<p>Us News:</p>
<li> Massachusetts Inst. of Technology 4.8 </li>
<li> Stanford University (CA) 4.7
University of CaliforniaBerkeley * 4.7 </li>
<li> California Institute of Technology 4.5
U. of IllinoisUrbana-Champaign * 4.5 </li>
<li> Georgia Institute of Technology * 4.4
University of MichiganAnn Arbor * 4.4 </li>
<li> Carnegie Mellon University ¶ 4.3
Purdue Univ.West Lafayette (IN)* 4.3 </li>
<li> Cornell University (NY) 4.2 </li>
</ol>
<p>Hmm?</p>
<p>Sternman, there really isn't much of a difference between #5 and #15. Most in the know agree that MIT, Cal, Caltech and Stanford are the top 4. But is Michigan really better than Northwestern or CMU better than Cornell? Few people would differentiate between the top 15 programs.</p>
<p>Cornell is much better for engineering than Purdue. The students with whom you would be working at Cornell would be much better than at Purdue. For example, the SAT scores at Cornell are 250 points higher than at Purdue. The SAT scores in Cornell engineering are only about 30-40 ponts lower than at MIT and Caltech. The difference in the student body is huge. Engineering at Cornell is taught at a very high level. Courses move quickly and cover a lot of material. I am not sure, but you might see differences in the level of the textbooks that are used. The overall culture and climate at an Ivy has a richness and sophistication that can't be matched by many non-Ivies.</p>
<p>the SAT range at Cornell's engineering school is something like 1380-1550 for the class of 2008. Not sure what it is now. </p>
<p>Unless money is a huge factor, very rarely will students turn down Cornell for a place like Purdue.</p>
<p>Compare the starting salaries--not much difference.</p>
<p>most engineers make about the same for starting salaries. </p>
<p>The Cornell grads probably find it a whole lot easier to get the jobs, though.</p>
<p>I could care less about either of these schools, but where exactly is the evidence that either is better? I have what US News is saying, but can anyone back up the Cornell > Purdue argument?</p>
<p>Barrons- The starting salaries for Cornell electrical engineers averaged $60,000. What is it for Purdue?</p>
<p>The quality of a four-year engineering education can't be reduced to starting salaries. </p>
<p>If starting salaries are the same for engineers of varying abilities, that says something about the acumen and competence of recruiters. If you were a recruiter, would you pay the same starting salary for a B student at Purdue and Cornell?</p>
<p>By the way, I think the Purdue electrical engineering program is excellent and I believe they do a great job for their students. I hope I don't sound elitist or arrogant. But, the difference in student ability is inescapable.</p>
<p>Aside from starting salaries, if your SATs were in the 1400s-1500s wouldn't you rather spend four years with other students who have SATs in the 1400s-1500s? If your SATs are in the 1200s-1300s, then maybe Purdue is a better fit anyway.</p>
<p>You can't just compare ECE vs overall engineering since ECE tends to be higher. I think overall Cornell engineering is over 50k along with Purdue's.</p>
<p>ECE starting salaries are the highest but the others range $53-$56 thousand except for Civil. The Comp Sci grads earned an average $66K to start. MechE and Applied Physics about $55K. ChemE about $53K. </p>
<p>I would be interested in knowing salaries 5 and 10 years down the road. That would be an interesting comparison, too.</p>
<p>I still wouldn't trade the Cornell experience for anything. </p>
<p>Don't get me wrong. I am sure Purdue engineers do a great job.</p>
<p>I never attended Purdue, or hired engineers, so I can't say much for certain.</p>
<p>But I can say the following:</p>
<p>`1) As for the level of courses, when I was an engineering student at Cornell I had textbooks written by Purdue professors. We did homework sets from problems out of the books mostly.</p>
<p>I also recall textbooks written by Profs at:
West Virginia U (statics)
U Wisconsin(dynamics)
Stanford (EE)
RPI, I think (Thermo)
Syracuse U
various others</p>
<p>2) when I was an engineer I worked with graduates of Purdue who were doing the same level job as I was. THey got hired there. obviously, just like I did.</p>
<p>The average capability of Cornell engineers may be somewhat higher, but I would guess that the Purdue engineers of equivalent capability have comparable engineering opportunities. Though slanted more towards the midwest.</p>
<p>The Purdue engineers probably have less access to opportunities outside of engineering, eg investment banking.</p>
<p>All of this just a guess.</p>
<p>Just from a personal perspective I know Cornell has a great reputation for engineering. I'm not too familiar with Purdue.</p>
<p>Monydad is right on the money...so to speak! hehe!!!</p>
<p>my impression of Purdue is sort of diminished thanks to a few resumes my mom (who recruits for engineering for a huge company) sent me a few months ago...</p>
<p>One student had work experience at (and I quite verbatim): "The local pizza joint."</p>
<p>Another student worked "At the liquor store where I enjoy a nice discount and can read books when it's not busy"</p>
<p>A different student's resume included contact information with an email that was something along the lines of "<a href="mailto:ItalianPlaya69@yahoo.com">ItalianPlaya69@yahoo.com</a>"</p>
<p>Finally, one student's statement of intent on their resume simply stated "Hello!?!"</p>
<p>These were all submitted from Purdue students. I've seen a few other bad ones, but not this many from one school. Lesson learned - work with career services and get it done right.<br>
For those who have no idea, it's things like these that make HR people chuckle and send them around to other people in the office as a quick laugh. </p>
