<p>I don't really have much to add to the conversation but it seems as if DocT approaches engineering and physics as two mutually exclusive entities, which is far from the truth. While engineering and physics do branch off eventually, you do need the latter for the former. It might be because I haven't taken any really high level courses but everything engineering that I've done required a pretty solid understanding of the scientific principles involved.</p>
<p>
[quote]
There is no way in hell your average doctor could ever in his or her life solve complex analytical problems
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That is one of the most ridiculous thing I have ever heard. How about everytime a patient walks through the door and needs to be diagnosed? I think you have the wrong perception of what actually goes on in medical school. Most engineering students consider the hardest courses they take to be Organic Chemistry courses. I think its fair to say that the human body is just as/ if not more complex than any mechanical object we know today. Take an advanced biology course and see how much fun it is.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Call me an idiot, but I don't think rankings matter.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Maybe it's unfair to say that students at Top Schools are brighter than students elsewhere. Although it certainly is fair to say that students at top schools are usually hard workers. Companies don't recruit from MIT because they want to brag about hiring MIT employees, They recruit from MIT because the students are "the cream of the crop." You couldn't get through an engineering program at MIT without working your butt off, I dont care how smart you are there is a ton of work involved and you will not make it through school unless that work gets done. Top firms and companies want hard workers and the typical student at a top school has obviously worked pretty hard ever since pre/early teens to get in the position they are now. The Firms would expect no less effort to be put into their careers as opposed to someone with a 2.2 from a public school who has barely put any effort in to their work. Are they hard workers? they might be, but from a professional standpoint who would you hire? a person who puts in alot of effort with little to no results or a person who has proven their worth in gold. </p>
<p>Maybe it's time to grow up and see the truth. If rankings don't matter why does the average graduate of a top 10 school earn more than a public university graduate?</p>
<p>who say they earn more, prove it. I make a pretty good salary at IBM, just starting out, I make around 85K a year. so its all good and I haven't even graduated yet. If you know your stuff, it doesn't matter where you went to school, or even if you went to school. Id also like to point out that a very large number of security experts, never went to college, or most likely never graduated from HS and some if not most can make up to 400K a year. My uncle is a engineer at Cisco, guess what never even graduated HS.</p>
<p>UriA702, I really think its time for you to grow up and see the truth, you are living in a world where others define you. I live in a world where I define me. If a company doesn't want me, Ill just do it myself and do it better and put them out of business. Thats my mentality. I don't feel inferior to any MIT or CalTech Grad, actually Id compete with them head up without a fear and would almost guarantee I would be better. Ive beat some to get into the Google Summer of Code 2x in a row and know my skills are worth something.</p>
<p>Now to say that somebody is not a hard worker with a 2.2, its just judging them. How do you know that, that person didn't try there best and studied 15 hours a day. I graduated with a 2.84 and usually studied 10-15 hours a day, so did I not try hard? Believe me I love to study, and I work really hard. A grade doesn't show that you worked harder. Like my roommate last semester who was pre-med, never studied, never went to class. Just played wow all the time. Ended up with a 4.0. While his friends who struggled there asses off in the same classes and only got 3.2's. Did my roommate who never studied work harder, I doubt it, but he sure a hell has zero work ethic.</p>
<p>As to the living organism's, doctors don't even understand them, they know a little about them, but all of 10% is still unknown. We as engineers deal with finite machines. we deal with things that don't change and we are in control. Doctors see many different patients, and not 1 human is the same as any other. What does a cardiologist do, if the heart is on the right side rather than the left. Organisms are so dynamic and can changed very dramatically on the way that they are developed, It is not even fair to compare a person would deals with the static to a person who deals completely with the dynamic.</p>
<p>anybody here have a phd/md in engineering?</p>
<p>i586, your story is becoming stranger and stranger. You have a 2.8 GPA, you say you haven't learned anything in college you haven't known before, and then you got a job with IBM paying $85K? Give me a break. The average engineer doesn't even make that much, and you're making that your first year out of college?? Come on...</p>
<p>quoting i586 from post 104... he HAS NOT edited anything yet. if post #104 is edited, then he changed what I pointed out.</p>
<p>"who say they earn more, prove it. I make a pretty good salary at IBM, just starting out, I make around 85K a year. so its all good and I haven't even graduated yet. If you know your stuff....
.
.
.
I graduated with a 2.84 and usually studied 10-15 hours a day, so did I not try hard? Believe me I love to study, and I work really hard. A grade doesn't show that you worked harder......"</p>
<p>wait.. have you graduated yet? do you really make $85k a year? Does IBM need a recall?</p>
<p>Guys, just let it go. No point in letting him continue his BS.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have not graduated yet, though I could if I wanted to. so it is just as good as graduating. I haven't ever lied on this forum and I do make that much. IBM hires on a scheme that pays you more for the skills you have.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
I graduated with a 2.84 and usually studied 10-15 hours a day, so did I not try hard? Believe me I love to study, and I work really hard. A grade doesn't show that you worked harder....
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Both posted by i586 within 2 days.</p>
<p>lol...what a fake a**hole.</p>
<p>have not graduated yet, though I could if I wanted to. so it is just as good as graduating. I haven't ever lied on this forum and I do make that much. IBM hires on a scheme that pays you more for the skills you have.</p>
<p>id rather spread the truth rather than putting people down. You guys come around saying if you don't go to a top 10 without a 3.5, you wont get a job. Thats just false, grades and the school you go to mean much less to a company than how well you perform as a engineer, doing written tests and solving problem sets may earn you a high gpa, but since when do engineers solve problem sets for a living they don't. A company would be much more impressed with somebody who could prove they knew what they were talking about. They would show this in the interview as well as through a portfolio of projects. My school and my grades sure as hell didn't get me a job at IBM. I got me a job at IBM. I have said it before that I am more self taught and learned by doing projects and such. If you look at the major success stories in technology. The Biggest of the Big are those who said fcuuuuk school.</p>
<p>If you want to belive me, then thats great you are making the right choice. If you dont then thats ok to, as I could care less. I am here to help those understand that being a engineer is not about problem sets and a gpa.
