<p>Between Columbia SEAS and UPenn SEAS, which school would be a wiser choice for chemical engineering with some economics and foreign language (special programmes, minors or even double majors)? I’m not looking to pursuing engineering as a lifelong career (will do engineering for the initial years)</p>
<p>Any advice is appreciated!</p>
<p>Also, how would these schools compare with Cambridge?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>ali-</p>
<p>UPENN is known for its special programmes, but many you have to apply for during the application process or as soon as you get in. Overall the engineering school is what we might call ‘traditional,’ in the sense that it is geared around developing and building future engineers.</p>
<p>Columbia engineering is like a spunky little sibling. It is fun, it is smart, but doesn’t always takes itself too seriously. By this I mean the idea of the school is to work hard, but also to push students to explore aspects of engineering and applications of the ‘engineering mindset’ to problems perhaps outside of engineering disciplines. You will be exposed to many different career paths, alumni/ae from chemical engineering doing all kinds of things - one of my best friends who did chemE is finishing a PhD and is going to work for a big consulting firm doing tech/science consulting. Columbia encourages you to think differently.</p>
<p>Compared to Cambridge, I’d say the culture of all three schools you would find to be very different - and the difference between the teaching methods is equally different. Columbia SEAS is a small school, UPENN SEAS is larger, and Cambridge Colleges offer a different experience as far as living is, but also the potential to do research.</p>
<p>I will be naive about engineering at Cambridge because I am not familiar with it. </p>
<p>Columbia SEAS is a good choice for someone that does not know if he/she wants to go into engineering, but likes the engineering mindset. Living in NYC it is easy to figure out a whole host of things out there you can latch onto, learn about, and push you in new directions.</p>
<p>[ARWU</a> FIELD 2010 Engineering/Technology and Computer Sciences](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/FieldENG2010.jsp]ARWU”>http://www.arwu.org/FieldENG2010.jsp)</p>
<p>According to this, Cambridge is ranked far higher for engineering than Penn or Columbia; but this list also consist the data of CS. The experience differs a lot, needless to say. The Engineering Faculty at Cambridge University is massive, but the colleges and the supervisions offer an other, small group experience. And of course, the overall student/faculty ratio is also excellent, but it’s good at Penn and Columbia as well. My problem is with Penn and Columbia that despite these are excellent schools (especially Columbia), they are not particularly strong when it comes to engineering, while Cam is definitely strong in this area. In overall reputation, Cambridge easily surpasses Penn, and even Columbia; but the difference between Columbia and Cambridge is quite small, at least in my view. </p>
<p>Have to add, however, that at Cambridge you will not be able to pursue minors, as the UK system, even the Oxbridge one, is not a liberal arts model.</p>
<p>@GeraldM</p>
<p>Thks for the advice! Are you from America?
Cambridge is a lot easier to get in for us than Penn/Columbia, perhaps due to the fact that we also follow the A levels system. The stronger students in our school therefore usually go to the states. Perhaps because of this, I was led to believe that Columbia/Penn are more prestigious (at least amongst those who are more familiar with overseas unis). It’s different over in the states?</p>
<p>I hope to choose a school that’d give me more options upon graduation. in terms desirability from the perspective of future employers in the states, how’d you rank penn, columbia, cambridge and cornell? If I go to penn, i’d probably try for a few programmes at Wharton (according to a current student, “many” students were able to combine wharton + eng for a “normal dual degree” (i.e. not the jerome fischer MnT programme), i’m not sure how true this is though)</p>
<p>Thank you so much for your advice!</p>
<p>You’re welcome! The fact is, that I’m not from the US but from the EU, as anyone can tell this from my terrible English (even if I have pretty much of an American accent, and spent and will spend some time there, but I make tons of grammatical mistakes).
