<p>I just want your thoughts on how tough the school is and how the atmosphere is. It would be great to know. Thanks, I am thinking about attending.</p>
<p>don't attend, its horrible</p>
<p>^^why?.......</p>
<p>^^Yeah, Jeff, making a statement like that is not helpful at all.</p>
<p>If you're going to bash a program at least give some explanation.</p>
<p>its not bashing, its the truth, i'm a junior here at michigan engineering, supposedly the mechanical engineering program is top 3 in the country. well, every year I think this engineering program gets worse. I'm in my junior year, and my classes are still 50 people. there is very little interaction between students and professors. I got into some very good schools whose ranking national is better or similar to umich, and right now i'm paying out of state tuition, and its such a ripoff, the education is not what the ranking indicates. I really don't know why michigan engineering is ranked all that high. The students here are mostly bright, about my level, but the instruction is really poor. They expect a lot out of the students, hard exams, hard homework problems, but they don't really provide the education to do it. </p>
<p>1 example out of 1 million why umich engineering is really bad, they teach us unigraphics in a design class, and it wasn't really teaching, they give you some packet to read and u hand in an assignment. In industry, CAD programs are widely used, instead of teaching AutoCAd to us, they assumed we know this somehow. Go into machine shop to make something, they don't teach you how to operate the mill/lathe there, and somehow expect you to know this as well. a lot of us have no idea what each thing is called and the jerk known as bob,(u'll know him if u attend here) will be like " i don't know what you are talking about" everytime u ask him for help.
All the classes are lecture style with a lot of people, basically, this school prides itself on giving out bad grades and making you feel inferior, while you getting ripped off and not learning anything in this process. A lot of the things i learned in class are from the textbook. the exams are basically your entire grade for the class. Some classes will give you 2 problems for an exam and each will be worth 50% of your grade.
in a large school like michigan, its hard to know good people, u see the same people all the time, but very few people here actually have close friends.</p>
<p>if i had a choice right now, i'd goto a smaller private school where you actually learn something. the education is not at all its cracked up to be.</p>
<p>job prospects...
i started looking for internships/jobs last summer, and u'll find out that employers don't think highly of michigan engineering at all, there are a lot of recruiters that come during the career fair, but u have to realize that there are 1000+ people graduating here every year and there are about 200 companies hiring, some of them will hire 1 or 2 people. job placement here is not much better than SUNY-stony brook or university of iowa. almost all of the employers will say "3.0 gpa requirement", i was top 2% in my high school, and almost perfect gpa in high school, and i have a 3.0 here barely, even with all the hard work. even the people in the career office jokes that "a few michigan engineers actually got jobs this year without prior internship experiences and thats so weird"
michigan engineering=one of the worst decisions ever made.</p>
<p>now that i have some time to write more...</p>
<p>advising, worst ever, they have 2 advisors for a 1000 student department cramped in a small room. even on a less busy day u'd have to wait for 20 minutes for someone to talk to. and the advisors are all useless, they only know about classes and what u need to graduate, they won't tell u anything about the course material, nothing more than whats said on the course descriptions anyways. </p>
<p>campus, ugliest campus of all top 50 schools, i don't think u can name more than 5 schools in the top 50 that are uglier, an aerial view of UM campus is a bunch of plain looking buildings scattered around with that ugly tower in the middle. The only nice part of UM is the law quad. Everything in the Law School has an ivy feel to it, it makes sense since UM used to be on par with Harvard, Yale Law School</p>
<p>UM has a lot of renowned professors, true, my 3 years here, i haven't taken any class with really famous professors, i don't think they teach often. And being an engineer, u'll really get to take..... 3 or 4 Humanities/Social Sciences classes throughout your 4 years here. All those cool classes with top name professors, really has nothing to do with you, they get paid by the University for their affiliation with the University. For a good cause, since they attract top students, grants, prestige, etc. </p>
<p>Basically, this school has a lot of bright students, a lot of dumb students, a lot of so-so students, the bright students do well because they are hard workers and would do well anywhere, and they have enough self-initiative to use those resources. </p>
<p>UofM's environment is good for one thing only, it simulates the real world outside of academia, if u can survive this place and do well here, u have past a test, sort of.</p>
<p>Jeffl,</p>
<pre><code>I am sorry you have not had a good experiece at Umich. What you said sounds a lot like Purdue (where I spent 7 years getting my M.S. and PhD) as well. This is why I tell high school students to focus on smaller schools that focus on teaching you.