Last edited by i586 : Today at 05:05 PM. </p>
<p>from the other thread.</p>
<p>Your ability to engineer well is a direct result of what school you go to. Your logic is irrational and nobody is going to agree with you. If that wasn't the case top firms would recruit at your local community college not Columbia and MIT</p>
<p>i586's former user names are zorz and goat4d. Search for their past threads and posts. The exaggeration and BS is a work of art.</p>
<p>UriA702, I would like to redirect your quote upon yourself. Your logic is irrational and nobody is going to agree with you. While a top-notch school will help you somewhat with recruitment, oftentimes your experience has more worth than the prestige. The engineering curriculum at any ABET accredited college is very similar. On average engineers at top ranked schools are smarter than those at lower ranked schools; the bigger selection of qualified candidates makes recruiting at "better" schools a more efficient process. That does not mean there are not many people at "worse" schools that don't deserve the jobs or even get them. </p>
<p>Also, to say that top companies would recruit at CCs over top schools is simply ridiculous.There is obviously a difference in aptitude between the average CC goer and an MIT student.</p>
<p>HinmanCEO, while I am skeptical of some of i586's claims, $85k/year isn't outrageous if it includes benefits. My brother started working at Google a couple years ago making around $70k plus lots more (exceeding $15k/year) in benefits. I think I read in another forum post that i586 took part in Google's Summer of Code for two years (if this was someone else then sorry). If the Google projects and everything else he's done were good enough then his GPA might not matter.</p>
<p>Ameechee, we are well aware.</p>
<p>ok tell that to all of the millionaire technology entrepreneurs who never went to college or dropped out. Just the same as only the best doctors in the world come from top schools. yeah right, id highly disagree again.</p>
<p>Like I said, I have done the Google summer of code 2x in a row, why would the different projects choose me over some other higher end schools. When I got the job at IBM, there was a group of us about 12 deep. Some recent grads from some schools such as Columbia, Georgia Tech, Yale and Cornell were in that 12. While I was from University at Buffalo. Hrm again why the heck did they choose me.</p>
<p>I will again stick to my main offensive point, that being able to solve problem sets at a Higher ranked school doesn't make you a better engineer. It sure does make ya a better problem set solver though.</p>
<p>I don't really care if anybody agrees with me. I know from fact and experience that the school and your grades are not the biggest determinant of future success. I know from experience, something none of you have as of yet.</p>
<p>sure I will agree with you, that if you want to be normal and just go 100% by grades, then yeah a company is going to go with a higher ranked school. why ? they have nothing else to go on. You are letting your school and grades talk for themselves. While I could go to the last ranked abet school and still beat out people from the schools I mentioned.</p>
<p>I got accepted into UB, stony brook, Binghamton, RPI, Penn state, U Roch, RIT, about 5 cunys (hunter, Lehman, city, queens, and baruch, polytechnic, and U maryland.) I got into some good schools, but I chose UB because I loved the school and it was cheap.</p>
<p>again</p>
<p>If you want to believe me, then thats great you are making the right choice. If you don't then thats ok to, as I could care less. I am here to help those understand that being a engineer is not about problem sets and a gpa.</p>
<p>what do you have to say about this? lol</p>
<p>
[quote]
i586's former user names are zorz and goat4d. Search for their past threads and posts. The exaggeration and BS is a work of art.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>colincsl - Where did I mention anything about recent grad vs experienced professional? All I was referring to is entry-level recruiting and jobs. whether anyone choses to agree or not, a student with a 3.3 GPA graduating from Cooper Union will get the job over a 3.3 applicant from Manhattan College. I don't see how there can be a logical regarding top schools providing more solid education. schools with large endowment hire top professors with many years of experience who will keep students informed on a wide array of subjects including how to land top jobs. A referral from the head of engineer dept at Fu Foundation would impresses a whole lot more than a referral from head of engineering at Denver Community College.</p>
<p>Look at it from the employers point of view. You want an employee who is intelligent and willing to work hard for you. They'd be easier to find amongst the cream of the crop as opposed to fishing for a small fish in a large pond.</p>
<p>1586 - I Couldn't care less if your ability to do the job is just as well by graduating from any ABET accredited school and neither will any employer. Your resume needs to impress especially with very little to moderate work experience and a top name school like Berkley or MIT will set your application apart from all the other applicants right away. It may be unfair, but life isn't fair. If you work for IBM that is an exception to the rule, I'm going by the majority. Top schools also give you MAJOR NETWORKING OPPORTUNITIES, Something most universities don't have.</p>
<p>I'm not talking about experienced professionals, I'm talking about experience from research and internships. i586, for example, did Google's Summer of Code. The experience gained from activities such as this can't always be found within classes offered at these more prestigious institutions. You act like the quality of college is everything. It matters more about intrinsic motivation (resulting in more experience) and promoting yourself than what school you went to. If you do research on how heat effects metals in higher atmospheres at a State university with a 3.2 and are going against someone with a 3.2 at MIT with no experience, a place like Boeing is probably going to pick you. Sure, if all things equal then the person from the better ranked university will probably get the job, but you seem to neglect other factors that can outweigh prestige.</p>
<p>wow, in two days my post is lost.</p>