Prestige obviously depends on location and history related to specific institutions; in China or Singapore for example, Cambridge is certainly regarded more prestigious than Oxford. Of course you can find plenty of Chinese claiming quite the opposite, but generally speaking it’s true. In the US, I think most people regard Cambridge a way more prestigious than Penn. At least when I visited several Ivy League schools, even the Penn students agreed with this. Different people, different opinions, but just look at on the rankings: there can be no doubt that Cambridge is always ranked much higher than Penn. (Wharton is an other, different thing of course, that’s undoubtedly the best part of Penn.)</p>
<p>Cambridge:
ARWU World
5
ARWU National
1
Forbes
6
QS World
1
Times Higher Education
6</p>
<p>Penn:
ARWU World
15
ARWU National
13
Forbes
36
QS World
12
Times Higher Education
19</p>
<p>Another and more decisive factor is, the location: I’ve met many-many students who considered Stanford a way better and much more prestigious than Columbia. One is bound to wonder why? Because, despite they’re roughly equal, Stanford is at California. Bamm. The reverse is also quite common, Cal students calming Columbia is better, because…guess what: it’s in NY! The same also works between the UK and the US: I’ve met high school seniors in European countries other than the UK, who wanted to go to UChicago badly, because, somewhat surprisingly it’s in the US, and the top of that, it’s in Chicago! Going to the US is certeanly regarded higher in Europe, than going to the UK (with the exception of Oxbridge). But I also met Princeton students who considered Oxford much more prestigious than their institution…am…an interesting, but bold idea. Still, in the US, Oxbridge have a decent charm, and both universities belong to the world top 10, so it’s not just all about charming buildings and Harry Potter. Therefore when you’re claiming that Penn is more prestigious or exclusive than Oxbridge, I’m sure it is partially because it’s in the US. Obviously, not many students go to Penn from Europe or the UK, but many goes to Oxbridge. Columbia is an excellent school, I think it’s about equal with Cambridge, and considered equal too, but it is safe to say that the same not goes for Penn.</p>
<p>It would, however, be a mistake to conclude that I, for example, without bias towards US schools. That being said, despite research at, say, UCL is certainly better than it is at Brown, and ranked much higher than Brown in most cases, I would choose Brown any time over UCL. Any time. Summing up: prestige certainly depends on a lot of things, and there could start an endless debate over which is more prestigious: Cam or Columbia? But the same not goes for Cam vs Penn…with the possible exception of Wharton.</p>
<p>@Gerald</p>
<p>Hi! 
seems tt Columbia does enjoy a better reputation than Penn in the EU/from the perspective of someone living for some time in the states, unless i can be assured of double degree from wharton.
That cleared quite a bit of confusion for me! </p>
<p>thks ha </p>
<p>I’m actually from China haha, currently in Singapore, haha yup singapore Cambridge enjoys more prestige and in China it’s oxford.</p>
<p>Ohh, I thought you’re from the EU Probably coz the A-levels. An other important factor, that where you want to live and work? China, the nice Cambridge fetishist ministate of Singapore, or…? My ranking would be Cambridge = Columbia, and Penn as the second, even with Warthon. Another thing to consider, however: while Cambridge focuses on undergraduate education (although it slowly changes): 12, 000 undergrads, 6000 grads, in case of Columbia, it is the reverse: 2/3 grads. At Penn, the numbers are roughly equal. But the Cambridge tutorial and college system is definitely superior compared with Penn, or anything else with the exception of Princeton (which is, I firmly believe, the best institution in the US to pursue undergrad studies), and possibly a few elite LAC-s. But you cannot go wrong choosing either. Anyway, you 're on the waiting list at some other university…?</p>
<p>I’d warn you that Columbia SEAS is not for someone who has any doubt that they want to study engineering. You really have to believe that engineering is 100% for you and that you’ll enjoy the education. It’s a tough decision to make at your age and one that I think is preposterous for the admissions committee to place onto you.</p>
