I’m looking at WPI, RPI, and SBU as safety schools. I’ve noticed that although WPI has a great reputation for producing capable, experienced students, securing internships, having some really great tech and programs, etc., its rankings for the majors I’m interested are kind of disappointing. Of course I don’t place too much weight in the minutiae of the US News rankings because everyone determines “goodness” differently, but I was a little surprised to see this pretty great-sounding school ranked so far below Stony Brook and RPI. Any explanations and experiences would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!
What ratings are you referring to?
US News–87th for engineering, 90th for CS.
CS rankings are focused on graduate studies. WPI has an undergraduate focus, as well as a practical application focus. If you compare it to big research powerhouses by the graduate metrics, it makes perfect sense.
WPI is ranked 63rd in undergraduate engineering on US News, not 87th. That is tied with SBU. RPI is 32nd on that list.
WPI is ranked higher as an overall school than it is in one of its specialty subjects. That says a lot about the rankings to me.
In general, most would agree that RPI > WPI > SBU, and all three offer solid graduates. Employers know this, which is what matters. I wouldn’t focus on this.
Ah, that makes sense. Thank you so much.
If you look at the methodology behind the US News Engineering Ranking you will find that it based purely on a poll of people within academia (i.e. who have a vested interest in the outcome). As a result, the ranking correlates pretty closely with the size of the school’s Phd program, because these graduates are more likely to be employed in academia (i.e. become part of the voting pool) and they tend to put a high subjective value on academic research.
WPI is ranked higher in the National University Ranking than the Engineering Ranking because the National University ranking incorporates some data in the ranking methodology along with the opinions of people in academia (which is still a big component).
In the world of engineering, there is a saying - “In God we trust, but all others must supply data”. In general, the utility of the US News Engineering Ranking is zero and the utility of the National University Ranking is in some of the raw data that they collect, not in the ranking itself.
I am not very familiar with Stony Brook, but in terms of WPI vs RPI, WPI is known more for its undergraduate teaching and hands on, project oriented, curriculum. It has smaller classes and a much higher 4 year graduation rate (76% vs. 63%) and slightly better need based aid than RPI. RPI has a more traditional curriculum and undergrads receive more NSF graduate research awards than WPI undergrads. The relative value of these factors is dependent on your preferred learning style.
In terms of specialty programs WPI has a particularly strong program in Robotics - arguably one of the best in the country and RPI is one of only two private schools with a program in Nuclear Engineering.
WPI is an school with interesting and fairly intelligent students, and at least when I went there, it was fairly challenging.
As for US News, I’m with @Mastadon. Apart from the top 10 or 20 schools, I’d not take the rankings seriously. For the 20-80 schools, the students are of relatively similar caliber the material is likely taught similarly. Or the rankings do not in my opinion correctly correlate with the instruction quality and rigor. WPI is a good school, and for students who need more faculty attention, I’d recommend it strongly. It’s not the best choice for everyone, as your state school could be cheaper and the same employers may recruit there. At many of the top schools, professors primarily only pay attention to top students. At WPI, professors try harder to build most students into good students and capable engineers.
When you compare the curriculum with the top 10 engineering schools (roughly: MIT, Stanford, Berkeley, Caltech, Georgia Tech, Michigan, UIUC, Purdue, and Cornell), I’d say WPI would probably be less challenging. The professors are more supportive and there is effort to make sure most students succeed, but there is less material covered. You can Google the syllabi and problem sets of equivalent courses. Even when you account for quarters vs. semesters or anything like that. Not everyone thrives in the more hardcore environment, so this is not a reason to immediately disqualify WPI from consideration.
The professors at WPI do put in great efforts to make sure that the strong students get into the places (jobs and graduate schools) where they deserve to be. And some end up at top graduate PhD programs like Stanford, Cornell, Michigan, MIT and the likes. Still, for the student who is sure they want to go onto research, I’d suggest a more research-focused school than WPI.
There was an article in the Boston Globe this week about WPI researchers having developed a new chip… not sure if this link will work, but here goes…
There is an organization which is well positioned to judge the educational quality of engineering programs. That organization is the National Academy of Engineering. They select faculty for the “Bernard M Gordon Prize for Innovation in Engineering and Technology Education.” This prize awards $500,000 (1/2 to be split among the individual recipients and 1/2 to their college/university).
