<p>Like is the Columbia Fu Foundation School of Applied Science and Engineering any less prestigious than Columbia College?</p>
<p>You know what i mean.</p>
<p>I don’t think you can generalize on this at all. </p>
<p>I’d say there are several universities equally highly respected for almost all of their schools - Engineering, Arts and Sciences, Law, Medicine…</p>
<p>Some schools’ A&S might be more highly ranked, or better known, than their Engineering schools.</p>
<p>Others might be flipped. For example, Purdue is ranked very highly and quite well known in many Engineering fields. No slouch school in other fields, but easier to get into in many other fields.</p>
<p>As to “prestige”, that’s such a slippery concept. But if you are talking about rankings, reputation, selectivity… I don’t see any generalization at all.</p>
<p>Why would you care, if you wanted to be an engineer?</p>
<p>I really think engineering is different than many other disciplines. I would pay more attention to how well respected the graduates of a certain school are in the engineering discipline you think you want to study. I went to a small engineering school that has turned out more than its share of engineers who went on to get ivy MBA’s & became highly ranked corporate officers. Few would consider this school “prestigious,” but it turns out engineers who really know their stuff. If you want to be a consultant (IMO, someone who can’t do anything, but is happy to share his book knowledge!), there are schools that are known for turning out students who do well in this field.</p>
<br>
<br>
<p>Hmm hmm Kelsmom. DH is a consulting engineer. He can do it AND tell others how. He does his own design AND his own information sharing. To be honest, I found your comment a bit insulting to those who are good at guiding others in the right direction. </p>
<p>Now, having said that…I agree with others. Look at the program the school has in your engineering discipline, and how its grads are accepted in the working world. Engineering curricula are challenging at even the least prestigious schools. </p>
<p>I will say also, at some places it is more difficult to gain admission as a freshman into engineering, but it is still possible to declare this as a major as long as one has followed the course guidelines for engineering anyway. DD did this…entered as undeclared, but took the engineering sequence. She declared her major this year.</p>
<p>Engineering is a field that doesn’t pay much attention to the prestige accociated with any given college.</p>
<p>As to engineering consultants: Nobody HAS to hire them. Obviously they bring valuable expertise to a project, or in some cases a specific step in the design/manufacturing/testing/approval process, or the in-house staff would deal with it on their own. Sometimes it’s just a matter of intelligently using resources for a short term project, rather than bringing in new full-time employees. Sometimes the consultant has unique experience that is needed for the project’s success. I don’t know any engineering consultants with only book knowledge.</p>
<p>IMO, consultants (of any genre) have a skill set and knowledge which is of short term use to any one company or institution. They ‘do’ something a company does not need ‘full time’ on its payroll. </p>
<p>Kelsmom, it sounds as if your company has overlooked its internal resources.</p>
<p>I don’t know what you mean.</p>
<p>“Prestige” implies an audience. Nothing has prestige in a vacuum. The question has to be “prestige among what group?”. </p>
<p>My impression is that the engineering world has a different prestige map than, say, the financial world, or the art dealer world. I don’t have a great idea how Fu ranks in the engineering world, but I’m pretty sure that it doesn’t have the punch relative to other colleges that Columbia does in the non-engineering world. The same is probably true for Penn, Yale, or Cornell and their engineering schools (or programs), but may not be true for Stanford.</p>
<p>Outside the engineering world, if you go to Fu you still get to say you go to Columbia, so you will get whatever oohs and aahhs that evokes.</p>
<p>Within Columbia, there is probably a little bit of mutual rivalry between Fu and the College, with the College people looking on the engineers as a lower form of life, and the engineers considering the College people as aimless slackers. That is likely to be a little less true at other big name institutions. Columbia really doesn’t have a lot of students in specialized programs, and many of the College students are attracted by its Core, which is kind of inherently anti-engineering. Stanford, in contrast, is a pretty engineering-centric place, and engineers are in the mainstream there.</p>
