<p>And I was wondering what criteria these rankings are based on? As engineering students, won't we all learn the same sort of cirriculum? Do the higher ranked schools offer more advanced courses or do you "learn more" at these better ranked colleges? Are the professors better? </p>
<p>Just wondering how much weight to put on these rankings and what I should really consider when I'm choosing an engineering college?</p>
<p>A large portion of the ranking is given over to stuff that really means nothing in terms of the program. They take spending into account, so schools in more expensive areas tend to be inflated a bit. They also worry way too much about acceptance rates and the like. This tends to skew toward the smaller and more ‘popular’ schools. That is not to say that many of the highly ranked schools are not also very good schools, but the rankings (especially for US News) are not really about how well they educate.</p>
<p>As mentioned above, most of the ones I have seen have methodology listed somewhere.</p>
<p>“These undergrad engineering programs were ranked solely on a peer assessment survey conducted in spring 2013. To appear on an undergraduate engineering survey, a school must have an undergraduate engineering program accredited by ABET. The programs below are schools whose highest engineering degree offered is a doctorate”</p>
<p>So it is peer colleges ranking peer colleges.</p>
<p>Still your comment and questions about the differences for engineering colleges is a very good one. I’m not an expert in this area but I can make some comments for your consideration. </p>
<p>All of these listed are research universities with a high rate of research activity in the grad school, which I take to mean a lot of innovation is going on, there are project and research that undergrads can benefit from. That in turn attracts well regarded faculty. Because they are mainly large universities they can offer deeper and wider courses and have enough faculty to teach them. Some of them may have coursework that goes above and beyond the minimum so you learn more.Some may have specialized offerings that the college or professors there are known for. The graduates are well established throughout industry and academia so they are a known quantity. The non engineering requirements are known to be of quality to those peer evaluators as well, and the departments they are taught in are likely well regarded in their fields too.</p>
<p>However, if you attend a college that is ABET accredited you are indeed studying the same thing at some basic level. A smaller institute without a grad school may not get as high a ranking but may be more attractive because of smaller class size and more academic support. It may have a good reputation from employers in its geographic region and just not be on a national stage when other institutions are asked to pick ‘the best’.</p>
<p>US News Peer Assessments results align rather closely with the results of more objective measurements (for the highest-ranked schools, at least). That would not be the case if they were completely arbitrary and corrupt. That’s not to say they are unbiased. It may indeed be the case that this year’s PA scores are heavily biased by last year’s overall rankings. Although, the PA ranking positions of a few schools (esp. top-ranked state universities) do differ by ~5-10 positions (or more) from the overall ranking positions. Whether that might be due to well-informed insights by “Peers” into factors the other measurements don’t capture, or due to other kinds of bias, is debatable. </p>
<p>There have been cases of Peers who tried to use the assessment to boost a favored school or trash a competitor. Unless that behavior is rampant (which I doubt) then it isn’t likely to have much effect. I’d be more concerned about subconscious bias.</p>