Good LAC's in Engineering

College Search & Selection
21

<p>If you don't have the math/science grades to get into a solid engineering Masters program with a BS in Engineering from a comparable liberal arts college to Wellesley, you're going to get your butt kicked in the final 2 years of the 3/2 program at MIT or Columbia. I would hazard a guess that a below average student at a school like Wellesley has roughly a zero percent chance of actually completing the MIT portion of the 3/2 degree.</p>

<p>There are no "guarantees" with the Wellesley program. You have to apply as a transfer student to MIT following your sophmore year. If accepted to MIT, you have the option of deferring the transfer, completing your junior year at Wellesley, and then going two more years at MIT.</p>

22

<p>At my d.'s school, they guarantee graduate engineering admissions to Princeton, Dartmouth, UMich, Johns Hopkins, Notre Dame, and Tufts. But you still have to have a 3.5 GPA. I imagine it would take similar to do a 3/2 program, or to transfer to MIT or some such.</p>

23

<p>
[quote]
If you don't have the math/science grades to get into a solid engineering Masters program with a BS in Engineering from a comparable liberal arts college to Wellesley, you're going to get your butt kicked in the final 2 years of the 3/2 program at MIT or Columbia. I would hazard a guess that a below average student at a school like Wellesley has roughly a zero percent chance of actually completing the MIT portion of the 3/2 degree.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>First of all, I'm not talking about a below average student at Wellesley. After all, a below-average student at Wellesley might get her butt kicked at MIT, but she would stand basically zero chance of ever getting into a strong graduate engineering program anyway. I'm talking about a student who is still doing well at Wellesley, but not quite well enough to get into a top graduate engineering program. </p>

<p>Look, the truth is, at almost every school, even at MIT, once you've made it to the junior year, then as long as you demonstrate half-a-clue about what you're doing, you're going to pass your classes. Sure, you won't get good grades. But you're going to pass.</p>

<p>I'll give you the example of the LFM program, which is the combined 2-year MBA/SM-Engineering program run by MIT. These students have to complete both an SM in engineering, and an MBA from the Sloan School, both at the same time. Think about what that means. LFM students have to take the entire SM engineering curriculum along with the entire regular Sloan MBA curriculum. Furthermore, most of these students haven't even touched engineering coursework in years. You need at least 2 years of work experience to even be eligible for LFM, and most have far more than that. Their engineering "kung-fu" is therefore extremely rusty. Think about the environment. Normal engineering graduate students hang around their lab, where they can immerse themselves in a world of engineering. LFM students have to rush back to Sloan. One LFM student basically stated that the problem is that just when he starts to understand what is happening in his Thermo or Fluid Mechanics class, he has to rush back to Sloan to do his Accounting homework or meet with his Finance team. Hence, it's the constant context-switching that is killing him. Lastly, when it comes to engineering, they generally just aren't as good as the regular engineering graduate students. After all, most were basically admitted through the Sloan School and have a base level of technical knowledge that would allow the School of Engineering to let them into LFM, but they certainly aren't the equivalent of a true engineering graduate student. One LFM student said it best when he said that if really was as good as those regular engineering graduate students were, he would have been one of them, instead of having gone to the workforce and then gone to LFM. </p>

<p>But think about it. LFM has been around for more than 15 years, and in its entire history, not a single LFM student has ever landed in academic probation, either in the School of Engineering or in the Sloan School. The only LFM students who have not completed the program are those who voluntariliy quit to take a job or to transfer to a different program. Other than that, every single LFM student has managed to complete the SM engineering requirements. Most don't do so with top grades, but they at least manage to pass. </p>

<p>What I'm saying is that basically most engineering MIT classes above the junior level are passable even if you're not that good. True, it's extremely difficult to get an A. In fact you may end up with only a C. But that's passing. Many upper division courses are actually populated with plenty of graduate students, including LFM students. </p>

<p>My point is, if these LFM students, with all their handicaps and disadvantages, can pass those upper division courses, then I think a decent Wellesley girl can pass. At least the Wellesley 3-2 girl doesn't have to worry about juggling Sloan coursework.</p>

24

<p>Sakky:</p>

<p>But, the Wellesley woman has to get ACCEPTED as a transfer student to MIT to take advantage of the 3/2 program. If that student is strong enough to be accepted as a tranfer student, they are probably strong enough to get into a decent engineering Masters program after college -- especially if they go to school that offers a B.S. undergrad engineering degree in the first place.</p>

