<p>onecircuit: so you mixed S/R rankings and use their averages, and then you ranked the groups based on that. despite the fact that NRC did not want the rankings to be abused this way into a definitive 1-50 ranking?</p>
<p>so do you always use data in bad faith?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>admissionsgeek, let me make it simple for you</p>
<p>If you use the lower figure for the s ranking, Princeton Engineering destroys Columbia Engineering</p>
<p>If you use the upper figure for the s ranking, Princeton Engineering destroys Columbia Engineering</p>
<p>If you use the upper figure for the r ranking, Princeton Engineering destroys Columbia Engineering</p>
<p>If you use the lower figure for the r ranking, Princeton Engineering destroys Columbia Engineering</p>
<p>and finally, if you use the average for all of the above, Princeton Engineering destroys Columbia Engineering</p>
<p>very simple indeed</p>
<p>or to go from the NRC Data brief.</p>
<p>“The rankings are given in broad ranges rather than as single numbers, to reflect some of the uncertainties inherent in any effort to rank programs by quality.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>sorry admissionsgeek but it is Columbia that is using date in bad faith by reporting only the acceptance rate and yield without using the students that were let in through the waitlist</p>
<p>do you always use data in bad faith? not looking for something simple, just an answer to my question.</p>
<p>do YOU always use data in bad faith?</p>
<p>First off, both rankings provided by onecircuit are drastically inaccurate. Both Princeton and Columbia have great Engineering programs, although it is true that Princeton is generally stronger. However, neither of those compare against top-tier universities with strong Engineering programs (MIT, Cornell, Caltech, Stanford, and even UChicago, UMichigan, Northwestern, and Carnegie Mellon).</p>
<p>My brother was accepted into Engineering for Columbia, Cornell, Northwestern, and Carnegie Mellon. He was deciding between Columbia and Cornell (both offered great scholarships), but in the end chose Columbia because it allowed him to double major in Industrial Engineering and Economics. Cornell, Caltech, MIT, and other schools that prioritize in Engineering are absolutely brutal. They’ll probably get a job with a higher salary than those who graduate from Columbia or Princeton Engineering. But again, Columbia allows the double major advantage, especially for my brother who plans to get a MBA later. I don’t know if Princeton allows this.</p>
<p>CalvinTBOD, to show you how truly ridiculus your post is, Chicago doesn’t even offer engineering, yet you claim that both Columbia and Princeton Engineering doesn’t even compare to Chicago’s engineering)</p>
<p>truly truly unbelievable…</p>
<p>and please don’t lump Columbia’s engineering with Princeton’s engineering when doing comparisions to other schools. As stated earlier, Columbia is no where near Princeton’s engineering program.</p>
<p>Oops, I meant University of Illinois in Urbana-Champaign. Sorry, completely disregarded the fact that there was an actual University of Chicago.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>If you get into Engineering, this is not possible. The closest thing you could have done was the joint major in Economics - Operations Research (offered only to College students). However, even that option is no longer available. </p>
<p>Just some anecdotal evidence: my friends in the traditional engineering majors (which is pretty much everything sans IEOR) seem pretty happy with their experience so far. Look up some posts by beard tax if you want more context on the IEOR department. </p>
<p><a href=“IEOR courses - Columbia University - College Confidential Forums”>IEOR courses - Columbia University - College Confidential Forums;
<p>My brother’s attending for 5 years (or plans to).</p>
<p>Ah, I see. Thanks for clearing that up. The 4-1 (or 3-2) programs are pretty much the only ways that students can complete two majors across the College/SEAS.</p>
<p>I found another post by beard tax. I would definitely echo this sentiment of his (though I would say my experience in the Chemistry department was pretty darn bad):</p>
<p>
</p>
<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/columbia-university/1050460-fu-college-2.html#post11673472[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/columbia-university/1050460-fu-college-2.html#post11673472</a></p>
<p>Just wanted to add my 2 cents on Columbia’s engineering program. First, it’s highly dependent on what department you’re in, but the overall quality of the education has been quite bad. If you really want to do the due diligence, look into these resources</p>
<p>1) [url=<a href=“http://bulletin.engineering.columbia.edu/departments-and-academic-programs]Departments”>Departments and Academic Programs | Bulletin | Columbia Engineering]Departments</a> and Academic Programs | SEAS Bulletin<a href=“find%20what%20classes%20you%20need%20to%20take”>/url</a></p>
