Questions for Cal EECS students

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of California - Berkeley
1

<p>I applied to Berkeley CoE under an EECS major, and my school counselor said I'll probably get in, and if I get a scholarship I'll definitely go since Stanford is gonna be a rejection and I already got deferred from Princeton, plus Cal EECS is an excellent program so no complaints anyway.</p>

<p>Anyway, here are my questions:</p>

<p>Are EE and CS well integrated? Does CS help you in EE and vice versa?
Is it easy to skip entry-level CS courses? (I have a 5 on APCS AB and professional programmer certification from Sun, will that help??)
How much physics is in EE?
Do you recommend the 5-year Master's program?
How about the EECS/Materials Science and Engineering double major?
Is EECS killing you?? <-- most important question</p>

<p>Thanks!</p>

2

<p>I will answer your most important question. EECS will not kill you unless you surrender. If you fight, you will win. If you are used to working hard for grades in high school, you will be fine. Just keep doing what you are doing. If you are used to breezing by and getting an 'A' with minimal work, then be prepared for adjustment (I was one of the latter category). Doing well in EECS is all more about attitude than anything else. Good luck and hope to see you on campus.</p>

3

<p>Err... I'm used to breezing by and setting the curve, at least for AP computer science and AP chemistry. I'm the type who will rush a week-long programming assignment in half a day, and then go code a game of Tetris or something in my spare time, so I guess I'm a combination of the two.</p>

<p>Good to hear that it's manageable though, thanks.</p>

4

<br>


<br>

5

<p>To get into the 5 year master's program in EECS, the minimum GPA requirement is a 3.7. So, expect to not have a life and study all day long to achieve that goal. Getting a 3.3 at CAL (espeically in engin) is DAMN hard. And this is coming from a ChemE/NE double major. But again, ChemE has the lowest grading curve out of the entire engineering majors (B-/C+) but EECS is not that high either (usually curved at a B).</p>

6

<p>
[quote]
> Do you recommend the 5-year Master's program?
See how you do at Cal first. You have to apply as a third or fourth year and the acceptance rates are fairly low.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
To get into the 5 year master's program in EECS, the minimum GPA requirement is a 3.7.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Actually, the minimum recommended GPA is only a 3.5. But that's just the minimum required. It doesn't mean that if you have that minimum, you will get in. And having lower than that does not automatically preclude admission.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/FiveYearMS/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/FiveYearMS/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>However, personally I think the 5 year program is less than meets the eye. Don't get me wrong - it's far better than not having such a program at all. But the truth is, if you are good enough to get into this program, you are probably also good enough to get into an MS program at other top schools like MIT or Stanford (or even Berkeley's regular MS EECS program). Hence, the combined program doesn't give you much more than what you probably could have gotten anyway. The advantages are that you get to know earlier (as the app process is completed in junior year, as opposed to senior year), and you may be able to save some time (as this combined program takes an extra year, whereas the regular Berkeley MS would take about an extra 1.5 years). There is also some value in not having to spend money on an application fee (as the app for the combined program is free) or taking the GRE. </p>

<p>But it's still not as good as the combined programs available at other schools, notably MIT. For example, with the MIT EECS MEng program (which is MIT's version of the combined program), you only need a technical GPA of 4.25/5 (which translates to a 3.25/4). Granted, getting a GPA like that at MIT is no walk in the park, but it still represents a fairly strong 'home-field advantage' for MIT undergrads. The combined Berkeley program does not seem to offer strong 'home-field advantage'. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.eecs.mit.edu/ug/mengadm.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.eecs.mit.edu/ug/mengadm.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

7

<p>Thanks for all the information. The reason I wanted to do a 5 year MS is to save a year's worth of time and money, and I'm not going to get into MIT because I didn't apply, and Stanford is going to be a rejection because I didn't join enough clubs or some crap like that.</p>

<p>I find it amusing that everyone says that UCs are too numbers-based when the UC Regents sent out a letter to the UCs saying that they already look at EC's enough and that GPA/SAT should be considered more.</p>