<p>Mini:</p>

<p>Smith is not what we are talking about. That is an undergrad engineering program culminating in a BS Engineering degree. The 3-2 programs are for students at schools that don't offer any engineering courses.</p>

<p>My point is that IF you want a career in Engineering AND you are already thinking post-grad AND you want the benefits of a liberal arts undergrad experience, then you might as well go to a college that offers engineering (like Smith) and plan on getting a Masters in Engineering post grad, rather than spending one less year total and ending up with two undergrad degrees. I mean, a B.A. and a B.S. along with a couple bucks will get you a cup of coffee of Starbucks.</p>

25

<p>
[quote]
But, the Wellesley woman has to get ACCEPTED as a transfer student to MIT to take advantage of the 3/2 program. If that student is strong enough to be accepted as a tranfer student, they are probably strong enough to get into a decent engineering Masters program after college -- especially if they go to school that offers a B.S. undergrad engineering degree in the first place.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And that's the point. This is where I have my doubts. I strongly suspect it is actually easier to get into the 3/2 program than to get into a strong engineering program.</p>

<p>In any case, even if that's not true, it still means that you get 2 bites at the apple. A Wellesley girl can try for the 3/2 program, and if she gets in, she can take it and lock in that SB from MIT. Or she can decline it, continue with her regular BA, and then take her chances at trying to get into a graduate engineering program. Knowing how fickle graduate admissions are, if I already had a 3/2 admit in my hands, I'd be hesitant to waive it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
My point is that IF you want a career in Engineering AND you are already thinking post-grad AND you want the benefits of a liberal arts undergrad experience, then you might as well go to a college that offers engineering (like Smith) and plan on getting a Masters in Engineering post grad, rather than spending one less year total and ending up with two undergrad degrees. I mean, a B.A. and a B.S. along with a couple bucks will get you a cup of coffee of Starbucks.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hey, don't get me wrong. I'm not saying that I recommend this path for everyone. I'm just pointing to it at a possible option that might work well for some people. </p>

<p>And I have to disagree strongly with the sentiment expressed in your last sentence. I would argue that an SB from MIT is more marketable than a master's in engineering from a no-name school. Most schools out there are no-name schools. Sure, if you can get a master's from an elite school, that's obviously better. But most people can't get that.</p>

26

<p>
[quote]
Or she can decline it, continue with her regular BA, and then take her chances at trying to get into a graduate engineering program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, but the second bite comes without having taken a single engineering course in colllege! I would think the bite at the Masters apple would be stronger for a student who graduated with a B.S. in Engineering from a comparable school to Wellesley.</p>

<p>BTW, I'm not talking about "no-name" Engineering programs. Any above average graduate with a BS Engineering degree from a place like Smith or Swarthmore is going to get into very good Masters Engineeering schools. Maybe MIT, maybe not MIT. But, I don't think MIT is the ONLY engineering school in the country with a "name" status Masters program.</p>

<p>I'm not underestimating the value of a B.S. degree from MIT. I'm suggesting that the incremental value of a B.A. degree along with that B.S. degree is essentially zero, but comes at a very high cost: about $42,000 for the fifth year with no financial aid.</p>

<p>BTW, here is what Wellesley says about the 3-2 program:</p>

<p>"Students who plan to go on to graduate school should explore a Master's program instead of two bachelors degrees."</p>

<p>"The Double-Degree program is difficult and expensive; the rewards, however, are great. Students should also know that neither MIT nor Wellesley gives financial aid to any student in the fifth year of undergraduate study."</p>

27

<p>In my opinion, if someone is really interested in engineering as a potential career, they should attend a college that itself has engineering. The 3-2 arrangements that have been described here, and others I've seen before, are very conditional. From the outset there is no way to know if you will be able to attain the requisite GPA, or otherwise meet the standards to be able to gain acceptance at the other school. The actual fact of switching schools like this may also be disruptive.</p>

<p>Just my opinion.</p>

<p>Frankly I have my doubts as to whether many people actually complete any of these programs whatsoever. I view them as marketing pronouncements by colleges that don't offer engineering, to cover this up by making it appear that they've got this gap covered in some fashion. I doubt they really do have it covered.</p>

