I am applying to both the universities to the school of engineering. So which university will offer me more exposure to the global world. Also i would like to do a minor in mathematics and economics along with engineering. So which university will give me a broader perspective over engineering as well as economics?
"So which university will give me a broader perspective over engineering as well as economics? "
Cornell probably offers more engineering courses, in more sub-areas of engineering. In other words, a broader range. I’m guessing it covers a broader range of areas within economics too, since, in addition to the more conventional offerings in its College of arts & sciences, the university offers courses in various related applied areas in several of its specialized undergraduate colleges.
But that’s just my guess. Suggest look at the registrar’s list of courses offered this past year at both universities, and see for yourself.
", i would like to do a minor in mathematics and economics along with engineering. "
Suggest investigate curricula at both universities to see if you can even do that. At Cornell, engineering is in the engineering college, but math and economics are in the College of arts & sciences. I don’t know if engineering college students can take minors in the arts & sciences college.One may be able to get close enough though. IIRC majors in engineering can minor in business at the Dyson school. And there at least used to be an engineering program called “Theoretical and Applied Mechanics” which, while not a math minor, offered many advanced math courses within the engineering college; don’t know if it still exists. In any event you can certainly use free electives to take arts & sciences college courses in math & economics, I just don’t know whether one can get a formal minor in them.
“…which university will offer me more exposure to the global world.”
You can check their respective course listings, available study abroad programs, student profiles to see #s of international students,. If that would help you.
Princeton engineering students (BSE) may certainly pursue a certificate in an AB area. Princeton does not offer minors but rather a certificate (essentially the same thing).
I studied engineering in the early 80s at Princeton, then went to law school. Then, and I believe now, I would think of it in relation to the world as follows. First, relationship to real “engineering” world is by discipline. Princeton engineering profs tend to be very “up” on what is happening in the world in their disciplines. The environmental insights for example were fantastic. Second, the engineering school is separate but not as definitively segregated from liberal arts as with many other schools. You get a B.S.E. not a B.S., which is a bit symbolic but shows a broader focus. Third, the rest of the university (outside of engineering) is very “world aware.” The Woodrow Wilson School is a natural forum for speakers etc. from outside as well as for the kids inside. You can take advantage by taking courses and also attending lectures by prominent outside speakers. The student body itself is a good resource as well.
As to Cornell, I couldn’t speak for it other than by my general impression of it being a good spot for serious engineering study. And they were well known for industrial engineering, which Princeton did not feature.
The one thing I would point out as a possible point of contrast between Princeton engineering and other possible schools is that the tech teaching at Princeton tends to assume that the students are capable of high level and efficient absorption of concepts without over-drilling. Everywhere, there are weekly problem sets. However, at Princeton these problem sets can cover a larger number of concepts with relatively few assigned problems, and the tests can be very theoretical - testing on cutting edge areas.
In my 1980s investigation of the curricula of top state engineering schools, through attending friends, I thought I saw a large number of relatively repetitive problems assigned. This latter approach would tend to guarantee that a person really knows a concept, but it would move much less quickly through a curriculum. I might venture to say that the latter approach could be better for some people who intend definitely to be engineers. A rather large proportion of Princeton engineering students do not actually become engineers.
Also, as for doing engineering with “minors” in both math and economics, I think that is quite a lot to wedge into a 4-year curriculum. The subjects are somewhat compatible, with math being a background for both economics and engineering. However, certain engineering disciplines are more structured than others, with chemical engineering for example making rather aggressive course-choice demands. I think you could probably take 2-3 economics courses plus 2-3 extra math courses in addition to the typical engineering requirements, but not much more. At some point you’ll want to focus - and you may want to take courses outside of those technical areas as well. Even if just for pressure relief. By the way, if you structure all of this into a 4-year degree plan, I think you can probably forget about junior time abroad, varsity sport, etc.
Princeton’s and Columbia’s engineering are completely integrated in the college, where at Cornell’s there is very little interaction and cross registration and majors with the other schools.
