how important is the school you attend for engineering?

College Majors Engineering Majors
1

<p>Well, everyone always talks about university rankings. The person who graduated from a more prestigous university gets more respect than one who graduates from a not so presgious university (isn't ranking subjective).</p>

<p>Anyways, I was studying civil engineering, and will be transferring to Cal State University, Chico next fall. Yeah Chico is known as the biggest party school around, but thats not my reason for choosing to transfer there. Chico has the best construction managment program in the state, and civil engineering is their most popular engineering major. Also the percent of student that pass the Fundementals of Enginerring Exam is 84% which is 15% higher from the state average. I was also offered admission to Cal Poly Pomona, and SJSU, but chose chico, becuase its a residential campus (to get the college experience), and a smaller campus than sjsu.</p>

<p>But, It is Chico, I know. Its not Stanford, Cal Poly, or Berkerely (top engineering schools in california).</p>

<p>Will I be offered a lower starting salary, or not as good as a job that would graduate from Cal Berkeley? </p>

<p>Also, what should I do in order to increase my chance of getting a great job?</p>

2

<p>Actually, it's been seen that an engineering graduate from UCB and a graduate from a no-name won't have much of a difference in salary (unfair, but true), that is when going into an ENTRY LEVEL JOB. Now, the better diploma may help you when promotions come around, you want to transfer jobs, etc. But, in terms of entry level jobs, not so much. </p>

<p>Now, if you want to increase your chance at a great job, get as many internships and as much work experience as possible. That will help with any engineering degree. In fact, it's preferred by most firms that you have experience to get a great job. </p>

<p>Basically, a no-name degree with good work experience and glowing recs might actually be more helpful than JUST a degree from Berkeley (though, great work experience AND a UCB degree would probably be better than the former ;) ).</p>

<p>So, no matter where you go: get as much work experience as you can, do those internships/menial jobs to the best of your ability and impress the hell out of your superiors, and you will have a great job.</p>

3

<p>Get to know your professors, especially the prominent ones in the field. Get them to write recommendations for you later on.</p>

<p>Also, a question... are you planning on going to grad school?</p>

4

<p>yeah, I am going to go to graduate school. I really want to go to berkeley/stanford/MIT and the like, I just have to get a 4.0 at chico, get some good reccomendations, and work experience. </p>

<p>I plan on getting a either a MS, MENG, or if i get really interested (who knows) a PhD. I want to get my masters in constrction management/ project management.</p>

5

<p>Salary has nothing to do with the school you graduate from and everthing to do with your experience. Comapnies DO NOT hire based on where you went to school, they hire based on what you can do for them skill wise. Every position has a salary range attached to it. The more experience you have (relevent to the positon), the closer you will start at the higher end of the salary range. The most important thing to look at is what companies do on campus interviews at a particular school.</p>

<p>However, recruiters may gernearlly seek to fill more spots from certain schools than others, i.e. they'll invertivew for 10 slots at MIT and only 5 at School-X. Also, if two candidates competing for a job have the same amount of experience, the guy from the more well known school will have an edge (not factoring in who has better interview skills). The other thing is that bigger name schools usually have more corporate partnerships and better research opportunites so you'll have more oportunites to get experience. </p>

<p>Having said all of that, let's say you go to Montana Tech. (made that up I think) and get some research and internship experience in FEM. Now lets say someone graduates from MIT but got no internship or research experience while there. If you both interview for a positon doing FEM analysis, I'm 99.9% sure you'd get the job (speaking from experience).</p>

6

<p>...well, the only problem with that is that a lot of Montana Tech-ish programs don't offer things like finite element analysis. Schools you went to and salaries aren't totally unrelated, I wouldn't go so far as to say that.</p>

<p>For typical, more local-ish companies, JS, you're quite right. However, the really top-notch companies that design the tallest skyscrapers in the world are going to be looking for people with masters degrees from some of the top programs. It's unfair, but if recruiters have never heard of your school and they're trying to hire someone to do wind dynamics analysis on the next Burj Dubai, then they're going to skip over you and go for the guy with a masters from one of the top programs.</p>

<p>Grad schools, though, are a little bit more appreciative of people's undergraduate degrees. If you go to Chico and get great recommendations, high grades, good scores on the GRE, and some good work experience during the summers, you've got a great shot at getting admission and funding to at least one of the top ten.</p>

7

<p>aibarr, I'm not sure where your're getting your info. from.</p>

<p>It is very, very, very rare for any company big or small to pass up on someone from a lesser known institution with good experience for someone with a more well known degree and little to no experience (this is the point). As I pointed out, certain companies recruit more people from certain schools than others, thats a given. But, once the 10 guys from MIT and the 5 guys from Montana Tech. go for their second round interviews, who gets hired will once again come down to experience. As I also stated, more well known programs genearly have better opportunites to get experience via research and corporate partnerships, but at the same time the opportunites will also exist at lesser knonw institutions (just to a lesser degree). I will reiterate, salary has nothing to do with where you went to scool. I made more (and had more responsibility) than many of the interns I worked with from bigger name schools because I had research experince in the area I was working in. I'm speaking from experience.</p>