<p>MY doubts are not based on any facts however.</p>

28

<p>My dd has been thinking similar and waiting to get the final aid and merit offers from Hartwick, Randolph-Macon, Lafayette, and Colby. Her feeling, educationally, right now is that an engineering geared school might end up locking her off from interests that might better develop in a LAC environment.</p>

<p>Similar to your thoughts, Wavelength.</p>

29

<p>
[quote]
Yeah, but the second bite comes without having taken a single engineering course in colllege! I would think the bite at the Masters apple would be stronger for a student who graduated with a B.S. in Engineering from a comparable school to Wellesley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Look, interesteddad, I never said that I was recommending this path for everybody. People wanted to know what the options are, I am pointing this one out as an option. I never said that this option was better than the others you have described, I am just saying it is an option. My point is that people who go to Wellesley are not necessarily forgoing the chance to get an engineering degree. Nothing more, nothing less. </p>

<p>You are also presuming that everybody who has the choices that you are recommending. But come on, you know how fickle admissions is. It is very possible to get admitted to Wellesley but not Smith or Swarthmore or any of the either top engineering LAC's. Furthermore, some people may just feel that Wellesley fits them better, but still want the option to pursue engineering. This 3-2 program may be the way for them to go. </p>

<p>
[quote]

BTW, I'm not talking about "no-name" Engineering programs. Any above average graduate with a BS Engineering degree from a place like Smith or Swarthmore is going to get into very good Masters Engineeering schools. Maybe MIT, maybe not MIT. But, I don't think MIT is the ONLY engineering school in the country with a "name" status Masters program.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Oh really? I know several above-average engineering students from MIT who couldn't get into any of the strong master's degree programs that they applied to, whether at MIT or Stanford or Berkeley or any schools in the top 15 or so. If they can't do it, what makes you think that the above-average Smith or Swarthmore engineering student is guaranteed to get in? </p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm not underestimating the value of a B.S. degree from MIT. I'm suggesting that the incremental value of a B.A. degree along with that B.S. degree is essentially zero, but comes at a very high cost: about $42,000 for the fifth year with no financial aid.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Hey, nobody is saying that this program is for everybody. But I would argue that a lot of master's degree programs, even at no-name schools, also give no financial aid and also cost an arm and a leg. If your choice is between spending money to get an SB from MIT or to get a master's degree from a no-name school, I might take the SB from MIT. </p>

<p>Look, I agree with monydad that if you know you want to be an engineer, then sure, you should go to a school that offers engineering. However, what I'm pointing out is that a lot of people don't know that coming in. They find out later that they don't want to be engineers. Or they want to preserve the option to study something else.</p>

30

<p>"Look, I agree with monydad that if you know you want to be an engineer, then sure, you should go to a school that offers engineering. However, what I'm pointing out is that a lot of people don't know that coming in. They find out later that they don't want to be engineers. Or they want to preserve the option to study something else."</p>

<p>We've toured engineering schools with my DD, we have been guided by and met any number of students who were certain for the first one and two years that they wanted the engineering degree that -- engineering was not for them. Some were able to find an acceptable major at their schools (RPI, RIT) and switch ... possibly adding another undergrad year, others we have met post (MIT) have transferred and will graduate in 5-years with a Liberal Arts major degree ... almost like a 3+2 program without the interdisciplinary degree!</p>

31

<p>That's the far more common scenario, really.</p>

<p>Personally I addressed this risk by attending a college that was part of a greater university that had several other undergraduate colleges. Though transfer between colleges was not completely automatic, it was nevertheless a frequently-utilized option for many students there; particularly disenchanted engineering students. Since the engineering school at this university required relatively many liberal arts electives anyway, most engineers I know who switched out really didn't lose any ground. A number of them decided to switch to other of the colleges there, not just Arts & Sciences. It's nice to have so many potential options so close at hand without having to switch campuses and friends.</p>

<p>The other reasonable approach to mitigate this risk is the LAC with an engineering department, as we've been discussing. The challenge here is that some of these departments may not really provide much depth of training for those who DON'T change their minds and really follow through on their original plans to graduate with engineering degrees. I'm not saying these are all bad, I'm just suggesting that they need to be individually scrutinized in this regard.</p>

32

<p>I wonder how these 17 and 18 y/os know that they really want to become an engineer when they've experience so little educationally. This is why I think the 3/2 program idea seems smart--if you are interested and motivated enough, you will make it work. Dado...I hope all works well for your daughter. Lafayette and Colby are fancy schools for sure...and Hartwick is very much on an upward and emerging path right now. Her choices seem solid.</p>