</code></pre>
<p>Jeffl, you need to cheer up; smaller schools are not that much better than bigger ones. In fact, in a lot of ways, engineering at larger, elite institutions maybe better.</p>
<p>Coming from a small, elite, engineering school (The Cooper Union); I can tell you that many of my friends and I are independent learners. We don't depend on the profs or other friends to do well. Sure - the classes here are all taught by profs (no TAs') and the profs are more accessible than at the bigger schools but it really doesn't make a difference in the end. The material here is of such complexity in nature that a person really has to teach himself most everything in order to understand it. This isn't biology or poli. sci. where you can visit your prof. and he can clear everything up for you in 20 minutes with some talking. This is engineering - many of the concepts here have to be drilled into your head and that comes with lots of independent study. In fact, we read books - tons of textbooks. We pour through them and that's our real teaching source. The profs are really just the people telling us what to study and ultimately our graders but the real source of education is the literature. </p>
<p>In truth, all engineers are independent learners - whether at Cal-tech, or Michigan, or purdue, or even Colorado School of Mines.</p>
<p>In fact, I would see a huge benefit to attending michigan engineering over places like harvey mudd or rose-hulman; you'd at least be at a social place with a social atmosphere where people have a life and the student body actually has a life (for the most part anyhow). Obviously, going to a very small school like Harvey Mudd or Cooper Union does have it's advantages.....over places like Cornell or Michigan or UIUC - there's a lot less competition amongst students. The ratio of recruiting companies/individual student is also more pleasing than that present at bigger schools. As a result of all these things, internships and jobs are easier to find.</p>
<p>But that's really the only advantage I see. There is essentially no social life at these smaller schools. Even though the profs are more accessible and TA's are almost non-existant - students are still, very independent learners (many of my lectures are actually a waste of time for me to even attend to be frank....) If having such close contact with profs really made a big difference in engineering, our GPA's would be certainly somewhat higher than at bigger schools right? Think again. Harvey mudd's engineering average is a 2.7. You talk about Michigan engineering's affinity for "handing out bad grades"? Cooper Union is notorious for grade deflation.</p>
<p>The point I'm trying to make is, it doesn't matter whether you go to a large school or a small school - it's all up to you as an individual. At a bigger school, you'll have more fun, less stress and actually have a student body that isn't made of dorks.</p>
<p>The grass always looks greener on the other side.</p>
<p>Wing,</p>
<pre><code>I agree with you when you say that it is all up to the individual. College is certainly what you make of it, no matter where you go. I would dispute your statement that there is "no social life" at smaller schools. Many of these schools have quite a few activities. Sure, big schools will have more, perhaps many more, parties, campus activities, etc. But one student can only attend so many of these things anyways. Smaller schools, like the one I teach at, have less activities but still plently of things to do.
Learning is ultimately an individual activity and college will always have an aspect of self-learning. But going to a school that focuses on teaching you will bring several advantages. First, the teachers generally work harder to present the material in ways the students understand. I work many hours each week to refine my lectures. I am constantly assessing my students' learning and teaching to how students learn. Professors at large schools, who typically spend 90% of their time doing research, don't have the time to do things like this. Second, smaller class sizes provide an easier opportunity for students to interact and ask questions. Third, teachers at small schools are often more available for students. I have 20 office hours a week and a cell phone students can call me with. This availablity helps a student when he/she is struggling with a problem or concept.
