<p>Does anyone have an idea of why Purdue loses almost 50% of their freshman engineering students? I know that freshman year is difficult for engineering students at most colleges, but losing 50% would seem to indicate one or more of the following:
1. Purdue is accepting students in their engineering program that don't belong there (low HS GPA, SAT/ACT scores or poor work habits).
2. There is very little support for struggling students (tutoring, test prep, study groups ect)
3. Work load is so heavy that only half can survive
4. Quality of the instruction/professors is very poor.</p>
<p>I am NOT an engineering student at any college (yet), so please understand that I'm not trying to bad mouth Purdue. I'm just trying to figure out how such a supposedly good engineering program can lose so many students. Any ideas? What are other colleges doing that helps them retain more (certainly not all) of their freshman engineering students? Does anyone know of any programs that retain most of their freshman engineering students?</p>
<p>Probably b/c outside of engineering, Purdue is a fairly mediocre school. So kids see the amount of work non-engineers are doing and it gets them down about the major.</p>
<p>Just another theory to add to your 4 previous ones.</p>
<p>All of these contribute to some degree and all of them are related to each other in some way.</p>
<p>It’s mostly number one. Purdue and its engineers program are easy to get into, although I hear it’s been made slightly more difficult in the recent past. So, as you put it, people who “don’t belong there” end up starting engineering.</p>
<p>There is plenty of support available in various forms. However, some people do not take the initiative to go to office hours, study in groups, etc.</p>
<p>The work load is rarely that heavy. There are times when it’s heavy but a vast majority of the time it is very manageable. Engineering students in general like to “brag” about how much work they have but it’s really not that bad.</p>
<p>Some of the professors are very poor. Some are very good. Many more are spread between these two extremes. When you have a poor professor you will have to work harder and/or spend more time getting help. However, I have a feeling that this holds true at pretty much every school, especially research oriented ones.</p>
<p>Rather than say “no, you’re never going to make it and we’re not even going to give you a chance” like many engineering programs, Purdue actually gives more students a chance. A lot of people seem to measure the quality of a school’s program by its admission rate. In my opinion, this is less because its a good indicator of program quality than it is because people like to feel they are part of some small, selective, and elite club. “Oh look at me, I went to <selective expensive=”" school=“”>, aren’t I special?"</selective></p>
<p>I would say its a combination of #1 and the fact that other than Engineering/Pharmacy/Nursing no one does any work(Seriously every business major I know goes out on Thursday Night).</p>
Couldn’t the same approach be used in all majors and all colleges/universities if it makes the final product much better? Why only Purdue engineering?</p>
<p>Is this a method to increase enrollment in their other programs after 50% of the engineering students leave the program? Any ideas why Purdue takes this approach (to a more radical degree) than other top engineering colleges?</p>
<p>Purdue takes this approach because it is a state school. Most state schools have similar situations. They accept a larger number of people and therefore don’t have to be as picky. The good thing is, you end up getting some really brilliant people who would have otherwise gone under the radar for one reason or another who get in. The bad thing is that you also tend to get a little more riff raff.</p>
<p>One of the great things that about living in America is we are given a chance to be anybody that we want to be. The government doesn’t test us to determine where our aptitude lies and then dictate what our profession is to be based on our skills and the needs of society.</p>
<p>It also means that we can fail miserably at what we want to be.</p>
<p>As bonehead said, state universities are not in the job of trying to assess an individual’s skills and accept only those deemed highly likely to suceed. Instead, they accept a large number of students expecting those without the drive or desire will eventually find a different major.</p>
<p>And that, my friend, is exactly what I think the government should do. Give us the opportunity and allow us to fail.</p>
Isn’t Michigan, Texas A&M, Virginia Tech, Berkeley and many other top schools public? What makes Purdue admissions so different that they have a higher number of freshman engineering students leaving their program?</p>
<p>While I agree that the US Government should give us the opportunity and “allow” us to fail, I am curious what it is about Purdue engineering in particular that so many people do fail.</p>
<p>Most public schools have a 50% dropout rate. I’m not familiar with the admission policies of most of them, but I know that Berkeley is more selective than other California schools. I don’t believe this is because they want to decide who can be an engineer but because there are only so many slots at that particular school. Engineering majors rejected from Berkeley can go to other schools instead.</p>
<p>^^^
Other than Purdue which other public university has a 50% drop out rate from their freshman engineering program? I’d be interested in comparing the two to determine whether there are any similarities.</p>
<p>I haven’t studied the particular question (50% after the inital 2 semesters or 3 quarters at a university) so I don’t want to throw out names.</p>
<p>In general, only about 50% of incoming freshman will graduate in engineering within 6 years of the time that they initially applied. Whether they drop out after 1 semester, 2 semesters, 3 semesters, I have no idea.</p>
<p>Again, Georgia Tech has a 33% drop out rate in 6 years (i.e. 67% of incoming freshman engineers graduate as engineers by at least their 6th year of college).</p>
<p>Our school has a 53% graduation rate. This method of admitting students is very wasteful. Through this process, some students receive scholarships and financial aid for programs they are destined to fail in. If an institution weeds out weak students during the admission process, only quality students will be given the aid with an anticipation that they will at least graduate with a science degree. Compare that with students dropping out after 2-3 semesters wasting thousands of dollars.</p>