33

<p>IMO, after a few years at a liberal arts college that doesn't offer engineering: </p>

<p>-without taking a single engineering course;
-with nobody else on campus interested in engineering;
-with no faculty present engaged in engineering;
-with no on-campus lectures or people coming to campus involved in engineering-</p>

<p>these same kids will be 20 year olds who will know virtually nothing more about this than when they were 17-18 year olds.</p>

<p>That's partly why I think the chances of following through and completing one of these 3-2 programs are very small.</p>

<p>If they were not interested and motivated enough to attend a school that actually had this major in the first place, then I can't imagine what will go on at this liberal arts college that will have the effect of increasing their motivation to the required level. They will have no peer support, for one thing.</p>

<p>Just my opinion/guess.</p>

34

<p>Well, hey, monydad, let's not be too extreme.</p>

<p>First of all, like I pointed out, it may not be just about somebody who isn't interested or motivated enough to attend a school that actually had engineering in the first place. The presumption there is that anybody can simply attend whatever school they want. Like I said, admissions is fickle. You may find that you simply don't get admitted to those strong LAC's that have engineering programs, but you do get admitted to Wellesley. Sure, they could get into a not-so-good LAC that offers engineering, but choosing that over Wellesley means you better be pretty darn sure about engineering, and I think we all agree that most people aren't that sure. Similarly, I have heard of people who expressed some interest in engineering and who got admitted to Harvard, but rejected from stronger engineering schools like MIT, Stanford, Caltech, Princeton, etc. The choice then becomes to go to Harvard or go to a state school with a strong engineering program like Georgia Tech You better be pretty sure you want engineering to turn down Harvard for Georgia Tech. I think, except to save money, very few people would make this choice, no matter how interested they were in engineering. </p>

<p>Secondly, let's not denigrate the MIT-Wellesley interaction too much. When that Wellesley bus drops people off at Mass Ave, a good number of people are disembarking. I can't believe they are all just MIT students who are taking crossreg classes at Welllesley and are coming back. It's gotta be a decent number of Wellesley girls who are taking the bus to take classes at MIT. </p>

<p>Hence, it seems to me that because of the presence of the bus, and the extensive cross-reg relationship between Wellesley and MIT, if you're a Wellesley girl who wants to take engineering courses, you can do it. If you want to find faculty interested in engineering, you can do it. If you want to find lectures on engineering, you can do it. And that all therefore means that they ought to be able to find peer support. Yes, it's a pain in the rear to take the bus, but apparently a decent number of people are taking that bus. </p>

<p>Look, I agree that the chances of actually completing one of these 3/2 programs are not large. But it's still an option to consider. In particular, it's an option to consider in case you can't get into Swarthmore or one of the elite LAC's that offer engineering.</p>

35

<p>I wasn't specifically discussing Wellesley.</p>

<p>It's possible that Wellesley might be an exception.
Most LACs that have programs like this do not have buses that pull up to MIT. At very least a Wellesley student could take a course or two at MIT along the way to see if she actually liked engineering. Most other LAC students can't do this. But if she then can't actually get into MIT, or doesn't even know up front if she can get in, then it seems to me like a poor step-child of a resolution to this issue. </p>

<p>I would want to investigate carefully the nature and conditionality of this program before I made a decision about it. If it turned out to be highly contingent, as others I mentioned previously, I would personally choose Trinity College or some of the others over Wellesley. BUt YMMV.</p>

<p>For what it's worth, my daughter sat in on an advanced math class at Wellesley and was not impressed at all. She might have had a chance, based on performance in math stuff, to maybe get into MIT but chose not to apply because it did not seem strong to her in the areas she wanted to study.</p>

<p>So there's an example of someone spurning the seemingly more prestigious option because they don't have her desired course of studies. I would suggest that most people interested in engineering should make an analogous move in most reasonable cases.</p>

36

<p>But again, that raises the issue of whether you really know that you want to do engineering or not. The point raised by Dado2girls, of which I can second, is that plenty of people think they want to be engineers and then later decide not to be. It gets back to the example I raised above - what if you really did turn down Harvard for Georgia Tech because you want to be an engineer, and then find out later that you don't want to do engineering anymore? </p>

<p>Look, there are no perfectly optimal solutions. Every choice you make has its pros and cons.</p>