<p>Now, if you want to argue that MIT will give you more opportunities for research, coursework, and networking than (the imaginary) Montana Tech., I'd agree wholeheartedly. However, if a person goes to MIT and just graduates (no internships, research experience, etc.) not only will he or she be at a disadvantage against other MIT students with, they'll be at a disadvantage against people from other (not necessarily top) schools with good grades and experience.</p>

<p>I've done two internships for big name companies (GE, Lockheed) and most of the engineers I met and worked with did not come from top programs, though there were some that did. For instance, lots of people at GE were from te University of Cincinnatti and Ohio State. Now GE also recruits at top schools like MIT and Carnegie Mellon, but they don't (typically) go to Oklahoma State. So, if you want an easier in at GE, go to UCinncinnati, Carnegie Mellon, Ohio State, MIT, or any another school where GE usually recruits (the head of their engineering development program went to Clarkson for example). Of course, you can still get into GE if you go to UOklahoma if you've got the right credentials (gpa, experience), but you'll have to figure out how to get your foot in the door.</p>

<p>Once again, it will ultimately come down to what you know vs. what your competition knows. The less time and money a company has to spend on getting you up to speed, the more likely they'll be to hire you.</p>

8

<p>I just wanted to add that the info. I'm giving obviously does not apply to the on campus interviewing process. It relates to things like career fairs at confrences, open job postings in technical publications, etc. .</p>

9

<p>Internship hires are a little different from career hires... It's sort of like determining who you're going to go out with next Saturday versus who you want to marry.</p>

<p>Also, let's compare potatoes to potatoes. GE and Lockheed are gargantuan. The top companies in civil eng are tiny, in comparison to companies like Microsoft or Google or TI. Think about it: I own a calculator. You own a calculator. Neither of us owns a Sears Tower or an Empire State Building or a Golden Gate Bridge, I'm willing to bet. Consequently, in order to work on those "dream projects", as they're commonly called in the civ biz, you've gotta be at the top of the dogpile, and that means experience <em>and</em> good grades <em>and</em> a degree from a top grad program.</p>

<p>I've got a moderately large range of reference that I'm drawing off of. Last August, I sent out over 150 resumes to companies all over the nation (and a few companies abroad) and went to do a ton of interviews, and it was almost a little ridiculous how often Berkeley, Georgia Tech, Illinois, MIT, etc., were mentioned when comparing grad schools with the people at those really top places (in civil engineering, mind you, as the original poster is planning on getting a degree in) like Walter P Moore, Arup, Wiss Janney, Magnusson-Klemencic, LERA, and Parsons-Brinckerhoff. It was just a broken record reciting the top ten programs, when you ask where these people got their masters degrees.</p>

<p>Fact is, there just aren't as many civil/structural companies out there, and the big names don't necessarily mean that they've got thousands of people working for them. In all the offices I interviewed at, there were only about 20-40 engineers working in each division or each office. That's it. Civ companies are smaller. If you want to work on the fantastic projects, you have to get a degree from a fantastic program, unless you're content to construct smaller buildings local to your company.</p>

<p>For your field, you're quite right. Things are just different in our field.</p>

10

<p>Aibarr is right. Big name schools go a long way in differentiating those who get selected from everyone else. If you have two nearly identical applicants, one from MIT and one from Kansas State... The one from MIT will win everytime.</p>

<p>I ,myself, have been told by Lockheed Martin-Orlando recruiters themselves that they much prefer to hire students that come from Georgia Tech instead of those from the local universities.</p>

<p>And this was just for an internship..</p>

11

<p>I'm not really reading anything that's contrary to what I've written. I clearly stated that two candidates being equal, a more well known name on the degree will help. The point is, not having that big name won't hurt you so much as long as you've got exceptional credentials, which you can still establish at many lesser known schools.</p>

<p>I also pointed out that, in general, a lot of companies will interview a larger number of peopel from MIT than at school X, but the fact of the matter is the company still recruits at school X. The obvious conclusion is that if you go to MIT, you've got a better shot at landing a position because they take more people from MIT, that's understood. But, if you go to school X you've still got a chane (not as good of a chance but it's still there).</p>

<p>Lancer7, Recruiters don't hire, they recruit. My recruiter had nothing to do with my interview or hiring process. You get interviewed by an engineer, and the engineering supervisor for your group has final say so in whether or not you get the job (they come out and tell you that in the interview). I didn't actually meet my recruiter face to face until orientation. </p>

<p>There's definitely more FL people at Lockheed Orlando (missles and fire control) than from GA Tech. Pretty much everybody I met there was from some school in FL (including me), and Lockheed in Orlando has a partnerships with UCF. They also recruit at UMiami, FL State, UFand FL Tech (a real school). You'd think of all the schools in FL to have a partnership with, it would'nt be UCF (no offense) but the shcool is only about 45 min away from Lockheeds Orlando facilities. Now, this recruiter may prefer GA tech. grads, but there's no way they hire more in terms of sheer numbers (in Orlando). Now, if you want to get into aerospace and avionics which is headquarterd in GA (Martin-Merietta in GA+Lockheed in CA=Lockheed Martin) it's definitely better to have gone to GA Tech. If you want to work at Skunk Works, look at Stanford ,Cal. Tech, etc. </p>

