How much of a difference is in between these two majors? I am an incoming freshman at Purdue for applied physics and when I compared the course catalog for engineering physics at UIUC, Stanford, Cornell etc they were identical. The only difference being engineering physics is at the college of engineering and applied physics at the college of science.
1 Like
Hi!
You just took the question off the edge of my tongue 
I have had the same question and I am a junior at school right now and want to study physics in college. So now I am looking at different colleges with good physics programs and also was wondering about the difference between these two majors.
May I please ask you to give some ideas of what colleges except for well known ones are good in physics?
Thank you so much! Commented here to ask you about the colleges and to keep the thread active
UC Boulder is really strong in physics and is relatively easier to get into.
2 Likes
Some Engineering Physics majors are ABET-accredited (I believe in the same category as general engineering majors). Applied physics, that isn’t in an engineering school, typically isn’t. Whether the ABET accreditation is helpful or not is something opinions will differ on.
1 Like
ABET does have appear to have criteria for Engineering Physics specifically. For example CWRU’s Engineering Physics major is accredited with “Program Criteria: Engineering, General Engineering, Engineering Physics, and Engineering Science.”
However, I do not think the majors listed in the OP’s post are ABET accredited (Purdue applied physics, UIUC / Stanford / Cornell engineering physics) unless I am missing something on ABET’s web site.
1 Like
I figured Stanford wouldn’t be, since they bother with ABET only for a few programs where it’s considered particularly important. (CivE and MechE only, I believe.)
I knew that Tulsa’s Engineering Physics major was ABET accredited, as another example, so I knew CWRU wasn’t an anomaly, but now, out of curiosity, I’ve looked up what other schools are:
Austin Peay State University
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science in Engineering)
Case Western Reserve University
Engineering Physics (BSE)
Colorado School of Mines
Engineering Physics (BS)
Embry-Riddle Aeronautical University - Daytona Beach
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
Kettering University
Engineering Physics (BS)
Murray State University
Engineering Physics (BSE)
New Mexico State University
Las Cruces, New Mexico, United States
Engineering Physics (BSEP)
Saint Louis University
Engineering Physics (B.S.)
Southeast Missouri State University
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
Stephen F. Austin State University
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
The University of Central Arkansas
Engineering Physics (BS)
The University of Illinois at Chicago
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
The University of Kansas
Engineering Physics (BS)
The University of Tulsa
Engineering Physics (BS)
Tulane University
Engineering Physics (BSE)
Universidad Nacional de Ingenieria (Peru)
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Sciences)
University of Maine
Orono, Maine, United States
Engineering Physics (B.S.)
University of Minnesota Duluth
Engineering Physics (BSEP)
University of Oklahoma
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
University of the Pacific
Engineering Physics (BS)
University of Wisconsin - Platteville
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
Xavier University
Engineering Physics (Bachelor of Science)
So, a pretty random mix with regard to selectivity. Whether ABET is a criterion worth considering or not, hard to say. I’d assume programs that don’t have to check all of the boxes for ABET accreditation are able to be more flexible in their curricula, which could be a good thing, depending on what the student is looking for.
2 Likes
So none of the best engineering/applied physics majors in the country are ABET certified. Then IMO that ABET shouldn’t hold much weight specifically for this major.
In theory, Applied Physics is broader than Engineering Physics because Physics has applications outside Engineering. Also in theory, Applied Physicists do not actually have to be qualified to be engineers.
In practice? At the undergrad level? Yes, you might be mostly taking the same sorts of courses. Still, you might look to see if there are advanced topics in, say, high-energy, space physics, optics, or so on in an Applied track that are not in Engineering Physics, and possibly interdisciplinary stuff like biophysics, geophysics, and so on. Conversely, you might look to see if there are any core engineering courses required in an Engineering Physics track not required in the Applied track.
I will be taking the computational physics track. So, core ECE courses will be a part of the curriculum. Now if someone followed the astrophysics track in applied physics then it would have differences with engineering physics. As far as I understand it depends on how you structure your major.
That makes perfect sense to me!
The less engineery stuff in Applied Physics tends to be the sort of basic research stuff that isn’t particularly close to anything that would actually be a marketable product or service. Obviously computer stuff is mostly more on the marketable side and therefore on the engineery side.
Perhaps many schools don’t bother with ABET accreditation for engineering physics majors because it is unlikely that the graduates will go into work where PE licensing is relevant, and because they are likely to take enough of the specified kind of course work that the patent exam lists anyway.
This topic was automatically closed 180 days after the last reply. If you’d like to reply, please flag the thread for moderator attention.