<p>I feel like I'm behind compared to a lot of people. I have no AP scores, so pretty much I have to start from scratch. And I'm looking to get into EE, which is really competitive and require a lot of prerequisites. This quarter I'm taking CHEM142, MATH124, Intro to Engineering 101, and GEN ST 199. I also did EFS. Should I consider more classes next quarter?</p>
<p>You’re in good shape. There aren’t very many prerequisites for admission to EE and as long as you can maintain at least a 3.5-3.6 you should have a good shot of getting in.</p>
<p>Yeah I was just a bit worried because since many people I know are either taking more classes or did running start. But I’m also looking at having Applied physics as a second option, and that makes you take many physics classes. You have to take several for EE too. So I’m thinking if I take classes during the summer too, that would help a lot. Smaller class size too.</p>
<p>Don’t be influenced by peer pressure visa vi courseload. The EE admissions committee won’t care if you take 12 or 18 credits, or two vs four technical classes per quarter. But they will definitely care about the individual grade and GPA in those technical classes! If you can handle more classes with the same GPA, fine, but don’t risk your GPA by adding more than you can handle.</p>
<p>There are some extremely smart people at UW, but that tends to be the exception and not the norm. Most people, myself included, are in the same boat you are.</p>
<p>I’m also someone who originally wanted to do the applied physics track of the physics major, but I was also very interested in understanding how modern technology worked, so I wound up in EE. If you want to do one of the more physics-based concentrations in EE, you don’t have to worry too much about large class sizes. While the embedded courses are usually always full with a waitlist, courses in electromagnetics, photonics, semiconductors, etc. are almost always half-full. For example, my applied electromagnetics course this quarter only has 17 students.</p>
<p>Yeah, I know if I’m going to do applied physics, though it’s not a competitive major and you don’t even have to apply, you have to take a lot more physics classes than you have to in EE. But luckily a lot of the EE prereqs are interchangeable, such as intro to engineering and physics 101 (obviously). After talking to an adviser in the physics department, I think a good plan is to stick with the EE track for now, but just add some more physics classes starting winter quarter, and then deciding where I want to go after the EE prereqs are done.</p>
<p>@simba27 I’m on a similar boat. I just recently applied for ACMS and I hear back before registration for next quarter, November 7. If I don’t get into ACMS, I’ll have a good cry, contemplate my existence, cry some more, and then choose the applied physics option of the physics major.</p>
<p>Seriously though, the applied physics option is awesome; have you seen their applied physics labs?</p>
<p>@potatomawnster: ACMS is pretty cool. I wish you luck. And yeah I know! I was just roaming around the physics department and the APL a few days ago and saw the stuff that they work on. It’s right in my interests and is very amazing. I’m seriously considering doing Applied Physics. But the only thing that I’m concerned about is the difference between looking for a job with an applied physics degree and looking for the same job with an EE degree. From what I hear (mostly from my dad), is that the EE degree is much more attractive. But idk, what do you think?</p>
<p>@simba27 Thanks! Tbh, I’m probably being over-dramatic about not getting in. Even if I don’t get into ACMS, I still have applied physics, which is wonderful. If I do get into ACMS, I’m probably going to sorely miss some things applied physics could have provided.</p>
<p>I’ve looked into it for a while and it is true that EE degrees have a louder ring to it since it is formally called an engineering degree. However, applied physics is sometimes referred to as engineering physics as both terms seem to be interchangeable.</p>
<p>Applied physics certainly will sound less attractive than a traditional engineering degree in the eyes of the job market, even if these disciplines heavily overlap. If you look at a lot of engineering positions at Boeing for example, they require: “Bachelor, Master or Doctorate of Science degree from an accredited course of study, in engineering, computer science, mathematics, physics or chemistry.” In addition, they also want someone with some engineering experience even for entry-level positions.</p>
<p>While they seem to consider people with different degrees, I’m sure they will heavily lean towards those with traditional engineering degrees. Still, the statistics for applied physics majors still look very good (starting salary, employment rate, etc.), can’t say the same for theoretical physics however.</p>
<p>Yeah that’s exactly what I mean. Just don’t know if I want to take that risk or not. However, in the end it all depends on the person. I’m sure there are people in applied physics and other majors who have more engineering experience than people in an engineering major.</p>