<p>Absolutely no offense. Actually, I wanna ask that is CS major offered by college of Engineering(EECS program) more preferred by graduate school and employer. And also,can a student with B.A. of CS under L&S apply for M.S. under college of Engineering? Thanks for answering.</p>
<p>Question #1, of course going directly to EECS is better.</p>
<p>I don't think it's more preferred.</p>
<p>And L&S CS is not useless -- the average starting salary of grads with a BA in CS from Berkeley was $77,000 last year, much higher than EECS (and any major at Berkeley, I think).</p>
<p>That's ridiculous. The B.A. for CS is exactly the same as the B.S. Grads schools and employers won't look at it any differently. B.A. kids get to take the same CS courses. The only difference is that EECS people get to choose to take EE courses along with their CS courses.</p>
<p>And if you still think EECS people are better off, check out who has higher salaries according to the career center. <a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/Major.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/Major.stm</a></p>
<p>I've always wondered about this, but why do the L&S CS graduates actually make more than EECS graduates? Is it the more lucrative nature of software jobs or something else?</p>
<p>Probably, and the fact that EE is becoming (or has become) a very popular major, so the job market is tougher. In addition, the computer job world is pretty lucrative, and the jobs that L&S CS grads get tend to pay high.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And L&S CS is not useless -- the average starting salary of grads with a BA in CS from Berkeley was $77,000 last year, much higher than EECS (and any major at Berkeley, I think).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
And if you still think EECS people are better off, check out who has higher salaries according to the career center. <a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/Major.stm%5B/url%5D">http://career.berkeley.edu/Major/Major.stm</a>
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I've always wondered about this, but why do the L&S CS graduates actually make more than EECS graduates? Is it the more lucrative nature of software jobs or something else?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, actually, you guys missed the biggest reason of all. Until just recently, the CS major didn't admit anybody until about around the junior year, and admission was predicated on your prereq GPA. The result is that those students who had mediocre GPA's couldn't even get into the major. In contrast, EECS admitted most of its students as freshmen, and if you're admitted this way, then as long as you maintain at least a 2.0 GPA, you'd be able to stay in the major and graduate. CS has relatively few students with mediocre grades because most of those students wouldn't have been admitted into the major in the first place. </p>
<p>Hence, it's really an unfair comparison. CS basically cut off its low end of students, whereas EECS does not, and so the EECS figures include plenty of mediocre-performing students who drag down the salary figures. For that same reason, I expect the gap between EECS and CS to become negligible in the next few years because CS is no longer impacted which means that CS will start admitting (and graduating) some relatively mediocre students. It won't happen in the next few years because obviously those who are graduating this year from CS will be mostly those people who had to survive the admissions process from previous years. </p>
<p>
[quote]
[quote]
Probably, and the fact that EE is becoming (or has become) a very popular major, so the job market is tougher. In addition, the computer job world is pretty lucrative, and the jobs that L&S CS grads get tend to pay high.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Uh, I would hardly say that the EE job market is tougher than the CS job market. Nationwide, CS has been a more popular major than EE for years; far more people around the country graduate with CS degrees than EE degrees. </p>
<p>As far as the jobs that L&S CS grads obtain, I agree that they do tend to pay well, but that's because of the reasons above. Because of the admissions scheme, there have been very few mediocre L&S CS grads. Now that the admissions scheme is lifted, this is going to change.</p>
<p>I don't think the 'mediocre' point works very well. Consider that the average starting salary for Stanford grads in EE was $64,500 in 2005-2006. The average starting salary for Stanford grads in CS was $71,250. There's even a difference there. Would you say that's because CS at Stanford is more selective of who it lets in? No, I don't think so.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Uh, I would hardly say that the EE job market is tougher than the CS job market. Nationwide, CS has been a more popular major than EE for years; far more people around the country graduate with CS degrees than EE degrees.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I was speculating, you see.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Now that the admissions scheme is lifted, this is going to change.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree.</p>
<p>Oh thank goodness, I was almost planning on applying L&S. Just kidding.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I don't think the 'mediocre' point works very well. Consider that the average starting salary for Stanford grads in EE was $64,500 in 2005-2006. The average starting salary for Stanford grads in CS was $71,250. There's even a difference there. Would you say that's because CS at Stanford is more selective of who it lets in? No, I don't think so.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I never said that it was the ONLY factor involved. I said it was ONE factor, and probably the most important factor. </p>
<p>I don't deny that software jobs tend to pay more than EE hardware jobs. But that doesn't really get to the point made that CS people are really better off than EECS people. What we should be looking at (but unfortunately don't have the data for) is comparing EECS students *who specialized in option IV (the CS option) * vs. CS students. THAT would be a more fair comparison. After all, I am not surprised to find that software people get paid more than people who specialize in circuits or fab (option I). </p>
<p>You say that the point "doesn't work very well". I think the point is quite clear. Very few mediocre CS grads are produced because they won't even get admitted into the major. In contrast, EECS does graduate some mediocre grads. Mediocre people tend to get lower-paying jobs. Seems like simple logic to me. </p>
