<p>Don’t look as much at the prestige of the school as the opportunities it can help you with. for example, if you want a good law school that’s not to hard to get into, look at a state university like ASU that has lower tuition and more local opportunities.</p>
<p>I would also state that most flagship state universities would fall into this category.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think most people would say the best programs in mechanical engineering are a mix of publics and privates–UC Berkeley, Illinois, Purdue, Michigan, Georgia Tech, UCLA, Wisconsin, Texas, Texas A&M, VaTech, but also MIT, Stanford, Caltech, Cornell, Princeton, CMU, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins. The top publics are not necessarily easier to get into, At UC Berkeley, for example, the OOS admit rate this year was 24%, which is lower than CMU (30%). Michigan doesn’t tell us its OOS admit rate but its overall admit rate this year was 33%, but it’s considerably lower for OOS applicants, and even lower for engineering. At schools this size, the published overall admit rate can be highly deceiving because it doesn’t distinguish in-state from OOS applicants (a difference that is more or less meaningless for private schools), and it doesn’t distinguish by discipline. The engineering programs at the top publics often have far tougher admission standards than the published averages for the university as a whole.</p>
<p>Wait, do publics make you apply to the engineering division separately as well (I thought, you just put yourself on the track once you get to most of them)? Also, most of those privates are generally very hard to get into, especially those where the engineering division has separate admissions. They are already hard to get into in terms CAS, so engineering is very tough (as in, can likely still make getting into the publics, which are just as good, look like cake walks). And even among those that you listed, I would say that a few of them truly stand out the arena (Stanford, Cornell, and the engineering/science oriented schools. Actually, one might say that Stanford is all too similar to engineering and science oriented schools). Again, I would take my chances on the public and realize that I’d likely get just as good of an education. Plus, often these schools have a great “STEM community” at the UG level if you will. The scene I’ve observed at Tech is very interesting for example. From what I’ve heard, other publics with renowned engineering depts are similar. I suppose among the privates, such an energy is most felt at the Tech oriented ones (will include Stanford in this with some reservation).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Probably varies, but at most public flagships I’m familiar with, you need to apply and be admitted to the college of engineering to do an engineering major, and the admissions standards are generally much higher than for that same university’s college of liberal arts (or arts & sciences), which is typically much larger. At our public flagship, for example, the 50th percentile ACT score for enrolled freshmen has consistently been about 3 points higher for engineering than for the university as a whole, until a recent uptick in admissions stats for the college of liberal arts brought the university-wide median to within 2 points of the engineering median. But that’s still a very substantial difference on a 36-point scale. And if you’re admitted elsewhere in the university, switching to engineering is not as simple as changing your major; you need to apply for an internal transfer, and then it’s going to depend on your GPA to date and how many slots they have available. I believe at some schools (e.g., UC Berkeley?) it’s even more complicated in that you need to apply for a particular engineering discipline, and there are only so many seats available for that discipline. That’s why I say the university-wide average admission statistics may be very misleading when it comes to engineering at public flagships. That’s compounded by the fact that some public flagships have much lower admit rates and much higher middle 50% stats for OOS and international applicants–which only makes sense, insofar as their primary mission is to serve state residents.</p>
<p>You sometimes see differential admit rates in private schools as well. I’m pretty sure at Cornell it’s considerably harder to get into engineering and CAS than some of the “contract colleges,” and the latter pull down university-wide average. On the other hand at Columbia I think the engineering stats and Columbia College (liberal arts) stats are pretty comparable, and they don’t report College of General Studies stats, so the published university-wide averages are probably pretty close to the engineering averages. And at some privates there’s not a separate admissions pool for engineering, you just apply & if admitted engineering is one of your options. Nor, by and large, do private universities give an admissions ‘break’ to in-state students.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Berkeley is difficult enough to get into that it is not a safety for anyone, but it is not a reach for everyone type of school that some of the super-selective schools are. Top end grades and test scores would probably make Berkeley a likely (but not certain) for admissions, while the super-selectives would need that plus perhaps a state or national level award or EC or other qualities that stand out to that level.</p>
