<p>no engineering rankings are peer evaluation so it means that the deans of peer schools evaluate the program. if they don’t know, then they don’t have to report. only 40% of schools actually respond and this helps big research schools to get high rankings even if they aren’t that amazing…</p>
<p>they do not represent regional prestige. i guess they represent national prestige in the eyes of certain academics.</p>
<p>“Usenews sends surveys out to the top administration of all the schools, and then those people rate all other schools but themselves, or in there region”</p>
<p>that means regional prestige since the schools are only rating other schools near them</p>
<p>They rate “peer schools,” not necessarily schools located in their geographic region. I would assume they are only asked to rate schools they are knowledegable about.</p>
<p>It’s sad that “top-ranked” schools are seen as so much better when they probably aren’t always. 
What ever happened to going off of experience and ability instead of where you went to school, that makes the most sense.</p>
<p>well that’s a good point, after a few years in the workplace, one will be able to see who the real good engineers are and who aren’t and at that time college won’t matter. Also, during co-op there are opportunities to get experience through co-op programs so one can distinguish himself that way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes! Definitely agreed! A person can be good in school, but maybe not as good in real life, imo.</p>
<p>Well my provost said it was mostly regional, mostly larger geographic regions. Such as The north east, south east, south west, west, mid west. He said he bases his decisions on how he feels those other schools are serving their students as well as the community in which it serves. he then also bases his decision on how he feels research is progressing in his field. My provost had a CS backround, so he judged on that. He not only rated engineering schools, but all schools and all programs.</p>
<p>[Methodology:</a> Best Undergraduate Engineering Programs - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2008/08/21/methodology-best-undergraduate-engineering-programs.html]Methodology:”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2008/08/21/methodology-best-undergraduate-engineering-programs.html)</p>
<p>It’s likely he was only familiar with schools in his region, but he is not limited to only evaluating schools in that area.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I disagree. Graduating from a top undergraduate school makes a difference in access to certain jobs/careers and/or if you plan to apply to professional/graduate schools. </p>
<p>Conversely, as a PhD student, it is sometimes better to attend a lower-ranked university (let’s say USNWR #10, as opposed to #1-2) provided that you have the chance to work with a prestigious, well-connected advisor. In other words, the prestige of the specific research group you are affiliated with sometimes matter more than the overall prestige of the university you are attending.</p>
<p>Of course, higher ranked universities normally have the most prestigious research groups, as the two things normally go together. Also, a PhD from a top 3 university (e.g. MIT or Stanford) from my limited experience seems to give you some advantage when you apply for a faculty position.</p>
<p>
Its just not true. Its the person who gets the job, not the school. If some math braininess decides to turn down MIT and go to some second rate school. he is still likely to succeed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is the point I have been trying to drive at for awhile now. The people on here just want to cling to their so-called “top” schools and therefore say that they are the only way to get a good job. I don’t speak on here out of ignorance, I speak out of what I have seen in the “real” world. And BirdEye is right!</p>