<p>As ridiculous as they are I love US news rankings. haha</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m fairly familiar with GT (hence my name). Here I would say there are many more people than at many other universities I have known that subscribe to the “quality over quantity” philosophy in publishing. In fact, it is not uncommon to have only 2 or 3 publications by the time of getting the PhD, but those are publications that took at least a year or two of gathering information and are quite comprehensive. For example, I know one person who graduated recently with two publications, but one of them was the most downloaded article for the entire year from all the journals published by this particular well-respected publisher in this person’s broad area.</p>
<p>You might think that taking a year to gather the data for a journal article is customary but this is not so. It seems more prevalent amongst people educated in eastern countries, but even something as simple as a few microscope images will get published in an OK journal if they show something anomalous (with the right spin, of course), and so some professors use this to publish 3-5 times a year per student. I see plenty of cases where professors have hundreds of publications by mid-career (in their 50’s).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As far as I can tell, that index does not distinguish between journals and weights quite highly (60%) factors such as number of publications and citations per faculty. There is a big difference between publishing in Science and Physical Review Q, and it isn’t necessarily true that the Science article will get that many more citations because it is customary to cite papers within a journal you want to publish in to appease the editors. Many more people publish in lower tier journals than upper tier. Further, there is a difference between the placement of a citation in an article. Typically the majority of citations in a paper is in the introduction paragraph where they are not specifically referenced but are more or less (once again) placed to placate potential reviewers and editors and signify no real impact.</p>
<p>Using these objective metrics means that people can scheme on how to inflate their score using them, but at least if you use soft metrics like PA you have to at least do something noteworthy.</p>
<p>Best Engineering Schools Specialty Rankings:</p>
<p>Ranked in 2009 </p>
<p>1
Massachusetts Institute of Technology </p>
<p>Stanford University </p>
<p>University of California–Berkeley </p>
<p>4
Carnegie Mellon University </p>
<p>5
University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign </p>
<p>6
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor </p>
<p>7
California Institute of Technology </p>
<p>Georgia Institute of Technology </p>
<p>9
Cornell University </p>
<p>University of Texas–Austin (Cockrell) </p>
<p>11
Princeton University </p>
<p>12
Purdue University–West Lafayette </p>
<p>University of Southern California (Viterbi) </p>
<p>University of Wisconsin–Madison </p>
<p>15
University of California–Los Angeles (Samueli) </p>
<p>University of Washington </p>
<p>17
University of Maryland–College Park (Clark) </p>
<p>18
University of California–San Diego (Jacobs) </p>
<p>19
Pennsylvania State University–University Park </p>
<p>20
Columbia University (Fu Foundation) </p>
<p>Harvard University </p>
<p>Ohio State University </p>
<p>Rice University (Brown) </p>
<p>Texas A&M University–College Station (Look) </p>
<p>University of Minnesota–Twin Cities </p>
<p>University of Pennsylvania </p>
<p>Virginia Tech </p>
<p>28
Duke University (Pratt) </p>
<p>Johns Hopkins University (Whiting) </p>
<p>North Carolina State University </p>
<p>Northwestern University (McCormick) </p>
<p>University of California–Irvine (Samueli) </p>
<p>33
Arizona State University (Fulton) </p>
<p>Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute </p>
<p>University of California–Santa Barbara </p>
<p>University of Colorado–Boulder </p>
<p>University of Virginia </p>
<p>Washington University in St. Louis (Sever) </p>
<p>39
Brown University </p>
<p>Iowa State University </p>
<p>University of California–Davis </p>
<p>Yale University </p>
<p>43
Rutgers, the State University of New Jersey–New Brunswick </p>
<p>University of Arizona </p>
<p>University of Florida </p>
<p>University of Massachusetts–Amherst </p>
<p>University of Notre Dame </p>
<p>48
Boston University </p>
<p>Michigan State University </p>
<p>SUNY–Stony Brook </p>
<p>University of Pittsburgh (Swanson) </p>
<p>Vanderbilt University </p>
<p>53
Dartmouth College (Thayer) </p>
<p>Northeastern University </p>
<p>Polytechnic Institute of New York University </p>
<p>University of Rochester </p>
<p>University of Utah </p>
<p>58
Auburn University (Ginn) </p>
<p>Case Western Reserve University </p>
<p>Clemson University </p>
<p>Lehigh University (Rossin) </p>
<p>University at Buffalo–SUNY </p>
<p>University of California–Riverside (Bourns) </p>
<p>University of Iowa </p>
<p>65
Drexel University </p>
<p>Oregon State University </p>
<p>Syracuse University </p>
<p>Texas Tech University </p>
<p>University of California–Santa Cruz (Baskin) </p>
<p>University of Illinois–Chicago </p>
<p>University of Tennessee–Knoxville </p>
<p>72</p>
<p>Stevens Institute of Technology (Schaefer) </p>
<p>Tufts University </p>
<p>University of New Mexico </p>
<p>Worcester Polytechnic Institute</p>
<p>to Alexandre, I’m just pointing out that for the productivity index rank(<a href=“http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2007&primary=5&secondary=49&bycat=Go[/url]”>http://chronicle.com/stats/productivity/page.php?year=2007&primary=5&secondary=49&bycat=Go</a>)
