<p>I was recently accepted and will be attending the 3-2 program at Columbia. Before recently i hadn't really looked online about it since now i wanted to get a sense of my life for the next 2 years. I haven't found that much but what i have found is tons of criticism on the 3-2 programs. </p>
<p>Anybody have any concrete stats/reasons why? Most of the reasons i have seen are just pure opinion based as like why leave after 3 years, or dont apply to me such as most who try dont follow through</p>
<p>The biggest obstacle you’ll face is integrating into a group that has already been together for two years. They’ll be going full Columbia speed, while you’ll be adapting to the change. make sure you hunt down some old exams from the classes they just finished to make sure your ready to join them. If not, back fill over the summer. As has been previously said, you’ll make it the best it can be for you. Good luck!</p>
<p>Good for you, but realize that you, as one who is transferring to a “2” school, are an outlier compared to all of the college frosh to enter college intending to do 3+2 programs.</p>
<p>If you’ve already gotten this far, I personally don’t see any problem.
The biggest problem I see with the program is the high GPA you are required to maintain. 3.5 in engineering, which I believe is a requirement, is beyond most people - you are on track to graduate with honors if you can maintain that. Statistically, it doesn’t make sense to depend on that.</p>
<p>Overall statistics don’t apply to everyone, of course. That being said, better safe than sorry. If you already got this far, then you’re fine.</p>
<p>I really don’t understand the question. It’s not that folks “hate” 3-2 programs. It’s simply been demonstrated that many kids enter such programs and subsequently change their minds. Moreover, as a practical matter, having two bachelor degrees, say one Science and one Engineering, may be of no benefit when you can earn an M.S.E. in less than two years. A master’s in engineering carries more weight with employers than a second B.S. Also, the obvious drawbacks to 3-2 programs is that new transfer students are not guaranteed financial aid at the target school (this may not affect you). One more thing; are you saying that you have already been accepted by Columbia engineering school?</p>
<p>“Hate” might be too strong a word; “dislike” might be better.</p>
<p>My son looked into a 2+3 program but I discouraged him from considering it. He knew he wanted to be an engineer and my thought was why wait to get started.</p>
<p>My concerns about a 2+3 program are the typical ones that most people have and they would be:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>The cost of 5 years of school. </p></li>
<li><p>The second BS/BA degree doesn’t amount to much from the point of view of potential engineering employers. You are required to take enough non-engineering general requirements within a typical engineering program to satisfy most people’s other interests.</p></li>
<li><p>You don’t really get started with your engineering program until you’ve put 2 years into college. A typical engineering program entails starting with seminar type engineering classes your freshman year. You start to get a feel of what engineering is about, something that you don’t get in high school. The are many students that start in engineering and find that they don’t do as well in it as they thought they were going to or just don’t like it. In a 2+3 program, that realization (if is it to occur) would not be evident until the end of your third year. Switching majors at that point is kind of late in your college experience (read time consuming and costly).</p></li>
</ol>
<p>I would turn the question around and ask you what you found appealing about the 2+3 program?</p>
<p>to answer the various questions that came up; yes i have been accepted into Columbia’s Fu SEAS and I will be matriculating there this coming fall. </p>
<p>To answer @HPuck first its 3-2 not 2-3, also what I found it appealing is that although you say that you take enough non-tech courses, I am willing to say that I have taken much more than most engineering students would ever take my 3 years at my LAC. I was somewhat close to even double majoring in areas such as history and philosophy just on the basis of my other classes taken. And for your second point, do you have any information/numbers about this statement? I am curious
Also FYI, in response to 3 thats how it is in most engineering schools too I believe, at Columbia the first two years are spent taking the basic math/physics classes no real engineering classes yet.</p>
<p>I agree with HPuck’s point 2. There is so much for an engineering student to learn that an employer would prefer to see more technical classes. I don’t care if someone gets another degree in some other field!</p>
<p>I am not a big fan for reasons above and my comments in other threads. But If the arrangement work for you and your parent (paying for 5 years), then pay us no heed. </p>
<p>yeah but its not like you major in english and go on to study EE in engineering schools, transitions like that just are very unlikely to occur, the two degrees are most likely in very related fields</p>
<p>In many 3+2 programs, the “3” school limits the student’s major there to something like physics, chemistry, or math. But some “3” schools allow the student to choose any major there, as long as s/he includes the engineering preparation courses.</p>
<p>I hate it because it’s a whopping 5 years. i would do engineering if I really want to do it and then go to columbia or such places for my masters. and not to mention the new social surroundings. </p>
<p>^^ kind of confused at those 2 statements…if Columbia engineering is not considered a marquee engineering school then shouldnt the admissions be more of a cakewalk? </p>
<p>Admissions standards and program quality don’t always correlate very well. In fact, they often don’t for engineering. Sure, you have the Caltechs of the world where it correlates, but then you also have all of the Ivies not named Cornell or Princeton (though several are still good in several specific engineering departments, just not generally across the board).</p>
<p>What I’m afraid that you might find is that the next two years are going to be brutal because you will squeeze difficult material into two years that most schools cover in three. </p>
<p>Like others have said, the issue with most 3-2 programs is that few people complete them whether because of money or because it’s too hard. You seem like you have the determination to do so. Just don’t underestimate how hard it’s going to be. </p>
<p>I think that if you do well, you will have an enviable education. </p>