Princeton offers an econ program in the school of engineering. My son is all fired up about it—but, of course, SCEA was deferred.
@rednecktiger, I think you are referring to Operations Research and Financial Engineering. I think of this more as an area of concentration in and of its own and it is more like applied mathematics. It is great for many people, but I do not think it is a way to get an engineering background in something substantively engineering (like civil, electrical, mechanical) plus an economics background. (It actually used to be more that way, as it was administered out of the Civil Engineering department and required substantive courses in engineering.) It is now more of a quantitative modeling methods area in and of itself. Again, great for some especially those who want to go to Wall Street and do modeling, pricing, etc.
To follow up, until the early 1980s you had a popular program administered out of civil engineering called “basic engineering” which was a topical introduction to engineering, along with older style MBA courses. Described historically here: https://books.google.com/books?id=6E4ABAAAQBAJ&pg=PA46&dq=dean+howard+menand+princeton&hl=en&sa=X&ei=DEnjVLvLGoi4ggS434DwBQ&ved=0CDQQ6AEwAQ#v=onepage&q=dean%20howard%20menand%20princeton&f=false
Then Dean Menand (Harvard M.B.A.) retired and the newer faculty hired for basic engineering were oriented to the quantitative aspects. This morphed into quant-style undergraduate MBA-type focus. It is popular in its own right and for its own significant merit, but I don’t know if this is what the OP is looking to do and from his post it does not appear so.
Re #5:
“Princeton’s and Columbia’s engineering are completely integrated in the college, where at Cornell’s there is very little interaction and cross registration and majors with the other schools”
???
I don’t know, and haven’t looked up, anything about Princeton, but as to the others:
Cornell does have a separate College of engineering, but its students have substantial interaction and cross- registration with students from the university’s other colleges. As for interaction, for one thing, students from all its colleges live together in the dorms, and thereafter at their own election. Socially the unversity is not segmented by college at all. Academically, the engineering college’s mandated writing seminars (3 courses) and liberal studies electives (6 courses) are generally, or always, fulfilled by courses in other colleges, all save maybe one at the student’s election. The highly motivated student can take more. There is a CC poster who took 20 credits a semester, including extensive offerings at the other colleges. Moreover, all of the college’s foundation science and math courses are taught out of the College of Arts & Sciences.
Columbia too has a separate college of engineering, named “Fu”.
Their program requires 27 “points” (credits) of non-technical courses. Presumably those courses are generally offered at Columbia’s other colleges… But about 2/3 of those are not electives, they are required courses.
I don’t know about cross-majoring, engineering with other colleges, at either of these two universities. But even if it is technically allowed, I would suspect that the main problem outlined in #4 above would make it rarely feasible, at any place that offered a “real” engineering major.
Princeton’s organizational set-up is actually about the same as described for Cornell and Columbia. Separate engineering “school,” but that’s a separate building where engineering courses are taught and engineering professors’ offices are maintained. Students are integrated throughout the residential dorms. Foundational science and mathematics courses taught outside the engineering school, non-engineering electives taught elsewhere.
Re#9:
“I don’t know about cross-majoring, engineering with other colleges…”
I didn’t then, but, as to Cornell, now I do:
http://as.cornell.edu/academics/opportunities/dual-degree/
Cornell’s program is stronger, but Princeton has more “overall prestige.” whatever that’s worth.
I don’t think anyone in the field would or even could agree with Barbie’s categorical statement like “Cornell’s program is stronger,” but Monydad’s posting of a link showing that Cornell has a 3-2 program is probably more pertinent to the discussion. Princeton historically did not allow kids to go more than eight credited semesters for any undergraduate degree and did not have a 3-2 program. Anyone interested should check out the current limitations at Princeton, if any. As to Barbie’s statement about quality - Princeton accepts outstanding applicants and puts them through a rigorous, difficult, and current program. A Princeton engineering degree is very highly regarded especially in academic circles. I would not say that it is stronger or weaker than Cornell’s but I certainly view the statement about Cornell’s stronger very skeptically.