yale for engineering

College Majors Engineering Majors
1

<p>ok.. this is my dilemma and i would really appreciate any honest answers..</p>

<p>i know yale may not be the best school for engineering but it is an amazing school in general. i am pretty sure i would want yale to be my first choice AND i am pretty sure engineering (chemical) will be my major.</p>

<p>i know that many schools are better, but yale's name is not ignorable. truly, it isn't. i would much rather go to yale than cornell (based on previous forum).. and even though i would not choose a school solely for prestige, nobody can deny TRULY.. that prestige is an important factor. </p>

<p>for graduate school, i'm planning to attend anywhere, but for undergrad, yale..
do you think i am making the right choice?
does anybody have comments on yale chem. engineering? please..</p>

2

<p>Honestly... I wouldn't choose Yale, personally, but we're not talking about a personal decision. I went to Rice because a) it had a great program, and b) I loved it there.</p>

<p>Are you considering Yale <em>just</em> for prestige, or, when you visited Yale, did you <em>love</em> it there?</p>

<p>If your answer is the former, then you're doing it for the wrong reasons and you're making the wrong choice. If you're considering Yale because you LOVE Yale, then you should go for it.</p>

<p>All things being equal, I think that the undergrad <em>experience</em> is the most important thing, and that so long as you're at a top-tier school, undergraduate programs are pretty comparable.</p>

<p>Choose an undergrad school because you love it there.</p>

3

<p>I see nothing wrong with choosing a school just for the prestige, as long as the person is honest about it and knows what he's getting into. It's no different from a guy choosing to work for a big-name company right after graduation even though he doesn't really want to do it, just because he knows that having that company's name on the resume is going to be helpful later on in his career. For example, I know a number of people taking high prestige investment banking analyst jobs at places like GS or Morgan Stanley, even though they already know that they probably won't like it, just because they know that it will be very good to have that experience on their resume for whatever it is that they want to do later on in their life. </p>

<p>Now don't get me wrong. That doesn't mean that your own personal preferences shouldn't come into play. Of course they should. But prestige and career-ism are legitimate factors. Sometimes you gotta do something you don't really like in order to later get to do things that you do like. Heck, even at MIT, there are some engineering students who don't really like it but are just gritting their teeth and bearing with it because they know that the MIT engineering degree is valuable.</p>

4

<p>suggest check # courses offered in chemical engineering.</p>

5

<p>It depends on what your philosophy is, sakky. Personally, I think "he who dies with the most toys wins" is a sucky philosophy. Life ain't a rent car. Put some miles on that vehicle, because you can't take it with you.</p>

<p>Now, if you're into the whole prestige thing and that's all you care about, whatever. I just think that's a lousy and miserable way to live. You can't always count on there <em>being</em> a "later in life," as awful and pessimistic a thought as that is... Unfortunately, that's how it goes.</p>

<p>I'm not gonna get into the philosophy of it all, but the bottom line is that if you're in it because you think that money or prestige is guaranteed to make you happy, you're sorely mistaken.</p>

6

<p>I'd rather look at it as a case of delayed gratification. You can't always do what you like. Sometimes you gotta do things you don't like. For example, I don't particularly enjoy washing the dishes (who does?), but it's gotta get done.</p>

7

<p>Choosing Yale's engineering program simply for prestige isn't such a good idea. If you love the school, that's one thing, but there are other schools out there with more prestige in the field and that offer vastly different experiences. When you're deciding between schools towards the top, you have the luxury of choosing based on environment.</p>

<p>That said, the OP said that Yale was an amazing school in general in his view, so I doubt that it's solely for prestige.</p>

8

<p>
[quote]
but there are other schools out there with more prestige in the field

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think that he was looking at the overall prestige of the school, as opposed to prestige within engineering specifically. When you're talking about overall prestige, there aren't exactly a whole lot of schools that are more prestigious than Yale. In fact, there probably is only 1 such school.</p>

9

<p>Gregofj, Yale is a prestigious school...but Yale Engineering isn't prestigious in the Engineering world. Now, if your intent is to major in Engineering but then to go into a different profession after graduation, then it probably makes no difference and the Yale name will serve you well. But if you want to enter the Engineering World, Yale will not open the doors you want. I worked at Ford and Eaton (both amjor manufacturing companies) and have recruited for Cisco. I can tell you right now, none of those companies recruit Engineers at Yale. They feel that they can get more qualified and committed Engineers at Purdue or Texas A&M, than at Yale. And if they want the brainy Engineer, they would rather get a Berkeley, MIT or Stanford grad than a Yale Engineer. Bottom line, Yale makes almost no sense for an Engineer.</p>

<p>Sakky, there is almost no difference in prestige or network power/influence among the top 20 universities and the top 10 LACs. When it comes to those schools, one should chose solely on what makes most academic and social sense. Professional success once one graduates from a top university is 100% based on work performance and not on whether somebody graduated from Harvard rather than Northwestern or Yale rather than Cornell.</p>

10

<p>I work in an engineering consulting firm and I TOTALLY second Alexandre. Sakky may have different experience but clearly his view/personal experience doesn't apply everywhere. By the way, Yale and engineering does sound like an oddball combination but that's probably just me. If I were an engineering firm recruiter, I'd take a Berkeley engineer anyday unless the Yale person has a great resume.</p>

11

<p>Don't be concerned with Yale Engineering's ranking. The whole engineering ranking thing is really bogus for an undergraduate schoool like Yale because you will have many opportunities for a successful career coming from that place, just maybe not engineering jobs. Once you become a Yalie and you have spent good effort keep up grades, you'll be almost a shoo-in for law or med school. </p>

<p>The bottom line is, if you're 100% sure you want to become an engineer, Yale probably isn't the best option. But if you want a wide range of choices after graduation, I would take Yale without a heartbeat.</p>

12

<p>
[quote]
I worked at Ford and Eaton (both amjor manufacturing companies) and have recruited for Cisco.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Funny you would say that because I strongly remember being in a meeting with some Ford executives where they basically said that they preferred recruiting at local no-name schools such as Michigan Tech and Wayne State than to recruit at a high-prestige engineering school such as MIT. In fact, they were stating that they got very little success recruiting at MIT precisely because #1, they would give out job offers but they would be declined (often times in favor of sexier tech companies or for consulting/banking), and #2, the MIT engineers who did join Ford ended up getting bored and frustrated and would quit, and in fact that is why they are strongly considering reducing recruiting at MIT, or even stopping entirely.</p>

<p>The point is, I would not be put too much weight on where these big companies recruit at. After all, companies like that don't really want the best engineers. They may say that's what they want, but that's not what they really want. What they REALLY want is a "good-enough" engineer who doesn't have high salary expectations and doesn't have a lot of other options and is willing to stay within the confines of the job itself as opposed to wanting to roam around. This is precisely why a lot of big-name traditional companies refuse to recruit engineers at MIT, because the MIT engineers ask for too much money, want sexier high-tech positions, or want a clear path to management, and a lot of companies simply don't want to give that. Hence, they would prefer to recruit at local no-name schools. For a similar reason, a lot of companies will recruit future managers at local no-name B-schools but not HBS because the HBS grads want too much money and too much power. </p>

<p>It's not about what the companies want, it's about what you want. IF you ask the companies what they really want, they would say that the would love to be able to pay all of their engineers minimum wage with no benefits while making them do all the scut work with no possibility for advancement. </p>

<p>
[quote]
They feel that they can get more qualified and committed Engineers at Purdue or Texas A&M, than at Yale.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>And again, I feel that this is more because the engineering firms know full well that to land a Yale engineer, they are almost certainly competing against consulting and banking (for which they will find the offers extremely difficult to match), but to get a Texas A&M engineer, or (especially) a Wayne State engineer, you just have to make your engineering offer competitive with other engineering offers.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Bottom line, Yale makes almost no sense for an Engineer.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>See, this is the kind of rhetoric that I disdain the most. Look. Yale engineering is ranked somewhere in the 40's-50's. That is a FANTASTIC rating, when you consider the fact that they are hundreds of engineering programs out there, most of which are no-name. So if Yale makes almost no sense for an engineer, what about all of those no-name engineering programs? Are all the engineers who came from those programs completely worthless? </p>

<p>Last time I checked, those engineers coming out of New Mexico Tech, Montana Tech, Kansas State, and places like that seemed to be doing pretty well for themselves. So if that's true, then why would the Yale engineer have so many problems? </p>

<p>
[quote]
I work in an engineering consulting firm and I TOTALLY second Alexandre. Sakky may have different experience but clearly his view/personal experience doesn't apply everywhere. By the way, Yale and engineering does sound like an oddball combination but that's probably just me. If I were an engineering firm recruiter, I'd take a Berkeley engineer anyday unless the Yale person has a great resume.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, see above. If the engineers coming out of New Mexico Tech (a school I had never even heard of until a few months ago), are doing just fine, then why is it so bad to get an engineering degree from Yale. I think few people would dispute the notion that Yale engineering is better than New Mexico Tech engineering. </p>

<p>
[quote]
If I were an engineering firm recruiter, I'd take a Berkeley engineer anyday unless the Yale person has a great resume.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Look, the truth is, engineering undergrad programs are basically the same. That's why there isn't that much difference between the engineering salaries earned by the Berkeley engineers and that of, say, the San Jose State engineer. What that indicates is that either the undergrad engineering curriculums are basically the same, or even if they are substantially different, employers don't place much value on the difference. </p>

<p>Compare the salaries earned by engineers from Berkeley vs. the ones coming out of San Jose State. The differences are not large. SJSU engineers seem to be doing quite decently.</p>

<p><a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm#salary%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm#salary&lt;/a>
<a href="http://careercenter.sjsu.edu/download/SJSU%20NACESalary%20Survey%2004%2005.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://careercenter.sjsu.edu/download/SJSU%20NACESalary%20Survey%2004%2005.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>It's hard to imagine that the Yale engineers are going to be any worse off than the engineers coming out of San Jose State, or Montana Tech, or any schools like that. </p>

<p>
[quote]
The bottom line is, if you're 100% sure you want to become an engineer, Yale probably isn't the best option.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think this is the true heart of the matter. The fact is, even many of the elite engineers don't really want to be engineers. For example, course 6 (EECS) is considered to be the 'premier' flagship engineering discipline at MIT. And yet even from course 6, about 25% of the undergrads end up in banking or consulting.</p>

<p>"around a quarter go into investment banking and other financial or management consulting"</p>

<p><a href="http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2008/choiceofmajor/courses/course6.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://web.mit.edu/firstyear/2008/choiceofmajor/courses/course6.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And that doesn't even include those EECS students who intended to get into banking/consulting, but didn't get an offer. I would say that anecdotally, for every one person who gets into banking/consulting, there is at least one other person who tried to get in, but were unsuccessful. You would think that there were any truly dedicated engineers in the world, they would be the MIT EECS students. But apparently not. </p>

<p>The point is, plenty of people who intend to get into engineering end up switching out of it, and even of those who complete their engineering degrees, plenty of them never take an engineering job. Hence, turning down Yale for, say, Purdue, is I would say tremendously risky, because what if you find out that you do that and then find out you don't want to be an engineer?</p>

13

<p>" I feel that this is more because the engineering firms know full well that to land a Yale engineer, they are almost certainly competing against consulting and banking "</p>

<p>.. yeah that (but then MIT??) .Or perhaps it's because they don't even realize Yale has an engineering school. Perhaps few of them have ever even come across a Yale engineering graduate looking for an engineering job. Just a guess.</p>

<p>"...if Yale makes almost no sense for an engineer, what about all of those no-name engineering programs? "</p>

<p>It's very possible that a good number of these programs probably provide more comprehensive training in engineering practice than Yale does, and their graduates are more recognized by engineering employers in their regions. For one, Kansas State University has a highly respected program in its part of the midwest. I worked with several grads of that program. Employers looking for engineering talent in their regions will probably visit those campuses for talent. They will not visit Yale.</p>

<p>"..the truth is, engineering undergrad programs are basically the same."</p>

<p>I doubt I view this "truth" the same way you seem to.
Their core courses are probably mostly the same. But the amount of majors and electives available for junior and senior year students may be significantly different. The breadth of offerings are probably very similar among the "real" comprehensive engineering programs. But the little boutique-y "engineering science" programs, some of which don't provide degrees in the specialized areas of engineering, may or may not have significant amounts of upper-level courses in various sub-areas of engineering. Which means if you go to these places you may not be exposed to these fields in depth, or to a great extent. So you may never know you are interested in a particular area. Or, if you are, you may not be able to pursue it. I would guess there are whole areas of engineering practice that some of these places don't even have.</p>

<p>"Yale engineering is ranked somewhere in the 40's-50's." Personally I doubt this ranking has much to do with factors relevant to students who want to become practicing engineers. Just my guess.</p>

14

<p>"..the truth is, engineering undergrad programs are basically the same."
-part 2 -</p>

<p>Another distinguishing feature among undergraduate engineering programs is the availability of a so-called "co-op program" - a work-study program that provides engineering students with real-life work experience while they are still in college. I know Cornell offers this, and I believe MIT does as well. I don't know who else does or doesn't, but not everyone does. It is extremely useful experience to have in informing one's selection of upperclass electives and design projects. Also gives many a leg up on job offers.</p>

<p>The availability and types of design projects available to upperclassmen may vary among colleges as well, I would think.</p>

<p>But the main distinguishing feature, to me, is the availability of majors and advanced level courses in the various sub-specialties of engineering. It could be that, if exposed to environmental engineering (just to pick something) early on you might wind up being turned on to envirnonmental engineering, and it could become your life's work. Even though you knew nothing about it before you started engineering school. But if you go to a boutique-y program that really only has many advanced electives in, say, electrical engineering- and not even comprehensive electrical engineering, but just those aspects that relate to computer science, say- well then you'll never really know about these other things.</p>

15

<p>
[quote]
yeah that (but then MIT??)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Which gets back to a point I have been making a lot on CC, which is that a lot of people who study engineering don't really want to be engineers. Not even the guys at MIT, and you would think that if any school's students would be dedicated to engineering, it would be them. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Or perhaps it's because they don't even realize Yale has an engineering school. Perhaps few of them have ever even come across a Yale engineering graduate looking for an engineering job. Just a guess

[/quote]
</p>

<p>It can't be any worse than some schools who I haven't even heard of. For example, again, I didn't even know that New Mexico Tech even existed until a few months ago. </p>

<p>
[quote]
It's very possible that a good number of these programs probably provide more comprehensive training in engineering practice than Yale does, and their graduates are more recognized by engineering employers in their regions. For one, Kansas State University has a highly respected program in its part of the midwest. I worked with several grads of that program. Employers looking for engineering talent in their regions will probably visit those campuses for talent. They will not visit Yale.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I think it's more for the same reason why Ford is recruiting many more students at Wayne State and is starting to cut back at MIT, and in fact, in a few years, may no longer recruit at MIT at all. And in fact, many of the large, but unsexy manufacturing companies in the world will not recruit at MIT. Like I said, many employers aren't really interested in hiring the smartest people, they're interested in hiring people who are good enough and for whom they don't have to compete with other glamorous employers to get and who won't get bored with the jobs they are trying to fill. Why buy a Lexus when a simple Chevy will do? </p>

<p>I would venture to say that Yale has a pretty darn respectable engineering program within the niche that it occupies. As good as MIT? Again, of course not. But far more respectable than a lot of other engineering schools. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Their core courses are probably mostly the same. But the amount of majors and electives available for junior and senior year students may be significantly different. The breadth of offerings are probably very similar among the "real" comprehensive engineering programs. But the little boutique-y "engineering science" programs, some of which don't provide degrees in the specialized areas of engineering, may or may not have significant amounts of upper-level courses in various sub-areas of engineering. Which means if you go to these places you may not be exposed to these fields in depth, or to a great extent. So you may never know you are interested in a particular area. Or, if you are, you may not be able to pursue it. I would guess there are whole areas of engineering practice that some of these places don't even have.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>
[quote]
But the main distinguishing feature, to me, is the availability of majors and advanced level courses in the various sub-specialties of engineering. It could be that, if exposed to environmental engineering (just to pick something) early on you might wind up being turned on to envirnonmental engineering, and it could become your life's work. Even though you knew nothing about it before you started engineering school. But if you go to a boutique-y program that really only has many advanced electives in, say, electrical engineering- and not even comprehensive electrical engineering, but just those aspects that relate to computer science, say- well then you'll never really know about these other things.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>So what you're really indicting is not just Yale specifically, but rather small 'boutique'-style engineering programs in general. Like Harvey-Mudd, which I would consider to be something of a boutique, and for which you can't get a specialized degree in an engineering subfield (rather, you just get a general degree in engineering). Like the engineering programs at the LAC's like Swarthmore. I see Yale engineering as no worse than any of these LAC-style engineering programs.</p>

<p>Besides, if the ability to choose and to switch around in majors is a problem, then I would posit that significant problems exist in many of the large state engineering programs. Take Berkeley as an example. At Berkeley, students are admitted into the engineering program by a specific engineering major, and switches in major are not trivial. At Yale, anybody is free to major in whatever they want, and switch around and pursue whatever they want. At Berkeley engineering, not so. You have to pursue whatever major that you got admitted into. If you find out that you like some other kind of engineering discipline more and you want to switch over, it's not automatic. You have to apply to switch over, and depending on the demand, you stand a good chance of being denied. Some engineering majors at Berkeley almost always deny switch-in petitions. So you might you come in as a mechanical engineering student and then discover that you like EECS more, so you apply to switch over, and get denied. </p>

<p>The upshot is that at Yale, you are free to shop around, trying on different majors and different engineering subfields. At Berkeley, before you've even been admitted to the school, you have to declare what engineering major you want to be in, with few opportunities to switch around later. So really, at the end of the day, who REALLY has more room to explore and roam and discover what they really like, the Yale engineer or the Berkeley engineer? This is an example of the supposed choice of certain large engineering programs being far less than meets the eye. Who really cares if your school provides a wide range of majors if you're not allowed to declare the major you want? </p>

<p>
[quote]
Personally I doubt this ranking has much to do with factors relevant to students who want to become practicing engineers. Just my guess.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>That doesn't take away from the fact that there are numerous no-name engineering programs that don't even have the breadth of resources, the faculty, or the student quality that Yale engineering has.</p>

16

<p>Sakky, I am not sure who told you that Ford recruits at Michigan Tech and Wayne State. I have yet to see Ford send anybody to recruit at either one of those campuses. Ford may hire some Wayne State and Michigan Tech Engineers, but almost never with the intent of having them be more than just entry level workers. Of course, if they should be brilliant and shine, they can rise in the ranks, but Ford is actually very choosy as to where they recruit their FCGs (Ford's 4-5 year development program for recent college and graduate school graduates). The main hunting ground for FCG Engineers at Ford are Michigan, Purdue, Cornell, UIUC, Carnegie Mellon and Northwestern. Those are all top Engineering programs, especially in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering. </p>

<p>And I must disagree with you on your point that there isn't much of a drop-off between the top 7 or 8 Engineering schools (like Cal or Cornell) and an Engineering program that isn't ranked in the top 40 (like Yale). In a very widespread and relatively low-maintenance field such as English or History, I can see how one can say that there isn't much of a difference between the top 10 and the top 50. There are probably over 50 excellent English or History programs out there. But as it is, only a few universities have real Engineering programs and the difference between a top 10 Engineering program like Cornell and an Engineering program that isn't even ranked among the top 30 is actually significant. Let us face it, only very pretentious or completely ignorant people think more highly of Yale than they do of Cal or Cornell. Anybody worth anything would think of those three school as peers. So unless the OP truly loves Yale beyond compare, I cannot see how chosing Yale over Cornell for an Engineering major can possibly make sense.</p>

<p>Like I said, if the OP's interest in Engineering is purely theoretical and he intends on going to Medical School or Law school right after graduation, Yale works great. But he is an Engineer at heart and wants to seriousaly explore Engineering academically and later on porfessionally, Yale is not worh the effort. </p>

<p>There is no reason for disdaining my rhetoric Sakky. The reason I do not recommend Engineering majors even bother with Yale is because they only have a limited number of applications that they can fill. Wasting the time, effort and money to apply to Yale when they could apply to Princeton or Cornell instead simply doesn't add up.</p>

17

<p>
[quote]
Sakky, I am not sure who told you that Ford recruits at Michigan Tech and Wayne State. I have yet to see Ford send anybody to recruit at either one of those campuses

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Check out who is recruiting for on-campus interviews on 2/15</p>

<p><a href="http://www.stuaffrs.wayne.edu/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stuaffrs.wayne.edu/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>
[quote]
Ford may hire some Wayne State and Michigan Tech Engineers, but almost never with the intent of having them be more than just entry level workers. Of course, if they should be brilliant and shine, they can rise in the ranks, but Ford is actually very choosy as to where they recruit their FCGs (Ford's 4-5 year development program for recent college and graduate school graduates). The main hunting ground for FCG Engineers at Ford are Michigan, Purdue, Cornell, UIUC, Carnegie Mellon and Northwestern. Those are all top Engineering programs, especially in Mechanical and Electrical Engineering.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yet check out who Ford is 'touting' as examples of some of its 'model' recruits.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.mycareer.ford.com/ONTHETEAM.ASP?CID=20%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mycareer.ford.com/ONTHETEAM.ASP?CID=20&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>This is what I got from the list. There are about 27 Wayne State grads listed on that page, and about 10 Michigan Tech grads. That compares extremely favorably with the roughly 45 UM-Ann Arbor grads, the roughly 13 UIUC, the 2 (yes, only 2) listed Northwestern, about 7 Purdue grads, 3 CMU grads, and zero Cornell grads, especially when you compare the size of Wayne State and Michigan Tech to some of those other schools. </p>

<p>Now I don't claim that this list is a representative sample. Rather, this is simply a list that is constructed by Ford's PR staff. And yes, some of them aren't engineers (i.e. some are MBA's, but this seems to be true of both Wayne State/Michigan Tech grads and grads of the other schools). However, the point is that Wayne State and Michigan Tech seem to be pretty well represented, at least when it comes to who the Ford PR staff wants to tout as examples of 'model' employees.</p>

<p>Furthermore, take a gander at all of those Wayne State and Michigan Tech engineers who got invited to FCG. It seems like quite a few of them did. </p>

<p>
[quote]
And I must disagree with you on your point that there isn't much of a drop-off between the top 7 or 8 Engineering schools (like Cal or Cornell) and an Engineering program that isn't ranked in the top 40 (like Yale). In a very widespread and relatively low-maintenance field such as English or History, I can see how one can say that there isn't much of a difference between the top 10 and the top 50. There are probably over 50 excellent English or History programs out there. But as it is, only a few universities have real Engineering programs and the difference between a top 10 Engineering program like Cornell and an Engineering program that isn't even ranked among the top 30 is actually significant. Let us face it, only very pretentious or completely ignorant people think more highly of Yale than they do of Cal or Cornell. Anybody worth anything would think of those three school as peers. So unless the OP truly loves Yale beyond compare, I cannot see how chosing Yale over Cornell for an Engineering major can possibly make sense.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I am saying that there is not a huge dropoff for the simple reason that salaries don't really drop off. Let's face it. Even engineers from no-name schools get salaries that are not significantly different from engineers from the top schools. </p>

<p>For example, consider the salaries from a school like New Mexico Tech, a school I had never even heard of until a few months ago.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.nmt.edu/about/facts/grad_salaries.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.nmt.edu/about/facts/grad_salaries.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Or how about Montana Tech?</p>

<p><a href="http://www.mtech.edu/career/Grad%20Statistics.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.mtech.edu/career/Grad%20Statistics.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Compare that to the kinds of salaries that engineers from an indisputably elite engineering school like Berkeley make. You will notice that it's basically the same, once you adjust for geography.</p>

<p><a href="http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://career.berkeley.edu/CarDest/2004Majors.stm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>The point is, engineering salaries tend to be pretty much the same whether you go to a famous engineering program or a no-name one. The differences are slight. That is why I say that there is little dropoff in engineering programs. </p>

<p>I do agree that high-prestige engineering programs are more likely to get you into high-prestige engineering companies. But if those high-prestige engineering companies are not willing to pay those top grads more, then, honestly, who cares? Somebody out there is paying those New Mexico Tech and Montana Tech grads pretty well. Sure, they might be no-name companies. But if they are paying those engineers, then who cares if they are no-name companies? </p>

<p>I also agree that the major banks and consulting firms care a lot about engineering quality. However, the fact is, we all know that the major banks and consulting firms are coming to Yale. So the Yale engineers are not hurting in that respect. They can just utilize normal recruiting. I think we can clearly agree that you are far more likely to get into McKinsey by getting a Yale engineering degree than getting a Purdue engineering degree.</p>

<p>
[quote]
So unless the OP truly loves Yale beyond compare, I cannot see how chosing Yale over Cornell for an Engineering major can possibly make sense.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I would couch it in terms of a person who isn't that sure about engineering. After all, as I'm sure you know, plenty of people (in fact, probably the majority) end up switching out of engineering. And even of those that stay and graduate with an engineering degree, plenty of them, especially from the elite schools, will never work as engineers. Hence, the chances of somebody as a freshman who says that he wants to be an engineer actually ever working as an engineer are actually quite small. </p>

<p>If you choose Yale over Cornell, and you eventually choose engineering, honestly, what have you really lost? Like I said, even the New Mexico Tech engineers are getting pretty decently paying engineering jobs. So how much have you really lost by choosing Yale over Cornell? About the only thing that I can see is that maybe you lost your chance to work as an engineer for a high-prestige engineering company like Microsoft or Google. Maybe. But so what? The truth is, those companies evidently don't pay significantly more than the no-name engineering companies do. On the other hand, you may have arguably enhanced your chances of getting into a bank or consulting firm, which it seems as if a lot of Yale grads (regardless of major) end up doing. </p>

<p>
[quote]
But he is an Engineer at heart and wants to seriousaly explore Engineering academically and later on porfessionally, Yale is not worh the effort.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Like I pointed out, even a lot of MIT engineering students are not engineers at heart. Hence their attraction to the siren song of banking and consultling.</p>

<p>
[quote]
There is no reason for disdaining my rhetoric Sakky. The reason I do not recommend Engineering majors even bother with Yale is because they only have a limited number of applications that they can fill. Wasting the time, effort and money to apply to Yale when they could apply to Princeton or Cornell instead simply doesn't add up.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>To follow that logic, you might as well simply not bother to waste the time and effort to apply to Princeton or Cornell either, and just apply to only one school - MIT. You apply to a range of schools to maximize your chances of getting into at least one. There are plenty of people who get into Yale but not Princeton. I'm sure there are even people who get into Yale but not Cornell engineering. I know a person who applied to all of HYPSMC, and got rejected by every one of them except for Harvard. The point is, admissions is fickle. When you're talking about schools like that, you just don't know who exactly is going to admit you or not.</p>

18

<p>Sakky, don't you ever sleep dude?! LOL Anyway, Ford will hire many employees from Michigan, but it does not recruit heavily at most of those universities. Most students at Wayne State and Michigan Tech have Detroit connections. Wayne State is huge, with well over 25,000 students. But if you look closely, you will see that most of those who came in at a high level come from top Engineering programs, like Penn State, Ohio State, MIT, Stanford, Cal, Columbia, CMU, Michigan, UIUC, Purdue, UT-Austin etc... Most of the employees from other universities were brought in at lower levels and rose in the ranks over the years. Look at the sample you have provided us. There are 360 "model" Ford employees. Of those, 103 attended Fiske ***** universities. </p>

<p>Carnegie Mellon University (2)
Columbia University (4)
Duke University (1)
Georgetown University (1)
Harvard University (1)
Massachusetts Institute of Technology (4)
Northwestern University (2)
Stanford University (3)
University of California-Berkeley (4)
University of Chicago (1)
University of Illinois-Urbana Champaign (12)
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (44)
University of Notre Dame (4)
University of Pennsylvania (1)
University of Texas-Austin (8)
University of Virginia (2)
University of Wisconsin-Madison (8)</p>

<p>Another 100 or so attended decent schools like Penn State, Ohio State, Michigan State, Indiana, Purdue, Texas A&M, NYU, USC, George Washington etc...</p>

<p>But as we both know, many of those aren't even Engineers. Many of them are MBAs and many others work in various different departments.</p>

19

<p>"If you choose Yale over Cornell, and you eventually choose engineering, honestly, what have you really lost?"</p>

<p>I haven't examined Yale's program, but potentially:</p>

<p>You may have lost the opportunity to fully explore the myriad varied sub-areas within the broad field of engineering. </p>

<p>You may have lost exposure to what would have been your true calling.</p>

<p>You may have lost the ability to pursue a particular area that you become passionate about, as your interests develop. because they don't offer it. Or , even if they do, not at an advanced level.</p>

<p>You may also have lost the opportunity to get early exposure to engineering practice via a coop program.</p>

<p>You may have lost the convenience of significant on-campus recruiting for engineering jobs, and the wide exposure to available companies and jobs that are out there that substantial on-campus engineering recruiting programs provide.</p>

<p>Once again, I say potentially. I haven't looked at Yale's program, breadth/ depth of engineering offerings, on-campus engineering recruiting, etc.</p>

20

<p>Sakky: Montana Tech, formerly the Montana School of Mines, has been nationally known for decades as a school with top programs in geology, mining engineering and chemical engineering. Now part of the University of Montana it has a broader engineering program. New Mexico Tech, while not known to you, was formerly called the New Mexico School of Mines, and has long had a fine local reputation. The Colorado School of Mines, also with a long-held national reputation, still has that name.</p>

<p>Many large companies recruit or hire locally in large quantities not because they want engineers (and other employees) who will be content to stay in a dull boring job without pushing for advancement but because they are looking for employees who already have ties to, and like, the geographical area and are thus less likley to leave for different parts of the country.</p>