<p>From the companies I've talked to, they've all said that they hire people who have specific skills that can directly contribute to the company... We are no longer in the days when companies actually take a lot of time to train workers, since it is too costly/time consuming day... Therefore, its best to go to the school that can train you well in a specific area, ie "program prestige"</p>
<p>"1. You're probably going to switch majors at some point, so it's better to be at the overall stronger school.</p>
<ol>
<li>The majority of the courses you take will NOT be in your major field."</li>
</ol>
<p>I don't think this is true for engineering. Engineering isn't a major that you can switch in and out of. Engineers need to know they want to study engineering as freshmen and while their math, physics, etc. requirements aren't strictly engineering courses, most of the courses engineers take are part of their major requirements.</p>
<p>For grad, the answer would be program prestige over college name prestige, by far. For undergrad, I would say that usually it is the reverse, but it varies by particular case, and also, you still want your big name school to have a <em>solid</em> program in your field.</p>
<p>Engineering is enough of a specialized world that even at the undergrad level program prestige might trump school prestige, but Columbia has a top-notch engineering school too.</p>
<p>There are a number of undergraduate LACs that, IF LUMPED WITH NATIONAL UNIVERSITIES by USNWR, would rank top 20. Currently USNWR bifurcates the universe of undergraduate institutions by size.</p>
<p>Here is their rank for Top10 LAC:</p>
<ol>
<li> Williams</li>
<li> Amherst</li>
<li> Swarthmore</li>
<li> Wellesley</li>
<li> Carleton</li>
<li> Middlebury</li>
<li> Bowdoin</li>
<li> Pomona</li>
<li> Davidson</li>
<li>Haverford</li>
<li>Claremont McKenna</li>
<li>Grinnell</li>
<li>Vassar</li>
<li>Wesleyan</li>
<li>Washington & Lee</li>
</ol>
<p>Here is yet another rank for very small Engineering Schools:</p>
<ol>
<li> Harvey Mudd College (CA)<br></li>
<li> Rose-Hulman Inst. of Tech. (IN) </li>
<li> Cooper Union (NY) </li>
</ol>
<p>If the National Universities, LAC and small Engineering lists were merged, I have no doubt that the top 15 LACs and the top small Engineering would intersperse themselves evenly within the merged list into positions starting around position 6 or 7.</p>
<p>I have my own list rank ordered by Selectivity, and nine of the LACs are top 30. I have yet another list rank ordered by midpoint 25th/75th% SAT and again nine the LACs are evenly spread through the top 30. I have yet another list of schools rank ordered by Graduate Division strength (FYI Stanford is #1 and Berkeley #2 across 41 graduate disciplines), which is another story and these LACs do not play on that field at all.</p>
<p>So it is quite evident that the Prestige of the LACs is every bit as pronounced as the National Universities among the consumers of higher education.</p>
<p>USNWR rankings are so unreliable. The Service Academies just found their way on the list after years as being recognized as "unranked specialty schools". I mean, just look at one of the profiles for the U.S. Naval Academy:</p>
<p>Admissions 14% accepted (toughest LAC and national public school to get into) This has to carry its weight.</p>
<p>The SAT score ranges aren't bad considering that only 60% of each class is composed of incoming high school students.</p>
<p>I even have a hard time seeing USNA being ranked #20 out of the LAC. We have over 4,300 students. Overall, it's a good mixture of engineering and liberal arts, and the name recognition isn't bad either. Contrary to popular CC belief, these instutions are reputable, and for the career path, they have to rank somewhere in the top 20 of ALL schools overall.</p>
<p>West Point may be the most under rated school in the country with 96% of the classes with less than 20 students, zero % of classes with 50 or more students, and 100% of the professors are full time profs. To the OP: If you are certain of your major and career objectives, go with the better program, but if you might change your major, then go to the better university.</p>
<p>GoNavyXC -</p>
<p>A relative of mine started in Annapolis this year. He was a cross admit at Berkeley along with the Air Force Academy.</p>
<p>I would concur that the Naval Academy would be ranked top 25 if USNWR would include it in the category "National University".</p>
<p>However, I would rank it Top 10 if other factors like leadership are factored in, as employers always do.</p>
<p>
[quote]
For grad, the answer would be program prestige over college name prestige, by far.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think this, like undergrad, depends on what exactly you intend to do with the degree. I know a number of grad students who actually have no intention of actually using their specific degree to enter that specific field, and are just in the program to leverage the school's general brand name. </p>
<p>As a case in point, I know a guy from Turkey who is in a grad program at Harvard. He has privately admitted that he doesn't actually intend to work in his field after graduation. What he really wants to do is go back to Turkey and enter government, perhaps running for political office, and leverage the Harvard brand name. After all, few Turkish voters know which grad programs in the world are strong and which aren't. All they will see is the Harvard brand. (Nor am I singling out voters in Turkey, as, honestly, most American voters also don't know which particular grad programs are good and all they see is a school brand name.)</p>
<p>Cash also makes a difference in this question. Is it worth paying 2 or 3 times as much, or even more depending on the school and scholorships, to attend a school where the quality of education in the program is fairly similar?</p>
<p>If you are going to be an engineer, why would you choose someone like Yale over UC Berkeley, U-Illinois Urbana Champaign, or Harvey Mudd... Those places have much better engineering programs than Yale</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you are going to be an engineer, why would you choose someone like Yale over UC Berkeley, U-Illinois Urbana Champaign, or Harvey Mudd... Those places have much better engineering programs than Yale
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think the answer is inherent in your question. The key is ** if ** you really are going to be an engineer. The truth is, a lot of engineering graduates, particularly at the top schools, will not work as engineers.</p>
<p>As a case in point, take the EECS program at MIT. I think we can all agree that MIT is an elite engineering school. EECS is the largest and arguably most prestigious program at MIT. Yet the fact is, 25% of MIT EECS grads end up taking jobs in strategy consulting and finance (i.e. investment banking). </p>
<p>Look, the truth is, just because you major in a particular field doesn't mean that you have to, or even want to, work in that field after you graduate. After all, most history majors do not intend to become professional historians. Most poli-sci majors have no intention of become professional political scientists. Most psychology majors do not intend to become professional psychologists. Hence, we shouldn't assume that all engineering students are going to work as engineers. An undergrad major is just something you do for 4 years to expand your mind and get a degree before you move on to whatever your real career happens to be.</p>