<p>
[quote]
I disagree.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Why do you disagree? Isn't it logical to believe that those who have worse college grades will probably get worse jobs that pay less than those who have good grades? And like I said above, very few people who graduated from CS in the past actually have 'worse' college grades because they probably couldn't even get into the major in the first place.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In contrast, EECS does graduate some mediocre grads. Mediocre people tend to get lower-paying jobs. Seems like simple logic to me.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'd argue that EECS tends to be self-selective (at least more so than other majors), and those who can't take it drop out, considering it's one of the hardest majors at Berkeley. Even if there are 'mediocre' students left after that, I think there are few in proportion to the total number of EECS grads. Do you honestly think there are enough 'mediocre' students to drag the average salary down $10,000 dollars (in comparison the average salary of CS grads)? That's simply ludicrous. And the average is extremely close to the median, so I don't think those (comparatively) few 'mediocre' students are able to bring the average down that much.</p>
<p>I'm going to stay out of the OT argument and just respond to the OP.</p>
<p>No, the L&S CS major is not useless. I know plenty of L&S CS graduates that have gone on to work at various software companies (some startups, some big names like Microsoft and Google). EECS is really for people with some interest in EE, even if they want to do CS primarily. L&S CS is for people who want to do as little EE as possible.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'm going to stay out of the OT argument and just respond to the OP.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, the above argument is answering the OP's question -- we're discussing how 'useful' L&S CS is (refuting the idea that EECS > CS).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I'd argue that EECS tends to be self-selective (at least more so than other majors), and those who can't take it drop out, considering it's one of the hardest majors at Berkeley. Even if there are 'mediocre' students left after that, I think there are few in proportion to the total number of EECS grads.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Some can't drop out because of the so-called "engineering trap". They can't transfer out of engineering. But more commonly, they don't want to drop out. They simply want to graduate EECS with above a 2.0 to get that degree. There are a lot of EECS students with GPA in the low 2's, while CS majors historically need ~3.5 in lower divs to get into the major, so yeah, that would be a rather large factor.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Some can't drop out because of the so-called "engineering trap". They can't transfer out of engineering. But more commonly, they don't want to drop out. They simply want to graduate EECS with above a 2.0 to get that degree. There are a lot of EECS students with GPA in the low 2's, while CS majors historically need ~3.5 in lower divs to get into the major, so yeah, that would be a rather large factor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I know -- but I don't think there are enough of said mediocre students to change the average starting salary that much, even with other factors considered. It's roughly the same at Stanford (and I surmise at other schools, too).</p>
<p>If you really hate hardware then EECS is no good, but if you are indifferent or at least can stand it, then there's simply no harm in getting an EE degree and take extra CS courses than getting just a CS degree.</p>
<p>I could be wrong, but I've heard this same advice from multiple elders who've "made it" either directly inside the high-tech industry or are prominent in other professions (doctors, lawyers).</p>
<p>kyledavid,</p>
<p>But sakky already brought up another point: the choice of career paths. EECS may get jobs in software or other things like circuits whereas CS majors all (I am oversimplying of course) go to get software jobs which tend to pay probably more than typical average EE jobs. It's like ChemEs going into biotech/pharmaceutical industry are gonna make more than those going into environmental one. </p>
<p>By the way, as the link in post #4 shows, the average CS salary was 66K, not 77K.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But sakky already brought up another point: the choice of career paths. EECS may get jobs in software or other things like circuits whereas CS majors all (I am oversimplying of course) go to get software jobs which tend to pay probably more than typical average EE jobs.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But that's irrelevant. The point is, L&S CS is far from useless, and if anything, is more "useful" than EE (if you go by the job opportunities as you mention, and the pay for them).</p>
<p>
[quote]
By the way, as the link in post #4 shows, the average CS salary was 66K, not 77K.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Post #4 shows that the most recent average salary for CS majors is $77k. The $66k figure is the average of the past 4 years' average salaries.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Year Reported 75th Percentile Average 25th Percentile Median<br>
2003 25 $66,000 $59,250 $50,000 $59,000<br>
2004 43 $66,500 $61,126 $55,250 $60,000<br>
2005 24 $75,500 $69,135 $63,750 $72,500<br>
2006 28 $81,000 $76,929 $65,000 $75,000<br>
Total 120 $75,000 $66,024 $57,000 $65,000
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Note, also, that the most recent (2006) average salary for EECS is ~$67,500, as I pointed out in an earlier post. The average of the past 4 years' salaries is ~$62,000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Year Reported 75th Percentile Average 25th Percentile Median<br>
2003 54 $62,500 $55,814 $46,500 $58,750<br>
2004 85 $67,500 $59,665 $52,000 $60,000<br>
2005 62 $70,000 $62,461 $56,370 $63,750<br>
2006 77 $75,000 $67,570 $57,000 $66,000<br>
Total 278 $70,000 $61,730 $55,000 $61,000
[/quote]
</p>
<p>how do you know this?</p>
<p>^^okay, my bad; i was reading the numbers too quickly. regardless, my point is one can't say one is better than another based on salary numbers alone. </p>
<p>average gpa and career choice aren't the same and hence it's an unfair comparison.</p>