I currently have a weighted GPA of 5.0417 and scored a 2030 on my SATs (Reading: 650, Math: 770, Writing: 610). I am naturally talented at math and wish to study engineering. I also wish to play D3 soccer and have great chances according to my coaches. I have recently been accepted into the Honors College at Arcadia U. and have made their soccer team. Academically, they do not have engineering available but have a program linked with Columbia University in which I’d be able to get 2 bachelors degrees: a Math from Arcadia and an Engineering from Columbia, in 5 or 6 years. On the other hand, I have a good chance of being admitted to Stevens and will receive a similar scholarship (based off of my friends’ admissions decisions to Stevens). I understand the prestige of Columbia is more valuable, but is it worth the extra time and money to receive 2 degrees rather than one bachelors in Engineering from Stevens IT? (Stevens has a great internship and co-op program, but my chances of playing soccer there are not definite) Please give me some advice.
In engineering, prestige really doesn’t mean all that much (meaning: at all). You’d be better off going to Stevens for 4 (or less) years than going to 2 different colleges for 5 or 6.
No. In fact it is much worse!
Many LACs and smaller colleges offer a 3-2 program. Few students actually complete them. Why? Columbia, for example, requires an overall and eng-specific GPA of 3.3 with no grade ever below a 3.0 in any eng-specific class. To me, that’s harder than getting in as a frosh. At a 4-year engineering school if you have a bad semester and then get on the ball all is forgiven by the time you are interviewing for jobs as a senior; have a bad semester at Arcadia and you won’t be an engineer. Is that better?
Also after 3 years in college many kids just want to be done with the damn thing. At 3:2 schools they see their friends graduating in a year and by filling out a change of major slip they can too. Or they can pack up for parts-unknown, a school where they don’t know anyone, and slog it out for 2 more tough years in engineering. There aren’t a lot of takers.
3-2 programs are like lures that colleges without an engineering school dangle in front of prospective students, who think they are “keeping their options open”. If you are seriously considering this route, ask Arcadia how many students they sent off to each of the partners in each of the past 3 or so years. My guess is almost none. And ucbalumnus pointed out in an earlier thread that http://apps.carleton.edu/curricular/physics/for_students/department_links/engineering/questions/ indicates that about 50 to 60 students are interested (i.e. 16 to 20 students per year), but only 0 to 3 actually transfer to Columbia or WUStL to finish the 3+2 program.
Lastly if you think having 2 degrees is somehow “better” in the eyes of future employers, its not. If you get thru an acredited engineering program everyone knows you have enough math chops to handle anything you need to learn.
@mikemac Wow, thank you so much. I have been leaning toward Arcadia recently, but this information is making me rethink my options. I will research more and think twice before I choose Arcadia.
@dude1715
Listen to @mikemac
He knows what he’s talking about.
Also, if you look on Columbia’s 3+2 program page, it does not promise as much financial aid to 3+2 students as it does for other students.
http://undergrad.admissions.columbia.edu/apply/combined-plan
My son goes to Haverford on a combined program with U Penn and it was a bad decision. Haverford and small LAC’s are not the place for engineering students. I wish they had been honest with us. My son would have been much better off at Lafayette or Stevens!!
Think realistically, will you be able to play soccer at Arcadia and manage the grades to stay in the engineering program/keep a good GPA to move on to Columbia? As @mikemac and many other people say, it is so difficult to maintain a 3.0.
Stevens Insititute of Technology is a very nice school, close to NY, where you will have more of a focus on engineering. I really haven’t heard of Arcadia pumping out many engineers into the work force…Unfortunately, with the career path you’ve chosen, it may be difficult to balance soccer at all. Playing intramural or kicking it around every now and then with some buddies may be more beneficial to stay in shape and stay relatively fine academically; soccer may have to be sacrificed anyways.
I agree with above. Many families (like ours) in these threads were intrigued initially by the idea of 3-2 but ruled it out after further analysis.
Per soccer, it would be hard to balance D3 and engineering. But by all means keep playing in colleges (intermurals or club). You will benefit from the continued exercise.