<p>I am not sure but assume that each student will have a Columia University diploma. And it is the nature of univesities to be divided into a number of different colleges or schools depending on the terminology they choose to use.</p>
<p>I would imagine the only reason there is not a greater recognition of Columbia’s engineering/applied science school is due to its small size. However any employer who hires one of its grads will be very pleased indeed.</p>
<p>Also, because of the comprehensive and detailed nature of ABET accreditation, there is far more uniforminity in the quality of engineering education than in many other academic disciplines.</p>
<p>In some schools it is harder to get into the Engr. school than it is Liberal Arts…</p>
<p>“In some schools it is harder to get into the Engr. school than it is Liberal Arts…”</p>
<p>My guess is that that’s the case in most schools.</p>
<p>Are you guys saying Fu engeneering school is easier to get into than Columbia college?</p>
<p>no, I’d say Fu would be tougher to get into</p>
<p>Actually, I think that if you look at the numbers Fu gets substantially fewer applications per slot than Columbia College (about half). The acceptance rate at Fu is significantly higher than at the College (meaning 25% or so vs. 10%), or at least it was a few years ago when I looked at it. Fu has a lower yield, too, which factors into that. So, in a sense, it’s easier to get into Fu than the College.</p>
<p>It’s hard to tell whether the students enrolled at Fu are “better” than those at the College, because the stats for both are sky-high, and stats don’t tell the whole story. It’s also hard to tell whether the Fu applicant pool is stronger overall.</p>
<p>LOL to mini’s comment on “why would you care about prestige if you want to be an engineer?” How true. Most engineers don’t care much about how they’re viewed by others (our minds are elsewhere), and are doing well if they put on a full set of clothes each morning.</p>
<p>Once you’re out in industry for a few years, where you got your degree is far less important than your ability to produce. That is different if you want a career in academia–they will always care more about your “pedigree”.</p>
<p>If you’re worried about how others at Columbia will view you if you’re in the Engineering school, then don’t go to a school that has a diverse student body–instead, go to a technology-focused school like MIT, where ubergeeks are treated like rock stars.</p>
<p>Late to getting back to this thread, but thumper … the consultant comment was not directed at the FIELD of consulting for engineers. It’s not always easy to come across the right way when posting … sorry. Let me explain where my comment came from: Kids out of college, with NO experience, just book knowledge, are being hired as highly-paid consultants. I just cannot fathom why a company would want some smart-but-clueless person giving advice without experience. I am willing to bet, thumper, that your H actually worked as an engineer before becoming a consultant. I have worked in the real world, on the receiving end of poorly engineered ideas and products … and I have been told by ivory-tower-engineers that these ideas & products “have to” work … after all, they fit specs. Engineers who work first & THEN consult have a wealth of experience & knowledge that is most helpful. That is not the kind of consulting engineer I meant. I meant the kind that graduates, is hired for 6 figures, and frankly does not know how to really engineer anything. Obviously, I had some bad experiences with them when I worked. :)</p>
<p>My husband, the consulting engineer, does not earn 6 figures NOW…and he’s been in the field for 25 years. But he has a huge bank of knowledge about his field and it’s his job to both design and consult. Most engineers I know like to DO…not just tell others what to do. </p>
<p>OT…but regarding consultants…I like the kind who actually DO…not the kind who just tell and LEAVE.</p>
<p>Me, too. Those are the wonderful kind! 
I just get frustrated when I hear young would-be engineers planning to go into consulting right off the bat. One engineering grad I know recently signed on at a consulting company for a larger salary than my H with 30 years of engineering experience makes. If it were my kid, of course, I’d have been thrilled for her. But to be honest, the thought of this young woman going into a company & making suggestions about how to do things better makes me cringe. Maybe she will be thoroughly trained & all will be well. I just can’t see how she can understand systems, people, etc. without having been in the trenches at least for awhile. Sure, there are some theoretical areas in which there is really never any “experience” necessary to do the consulting work; book knowledge is what it takes in this kind of work. For the majority of engineers, though, expertise is gained through experience.</p>