<p>
MIT is rumored to be pretty intense.
</p>
<p>And that it is, but intense doesn't mean "not fun".</p>
<p>
[quote]
Why do you care if Yale's name is better than Cornell's?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm not saying that I care. I am saying that certain employers care, and in particular, consulting and banking firms care. And these are precisely the kinds of jobs that many engineers, even from the best engineering schools, apparently want. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Cornell is a better school for engineering, anyone who matters knows this.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>But that's not my point. We all agree that Cornell is a better school for engineering. What I am asking is how much does that really matter? Like I said, plenty of engineering students even at MIT prefer not to work as engineers. And if you're not going to work as an engineer anyway, then what does it matter if you went to a better engineering school? </p>
<p>
[quote]
Also, anyone that matters will know that where you went to school isn't what's important
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree with this also, which means that there is even less of a reason to 'prefer' Cornell over Yale because of its better engineering program. So you should go to the school where you are the most comfortable, not necessarily the school that has the 'best' program. </p>
<p>
[quote]
EDIT: What gave you any indication that MIT has less prestige than Yale?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I also never said that MIT had less prestige than Yale. I am saying that one reason that people use to prefer MIT over Yale (that MIT has better engineering) is not as good of a reason as some people seem to think it is. Like I said, who really cares if you graduated from the #1 engineering school in the world if you're not going to work as an engineer?</p>
<p>Don't get me wrong. I am not saying that people shouldn't go to MIT. I am saying that when you're talking about schools of the caliber of MIT, Yale, and Cornell, you should primarily base your choice on what you are most comfortable with. To choose a school because it has better engineering - I don't know about that. First off, plenty of people who intend to do engineering never actually do (they often times switch out because they don't like it). And even of those that do complete engineering degrees, plenty of those people decide not to take engineering jobs.</p>
<p>Why don't you apply Harvard Engineering program ?
Many of top engineers graduated from Harvard Engineering program
such as
Bill Gates (Software Engineering
An Wnag (Electrical Engineering : invented Magnetic Tape
Fisher Black ( Financial Engineering</p>
<p>They are all billionaire engineers</p>
<p>
[quote]
Many of top engineers graduated from Harvard Engineering program
such as
Bill Gates (Software Engineering
An Wnag (Electrical Engineering : invented Magnetic Tape
Fisher Black ( Financial Engineering
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As said on the other thread, Bill Gates never graduated. Fischer Black's Harvard PhD was in Applied Math, not engineering. An Wang's Harvard MS and PhD were in Applied Physics, not engineering.</p>
<p>Which is more prestigious in general? I couldn't say.</p>
<p>Which is more prestigious in engineering? MIT wins each and every single time.</p>
<p>It depends on what you want, like Sakky said. If you're not going into engineering, then Yale is the better choice to me at least. But if engineering is your goal, than cornell or MIT should be far ahead of yale.</p>
<p>I've visited MIT and Yale, and I think there is a significant difference in the type of student that attends the two schools.</p>
<p>Yale students, at least the ones I met, seemed a little bit cliquey... still in highschool mode, really. Also, many of them think theyre going to be president some day. They focus a lot on the alleged prestige of their own school</p>
<p>Let me give you some anecdotal evidence of that:</p>
<p>Girl at Yale: Yeah, you know, I think its pretty cool that I go to a school that's ranked number 1 for student happiness</p>
<p>Me: lololol no... stanford is ranked number 1 (yale is ranked 18th. not to mention that rankings mean very little)</p>
<p>Girl at Yale: umm, no, yale is ranked number 1... dont you read princeton review?</p>
<p>At this point I realized I wouldnt be able to talk to this person without an actual copy of PR in my hands, so I just gave up.</p>
<p>MIT students may be more quirky, but theyre also more down to earth. Also, quirkiness is a good thing.</p>
<p>I'd say theres also a lot more politically correct BS at yale.</p>
<p>Those are just my impressions. I could have totally been hanging out with the wrong group at yale, so take it with a grain of salt.</p>
<p>i just wanted to point out how absurd this question of prestige is. When you apply for a job, the difference between you getting a job and not will not be determined by whether you went to cornell or MIT. The person does not simple look at your resume and place them in order based on prestige of school. If the kind of situation you are referring to is when everything else is equal in the applicant pool and an MIT degree might boost you ahead, that situation never really exists. Many other factors provide that competitive edge, the largest being one's social skills and amiability.
Just something to think about, i'm a trumpet player and I recently came back from the National Trumpet Competition. What I found ironic was the fact that none of the trumpet players who placed were from Juilliard or any other conservatories, but from places like Kansas State or University of North Florida. The judges did not hold a lack of a prestigious name against these competitors. While this is not completely analogous to the real world, it says to me that the only people who consider name to be important are the ones that have no say in your success. While the rest of us watching were really impressed that so and so went to Juilliard, it didn't factor into the judges decision at all, and similarly, it won't factor into someone's chances at a job.
