<p>i have talked to high-up people of a major aero company (not just some small firm) who told me that the graduates from those schools are as good if not better than the ones from the high prestige schools
Blah-- Your question pegs you as just another example of people being blinded by admissions stats and superficial prestige.</p>
<p>Education-wise, there is probably very little difference between top schools. That doesn't have anything to do with the original question though, which asks why Purdue and UIUC aren't mentioned in the same breath as MIT and Cornell as often. I think that has more to do with the fact that they're in the midwest. Mass media tends to focus on northeast schools and California schools, and the media probably has as much of an effect on perceived prestige as anything else. The movies usually portray the rocket scientist nerd as a MIT alum rather than a Purdue alum and the reverse for a star football player. I'm not saying these are correct stereotypes, but merely what the media represents. </p>
<p>And I don't think it's fair of you to assume Blah is "blinded by admission stats and superficial prestige." He merely questioned your information sources, which should be expected on an internet forum.</p>
<p>well, i kind of agree that there is almost no difference education-wise among top schools... </p>
<p>see, the thing with awe-inspiring schools is that, ppl don't go awe particularly because of the caliber of those schools, but because the fact that you have been admitted there proves that you were among the top of your peers.</p>
<p>for instance, i have no idea who the faculties are at Olin or anything about caliber of its engineering programs, but i have utmost respect for its students just because i know that school is extremely competitive to get in.</p>
<p>but if you look back, at least i did, don't you think the SAT, the easy high school classes were ridiculous basis on which to judge a person's intelligence? I spent a total of 5 hours prepping for the SAT, and maybe 5 hours a week studying in high school. Which is nothing compared to the rigor of an engineering curriculum in college.</p>
<p>east coast schools like Cornell and CM may be more discriminatory in admissions, but the quality of education and job offers is equal or better in midwest schools.</p>
<p>But you really have nothing aside from a few guys' opinions to back that up, and everyone's got some bias.</p>
<p>Why not go to Purdue and gather some evidence, rather than slingin' fightin' words?</p>
<p>btw... font styles don't prove points, they just highlight them.</p>
<p>a few guys and USNWR...</p>
<p>anyway... the point of this thread was that midwest engineering schools are underrated in CC. and i don't think anyone has disagreed with that.</p>
<p>You're not going to get far with me saying that USNews said it's so. I speak from personal experience when I say that I don't think an undergrad engineering degree from UIUC (which I TA'd classes for) holds a candle to what Rice undergrad engineering produces, so I'm going to take everything they say with a grain of salt and recommend that everyone else do the same.</p>
<p>Purdue is a good, solid program. You will walk away from there with a degree that, given hard work, a good GPA, and good recommendations, may take you anywhere within your given field... But even USNews doesn't think that it's ranked up there with CalTech and MIT.</p>
<p>really... its #6 for aero (tied with UIUC) which is only 1 spot lower than CalTech. I have already said nobody touches MIT, but CM and Cornell don't have much ground to stand on in this. those 2 schools are not <em>better</em>.</p>
<p>actually, 11 of the top 20 aero programs are public schools... also the least talked about...</p>
<p>I think you're worrying too much about ratings. Between that and this site, your mind is going to be warped when you get to college</p>
<p>if you are talking aero, you can actually goto an eng school that's like ranked beyond 100th or something, and Lockheed will still hire you. they hire from like everywhere and they are the biggest employer for most AE/ME programs in the U.S.</p>
<p>but for something like CS, your school prestige definitely helps you out. Goldman Sachs was our CS bachelor's biggest employer in 2006 (IT analysts positions) and employers like GS do care alot about the school's prestige...</p>
<p>yes, but there are differences between the positions that they hire from different schools. Most of the employers that hired Michigan engineering students hired them into Leadership Development or some sort of fast track rotational program. </p>
<p>I'm not saying that 100 ranked programs don't have students getting into these positions, but they are a minority. There are so many engineering jobs out there, but a school's reputation matters for the elite engineering jobs, and i'm sure you agree with this, since you cited CS. I also wouldn't say an IT analyst at Goldman Sachs is an ideal job for the top CS students. Goldman Sachs has 30,000+ employees, from my experience, IT department at a bank is not a prestigious job.</p>
<p>keefer/ i guess i agree with you.</p>
<p>although i do think ppl who got hired by Goldman gotta be pretty smart ppl since its gpa cut-off is so high. well, but i guess it might not be an ideal job for top CS grads like you mentioned.</p>
<p>and then just to deviate from the main topic, is being hired into LDP better than Direct Hire?</p>
<p>If you really care about ranking so much, you might as well try to get accepted to those elite engineering schools. I'm kind of curious how they ranked these schools too. It might just be higher cause of the more research output the produced a year or they have more funding?...</p>
<p>Its funny. you are trying to garner respect for purdue but the fact that you may be going there does wonders for its perception based on this thread. As I've stated before, Purdue's students do not measure up to Cornell's. What you will soon realize is the fact that your classmates make up a large part of your education. If you have smarter classmates, you will be motivated to do better due to upward comparison. Opposite might happen at a place like purdue. I still say Purdue does not compare to Cornell not just because of the ivy label. I think thats silly and its why I applied to Cornell for engineering and not harvard, yale, dartmouth (schools arguably more prestigious). Simply put, Cornell does better research than Purdue as I've been to conferences at both and have done research collaborations with purdue students. its a ****ing joke when Purdue personnel present at their own conference when there are other researchers from Cornell, MIT, Northwestern,Caltech,Stanford..etc. among others..present.</p>
<p>ele902 - actually, cornell (tied 7) is the only ivy ranked above Purdue(9) in overall undergrad engineering. uiuc is #5.</p>
<p>keefer - the Leadership Development program is exactly what i want to get into after i get my ms or phd.</p>
<p>well, i guess,</p>
<p>in the end, having the school pride is good,</p>
<p>and seriously, you will have no problem getting into that LDP w/ Purdue degree ... it's not like they handpick ppl only from MIT/ Stanford or something for LDPs.</p>
<p>You have no experience with the schools. Stop citing US News as your only source.</p>
<p>Hilariously, out here in CA, practically no one cares about the East coast schools. MIT maybe.</p>
<p>The next two biggest schools in terms of engineering prestige would be Michigan & GA Tech. I don't get the impression that a lot of people even know what is an Ivy.</p>
<p>Seriously, stop using it to convince yourself it's a school at the same league as those elite engineering schools. Each source has a different way of ranking a school. It might not even be the rigor of the programs that brought its rank up. It could have been the amount of research output or funding they received.</p>