</code></pre>
<p>Sorry but I guess it's just personality. I love my big school. What sucks is that my classes are getting smaller and I'm starting to see the same faces over and over again. Blech. Personally I loved the huge classes in lecture halls with 200+ students because I had a lot of people to get to know. Yeah I like small classes but they don't work out well unless it's lib arts or actual discussion not just quiz sections. And as far as competition, that's cool what doesn't kill me makes me stronger. I don't need to be coddled. I learn stuff on my own. Most of the jobs I'm interested in are big firms and stuff like that so going and learning in an evironment where competition is fierce and there are a lot of people but a lot of opportunities too. So going big is important to me.</p>
<p>The only thing that bothers me right now is that I'm being taught by a couple of professors that are gone a bit too much (one right around the time of tests which I don't care b/c I wouldn't go to him for help but that is a bit unnerving) for their research. Oh well as long as I get to work in his lab, I dont care.</p>
<p>I personally can't wait until I start the bio sequence so I can get into some big classes again and meet more people. Plus the number of other oppotunities like business and lib arts rather than just engineering at the smaller tech schools. Just means more different types of people and places and interactions. Sorry I wouldn't give up my big school for the world but it's all about personality. I would feel crushed in a smaller school so really there is no "better" one. No matter what either person says. It is just a matter of individual tastes and learning styles.</p>
<p>So dr reynolds getting the word out there about smaller schools is nice and good for you so that people know they have other choices than the BIG name schools. But you shouldn't say they are better b/c they aren't. They are just different. Same with big schools. For some they are better and others they aren't.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If having such close contact with profs really made a big difference in engineering, our GPA's would be certainly somewhat higher than at bigger schools right? Think again. Harvey mudd's engineering average is a 2.7. You talk about Michigan engineering's affinity for "handing out bad grades"? Cooper Union is notorious for grade deflation.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>The presumption here is that there is some correlation between school size and grade inflation/deflation. I am not aware of any such correlation. After all, Caltech undergrad is tiny, almost as tiny as HarveyMudd, and 4 times smaller than MIT undergrad. Yet Caltech grading is notoriously difficult, arguably the most difficult of any engineering school.</p>
<p>Look, the point of small classes and small student/prof ratios is to be able to get a more personal and more intimate educational environment, not necessarily to get better grades. As I'm sure we all know, there are classes where you can learn a whole lot even though you got a bad grade, and then there are classes where you can get an A+ while learning nothing at all. Learning and getting top grades are not always congruent. </p>
<p>In fact, one of the tactics that students often times pull to get top grades is to deliberately take classes that they know are easy and/or in things that they already know. I know people who were completely fluent in a foreign language but decided to take the entire intro-sequence of that language anyway because they knew it would be easy for them. They didn't learn a darn thing, but they did get a string of easy A's, and that's all they cared about. {Incidentally, this is why I think that all intro-language classes should be graded P/NP to eliminate this sort of behavior}. </p>
<p>
[quote]
There is essentially no social life at these smaller schools. Even though the profs are more accessible and TA's are almost non-existant - students are still, very independent learners (many of my lectures are actually a waste of time for me to even attend to be frank....)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This I also have to question, because social life is not just about the size of the school itself, but has to do with a wide range of factors. I would point out, who says that you necessarily have to socialize only with the people in your school? If you don't like them, interact with other people outside the school. In the case of Harvey Mudd, you have all the other Claremont system students around you. Harvey Mudd is therefore in effect part of a much larger university system. In the case of Cooper Union, come on, you're smack in the middle of arguably the most dynamic city in the world. I don't mean to be harsh, but if you live in the Big Apple and you can't find social things to do, well, I don't know what to tell you. To paraphrase Samuel Johnson, if you're bored with NYC, you're bored with life. </p>
<p>Heck, when you look at it that way, I would argue that Cooper Union actually provides you with MORE social opportunities than do, say, a Cornell or a Michigan or a UIUC. After all, let's face it. Ithaca, Ann Arbor, and Urbana-Champaign are fairly isolated college towns. There may be a lot of things going on within the universities themselves, but what if you want to do something outside of the university? You go to Cooper, and all the activities of NYC are just a subway ride away. </p>