<p>If the OP wants to major in mechanical engineering, there are some schools which are not as selective as Berkeley but have top end reputations specific to that major, such as Georgia Tech, Purdue, Penn State, Texas A&M, Virginia Tech, etc…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It is fairly common at both publics and larger privates (e.g. Cornell, Columbia, USC, NYU) where one has to apply to a division (e.g. arts and sciences, engineering, or business) or a specific major. In such cases, the admissions selectivity can vary by division or major, and changing into the more difficult to enter division or major later means going through another admission process based on one’s college GPA.</p>
<p>I think McGill is the quintessential prestigious university that’s not hard to get into. It’s not named after a place and has been called the “Harvard of Canada” (by McGill alums, LOL!). </p>
<p>Basically, it’s the most prestigious university in a whole country.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes and no. McGill alums would certainly have you believe it’s the “Harvard of Canada” and “the most prestigious university in a whole country,” and it’s the Canadian school that gets by far the most attention in the U.S. But MacLeans magazine, Canada’s leading national newsmagazine, publishes its own college rankings annually, and McGill is pretty consistently one of the “Big Three” along with the University of Toronto and the University of British Columnia (UBC). MacLeans currently has McGill #1, UBC #2, and Toronto #3, but Toronto has held the top spot at times in the past. And alums of other top Canadian schools like Queen’s, U Alberta, MacMaster and Dalhousie would argue the conversation needs to be somewhat broader insofar as Canadian universities are not as sharply stratified as U.S. schools. </p>
<p>Nor does McGill clearly outshine Toronto and UBC in world university rankings. ARWU has McGill #58 globally, behind #28 Toronto and #40 UBC. THES world rankings have Toronto #21, UBC #30, and McGill #34. QS has McGill #18 and Toronto #19, with UBC a bit further back at #45. Few Canadians would disagree that McGill is one of the best universities in Canada, but I don’t think you’d find anything close to a consensus that it’s the “most prestigious university in a whole country.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As an illustration of how separate admission to engineering at a public flagship can result in admissions standards that are sharply higher for engineering than for the university as a whole, here’s a helpful chart from the University of Minnesota-Twin Cities showing median entering freshman ACT scores by school or college within the university for the period 2008-2012:</p>
<p>[OIR</a> : New Freshman Characteristics - Fall 2008-2012 Composite - Median](<a href=“http://www.oir.umn.edu/student/characteristics/term/1129/trend/10034/data_sets/10184]OIR”>http://www.oir.umn.edu/student/characteristics/term/1129/trend/10034/data_sets/10184)</p>
<p>As you can see, median freshman ACT scores in the College of Science & Engineering were consistently 3 points higher than the university average (on a scale of 36), and 3 or 4 points higher than the College of Liberal Arts (the university’s largest undergraduate unit) from 2008 through 2011. In 2012, an uptick in CLA scores brought the CLA median back within 3 points of the Engineering median, and drove the overall university median up to within 2 points of the Engineering median. </p>
<p>Still, a difference of 2, 3 or 4 points on the ACT is huge. If a similar relationship obtains at Michigan, the middle 50% ACT score for the university as a whole of 28-32 could translate to 30-34 or even 31-35 for Michigan engineering, i.e., the same level as some very selective private universities. And that’s without even taking into account that schools like Michigan tend to hold OOS applicants to higher admission standards than in-state students.</p>
<p>UCLA
NYU
Boston University</p>
<p>But bclintock, you know what’s scary? I think schools like Duke and JHU separate their admissions in such a fashion and their (ok, at least Duke’s) CAS scores are already in the ranges you described those engineering schools. It’s quite ridiculous (the engineering stats are very close to those of the general populous at HPYSM, maybe Caltech). I’ve actually seen course websites for physics (engineering or scientists, you know, the tougher calc. based series among the several usually offered at such schools) at these top schools and there is hardly a difference. In fact, often places like Berkeley and Michigan are a tad harder. So the higher threshold is not justified if the private schools are basing their decision on who they think will handle the work the best (I mean, many of the privates give a slightly more generous curve in the weeder physics and math courses than the public counterparts. This is definitely the case at Duke). In such cases, it appears CAS students with strong math backgrounds but lower SAT/ACT than the normal engineering admit could likely handle the engineering curriculum at such schools as well as the higher scoring people. </p>
<p>I can see why maybe the public schools would do such partitioning, but some of the privates…I find the practice questionable (it’s like another method of essentially cherry-picking test scores even though they know, beyond a certain point, it will make no difference). It would almost make more sense to pre-select pre-profs (such as pre-meds) as their success depends more on the ability to take exams moreso than work extremely hard (engineering majors will have to much more projects for example, and the homework load is generally heavy in such courses, in addition to having to plan for fairly rigorous exams. Standard science courses usually just have some p-sets with exams. If there are projects, there is usually only one) with a very heavy courseload (I do not consider the standard pre-health courseload heavy in comparison to those doing engineering or planning to pursue graduate work in science. In addition, often the course selection is easier as I explained a while ago). I guess, if I were these schools, I would look at GPA, course rigor (particularly, did you go beyond IB/AP and maybe take courses at a local college before coming, especially if you were located near a major research university. I could care less if your SAT is a 1440 as opposed 1490).</p>