How about 3-2 programs for students who may not be ready for college rigors straight out of high school? Perhaps 3 years at these colleges taking required math, physics, chemistry, etc and then continuing onto Engineering program would suit some students. Of course if a student isn’t motivated, they will fail whether it is at engineering school or before they get to it. I am interested in this for my son. He will do well at colleges with small class sizes. As an example, we visited Georgia Tech and our jaw dropped when they said as many as 200+ students may be in a Calculus class. That isn’t a recipe for success for my son. So, the thought about 3-2 programs or transfer program like RETP that Ga tech has.
@HFAparent
That makes it even worse. If they’re “not ready” for college rigors, they won’t be able to maintain the gpa necessary to transfer. Besides, the professors all have office hours and there are plenty of recitation sessions.
HFA - Look for some of the old threads on the topic. The general consensus is that engineering works best with 4 year course sequences. I applaud you for looking for a good fit major/program but just don’t think 3-2 is the answer. Hang out with us (engineers and/or parents of engineering students) here … we’ll help you find other ideas 
@colorado_mom, what did your analysis reveal? The overriding theme here seems to be about students not doing well enough to meet GPA requirements to be able to transfer. Weak students will be weeded out anywhere, no? There is attrition after freshman year like ga tech told us. Without motivation from student to excel, it won’t matter if it is 3-2 program or 2-2 program or straight to college.
GPA was not much of a factor in my analysis. Low GPA issue is also a concern at some schools just to change major… so it can be a factor in 4 year programs. (I often warn student about that snafu).
I made judgement based on my own MechE college memories and study of various schools for my kids (one that stuck with engineering and another that did not). Here are a few of the reasons I did not like 3-2:
- Engineering is different from a lot of other majors. It has itnertwined course sequences that work better in a traditional 4 year program. Each school is a little different, but here's an example flowchart (the format show typical prereq/interdependencies.. use Ctrl-+ to zoom in to make it more readable). http://mechanical.mines.edu/MECH-flowchart
- Unless the 2nd college is in the same town, I can't envision a student wanting to switch schools right before his buddies head into senior year.
- There is an extra year of college costs
- The first three years won't have enough meaty engineering work to help the student confirm that it's the right path. So the typical freshman attrition (a good thing for students not a good fit for engineering).does not have its natural progression.
Sounds like HFAkid would be better off at a smaller college for engineering, or perhaps an honors college at a state school where smaller classes are possible.
The 3-2 concept is one of those things that sounds good in theory but rarely works in reality. It’s more of a marketing gimmick for colleges that don’t offer engineering to say they do.
Agree with everything stated above. Also, having a second bachelor’s degree is absolutely no advantage for an engineer. Spend the time and money on Master’s, if relevant and desired.
Stevens is an [url="<a href=“http://theaitu.org%22%5DAITU%5B/url”>http://theaitu.org"]AITU[/url] school and you will get a very good engineering education there. The AITU schools are well-known for engineering education and their graduate are able to find jobs. Speaking as a faculty member at another AITU school, I agree with all the other advice about the 3+2 programs. The ones we have at my university have very few students in them.
“Employers tend to look very favorably on students who graduate from these programs. Columbia’s engineering school reports that, in recent years, the dual degree students have had better job opportunities, with higher starting salaries, than students who go directly through traditional engineering programs. Employers value the reasoning, critical thinking, problem solving, and communications skills which students acquire at the liberal arts college. These skills, combined with the outstanding technical preparation from the engineering courses, make for an attractive job candidate.”
At issue isn’t whether the students are employable after graduation. It is whether they graduate with an engineering degree in the first place. Also, don’t dredge up old threads.
I played sports at the D3 level and studied engineering. My best grades were actually when my sport was in season. Why? Because while playing I had to manage my time. When out of season, my scheduling got out of control at times and my studies suffered.
Playing sports at a D1 level is a whole other ballgame, but D3 sports aren’t the same commitment to travel and my practices were at a more “study friendly” time.
I’d also avoid the 3-2 programs. Many reasons but one you may not also consider is that you’re starting your career one year later, which can mean leaving your $70k salary on the table for that year.