<p>Once you’re in SEAS, there’s little likelihood that you’ll transfer into the college and study economics. I think SEAS is great for students who want to pursue engineering as a lifelong career. However, if you find yourself in a spot where you’re wondering what you want to pursue, you might find that the engineering education restricts your ability to pursue extracurricular and social activities due to the rigor and grading.</p>
<p>ali, I am from Penn and somehow ended up on this thread (through boredom, really, because I have no reason to be on the Columbia thread…and if you’re wondering why I don’t have work/people to hang out with it’s because I’m at home, not at Penn, due to nature/was supposed to be abroad in Japan) and I had to say something…GeraldM may have the opinion that “Columbia is definitely as prestigious as Cambridge but Cambridge is easily more prestigious than Penn,” but I really think it’s just that poster’s opinion (which we are all entitled to, of course). And yes, the poster showed some rankings, but honestly, I’ve never given much weight to rankings and while some people do, many don’t. Rankings are so subjective–even when based on objective fact, what you choose to comprise the rankings is itself subjective. Many are also based on the graduate schools, not undergrad level (and as I go on to say below, UK and US systems are so different, they really can’t be compared fairly in terms of experience).</p>
<p>I have never heard that poster’s opinion before. In fact, I would say I have rarely seen Penn and Columbia compared anyway in terms of prestige; thinking on it, I would say people in the US in general probably view them pretty equally (once they know you’re talking about Penn the ivy and not Penn State). I would also say people rarely compare the prestige of top American universities to Oxbridge, just because they are so very different. People rarely go to Oxbridge from the US just because the application process is very different, and you have to choose what you’re studying from the beginning in the UK. I believe the social scene is also very different. So when someone does end up going there, it seems very rare and cool. I thought for awhile about applying to Oxford (or it might have been Cambridge, I honestly don’t remember) for Oriental Studies, since I study Japanese and that requires no AP’s, and I probably could have gotten in. In the end, I decided not to apply because I wanted the American college experience.</p>
<p>In terms of prestige out of the US, I really can’t say for sure, but I imagine, even if people don’t know the school specifically, if you say a school is an Ivy, people generally get it. (And honestly, anyone employing you will get it).</p>
<p>Also, I wanted to add, you said someone (possibly me, haha) said that many students are able to do both Wharton and Engineering, but you aren’t sure how true it is–I’m not sure how clear I or someone else made it in that original post, but the only difficulties come from time management (and, I suppose GPA if you want to do Wharton). If you want to do a dual with econ, logistically it’s actually really easy–you only need a 3.4 by the end of your freshman year to add the college degree on. You “apply” but really, if you have the 3.4, I’ve never heard of it being a problem. For Wharton, you would need probably a 3.75+ to add that as a dual. If you just want to switch to the college and lose engineering, it’s only a 3.0. The only issue would be that many engineers struggle a lot in their freshmen classes (science and advanced math classes at penn are hard) and end up not getting the best grades…but I also have an engineering friend who got a 3.9 his first year. In terms of actually doing the two degrees, it does require a lot of time, and it helps to do summer classes, for example (or just be really smart so things take less time).</p>
<p>Also, you say you’re from China but currently live in Singapore…I don’t know how “Singaporean” you are, but there’s a pretty big Singapore contingent at Penn, and they are very active as a group and are generally just pretty cool (and close to each other).</p>
<p>@Gerald</p>
<p>I’d need to come back to singapore to work (scholarship bond, so no choice here haha)
No i’m not on any waitlist–rejected flat out by princeton and dartmouth haha oh wells :X
i got a couple of other offers but will be deciding between Penn and columbia SEAS.