<p>How can I not defend Cornell when I see stuff like this.</p>
<p>monydad-
some random thoughts...</p>
<p>SAT range for Cornell: 1290-1480
SAT range for Purdue: 1030-1260
almost no overlap</p>
<p>At Cornell, the SATs in engineering are about 100 points higher so I estimate a midrange in engineering 1390-1580 at Cornell. I assume the Purdue engineering students also have relatively higher SAT scores.</p>
<p>To reiterate, you can't measure the quality of education by starting salaries. It is ludicrous to suggest that Cornell and Purdue are on par. How can you ignore a 250 point SAT difference and all the academic qualities that acrue to brighter students? If less capable engineers are paid the same, it is not only unjust but it is bad for business. I think human resource/personnel offices are somewhat pressured by legal concerns to treat everybody the same, even though applicants are not the same. From what I gather, the hiring process is often not astute.</p>
<p>Starting salary data usually comes from a survey of graduated seniors one or two year after graduation. Cornell graduates probably pursue masters, professional, and PhD degrees in greater numbers and are therefore not in the starting salary data. </p>
<p>I would guess that Cornell students would perform better than Purdue students with textbooks and problem sets written by professors from anywhere, including Purdue authors. When I said that the level of the textbooks might be higher than those used at Purdue, it had nothing to do with where the authors were from. I was talking about the level of the concepts and the math. Textbooks reflect the conceptual level at which courses are taught. Student ability places limits on how sophisticated the courses can be. Some graduate admissions committees in engineering want to know which undergraduate engineering textbooks were used.</p>
<p>It is possible that Purdue graduates with capabilities similar to Cornell graduates have similar opportunities in engineering. I hope this is true. It is only fair. There probably are not many Purdue undergrad engineers with capabilities similar to Cornell grads, although it is hard to know. I don't know the percent of engineers who graduate from Purdue engineering. At Cornell, it is about 88-89%. At purdue, the graduation rate from engineering might be less than that, so there is some weeding out by graduation.</p>
<p>The level of the concepts and math in the courses I referenced were exactly the level that was in those textbooks. I have observed that textbooks are typically written by professors via developing lecture notes from the courses they actually give at their own schools. I have no reason to suspect that these courses/texts were any different.</p>
<p>The level of capability you listed does seem quite significant to me. However I believe that, like Cornell, Purdue has a number of undergraduate colleges, and students may have disparate academic capabilities. I wonder whether these stats apply particularly to Purdue's engineering school. And whether most Purdue engineering applicants primarily take the ACT, as was the case in the midwestern area I recently moved from, rather than the SAT.
And whether they have honors programs or the like where students of substantially higher capability are enrolled.</p>
<p>BTW, starting salaries will undoubtedly be influenced by geographic factors. Purdue is a midwestern school, hiring undoubtedly has a midwest bias, and it has been my experience that the midwest pays a bit less for equivalent engineering jobs. The cost of living is also less, generally moreso than the difference in compensation.</p>
<p>The other point you made is also a possibility: significant weed-out might occur at Purdue, leaving a higher percentage of capable engineering applicants in the end. I know the midwestern state U I was near was known to engage in this practice ruthlessly. It was easy to get in, from in-state ayway, and the aggregate entry stats reflected this. But by sophomore year there was very substantial attrition. The stats of those who ultimately graduated would probably look much stronger than the stats of the entering class, at that public university. Don't know about Purdue though.</p>
<p>I want to again make the point that people who do the hiring are often not very good at recognizing excellence. And, even if they can recognize excellence, it is very difficult for human resource offices to reward it financially because of legal and policy constraints. In effect, companies financially reward mediocrity, rather than excellence.</p>
<p>On the face of it, one would assume that Cornell engineering would be better. But Purdue has nearly 40,000 students, so I'm sure that the best of Purdue compare favorably with the best of Cornell. Alsol, the sheer size of the program allows students at purdue to do stuff they couldn't do anywhere else. purdue's honors program is also excellent from what i've heard.</p>
<p>"I'm sure that the best of Purdue compare favorably with the best of Cornell"</p>
<p>I'd put money on saying that the best of Purdue compare favorably with the average ones at Cornell. Remember, over a quarter of the students in engineering at Cornell scored above a 1550 on the old SAT, and I imagine these scores rose recently with some of the most competitive classes to date. </p>
<p>"the sheer size of the program allows students at purdue to do stuff they couldn't do anywhere else."</p>
<p>A perk at Cornell with 13,000 undergraduates as well. This isn't quite the same as at many other "tech" schools and would be a good reason for a "not so sure about engineering" type of student to pick a school like Cornell or Purdue over other tech-focused schools.</p>