Since 2001, the National Academy has recognized “new modalities and experiments in education that develop effective engineering leaders.” Engineering education is the focus here and not the football team or the total size of a large university’s graduate school or research budget. Public awareness is not the measuring stick here. There are no Nobel prizes for engineering.
These are the most recent winners:
2016 WPI (4 current faculty members awarded)
2015 Northeastern (2 faculty members awarded)
2014 Dartmouth College (4 faculty members awarded)
2013 Olin College of Engineering (3 faculty members awarded)
2012 Harvey Mudd College (3 faculty members awarded)
2011 Virginia Commonwealth University (1 faculty member awarded)
2010 none listed
2009 Stanford University (2 faculty awarded)
Visit WWW.nae.edu/Projects/Awards/GordonPrize.aspx for more detail. If you have not heard of these schools, perhaps you should find about more about them then you can learn in the US News rankings. Is US News or is The National Academy of Engineering in a better position to judge educational creativity and efficacy in engineering education? If you believe it is the total dollar value institution’s research budget I suggest to put Johns Hopkins University on your list and forget all the rest. Johns Hopkins is so far ahead that the rest of us that we are eating their dust.
Look at the quality of experience offered at WPI. The WPI plan, including the IQP and MQP is unique among universities. My S ('15) found himself talking a lot about his MQP during job interviews as well as on the job. He started work about three weeks after graduation. He didn’t have the opportunity to complete his IQP at one of WPI 's global centers, but that would have been very cool.
Genuine excitement about the learning process is a very big element in any education. I went through assisting in project experiences in my first year after graduation from WPI. I had graduated under the older traditional system. The “WPI Plan” was brand new and very revolutionary.
My first job was to assist under a federal grant to write reports and to help about 30 students through different phases of the two year, interdisciplinary study. I was NOT teaching staff, but the utility person working out of the director’s office. Three Civil Engineers, two economists and one sociologist from the teaching faculty were very directly involved in academic advising regarding air, noise, traffic, social impact and the many economic aspects of interstate highway systems. We were working on real issues for the federal and state government. These interdisciplinary projects are called IQPs.
The commitment was palpable. This was the interdisciplinary vehicle needed to hone a student’s true problem solving skills. Students really had to learn how to formulate the right questions and design real world solutions. As a graduate of the traditional program, I was jealous of their undergraduate learning experience. Today, many secondary schools and universities are actively involved in the student project and student research.
WPI has not rested. They have been working for over forty-five years to optimize the integration of the classroom learning process with the two different project experiences. The researching and honing of this educational process is ongoing through a number of established vehicles.
Prior to this new program, co-op was the only vehicle out there with the potential to create such a learning experience. Co-op is a great idea which I believe was largely pioneered by Northeastern University (2015 Gordon Prize winners). The WPI project approach was designed to allow teaching faculty to better manage the scope of student projects. A number of project centers in both the US and overseas have been set up to expedite these projects.
Co-op is available at WPI. Students work for six to eight month’s and maintain student status. This experience can augment a students education and assist financially, but is not the same vehicle as an IQP or MQP. All Co-op experiences are not explicitly designed to meet a student’s educational needs.
Whatever you do, it helps to get excited about your education!
Excellent, @retiredfarmer. Thank you for that.
WPI is a great school. My kid is not STEM (neither are we, his parents), but if he were I would want it to be considered. Spent sabbatical near it and was really impressed by the quality of faculty and students, community spirit and entrepeneurial energy on campus.
RPI>WPI>SBU. Where do you think UMASS Amherst fits in?
For CS: UMASS>=RPI
Overall STEM: UMASS>=SBU
This is very generalized of course, but should give you an idea of where UMASS fits in. Fit and financials will probably be a more important deciding factor in comparing many of these schools listed.
@retiredfarmer, thank you. It helps a lot to know all of that stuff. Throughout high school, thanks to a combination of a bad engineering teacher (who went to Cornell, actually…what do you know?) and a rather sexist robotics team I’ve been pretty frustrated by a lack of opportunities to apply the things that I know. I think I’d be pretty happy at WPI so I’ll definitely consider it when applying to colleges next year.