the computer engineering rank and EE rank used the exactly same data and somehow they didn’t put Caltech and Princeton into the EE rank, MIT seem to be left out of the computer engineering rank too or maybe it scored lower than all the top 10 in Computer engineering rank… </p>
<p>anyways, i agree this productivity index rank does really represent how good these universities’ EE department are.</p>
<p>I don’t understand why Marquette is never mentioned in any of these lists, even those that go down to the 70s. Even when I work with attorneys from the midwest and mention that my son is interested in Marquette, they all reply, they have a great engineering school. </p>
<p>Do you think that it is maybe overlooked because it is a Catholic university, or because it may be in the shadow of some more well known schools like Northwestern?</p>
<p>From what I’ve seen, it seems like a wonderful school, where son would get a great education and even be able to get a job after graduation.</p>
<p>To be fair, gt, while I do agree with you completely about quality over quantity, NRC attempts to use both which is why the number of citations is taken into account. Now, this is a hard thing to do right, since you may have a huge impact on your field but the field may be limited so getting 6-7 citations may mean that you’re the most influential in an area, however, in general, citations represent the importance of your work in the growing body of knowledge and help to balance out those who are just producing unimportant papers and those who are producing work that’s being built upon elsewhere.</p>
<p>To be fair, Hopkins’ EE program is ranked in the top ten because Hopkins’ alumnus Michael Bloomberg '64 graduated with a B.S. degree in electrical engineering and has donated a modest amount to the program. The building is very pretty :D</p>
<p>Chicago78 - What is the source of that list? It is not USNews.</p>
<p>It is USnews.</p>
<p>Ranking in Computer Engineering 2009</p>
<p>chicago 78, do you have the 2009 rankings for civil engineering? just wanted to take a quick look</p>
<p>@pierre0913: [Undergraduate</a> engineering specialties: Civil - Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/spec-doct-civil]Undergraduate”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/spec-doct-civil)
no Ph.D: [Undergraduate</a> engineering specialties: Civil - Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/spec-civil]Undergraduate”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/college/spec-civil)</p>
<p>OK, Chicago…got ya. But I’m not sure how this thread transformed from general undergrad engineering rankings to the grad-level Computer Engineering rankings…and it wasn’t obvious from the title of your post that was what you were talking about.</p>
<p>Pierre…here is the full list of <em>undergrad</em> civil programs with PhD.</p>
<p>1 University of Illinois–Urbana-Champaign Champaign, IL
2 University of California–Berkeley Berkeley, CA
3 Massachusetts Institute of Technology Cambridge, MA
4 University of Texas–Austin Austin, TX
5 Georgia Institute of Technology Atlanta, GA
6 Stanford University Stanford, CA
7 Purdue University–West Lafayette West Lafayette, IN
University of Michigan–Ann Arbor Ann Arbor, MI
9 Cornell University Ithaca, NY
10 Texas A&M University–College Station College Station, TX
11 Carnegie Mellon University Pittsburgh, PA
12 Virginia Tech Blacksburg, VA
13 University of Wisconsin–Madison Madison, WI
14 Pennsylvania State University–University Park University Park, PA
15 California Institute of Technology Pasadena, CA
University of Florida Gainesville, FL
17 Princeton University Princeton, NJ
18 Northwestern University Evanston, IL
University of Southern California Los Angeles, CA
20 University of Washington Seattle, WA</p>
<p>The FSP Index is, as its name implies, a measure of the Faculty Scholarly Productivity for individual research university departments. It’s not necessarily equivalent to a measure of the overall departmental strength and prestige:</p>
<p>1) It’s more relevant to count ONLY publications and citations on prestigious journals and conferences; counting all publications weaken the impact of significant works.</p>
<p>2) FSP does not account APPROPRIATELY for the prestige and contributions of big name professors who are leaders in their own fields.</p>
<p>3) FSP counts only Federal grants; it fails to account for industrial grants and endowed chairs.</p>
<p>Scholarly productivity is not a good indicator of academic excellence. It’s certainly not intended as a guide for picking undergraduate/master programs … especially for engineering and other professional fields.</p>
<p>Let’s look at a couple examples:</p>
<p>CHEMICAL ENGINEERING (FSP ranking):
- UC-Berkeley
- Cal Tech
- Wisconsin
- UT-Austin
- Stanford
- Michigan
- Penn
- Delaware
- UCLA
- U of Washington</p>
<p>What is wrong with this picture?</p>
<p>Where are Minnesota and MIT, two of the four schools that’s been ranked as the top 5 chemical engineering programs for the past 30 years or more?</p>
<p>ACCOUNTING (FSP ranking):
- Wisconsin
- NYU
- Emory
- Kansas
- Stanford
- Michigan State
- U of Iowa
- Arizona State
- Missouri-Columbia
- Penn State</p>
<p>What is wrong with this picture?</p>
<p>Where are UTexas and UIUC, the perennial #1 and #2 accounting programs for this decade? In fact, this list is almost entire wrong. Compare it to the industrial standard - Public Accounting Report’s Annual Professor’s Survey:</p>
<p>Undergraduate Programs:
- UTexas-Austin
- UIUC
- Brigham Young
- Notre Dame
- USC
- Ohio State
- Georgia
- Indiana
- Penn State
- Texas A&M</p>
<p>Graduate Programs:
- Brigham Young
- UIUC
- UTexas-Austin
- USC
- Michigan
- Notre Dame
- UNC-Chapel Hill
- Texas A&M
- Indiana
- Georgia</p>
<p>Doctoral Programs:
- Chicago
- Stanford
- Penn Wharton
- UTexas-Austin
- Michigan
- UIUC
- Cornell
- U of Washington
- U of Iowa
- Harvard</p>