<p>
[quote]
At a bigger school, you'll have more fun, less stress and actually have a student body that isn't made of dorks.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Let me ask you this. In addition to being an engineering powerhouse, isn't Cooper Union one of the top art and architecture schools in the country? You might use a lot of words to describe art and architecture students, but 'dork' certainly isn't one of them. </p>
<p>Furthermore, elite engineering programs anywhere are full of 'dorkiness'. Many Caltech and MIT engineers are dorks. But, hey, so are many Berkeley engineers, and Berkeley is obviously a much bigger school. Heck, I've known Berkeley engineers who are dorkier than even the most dorky MIT student I've ever seen. I don't see that size of the school has anything to do with it. Top engineering programs, whether they are part of a big school or small, are going to have lots of dorks. </p>
<p>Nor do I think that fun and stress are necessarily correlated with size. Fun and stress have much more to do with the philosophy of the school than on its size. For example, I would argue that engineering at Stanford is probably more fun and less stressful than engineering at Berkeley or Cornell or Georgia Tech, even though Stanford is a smaller school, if for no other reason, that Stanford shies away from flunking out any of its students, not even its engineering students. Basically, at Stanford, as long as you make a reasonable effort to do the work, you are going to pass. Maybe with mediocre grades, but at least you'll pass. At the other schools, you can work extremely hard and STILL flunk out. You gotta admit, that's not much fun. And these are big schools that are 'supposed' to be more fun.</p>
<p>Look, I agree with your statement that it is really up to the individual. It's up to you to take advantage of what is available. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Sorry but I guess it's just personality. I love my big school. What sucks is that my classes are getting smaller and I'm starting to see the same faces over and over again. Blech. Personally I loved the huge classes in lecture halls with 200+ students because I had a lot of people to get to know. Yeah I like small classes but they don't work out well unless it's lib arts or actual discussion not just quiz sections. And as far as competition, that's cool what doesn't kill me makes me stronger. I don't need to be coddled. I learn stuff on my own. Most of the jobs I'm interested in are big firms and stuff like that so going and learning in an evironment where competition is fierce and there are a lot of people but a lot of opportunities too. So going big is important to me....Sorry I wouldn't give up my big school for the world but it's all about personality. I would feel crushed in a smaller school so really there is no "better" one. No matter what either person says. It is just a matter of individual tastes and learning styles.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, illinoisjbravoecho, I don't want to come off as combative. And I certainly appreciate that you're happy at your big school. But let's be honest. We are missing an important factor here, namely the prestige and strength of the program. You say that you really like big schools. And I'm sure a lot of students at UIUC say they also like big schools. But let's be perfectly honest here. Unless cost was an issue, a lot of those same UIUC engineering students wouldn't have thought twice about turning down UIUC to go to MIT or Stanford, except that they didn't get in (or didn't even apply because they didn't think they would get in). Yet MIT and Stanford are much smaller schools than UIUC. And even now, if Stanford and UIUC were to offer free transfer admissions to all its students, I think we would agree that a lot of UIUC students would happily transfer to Stanford but relatively few Stanford students would want to transfer to UIUC. </p>
<p>The point is, we're talking about a multi-dimensional optimization here. It's not just about personal fit and the size of the program, it's also about the prestige and strength of the program. Life is not always about doing things you like. Like our parents told us, sometimes you have to do things you don't like in order to get to do things that you do like. I know lots of MIT students who will privately admit that they don't really like their time there, and they could have gone to lesser schools that would have been more fun. So why are they there? They want to be able to prove to themselves that they can survive a very rigorous program. They believe that the rigor will build internal character and toughness. And maybe most importantly, they know that the MIT brand name will command respect and open doors later in life.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Quote:
If having such close contact with profs really made a big difference in engineering, our GPA's would be certainly somewhat higher than at bigger schools right? Think again. Harvey mudd's engineering average is a 2.7. You talk about Michigan engineering's affinity for "handing out bad grades"? Cooper Union is notorious for grade deflation. </p>
<p>The presumption here is that there is some correlation between school size and grade inflation/deflation. I am not aware of any such correlation. After all, Caltech undergrad is tiny, almost as tiny as HarveyMudd, and 4 times smaller than MIT undergrad. Yet Caltech grading is notoriously difficult, arguably the most difficult of any engineering school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>What I was trying to say that it your grades don't matter regardless of the size of the school. Jeffl was saying that at mich., it was almost like they were "handing out" bad grades and I was saying that at smaller schools [where you're treated more like a person than a number], grades don't get any better. I was making the point that grades have no correlation between size and grades - you misunderstood me and took it to be the opposite. </p>
<p>sakky, </p>
<p>I'm not trying to say smaller schools are or aren't better than bigger schools. It's not like I'm trying to talk trash about smaller colleges - I love my college but I have to accept some of its cons.</p>
<p>
[quote]
In the case of Cooper Union, come on, you're smack in the middle of arguably the most dynamic city in the world. I don't mean to be harsh, but if you live in the Big Apple and you can't find social things to do, well, I don't know what to tell you. To paraphrase Samuel Johnson, if you're bored with NYC, you're bored with life.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>True. NYC is amazing. But, the college experience isn't based off the city sorroundings. College experience ties in with many factors with a major factor being campus/student body. Criteria like clubs, activities, type of student body are important to take into consideration. The student connection at cooper is weak when compared to big schools like michigan where the social interaction within the student community occurs at a very large scale.</p>
<p>As an engineering student, I spend almost all my time studying and in some of the spare time that I have; I like to hang out with other students at my college. This is more ideal to me than....exploring the 'big apple' on my spare time and it should seem more logical as well. </p>
<p>At cooper, there is no interaction between the art, architecture, and engineering students. You might as well pretend like the art/architecture schools are in a different world. Forget different schools, let's focus within the specific engineering majors. At cooper, civE's tend to hang out with civE's and ee's tend to hang out with ee's. Sure, sometimes you have mechE's hang out with civE's but in general; even majors tend to get 'clicky'. When I'm trying to hang out with students who get 'clicky' within my own college, the situation is a little bit strange and uncomfortable. In essence, the bridge between different majors at bigger colleges like mich/cornell isn't as empty as at the smaller schools like cooper/rose-hulman/mudd.</p>
<p>Now to discuss the more sensitive topic of 'dorks'. I feel bad about calling all the engineering students dorks. The truth is though, almost everyone is extremely nerdy and many are even anti-social. Like I said, I love my college but I can't lie about it and say that your social life isn't going to significantly different whether you go to a place like cooper/mudd or michigan/uiuc. Because truth is, it will be drastically different. However, I'm getting used to this but that doesn't mean it's not true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The student connection at cooper is weak when compared to big schools like michigan where the social interaction within the student community occurs at a very large scale.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, believe me. There are plenty of big schools where the social interaction within the student community is also notoriously weak. I am not going to name names, but trust me, they exist. And that's my point - you can't automatically assume that just because a school is big, you are going to have better social interactions. </p>
<p>
[quote]
In essence, the bridge between different majors at bigger colleges like mich/cornell isn't as empty as at the smaller schools like cooper/rose-hulman/mudd
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, I don't know about that. I would use Caltech as an example. My brother went to Caltech, majoring in geophysics. There was a grand total of 2 geophysics students, including himself, in his class year. Yeah, that's right, 2. Nor is geophysics the only major that is like that at Caltech. Other majors at Caltech might have only 1 student of a particular class year, or sometimes even zero. For example, there are certain years in which the Caltech economics department does not graduate a single student. </p>