@abbidon: FWIW, WPI has earned a solid rep of being a great and supportive STEM school for females. My daughter attends an all-girls prep school and has done a 4 year pre-engineering program at her school… she has chosen to attend WPI in the fall. Each year at least one graduate of her school goes on to WPI, and the reports that have come back from those students have been overwhelmingly positive regarding their WPI experience.
One thing you should learn as an engineer, is that you shouldn’t count on your teachers to learn things (and you certainly should not blame your teachers if you don’t…). Good teaching is a valuable art, and good teachers really make the learning process more enjoyable. At any engineering school, WPI or elsewhere, there will be good and bad teachers. It’s your responsibility to make sure you are learning and doing well.
WPI isn’t highly ranked since the overall class metrics of the incoming class aren’t comparable with those of higher ranked schools (at least for national university rankings). For engineering rankings and STEM, WPI doesn’t have the same reputation amongst college administrators, professors, and employers as other schools. I wouldn’t say it’s bogus either. If you’re comparing a school in the top 50 to the top 60 there’s probably not a big difference but top 30 to 90 is a huge difference in terms of perceptions in industry, etc. (please do research before you bash me for acknowledging that rankings have some meaning - learn how they’re done first)
For reference:
WPI SAT: 1315
RPI SAT: 1420
Stony SAT: 1250
WPI top 10%: 68%
RPI top 10%: 78%
WPI research annually: 36 million
RPI: 103 million
Remember also that there are class metrics that are not published which include number of APs taken and average scores which may vary by institution. I’m willing to bet the higher ranked schools have students more qualified in that sense as well as in the more holistic sense with ECs, internships, etc. I also am willing to doubt that WPI students more readily get amazing internships as students at higher ranked schools. Sure, students do well at and out of WPI but coming from RPI, acedotally, I haven’t seen anyone with a decent GPA that’s tried that hasn’t gotten an internship at a Fortune 500 or really good firm. Still, they’re all great schools though. WPI is very solid for STEM and has developed a name for itself. Generally, I’d agree with someone above that noted it’s usually RPI > WPI > SBU but employers know that each of these schools produces great engineering graduates and in the end factors other than prestige may determine how you do in the future.
Taken from the US NEWS college ranking report:
"In spring 2016, U.S. News asked top academics to name the schools that they think have faculty with an unusually strong commitment to undergraduate teaching.
The rankings for Best Undergraduate Teaching focus on schools where faculty and administrators are committed to teaching undergraduate students in a high-quality manner. College presidents, provosts and admissions deans who participated in the annual U.S. News peer assessment survey were asked to nominate up to 10 schools in their Best Colleges ranking category with a strength in undergraduate teaching.
The Best Undergraduate Teaching rankings are based solely on the responses to this separate section of the 2016 peer assessment survey.
The Best Undergraduate Teaching rankings focus attention on one very important part of the undergraduate academic experience that is not always directly measured in a college’s regular peer assessment survey results and in its overall rank within the 2017 edition of the Best Colleges rankings."
WPI was tied for #18 in the country by this survey. They were tied with the University of MD and U of C Berkeley.
Please note that these are the opinions of college presidents, provosts and admissions deans who participated in the survey.
How does this “ranking” fit into considerations in the evaluation process?
The process of “ranking” has many flaws, among them:
- failure to account for the validity of the collected data itself;
- failure to rigorously test the relationship between the explanatory variables and individual success;
- an untested conventional wisdom that classroom grades predict professional success;
- failure to test and account for environmental factors which have not been quantifiable.
When attempts are made to model professional success or even classroom performance we find that the “unexplained” portion of the variance is much larger than the explained portion. We find that the ability for standardized tests scores to predict classroom performance virtually disappear by the third year of university studies.
Too many engineers are too ready to accept data at face value when they are applying their math skills to the behavioral world. The development and understanding of behavioral studies are not an easy art form.
All this means we are “down the rabbit hole” when it comes to a lot of conventional assumptions. This conundrum justifies the National Academy of Engineering’s interest in recognizing and encouraging educational innovation.
This should not be an argument of the old verses the new, but rather a recognition of the need to further improve the educational process for our future leaders.