT especially with the BME program. Are you a student or a parent there? My DS is going to GT for BME this fall and I actually found more insight in the thread than on the GT forum. :slight_smile:

38

@PeaceGrass : I am generally into pedagogy and undergraduate academics (specifically in STEM), so try to stay abreast of the trends and who/where is keeping up with them, and I also had friends who were a part of that program.

However, the stuff I posted is actually relatively easy to research, because it appears Tech is very transparent about its academic offerings and such. Many of the departmental websites there have nice interfaces full of information about the curriculum design and often contain the syllabi of courses. They really appear to want to inform students and parents about what they are getting as opposed to leaving them to assume. I didn’t go there (I went to the private school across town), but can appreciate those aspects and what I saw and heard from friends in that program. In addition, like many public schools, it is typically very transparent about grading pattens and makes a lot of institutional data open to the public or easy to access for those who want to compile the information.

I am serious about doing the RESEARCH to figure these places out. I don’t settle for reputation, rankings, etc. I research substance, because these places cost too much. Those reputations and rankings can be manipulated by strategic marketing and the biddings of the admissions office (those two arms typically work together) and often aren’t informative about academic quality (especially when you compare two or more high caliber schools), an d most prospective parents and students (and even current) buy into all of this because they didn’t do the research either. They settled for whatever superficial stuff the schools sell to them in order to get them excited and then current students usually have no sophisticated benchmark or reference point other than hearsay from outside of their experience. Data and details about the academics, outcomes, etc is not as “sexy” to prospective students and parents as showing them shiny facilities and amenities and simply just claiming “we are ranked high in X”.

The reality is that you can do deeper research and find information that may be important in drawing distinctions beyond hearsay or what the marketing/tourguides at each school told you. Again, a lot can be gathered from just going and exploring the undergraduate tab of the departmental websites or perusing around a schools university(or w/e undergraduate unit of interest) website, the student published newspaper, etc. Many people don’t do any of that, and nor do they say, sit in on classes during a visit. They kind of just “feel” a place out superficially, thinking they are getting a hint at the life style and academics at each school. This can often lead to much worse or better impressions versus the values of the student than what they’ll experience over 4 or however many years. I take hearsay and “word of mouth” mildly serious, but then try to use other things to make a judgement as well.

39

@PeaceGrass : For a little of inappropriate political humor. Instead of being the Barr of comparing or discussing any (so even my own) school (especially on the grounds of academic quality and experience), I try to be a Mueller. People don’t like it because it is more comfortable to stick with the superficial stuff and tropes as opposed to ceding that some hearsay about your own or other competitor schools is just downright false/unfairly contextualized or “hey, maybe my school isn’t as perfect as I’ve been told or convinced myself to believe based upon x,y, z” but it is what it is.

40

@bernie12 Thanks for your insight. We are also looking for a place where DS will thrive and enjoy the challenge but not just based on ranking and prestige. We also pick GT because the major is not locked in and he can always change his mind later.

One of my son’s good friend picked between UCLA and UCB by calling his cousin in India and see which school he’d heard of. :slight_smile: