right arrow
Examples: Monday, today, last week, Mar 26, 3/26/04

Engineering Admission Statistics 2018

GreymeerGreymeer 758 replies11 threadsRegistered User Member
The following 2018 fall stats are from the ASEE site. I have picked out the most common schools talked about on CC.

They are listed in the order of admission rate into engineering.

Note: Stanford, Harvard and U Florida did not provide complete stats.

Column Definitions:
School - university name
Admit rate - admission rate
SAT Avg - SAT average for engineering
Dif - difficulty of admission compared to other schools listed (1 being most difficult). This is based on SAT scores and admit rate.
#eng ugrad - number of enrolled ugrad engineering students (not including CS).
#eng applicants - number of applications for engineering received.
school    admit rate    sat avg    dif admit rank    #eng ugrad    #eng applicants
===================================================================
Harvard    4.5    1515    2    580    unk
Stanford University     5.1    1475    7    2702    unk
Columbia University    5.9    1510    4    1235    9465
Princeton University    5.9    1450    10    1059    8102
Yale    6.4    1505    7    279    6959
California Institute of Technology    6.6    1545    1    218    8208
Massachusetts Institute of Technology    6.7    1535    3    1253    21706
University of Pennsylvania    7.2    1525    4    1424    10710
Northwestern University    7.7    1445    16    1475    10433
Duke University    7.9    1535    4    866    8938
Dartmouth College    8    1490    14    387    3300
Brown University    8    1485    15    503    3176
Cornell University    9.5    1445    18    2920    13225
Carnegie Mellon University    10.9    1510    10    977    10374
University of California, Berkeley    11    1455    17    2638    25204
The Johns Hopkins University    11.5    1520    9    1448    9371
University of California, Los Angeles    11.5    1515    10    3040    26000
University of Southern California    11.5    1445    20    2124    13284
Harvey Mudd College    14.5    1525    10    577    4101
Georgia Institute of Technology    18    1460    19    6170    27250
University of Michigan    18.9    1423.75    24    4829    17659
University of California, San Diego    21.4    1310    40    4350    23388
California Polytechnic State University, San Luis Obispo    23.5    1400    26    5499    19624
Lehigh University    24.3    1395    27    1699    6041
The University of Texas at Austin    25.7    1450    22    4215    14513
Northeastern University    26.9    1475    21    2099    10273
The Pennsylvania State University    26.9    1195    51    7577    4698
Case Western Reserve University    29.3    1420    25    1251    unk
University of Virginia    30    1455    23    1694    6697
University of California, Davis    32.6    1320    45    2546    18718
University of Minnesota -Twin Cities    33.2    1360    36    3334    14457
NYU Tandon School of Engineering     33.3    1405    29    1434    6861
University of Florida    36.6    1395    31    5392    unk
Baylor University    38.4    1310    50    644    3881
University of Maryland, College Park    40    1440    27    1628    5834
Stevens Institute of Technology    41.9    1405    30    2126    6663
Stony Brook University    43    1390    36    2537    8752
University of Colorado Boulder     43    1375    39    2076    8970
The Ohio State University    43.1    1395    33    5953    10563
Worcester Polytechnic Institute    43.4    1375    40    2376    7168
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign    44.3    1345    49    7184    15016
North Carolina State University    48.4    1395    36    5303    8552
Rensselaer Polytechnic Institute    48.6    1430    31    2605    9751
Colorado School of Mines    49.2    1370    45    4165    12661
Purdue University    51.7    1405    34    7248    18901
University of Wisconsin-Madison    52.5    1415    34    2976    7363
Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State University    53    1370    48    6902    9758
University of Central Florida    55    1350    52    5836    8100
University of Georgia    55.5    1344    53    2007    2723
Rochester Institute of Technology    57.9    1340    56    2522    6138
Illinois Institute of Technology    60.2    1253.75    59    0    2296
University of Pittsburgh    60.5    1395    45    2521    4711
University of Washington in Seattle    61    1400    44    4163    11275
Rutgers    62.5    1420    40    3043    9442
Clemson University    65.5    1355    55    4621    6709
Rose-Hulman Institute of Technology    68.2    1365    53    1598    4471
The University of Alabama    68.5    1350    57    4569    4813
Arizona State University    72    1295    61    8231    8925
The University of Texas at Dallas    74.6    1350    58    2757    5128
University of South Carolina    76    1062.5    69    2550    3792
Michigan State University    77.8    1270    64    4571    6054
Louisiana State University    78.1    1240    66    4398    4034
Drexel University    79.7    1325    60    2544    8357
University of Arizona    80.2    1320    62    2159    2400
University of Arkansas    81    1232.5    70    2821    2649
Auburn University    82.6    1285    67    4347    4134
Texas A&M University    85    1335    62    11143    10519
University of Oklahoma    85.4    1305    67    2864    2917
The University of Alabama in Huntsville    87.1    1232.5    71    1692    1755
Iowa State University    95.9    1168.75    72    6725    5329
University of Tennessee, Knoxville    97.5    1508.75    40    2882    2572
University of Houston     97.8    1335    65    1429    1858

31 replies
· Reply · Share
«1

Replies to: Engineering Admission Statistics 2018

  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    edited September 6
    Northwestern’s 25th percentile is already at 1440 for the entire school. There’s no way the correct SAT average is only 1445.
    There’s also no way UCLA’s SAT is so much higher than UC Berkeley’s when UC Berkeley should have a slightly higher score instead.

    There are definitely errors, if not a ton, in the data.
    edited September 6
    · Reply · Share
  • 1NJParent1NJParent 1253 replies33 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    ^You can't add the two 25th percentiles from Northwestern's CDS together for the combined 25th percentile. At Northwestern, some high math scorers likely had relatively low RW scores, and vice versa.
    · Reply · Share
  • cshell2cshell2 404 replies5 threadsRegistered User Member
    The only school I know the stats on from this list is Minnesota - Twin Cities and 1360 seemed really low because I know the average ACT is 32. I looked at the school's freshman characteristics data for incoming 2018 class and only 2 of 1152 admitted freshman in CSE reported an SAT score at all, compared to 1007 ACT scores.
    · Reply · Share
  • MaineLonghornMaineLonghorn 38084 replies2086 threadsSuper Moderator Super Moderator
    So weird to think that I was in Honors Engineering at UT-Austin but my SAT score was below the average today!
    · Reply · Share
  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    edited September 6
    @1NJParent
    I wasn’t adding anything. Please do not assume. That’s the 25th percentile from Northwestern website (1440-1550). I know enough about engineering and college in general to spot irregularities. Northwestern ug engineering was ranked 13th in USN. Maybe I should add that its SAT shouldn’t be lower than Northeastern.

    Princeton’s scores are always comparable to HY but somehow the one listed here is over 60 points lower than HY even when its engineering school is superior to HY.



    edited September 6
    · Reply · Share
  • sushirittosushiritto 3843 replies9 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    I'm a little confused with UMich.

    The above table states that UMich median SAT is 1,424. The UMich Engineering website would support that listing 1,420 as the median SAT. But the median ACT is listed as 34, which concords to a 1,500 SAT. The SAT middle 50% for entire class, per the admissions profile, was 1,380-1,540. You would think the median SAT score for the CoE would be higher range. Higher than 1,424. Maybe it's because CS is pulled out of the CoE stats?
    · Reply · Share
  • CU123CU123 3537 replies65 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    Uh oh looks like we have bad data here. Shame on ASEE, you think they would know better.
    · Reply · Share
  • GreymeerGreymeer 758 replies11 threadsRegistered User Member
    I think some schools list admited scores not necessarily enrolled scores.

    An ACT score is a range of SAT scores. For instance a 35 ACT is 1490 to 1580. What to use? People opt for the score that makes them look better.
    · Reply · Share
  • sushirittosushiritto 3843 replies9 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    Greymeer wrote: »
    An ACT score is a range of SAT scores. For instance a 35 ACT is 1490 to 1580. What to use? People opt for the score that makes them look better.

    An ACT score of 35 concords to a 1,530-1,560. And the CB table states to use 1,540, if one SAT score is needed.

    https://collegereadiness.collegeboard.org/pdf/guide-2018-act-sat-concordance.pdf
    · Reply · Share
  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    edited September 7
    @Greymeer

    I agree enrolled vs admitted would be one source of error. I also think some of the scores represent those for the entire colleges rather than colleges of engineering. But still some irregularities don’t seem to be explained by these two factors. For example, given Princeton’s yield, I don’t expect much difference between scores for admitted vs enrolled. I also don’t expect the difference between its overall average vs engineering would be significant. So these two things wouldn’t explain why its score is 60 points lower than HY and a dozen other schools not even in the top 20! There’s no way UCLA’s score is 1515, even for admitted engineering students.
    edited September 7
    · Reply · Share
  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    Years ago, Northwestern’s engineering used to publish its average SAT on its website and it was 1460 back then (probably about 10 years ago). Since then, its mid-50 percentile range has increased while its admit rate has gone down (~30% to 8%). The score should be higher now, instead of what’s shown on this list.
    · Reply · Share
  • tk21769tk21769 10641 replies27 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    It's not surprising to see many questions about the numbers as well as possible irregularities. The closest thing to an authoritative source for admission data is the CDS, which does not report either aggregate SAT averages or break-outs for engineering admissions. So where does the ASEE get these numbers and how, exactly, are they calculated? If they come directly from each school, what reporting standards apply? The CDS at least provides more-or-less specific instructions for many sections, but even then, many questions arise about reported data.

    But maybe the ASEE explains all of this somewhere?
    · Reply · Share
  • 1NJParent1NJParent 1253 replies33 threadsRegistered User Senior Member
    With proliferation of options (SAT vs ACT vs neither, single sitting vs SuperScoring, admitted vs enrolled, etc.), there isn't much consistency in reporting. Colleges are likely to report numbers in ways that make them look better. ASEE isn't alone not verifying the numbers from colleges. No one, including all the ranking publications, does.
    · Reply · Share
  • firmament2xfirmament2x 253 replies0 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    Thank you @Greymeer for your work.

    @IWannaHelp . . . you’re not helping, lol…
    There’s also no way UCLA’s SAT is so much higher than UC Berkeley’s when UC Berkeley should have a slightly higher score instead.
    I think some schools list admited scores not necessarily enrolled scores.
    There’s no way UCLA’s score is 1515, even for admitted engineering students.

    Actually, IWannaHelp, I think you should be questioning the veracity of the other colleges’ SAT scores because UCLA’s should be correct. I agree that Berkeley’s would seem a bit low, because it should be in the 1,500s. UCLA makes a point to seek high scorers through separate admissions because of the rigor within its (and of course all other colleges’) E majors.

    It looks like ~ 3,000 undergrad E majors sounds about right because the total with CS is close to 4,000, with ~ 800-900 Computer Science majors – CS is housed in E at UCLA. And I believe that UCSD’s 4,350 is about right with it having ~ 1,300-1,400 CS majors, totaling ~ 6,000 undergrad E and CS majors. UCLA also has an unrecorded subset wrt the ASEE who take a Specialization in Computing program who become software specialists, through Letters and Science, specifically the Math Department.

    Additionally, the 1,515 would doubtlessly be a median, not a mean. This is because a median SAT score will either end in a 0 or a 5. Please note, @sushiritto in your #6. The chances are fairly small that they would end in a "5" because there would have to be a switch in scores by 10 points right at the median splitting the scores of the one above with one below it.

    In addition to the addition above, I looked at some prior conversation on College Confidential and saw that the admitted class for E majors to UCLA in the 2018-19 year had these qualifications at the median: 4.00/4.59/1,540 for uwgpa/wgpa/SAT. So a diminution of 25 SAT points sounds about right for those who’ve enrolled. Since a 3.93 gpa at UCLA for enrolled descends to the 38th percentile, I would suspect that the 4.0 would hold for those who enrolled.

    I will ask the author of the post above who's an EE major at UCLA if he would be willing to have some input in this thread.

    · Reply · Share
  • firmament2xfirmament2x 253 replies0 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    Additions and correction to my second to last paragraph, last sentence: Since a 3.93 gpa at UCLA for all enrolled freshmen in 2018-19 descend[ed] to the 38th percentile, I would suspect that a 4.0 would [have held] at the median for those E majors who enrolled in the referenced year.
    · Reply · Share
  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    edited September 7
    @firmament2x

    UCLA has *lower* mid-50 percentile than even USC according to USN. You are telling me somehow when it comes to engineering, this list here all of a sudden makes sense when its average/median is 70 points higher than USC?? It’s not like UCLA engineering is any special (no top-10 department as far as I know)? All UCs need to somehow give credit to high GPAs and they do admit a lot with very high GPA but relatively lower test scores. There’s nothing wrong with this and I fact, I think it’s what state universities should do. But what that means is UCs typically have a wider SAT range than its average HS GPA would suggest and that translates to lower average/median than comparable privates (Michigan is a bit of an exception with its hybrid admission to let in high percentage of OOS students).

    I believe there are published data for the UCs and it shouldn’t be hard to verify its average SAT is nowhere near it.
    edited September 7
    · Reply · Share
  • IWannaHelpIWannaHelp 412 replies2 threadsRegistered User Member
    I just started digging and apparently UCLA engineering did have 1540 for the most recent admitted class. I am pretty surprised. Maybe the number for UCLA is correct after all.
    · Reply · Share
  • firmament2xfirmament2x 253 replies0 threadsRegistered User Junior Member
    @IWannaHelp . . . If you believe that all CDSs are reported similarly, without purposeful gaming by certain colleges, then I have to question your discernment.

    Per your quote:
    UCLA has *lower* mid-50 percentile than even USC according to USN. You are telling me somehow when it comes to engineering, this list here all of a sudden makes sense when its average/median is 70 points higher than USC??

    I would have to question whether this were true, wrt a "*lower* mid-50 percentile [score]," as you stated.

    1.) UCLA and all UCs don't superscore SAT as effectively all private colleges do. And by superscoring, one could probably add ~ 40 points to the SAT medians, 20 points by number of sections. And a median is not derived from taking the midpoint of the 25th and 75th percentiles.

    There are certainly more lower end scores. But the grouping towards the 50th would be closer to its reported 1,520 at the 75th, instead of its 1,270 at the 25th. I would hope that you'd know why this is true.

    In addition, many of the lower-end scores are 1st-generation students, who've been admitted with a greater emphasis on holistics -- i.e., lower stats, because they do not attend very good high schools. UCLA's a state university, and by such has some duty to perform public good, to which you alluded a bit later.

    2.) But this is also explainable by the strategy given to these students often by UCLA undergrads who mentor them . . . for these students to take the college boards, both of them, often, which is actually good practice for their future MCATs, GMATs, and LSATS, and GREs and to show improvement. This is why UCLA reports a 127% reportage between both tests, one of the highest in the nation. These include many redundant lower scores that UCLA reports on its CDS.

    Based on some of the above, the median stats at the 50th for all students should be ~ 3.94/4.47/1,440 with the added superscoring and without any adjustment for the superfluity of ACT and SAT scores. The average would probably be around 3.89/4.40/1,400 (the gpa UCLA reports on its CDS is an average and is indeed 3.89), and I hope you'd understand why a mean presentation for all colleges is much lower than a median. This would occur at whatever college you attend or attended despite how lofty you may deem it to be. And it's not Harvard, but its pretty accomplished even with a high number of 1st gens.
    It’s not like UCLA engineering is any special (no top-10 department as far as I know)?

    To the contrary, UCLA E is very accomplished. And its E students are very involved with research and internships, and their first jobs are ascending yearly.

    The University is ratcheting up E enrollment and now has ~ 4,000 E majors including the 900 CS that Greymeer didn't include. The U will increase enrollment over the next decade by 1,000 undergrads, while reducing enrollments in the L&S. Additionally to meet the increased enrollment, it will hire 100 additional E faculty. It also just received a $100M pledge from the Samueli Foundation. It also has a new Engineering VI building that houses CS.
    All UCs need to somehow give credit to high GPAs and they do admit a lot with very high GPA but relatively lower test scores. There’s nothing wrong with this and I fact, I think it’s what state universities should do. But what that means is UCs typically have a wider SAT range than its average HS GPA would suggest and that translates to lower average/median than comparable privates (Michigan is a bit of an exception with its hybrid admission to let in high percentage of OOS students).

    You've assuaged your message and I'm appreciative, but I had to explain to you why the deficiency in SAT and the boards is not entirely true. UCLA and Berkeley also admit a decent amount of non-residents, and both have > domestic out-of-state students than Internationals. Both are in high demand across the US, and it's not just because both, particularly UCLA have better weather.

    And I wouldn't write off the futures of lower scoring 1st gens. UCLA and UCSD have been lauded by the NYT for having the highest number of "poor students who've become rich," per their wording.
    I believe there are published data for the UCs and it shouldn’t be hard to verify its average SAT is nowhere near it.

    I'm glad you found out the truth. And it is a median not a mean, probably about 4.00/4.45/1,515, with a mean manifesting a bit lower numbers. All colleges "hideout" moderately to considerably lower stat students below the 25th. And these numbers honestly, I don't think would be unusual because E has its own standards. I think that was your point about Northwestern's E majors' SATs; that it should be higher and perhaps it is.
    · Reply · Share
  • RichInPittRichInPitt 794 replies10 threadsRegistered User Member
    .
    Additionally, the 1,515 would doubtlessly be a median, not a mean. This is because a median SAT score will either end in a 0 or a 5. Please note, @sushiritto in your #6. The chances are fairly small that they would end in a "5" because there would have to be a switch in scores by 10 points right at the median splitting the scores of the one above with one below it.
    This would make it much more likely to be a mean. What are the chances that out of 3040 students, exactly 1520 students had a 1510 or lower and exactly 1520 students had a 1520 or higher? Did you reverse what was after “doubtlessly“?

    I suspect they are all means (often used synonymously with average) and rounded to the nearest 5. (In fact, many schools with odd numbers of students, but ending in 5 make median impossible).
    · Reply · Share
  • GreymeerGreymeer 758 replies11 threadsRegistered User Member
    Anomalous numbers and annotations.

    When compiling the stats I noticed some oddities that I corrected for as noted here below.

    1) CWRU listed 26k applications to engineering... which is more than Berkeley. CWRU is less than 50% engineering. Looking at news articles the total number of applicants for all majors last year was 26k. CWRU has consistently misreported this stat in past years. I did not list this stat on the table. And CWRU engineering admit rate is probably about 10% higher than the listed number.

    2) U Texas Austin listed their avg SAT as 1475 which is about 100 points higher than past years' reportings... and no appreciable increase in applications. The past years reports are upper 1300s. I figure someone submitted their avg admissions stat range instead of actual enrolled. I gave UT half credit. Which boosted their avg SAT 50 points from the normal 1400ish range. A yearly 10 to 20 point increase is understandable, but 100pts? nope. That could only happen if the entire upper quartile of admitted applicants accepted and the lower quartiles went somewhere else.

    3) UCLA listed number of applications as "26"... which I guessed meant 26k.

    4) Schools listing *only* ACT scores were scaled from the lower end of the comparable SAT range. Example 36 is 1550 not 1600. 35 is a 1490...

    5) Stanford, Harvard, and U Florida did not give SAT scores or application stats. I gathered the numbers from yearly general admission articles. U Florida's engineering admit rate is most likely lower than 30%.

    That is all.
    · Reply · Share
Sign In or Register to comment.

Recent Activity