<p>So does that mean that my brother was forever consigned to hang out with only that 1 other guy of his class that was majoring in geophysics, for fear of being 'cliqued-out'? No, I don't think so. His social group consisted of students majoring in a wide variety of subjects. After all, it had to be. Caltech is so small and certain majors have so few students in them that students have to socialize with people of other majors if they want to socialize at all. This even extends to engineering. Certain engineering majors at Caltech have very few students. How many environmental engineering students do you think there are at Caltech? </p>
<p>Hence, I would argue that if anything, there is MORE inter-major interaction at Caltech than at schools like Michigan or Cornell, and the reason is PRECISELY because Caltech is so small that Caltech students are forced to reach across majors. At a school like Michigan, you probably really can just choose to socialize only with people in your major. At Caltech, not so much. </p>
<p>Now I admit that I don't know exactly what's going on at Cooper so I will trust what you say about it, but my point is that you can't just generalize that all small schools lack inter-major interaction. In fact, in many cases, the exact opposite is true.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The truth is though, almost everyone is extremely nerdy and many are even anti-social.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, and you think this isn't true about engineering students at big schools? You really want to talk about anti-social nerds? Perhaps you'd like to visit the computer science labs in Soda Hall at UCBerkeley on a Friday night? Some of those guys in there literally have not showered in several months and cannot hold their end of a decent conversation to save their lives.</p>
<p>"Well, illinoisjbravoecho, I don't want to come off as combative. And I certainly appreciate that you're happy at your big school. But let's be honest. We are missing an important factor here, namely the prestige and strength of the program. You say that you really like big schools. And I'm sure a lot of students at UIUC say they also like big schools. But let's be perfectly honest here. Unless cost was an issue, a lot of those same UIUC engineering students wouldn't have thought twice about turning down UIUC to go to MIT or Stanford, except that they didn't get in (or didn't even apply because they didn't think they would get in). Yet MIT and Stanford are much smaller schools than UIUC. And even now, if Stanford and UIUC were to offer free transfer admissions to all its students, I think we would agree that a lot of UIUC students would happily transfer to Stanford but relatively few Stanford students would want to transfer to UIUC."</p>
<p>That's a bit ludicrous. There are many reasons I chose U of I over those places. (For one I didnt even want to go to MIT [way colder than IL. blech] nor did I think I would get in. Stanford was another story I thought I could get in but my parents wouldn't even let me apply.) I like being somewhat close to home. The only reason I would go to Stanford would be to escape the weather and just for a change in environment. I love U of I but again when you say Stanford or MIT that's on a different scale and they are private. Personally I like a big huge environment. If I was given the option to transfer to a smaller engineering college a la Olin, Rose-Hulman, etc. I probably wouldn't. I don't think you're correct on that one I think there would be more but U of I students aren't aching to get away except to a warmer climate. If you said transfer to MIT or UMich or someplace with better/equal rep with the same or worse climate, I doubt anyone would move.</p>
<p>You say that engineering programs big or small have dorks. True. We definitely do. But when I go to parties and bars they aren't filled with the social engineers like many tech or smaller schools. They are filled with people from other majors and that's the difference and point we're trying to make.</p>
<p>Also as many of my friends are learning the hard way just because U of I is easier to get into doesn't make any of it's programs any less rigorous.</p>
<p>I think Jeffl is suffering from a case of "the grass being greener on the other side." Michigan is a fine institution for engineering, one of the best in the nation and for very good reasons. If he doesn't like Mechanical Engineering's department it may be because it's also the largest engineering department (not 1000 students, more like <600) and you could definitely get much smaller courses if you were in AOSS or Material Science. To people on the board: don't let one bad story scare you away; to Jeff: don't think that it is necessarily better at other places and please don't try to generalize the entire Engineering college based on your own department.</p>
<p>
[quote]