8

<p>Hmmmm....I thought it was a 3.7 but my mistake. However, getting a 3.5 isn't easy either. Any GPA higher than a 3.3 is considered 'honors' at berk. Henceforth, to obtain a GPA of 3.5, you'd have to obtain atleast A-'s and B+'s (averaged) on your academic record. And that's not easy. I've known many "smart" students at my high school (Top 2% of graduating class) and JC (3.95 GPA or higher) who are in CAL Engineering and are bearly making a 3.0 GPA. Not trying to discourage but wanted to reveal the sort of competition that happens in engineering. I've heard that some engineering majors are "easy graders" (i.e. higher curve) than others. For example, I've heard that IEOR, CivE, maybe MechE (??) are easy graders than ChemE, EECS, NE, Mat Sci etc.</p>

9

<p>
[quote]
Thanks for all the information. The reason I wanted to do a 5 year MS is to save a year's worth of time and money, and I'm not going to get into MIT because I didn't apply, and Stanford is going to be a rejection because I didn't join enough clubs or some crap like that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Like I said, I don't know if it really would save a year of time and money. For example, you can get your BS in EECS from Berkeley in 4 years, and then get a master's at MIT or Stanford in one more year. In fact, in many ways, it would actually be better to do that as opposed to just staying at Berkeley, as graduating from 2 different schools means that you will have access to 2 different alumni networks. But the point is, it's unclear as to whether you really would save much time via the 5 year Berkeley program. If you're good enough to get into the 5-year Berkeley program, then you're probably good enough to get into the master's programs at MIT or Stanford. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Any GPA higher than a 3.3 is considered 'honors' at berk.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That's not quite true. If by 'honors' you mean graduation with general scholarship honors the GPA cutoffs vary by college (L&S, engineering, etc.), but is almost certainly above a 3.3. For example, graduating with honors in L&S in the year 2006-2007 required a GPA of 3.669. Engineering is lower, but is generally between a 3.5-3.6 or so (they might have it posted in McLaughlin). </p>

<p>Now, if 'honors' you mean eligibility for the honors program of your major, the GPA cutoff is then major-specific. For example, the EECS honors program requires a 3.7 (maybe that's what you were referring to before). However, something like poli-sci only requires a 3.3 overall and a 3.5 in the major.</p>

<p><a href="http://ls-advise.berkeley.edu/collegepolicies/honors.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://ls-advise.berkeley.edu/collegepolicies/honors.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Programs/honors.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.eecs.berkeley.edu/Programs/honors.html&lt;/a>
<a href="http://www.polisci.berkeley.edu/ugrad/honors.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.polisci.berkeley.edu/ugrad/honors.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>But the point is, it isn't quite true that "any" GPA that is higher than a 3.3 is considered to be 'honors' at Berkeley. You might have a GPA that is substantially higher than a 3.3, and still not have it be considered 'honors', depending on what you are majoring in and what college you belong to.</p>

10

<p>When you try to enroll in ChemE 194 (Honors Undergrad Research), their minimum GPA requirement is a 3.4. Yet, I do agree that honors would be in the range of 3.5+ for most colleges.</p>

11

<p>i'm interested in the eecs/material sci. major the op stated earlier. anyone have any more info on it?</p>

12

<p>To know more about the major(s), check out the College of Engineering Announcement posted on <a href="http://www.coe.berkeley.edu%5B/url%5D"&gt;www.coe.berkeley.edu&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

13

<p>Just wondering, what's the male/female ratio in EECS anyways? Any more dramatic than places like Caltech?</p>

14

<p>LOL...there are WAAAAAAYYYYYYYYY more MEN than WOMEN in engineering overall....that's why engineering majors drool when they see a decent chick. They are all excited to see a decent to good looking girl b/c 1). they are always surrounded by men 2). the girls in engineering are not your typical hotties. </p>

<p>HOwever, I must say that the "hot" girls that I've met in CoE were BioE majors.</p>

<p>To the OP, just b/c your high school counselor said that you might get into EECS doesn't mean that your going to get in (not trying to discourage). However, you need to understand that EECS is the most impacted major on campus and the department turns away many overly qualified applicants. So, if you recieve a reject letter, don't be too surprised.</p>

15

<p>i dont know about mechE being an easy grader major. and plus it's all speaking relative to other engineering majors. if you compared it to the other departments, engineering in general is probably the most difficult.</p>

16

<p>I don't mean "easy grader" as in you put little effort and still get a B. I mean easy grader as that their grading curves are generous. Most MechE classes are curved to a B....so the amount of time you'd put into a MechE class vs a ChemE class (curved at a B-), well, you get the point.</p>