<p>Actually, knowing what I know right now, and (despite my userID) living in the Northeast, when I hear of someone where I am going to U of Alabama I pretty much presume they are not only the top of their classes with amazing scores, but that they have merit scholarships and that they are going to have a kick-ass time at a big state school, which you can’t really have in New England. </p>
<p>I wish I had a candidate among my kids to do the same, because it sounds like a fun 4 years to me.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The actual reason for admission by division or major is that the division or major is capacity-limited relative to the number of students who want to study it. Student demand may change more quickly than departmental capacity can expand or contract, so schools which are not wealthy enough to maintain extra capacity are likely to face this problem.</p>
<p>Here is an example of a public university that admits by major, where the threshold scores vary considerably, but not by perceived rigor of the major:
[url=<a href=“http://info.sjsu.edu/static/admission/impaction.html]Info.sjsu.edu[/url”>http://info.sjsu.edu/static/admission/impaction.html]Info.sjsu.edu[/url</a>]
(Note: the SAT-based eligibility index for frosh admissions is HS<em>GPA * 800 + SAT</em>CR + SAT<em>M; HS</em>GPA is based on 10th grade and later academic course grades, with up to 8 semesters’ worth given +1 weighting for honors or AP.)</p>
<p>Ok, that makes some sense. But at the elite privates, the screening is before they arrive on campus sometimes, so isn’t that an issue? A person who would have gotten into CAS and maybe did a natural or physical sciences major instead may end up rejected from the school altogether because they applied to engineering (is that possible? Are people allowed to and do they apply to 2 units? And wouldn’t privates also be less hindered by the capacity issue (I mean, those non-Tech oriented privates outside of Stanford and Cornell seem to have much smaller engineering scenes)? Couldn’t there be some way, at such schools, to maybe let students join CAS if they qualify and then, if they make certain grades in the weeder physics/math courses or w/e pre-reqs for their dept., be admitted automatically or at least be allowed to take engineering courses. I’m not sure how it actually works at places like that, but I’m sure more than enough people qualify for it and I don’t know if so many students want to do that at such schools that it would overburden them.</p>
<p>On the cheaper end, I would recommend University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign and University of Wisconsin-Madison. </p>
<p>Does USC qualify? Their acceptance rate is about 20%.</p>
<p>Your acceptance rate to Cal depends on your major. if you are applying to the engineering dept., the acceptance rate is like ~10%. Though if you chose a major like Asian American studies or something that is really unpopular, you might have a better shot at getting in.</p>
<p>No, not really, USC is about as selective as Berkeley (stats-wise, I think. Though I wish they had a common data set). The difference may be that the in-state bias is not as strong (it should be non-existent because it’s private, but I’m pretty sure USC is one of those privates where there is indeed a much stronger one than its smaller private peers, especially ones in the midwest and east coast).</p>
<p>“Actually, knowing what I know right now, and (despite my userID) living in the Northeast, when I hear of someone where I am going to U of Alabama I pretty much presume they are not only the top of their classes with amazing scores, but that they have merit scholarships and that they are going to have a kick-ass time at a big state school, which you can’t really have in New England.”</p>
<p>For the most part, “top of their class students with amazing scores” are not headed to Alabama. The reality is more that very good students who want to attend college for little or no cost are going to Alabama. Let’s be realistic.</p>
<p>Those people with the high scores and who are really into having the state-school like “kick-ass” time may more often end up at places like ND, Duke, Vanderbilt, Virginia, Chapel Hill, UCLA, and USC. They would simply attend rigorous schools, with more state-school like atmospheres (and some of those are flat out state flagships) and awesome financial aid (in the case of privates and some publics, if you get in OOS. I think UVa may give decent aid for example, but I’m not sure). Also, keep in mind that many with those type of scores may either have different definitions of “kick ass times” (they’ll like parties, but they’ll also enjoy more intellectual atmospheres and the sorts of “fun” that spawn from them. Like how it may be more common for students to put on an impromptu play or something at places like Yale or Harvard) or are more than willing to scale down their expectations for additional academic intensity. I mean, the way honors colleges at many large flagships or state schools are set up seems to reinforce the idea that, for some reason, those students should want some degree of separation ( sometimes even physical. There may be full blown honors dorms and living learning communities) from the others.</p>