<p>2) [url=<a href=“http://www.culpa.info%5DCULPA”>http://www.culpa.info]CULPA</a> - Columbia Underground Listing of Professor Ability<a href=“students%20reviews%20for%20the%20professors%20and%20classes”>/url</a></p>
<p>Really, the engineering education is quite terrible. The teaching quality is much worse than what I received in high school. I always have a bit of shock when I transition from a SEAS class to a CC class, the difference in the quality of teaching is quite large. Students in SEAS teach themselves most of the material, as lectures and professors are quite useless. </p>
<p>Also, keep in mind that you give up a large portion of academic freedom choosing Columbia engineering. You will need to compete with the regular transfer application pool to gain admission to CC, that is, you will be competing with all other transfer students from Rutgers, NYU, etc. just to study a non-engineering major. Quite nonsensical and a much more restrictive policy than Princeton, Duke, Yale, Harvard, and most other comparable schools. </p>
<p>On the other hand, if you want to pursue a career in finance and you don’t gain admission to Harvard, Wharton, Princeton, Yale, Dartmouth, Duke, then Columbia engineering is a good choice.</p>
<p>So you’ve already study in Columbia Engineering program?
Please give me some advice. I’ve already got admissions in both USC and Columbia, and major in Electrical Engineering. Both of them provide no fundings and I am making a tough decision on which one to choose…
Allowing for the professors, location for job/interview, which one will you recommand?
PS: I/m not gonna pursue a Ph.D degree…
Thanks a lot~</p>
<p>So you’ve already study in Columbia Engineering program?
Please give me some advice. I’ve already got admissions in both USC and Columbia, and major in Electrical Engineering. Both of them provide no fundings and I am making a tough decision on which one to choose…
Allowing for the professors, location for job/interview, which one will you recommand?
PS: I’m not gonna pursue a Ph.D degree…
Thanks a lot~</p>
<p>Columbia… </p>
<p>Don’t waste your time at U$C… they have poor reputation. Go to Ivy League school.</p>
<p>New US News Engineering rankings came out last week (Grad but what Engineering programs benchmark from). Use only as a guide…</p>
<p>[Best</a> Engineering School Rankings | Engineering Program Rankings | US News](<a href=“http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/eng-rankings]Best”>http://grad-schools.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-graduate-schools/top-engineering-schools/eng-rankings)</p>
<p>Ivy+ Schools-
<p>Even if the acceptance rates are similar, you can’t say the qualifications of the students are similar at Caltech and Columbia SEAS, or that it’s equally difficult to get in for a given student (e.g. San Diego State has a 30% acceptance rate, while Michigan has a 51% rate). Caltech applicants are MUCH more self-selective - students who aren’t extremely strong in math and science don’t even bother applying, and SAT scores and GPA are the highest of any school in the country (so that’s no shame for SEAS, which obviously has very strong students in an objective sense).</p>
<p>cherokee-</p>
<p>what if we said then that the caltech applicants were weaker because they were less well-rounded?</p>
<p>in essence it is to ask, what is ‘good’ and who is ‘better,’ differs.</p>
<p>the purpose of having a low admit rate and what it suggests is that a school was able to be more discerning with its applicant pool to find the student (or kind of student) that the school prefers. columbia is able to be more selective than almost any other eng school in the country, and this gives it great flexibility to form the class it wants.</p>
<p>While I am a Columbia College student, I have many friends in the engineering school and have taken some classes within it. I think calling Columbia’s engineering school “terrible” is making an gross and inaccurate generalization. The school is one of the most competitive programs in the country to get into. The faculty that teach within the school are tremendously influential and students receive incredible opportunities coming out of it. Yes, there will be SEAS students that have not had good experiences. There are also SEAS students that love their department and could not imagine doing anything else.</p>
<p>Your experience will definitely differ and depend on your professors. Not every professor you encounter in SEAS will be amazing. There will be some professors you like more or less than others. As a College student, I have had professors whose classes I wish I had not taken and professors I have loved. In terms of the engineering school, you need to be sure you want to be an engineer. There are several requirements placed on engineers. If you aren’t interested in taking many math/science classes, SEAS probably won’t be a good fit for you.</p>