That said, my personal opinion is that you should go someplace that you have the most fun and fit the best with. I'll admit I just got rejected from MIT, but I also must say I wasn't too keen on going there. A place like Yale or Stanford would fit my personality better.</p>
<p>Oh, come on, stuff like that happens all the time. Sure, in a perfect world, everybody would get jobs and internships and get into grad school based on their own, perfectly determinable, intrinsic merit, but reality is that it's somewhat difficult to actually determine that intrinsic merit. When you apply for a competitive job, or for graduate school, you're up against a bunch of people who are all equally pretty amazing. Your goal is to be the most amazing, and one way to do that is to go to a really tough school.</p>
<p>Real life example: The summer after my freshman year, I applied for an internship at the NIH. I had never worked in a lab or taken a lab class before, but I still got the job (~1000 out of 5000 people were hired that summer). My boss told me later that he'd had a pile of several resumes from promising candidates on his desk, needed to make a decision by the end of the day, and picked mine because I was an MIT cheerleader. I stuck in his head.</p>
<p>The fact that I was an MIT cheerleader didn't get me to the final resume-pile-on-the-desk stage, but it did get me the job. </p>
<p>I'm certainly not saying that's a situation unique to MIT -- all of the other interns in my lab that summer came from Ivies. But going to a competitive school really does give you that final push in the application process, and hopefully that final push is all you need.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And these are precisely the kinds of jobs that many engineers, even from the best engineering schools, apparently want
[/quote]
The other dimension to add ... is what did they want as an 18 year old ... and what did they want as a 22 year old. Coming out of HS the top engineering schools do, in my opinion, pull in kids who are seeking analytical rigor and very talented student peers (please, sir, throw me into the deep end) ... and then over 4 years they mature and develop job preferences that may or may not match their asperations when they started school (for example, I bet very-very few HS seniors intend to be management consultants when they graduate from HS but that interest evolved while in college).</p>
<p>
[quote]
i just wanted to point out how absurd this question of prestige is. When you apply for a job, the difference between you getting a job and not will not be determined by whether you went to cornell or MIT. The person does not simple look at your resume and place them in order based on prestige of school. If the kind of situation you are referring to is when everything else is equal in the applicant pool and an MIT degree might boost you ahead, that situation never really exists. Many other factors provide that competitive edge, the largest being one's social skills and amiability.
Just something to think about, i'm a trumpet player and I recently came back from the National Trumpet Competition. What I found ironic was the fact that none of the trumpet players who placed were from Juilliard or any other conservatories, but from places like Kansas State or University of North Florida. The judges did not hold a lack of a prestigious name against these competitors. While this is not completely analogous to the real world, it says to me that the only people who consider name to be important are the ones that have no say in your success. While the rest of us watching were really impressed that so and so went to Juilliard, it didn't factor into the judges decision at all, and similarly, it won't factor into someone's chances at a job.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Look, I will admit that the value of prestige is often overblown on CC.</p>
<p>But that's not to say that it has no value at all. The truth is, some employers, especially high end ones, really do only recruit at certain schools. If you don't happen to go to one of these schools, you will find it extremely difficult to get hired by these companies. For example, McKinsey recruits at only certain schools. Goldman Sachs recruits at only certain schools. Cisco Systems recruits heavily out of Stanford, but not at, say, San Francisco Statee. That's not to say that it's impossible to get into these companies if you don't go to these 'chosen' schools, but it does make it that much harder. </p>
<p>One could also look at academia. Molliebatmit has talked about how the vast majority of the doctoral candidates of the top biology programs came from only a handful of schools, which is even more amazing when you consider the small size of these schools. For example, I have noted that the Arizona State system (the 3 campuses of ASU) has more undergrads than do the entire top 10 of the US News research universities combined. And that's just talking about one public school system. Yet those lower-tier public school systems send very few students onto the elite doctoral programs. Part of this is obviously due to the quality of the students - the top schools tend to have better undergrads who will tend to go to top doctoral programs. But there is also a lot to be said for being able to get rec's and do undergrad research with top prof's. </p>
<p>I think the most telling aspect of prestige is if you want to get a job in high-level academia. Almost all of the profs at high-prestige programs themselves got their doctorates from highly prestigious programs. Academia is an extraordinarily insular and incestuous environment where the standing of your doctorate plays a large role in what opportunities you have. You will notice that many profs will, in their online bio's, list their education (especially where they got their PhD) before they list any of their publications or even any of their academic ranks.</p>