<p>hi guys im an international student, and I want to study civil/environmental engineering in states. Georgia Tech, Rose Hulman, and RPI are all my dreamed schools, and now I have got the offer from all of them. Which one do you think I should go to?</p>
<p>Georgia Tech definitely ranks higher than the other two. RPI and Rose are also good schools because they aresmall schools with a lot of opportunities. RPI granted me $15,000 scholarship, and Rose will grant me the scholarship later, so I'm not sure whether I can get it or not. I took A-levels in my high school. It is a sort of international education program, and a lot of US colleges can give credits for that, including Georgia Tech and RPI, but not Rose Hulman.</p>
<p>Anyway, I like Rose more. I have read several threads in Rose subforum and it seems that a lot of guys finally choosed Rose over RPI, and they said they like like the cozy feeling in Rose. I think thats important for international students, basically because I need to make friends in states and I haven't tried this before ... a little bit nervous ...</p>
<p>And I haven't see any threads comparing Rose with Georgia Tech .. Thank you.</p>
<p>Check ASEE.org data base on retention rates at the two schools.</p>
<p>Georgia Tech has a reputation of having killer math/science classes the first year, and intentionally flunking out a large percentage. That higher ranking comes at a significant human cost. True top ranked schools have high retention rates, so there is no correlation between weed-out courses and quality of education.</p>
<p>Rose Hulman numbers seem to imply a fair number of dropouts as well, plus its a 5 year program, not 4.</p>
<p>Georgia Tech has a 93% freshman retention rate, WPI is 94%, Rose-Hulman is 80%.</p>
<p>The reason Rose-Hulman and Georgia Tech aren't frequently compared is because they're on completely different levels. </p>
<p>People generally don't try to decide between the two - if you get into Tech and RHIT is your other option, you go to Tech unless there's some extenuating circumstance.</p>
<p>I would have to disagree with GP Burdell slightly. I'm a senior EE at Rose-Hulman, and I will be going to Georgia Tech to get a PhD. From everything I've heard, the quality of the two schools for undergraduate education is fairly comparable. I know one Tech grad student who went to Rose, and he states that Tech classes aren't all that different from Rose's, in terms of quality. One of my advisers went to Tech for undergrad and grad school, and she says that our curriculum compares well with Tech's. </p>
<p>In fact, because we focus on undergraduate education, you'll typically find that a "C student" at Rose might know a bit more than a C student at Tech because of the quality of teaching over here. Professors aren't bogged down with a lot of research, so they are free to focus on teaching.</p>
<p>The true difference between the two schools is not quality of program but type of educational experience. If you want to go to a small school where undergraduate learning is emphasized, go to Rose. If you want to go to a larger school where you'll have more opportunities to explore research, to go Tech. The other difference between the two is location. Rose is located in a small city in the Midwest. Tech is in the middle of a vibrant Southern city.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Professors aren't bogged down with a lot of research, so they are free to focus on teaching.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I hear this argument frequently, and I believed it before I started teaching. </p>
<p>The fact is research professors are almost exclusively more well trained and more world renown than teaching professors. Further, this knowledge allows them to have a stronger grasp of fundamental concepts, be more up to date with the latest research and news, and more more involved in industry with consulting. </p>
<p>Just having a PhD shouldn't be sufficient to teach college - MIT and Stanford (and Georgia Tech, even) graduate many PhD's that don't really know what they're doing. Those individuals go to teaching colleges. The ones that are at the top of the class and fundamentally understand their field go to research colleges.</p>
<p>
[quote]
From everything I've heard, the quality of the two schools for undergraduate education is fairly comparable.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>In my experience hiring from both schools, they're not. The courses are the same, and material is somewhat similar (more of a focus on first principals at Tech), but the ability of new graduates is different. Obviously you can find good and bad students at any college, but I'm hiring a "C" student from either school, I take the Tech student without question.</p>
<p>I know one grad student in ECE who did his undergrad at Rose-Hulman. I didn't ask him about the specifics of the curriculum but he said the curves there were about as brutal as here. At least you've been broken in by now y2kwizard :)</p>
<p>... Rose guys definitely would say Rose is better/not bad, GT guys would say GT is better, and rpi guys, if there are some here, would also say rpi is better (I guess) ehh.. but anyway, thank you guys!</p>
<p>I am a kind of noisy guy who have a lot of questions, and I heard that the professors in Rose are quite helpful and easy going, because they focus on teaching. What about GT? It is a large school, and a public school, does it mean the professors would spend less time with students but just go for research stuff? If I got a question, do I need to go to TA, or can I go directly to my professor?</p>
<p>I think the undergraduate courses in schools like Rose and RPI may surpass that in GT because of the low student to professor ratio. No doubt GT is much better at research, but it seems that undergraduates don't need that many research works, so maybe that "research" advantage only work for graduate students or higher.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What about GT? It is a large school, and a public school, does it mean the professors would spend less time with students but just go for research stuff?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It depends on the particular professor, but in my experience, most are fairly open when dealing with graduate students. At that level, the material is not trivial to them (which is why many people send undergrads to TAs), and they want to be nice to a potential future colleague.</p>
<p>One of the reason you see GT a little higher is that a lot of students transfer to other departments like Business. At pure tech schools like Rose you will see a little lower. In fact Rose, Harvey Mudd and Olin have the highest engineering rates in the country. </p>
<p>The question from GT is what % in engineering graduate in engineering.</p>