<p>Admittidly, Lockheed does do more ON CAMPUS RECRUITING at Cal Tech, GA Tech, Stanford, etc. But once again, Martin-Merietta in GA+Lockheed in CA=Lockheed Martin. You can get into Lockheed if you go to school in AZ, but if you're applying for a position in FL, and they find someone with equal qualifications in FL or another school they normally recruit at, your chances aren't going to be too good.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
Comapnies DO NOT hire based on where you went to school, they hire based on what you can do for them skill wise.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, that's not entirely true. It actually depends on the company. </p>

<p>Take a look at Google:</p>

<p>"For the most part, it takes a degree from an Ivy League school, or MIT, Stanford, CalTech, or Carnegie Mellon--America's top engineering schools--even to get invited to interview [at Google]. [Founders] Brin and Page still keep a hand in all the hiring, from executives to administrative assistants. And to them, work experience counts far less than where you went to school, how you did on your SATs, and your grade-point average. "If you've been at Cisco for 20 years, they don't want you," says an employee. "</p>

<p><a href="http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/12/08/355116/index.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://money.cnn.com/magazines/fortune/fortune_archive/2003/12/08/355116/index.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

13

<p>Sakky, you're right about Google but I'd say they are the exception and not the rule.</p>

<p>Also, I'd advise anyone noting that quote read the article and make note of the context the quote is made in. It points out that despite all the "brain power" at google may not be all it's cracked up to be.</p>

14

<p>I dunno... I think maybe going to a school like MIT may even be a disadvantage for some types of people. Because in every class someone has to be the worst student, and because in every class 500 kids have to be in the bottom half. The admissions criteria is so stringent nowadays that some of these "bad students" at MIT could have been exceptional elsewhere. So say they give MIT 10 spots for interns and X-Y-Z-Tech only 5. It's a whole different realm of competition for those 10 spots.</p>

15

<p>Yes, but how many MIT students are there out there who're going to cruise through four years with absolutely no work or research experience? Your point seems to be more or less academic...</p>

<p>Bottom line, TMV, is that if you're planning on going to grad school, just work hard during undergrad and take all the suggestions that everyone's been giving and get into one of the top ten grad programs, which you'll need to be in if you want to write your own ticket in the field that you're in, then you'll be okay.</p>

16

<p>
[quote]

How many MIT students are there out there who're going to cruise through four years with absolutely no work or research experience?

[/quote]

For the record, the answer is "basically none". 80% of MIT undergrads do undergraduate research, and the remaining 20% is presumably made up almost exclusively of humanities and management majors (who comprise about 15% of the school).</p>

17

<p>Don't get the wrong idea. I think a person should aim for the higest possible goals they can attain. If you can get into a top university, and have the finances to afford it, definitely go for it 100%. I'm personally debating whether or not to attend Cornell for grad. studies. </p>

<p>I just don't want anyone to belive that all is lost if they don't graduate from a top 25 Univ., because it's just not the case. It is possible to graduate from a lesser knonwn Univ. and still have great opportunites and be successful. You've just got to have the right mindset/approach.</p>

18

<p>I got into both Trinity College (CT) and Northwestern university but will be attending Trinity for mechanical engineering. </p>

<p>One of the main reasons was financial aid. I hope I haven't made a big mistake by attending a much smaller college with a lower prestige!</p>

19

<p>bleh. hartford.</p>

20

<p>
[quote]
There's definitely more FL people at Lockheed Orlando (missles and fire control) than from GA Tech.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Never implied anything in regards to "sheer numbers" of GT students vs. FL students at missiles and fire control. Obviously, there are more Fl students than GT students at that branch. This is only because of the close proximity of Fl universities (mainly, University of Central Florida)to Lockheed Martin as you yourself mentioned. Secondly, most Georgia Tech engineers (at least in aerospace) end up working at other Lockheed Martin facilities such as the one in Marietta, or Boeing..etc. There would be no reason for most students from Georgia Tech or MIT or Stanford to specifically want to work at missiles and fire control. As a result, the only reason why there are many more FL students at missles and fire control is only because many more Fl students apply to that branch than GT students. </p>

<p>My argument still stands that when the opportunity comes that a student from Georgia Tech happens to apply there and it comes down to competing with a UCF, FSU, UF,Ftech grad for a position.. All else equal, the student from Georgia Tech will win all the time.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Now, this recruiter may prefer GA tech. grads, but there's no way they hire more in terms of sheer numbers (in Orlando).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Agreed. And again my point is given a GT grad and a UCF grad (all else equal), the GT grad will win all the time.</p>

<p>School name is quite important.</p>