That's a bit ludicrous. There are many reasons I chose U of I over those places. (For one I didnt even want to go to MIT [way colder than IL. blech] nor did I think I would get in. Stanford was another story I thought I could get in but my parents wouldn't even let me apply.) I like being somewhat close to home. The only reason I would go to Stanford would be to escape the weather and just for a change in environment. I love U of I but again when you say Stanford or MIT that's on a different scale and they are private. Personally I like a big huge environment. If I was given the option to transfer to a smaller engineering college a la Olin, Rose-Hulman, etc. I probably wouldn't. I don't think you're correct on that one I think there would be more but U of I students aren't aching to get away except to a warmer climate. If you said transfer to MIT or UMich or someplace with better/equal rep with the same or worse climate, I doubt anyone would move.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Do you really think it is ludicrous? What exactly are the yield rates of MIT and Stanford, compared to UIUC? Or perhaps we could go try to fine cross-admit data. My point is, on average, people will tend to prefer more prestigious schools, and the truth is, MIT and Stanford are more prestigious than UIUC (or do you really care to dispute that?). Sure, maybe you personally might not turn down UIUC for some other school, but I think you have to agree that many other UIUC students would. That's not to say that UIUC is a bad school, but just that, whether you like it or not, those other schools are more prestigious. </p>
<p>Come on. You really don't think there are any people at UIUC who wanted to go to MIT or Stanford instead, but didn't get in? </p>
<p>After all, what's so bad about admitting that? By the same note, MIT and Stanford routinely lose the cross-admit battle to Harvard (as does every single other school in the country). The truth is, a guy admitted to both MIT and Harvard is probably going to choose Harvard. Not guaranteed of course, and the fact that MIT's engineering program is better does tend to win some cross-admit battles. But by and large, the majority of the victories goes to Harvard. That's why Harvard has a roughly 80% yield rate, whereas MIT's is only about 60% (which is still a fantastically high rate). </p>
<p>
[quote]
You say that engineering programs big or small have dorks. True. We definitely do. But when I go to parties and bars they aren't filled with the social engineers like many tech or smaller schools. They are filled with people from other majors and that's the difference and point we're trying to make.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>And MY point is why do you always have to hang out only with people from your own school only? Is that some sort of rule? Cooper Union is in NYC, and there are literally thousands of parties and events going on every night in NYC. Like I said, if you can't find anything to do in NYC, don't blame the city and don't blame the school. If you don't like the people at Cooper, then go hang out with people from other schools like NYU or Columbia or CCNY. Why not? MIT people routinely hang out with people from Harvard, BU, BC, and all the other schools around town. </p>
<p>My point is, I am fascinated at the assertion that you could actually be socially bored in NYC. Put another way. Take the total aggregate 'social opportunities' in a town like Urbana-Champaign, and compare that to the aggregate social opportunites in NYC. I agree that each individual social opportunity in Urbana-Champaign may be a bit easier to access if you are a UIUC student because there will be lots of other UIUC students around. But come on, when you think about the total set of resources available in New York?</p>
<p>"In the case of Cooper Union, come on, you're smack in the middle of arguably the most dynamic city in the world. I don't mean to be harsh, but if you live in the Big Apple and you can't find social things to do, well, I don't know what to tell you. To paraphrase Samuel Johnson, if you're bored with NYC, you're bored with life."</p>
<p>I totaly disagree! I have lived in NYC for 12 years, it seems liek there's so much to do, but its really decieving. Firstly, a large chunk of people in NYC you just do not want to deal with, secondly, all the clubs and pubs in NYC require IDs and 30 dollar admissions. Seconly, Cooper Union looks like an elementary school. And there's always the problem of finding an apartment in the city.. which is a shack usually in alphabet city. I am in Cornell right now, and i find the party scene more fun more accesible and more close to home.</p>
<p>Look, my point is that you simply cannot conclude that just because a school is small, there must be no social life to be had anywhere.</p>
<p>Honestly, a large chunk of people ANYWHERE you don't want to deal with, whether it's Harvard or MIT or Berkeley or wherever. Secondly, you say that NYC clubs require ID's So? Are you saying that clubs in other places don't? You also talk about $30 admissions to clubs. Well, keep in mind that tuition at Cooper is free to everybody. I don't know what kind of financial deal you're getting at Cornell, but you gotta admit that that Cooper free tuition deal can cover quite a few nights of clubbing, if that's what you're into. You also talk about Cooper looking like an elementary school. So what? So now we're judging a school by what its campus looks like? Much of the campus of MIT looks like a stellar candidate for urban renewal, but that doesn't mean you shouldn't go to MIT. And finally about apartments? Hey, it all comes down to money. Again, this is where the free tuition at Cooper Union comes in quite handy, because it gives you more financial flexibility to find a decent place.</p>