I suppose the thing about penn is i can double degree eng + wharton (a current student says this is very possible if i keep my grades up) but columbia used to be my dream school hmm :X
will take a couple more days to make up my mind :D</p>
<p>ali-</p>
<p>one thing to consider about the double degree is that means you’ll be taking more classes than most folks over the course of four years. so the prestige of wharton certainly is enticing, but it might mean you’d have less time to explore other things.</p>
<p>second, at columbia seas you can do two pretty relevant minors: one in economics, quite obviously, and the other in entrepreneurship. You may also take courses in the business school as you prepare to develop yourself more. </p>
<p>and as gerald does mention: the columbia name is quite strong, and it is strong in places like singapore and east asia. it is an advantage to have columbia tucked underneath your arm by itself without needed to double degree in any program.</p>
<p>Penn is the number 1 university in students graduating with internship experience with a percentage of 90%, while Columbia is not EVEN in the top ten.</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/article/penn-tops-internship-ranking[/url]”>http://www.dailypennsylvanian.com/article/penn-tops-internship-ranking</a></p>
<p>Don’t forget Columbia’s core, which will limit you between your major and the core, there’s not much wiggle room for class exploration. And don’t mind what you hear that Columbia is much more “Prestiges then Penn” it’s more student’s trying to persuade you then actual fact.</p>
<p>work: the link doesn’t work. and the core is quite minimal distraction for folks in SEAS. in fact the liberal arts parts are fit into non-tech requirements that every engineer (at SEAS, MIT, Penn, etc.) has to fulfill.</p>
<p>well it seems the whole daily Pennsylvanian is down so I can’t fix the link right now, but thanks for telling me, but a core in principal is a strict mandate of classes that a student must take (no matter the slight flexibility Columbia might offer). The core dictates what courses must be taken, general distribution allows one to freely choice what courses in a certain field of knowledge and Penn allows extreme flexibility in what falls under physical science or writing (This is why Penn has that joke about screwing a bulb and getting 6 credits).</p>
<p>are you saying that being forced to take a course in economics, courses in physics, calculus, chemistry, a course in your intended major - all components of the engineering core - are restrictive and horrible ideas?</p>
<p>the core is foundational. upon which a student with that knowledge can better integrate into other courses and pursue further study.</p>
<p>A core is restricts students to pursue course that the core dictates, eliminating the student choice. While a general distribution allowing a student to create an individual plan, while still being a well rounded student, who is well versed in multiple disciplines. Can you really say that a student who wishes to be an engineer shouldn’t have the choice between reading the same book about an 1800th century love story (this may be abroad statement, but a statement with merit) as 7000 other students or a class about urban revitalization, in which a budding engineer can learn about the historic architecture and engineering development of cities while still being as well versed, but more individualized as any Columbia student.</p>
<p>i don’t understand what you just wrote. </p>
<p>a) you don’t understand how the core works for engineers. this is clearly demonstrated here. columbia’s core for engineers allows a lot of choice.</p>
<p>b) my argument for a core is simple. it is foundational. because you have the broad skills and thinking that makes choosing other courses easier. </p>
<p>a simple thought experiment: let’s say you have the choice between a class on urban architecture and another on urban sociology, both fulfill a single requirement, but both courses are different in what they teach and why. a student without a means to judge may just choose what sounds cooler irrespective of these differences, and perhaps to his/her detriment.</p>
<p>let’s say after choosing to take contemporary civilizations (a student at seas has the choice) the student finds sociology more fruitful. he/she can take the class on urban sociology because he/she thinks those issues are more pertinent than architectural issues. the core helps students figure out what they really want to study through these broad and interdisciplinary courses that cover the gamut of politics, history, literature and philosophy.</p>
<p>Having the choice of taking year long courses in either Literature Humanities or Contemporary Civilization or a Global Core course isn’t exactly a breadth of choices. And it’s that thinking, that students don’t know how to make their own choices, that schools implement cores, you don’t think that a student who has been accepted to these school can’t chose a class that interests them, you dont think they could read the course summary and see how it could add to their engineering curriculum or that first hand experience in the course would be the best teacher. By the time that students at Columbia finishes that year long course and takes that class in urban sociology a student at Penn could have taken a course in urban architecture, urban sociology and urban revitalization</p>
<p>You clearly don’t understand the Global Core. It is a list of over 50 classes pertaining to non-Western civilization, from which students must choose two courses. The Core, for seas students in particular, its very flexible. Regardless, the school requiring certain classes is not a bad thing, but beneficial for most people. You sound like an insecure penn fool, desperately trying to bash columbia without concern for truth. Get yo facts straight, b.</p>
<p>Sent from my DROIDX using CC App</p>