ABET accreditation does set a high minimum standard, including both engineering science and design course work. So one can say that ABET accredited programs are good, but that does not mean that they are all the same.
Within the constraints of ABET accreditation, colleges may have varying emphases, subarea offerings, additional material, etc.. For any given student, one program may be a better academic fit than another.
Olin is small and project-based and has entrepreneurial classes with Babson next door. Might be a good example for that approach. You could ask about career and academic /PhD outcome.
Indeed, when engineering design occurs in the curriculum may be important. A curriculum that follows the traditional order of math and natural science first, then engineering science, then engineering design may be efficient in terms of prerequisite sequencing, but may seem âtoo theoreticalâ for some students until late in the curriculum when the students reach the engineering design courses.
A âmore hands onâ curriculum may try to introduce bits of engineering design earlier, within the limitations of prerequisite sequencing.
NCSU may be delaying that because it has competitive secondary admission to engineering majors based mostly on grades in the common set of math and natural science prerequisites.
I think all schools that let you begin engineering the first year are going to be somewhat project based. I think if you want to find the ones that are the most project based, look at the course requirements. A school like WPI requires both a junior and senior year project.
PBL is a teaching method, rather than just a way to say you work on projects, so most schools that value true PBL will highlight it. That isnât to say you wonât do projects at other schools, but the way the course is designed may not be true PBL.
If your goal is to evaluate programs to find some that are more theoretical, one way may be to look for lecture based courses and see if you can find syllabi. That should show you grading, assement and projects.
We toured 15 schools with my D and it took a while for her to pin down what appealed to her. We toured big, little, public, private, rural, urban, more hands on, more theoretical, and all levels of selectivity.
Hereâs the list of where we went:
U Michigan
Notre Dame
Purdue
Northwestern
Bucknell
Lehigh
Cornell
RPI
Clarkson
Carnegie Mellon
JHU
OSU
Akron
Case
UMD College Park
The list was refined and changed after our first college tour and there were others on the original list but these were the schools that she ended up wanting to visit. She applied to 8 schools from this list and she had a very clear preference after visiting.
There are a lot of generalizations being made on this thread that have not been our experience so make sure to do your own due diligence when investigating programs when you are touring. If there is a first year engineering class, what does it entail? Some dive in to detail projects, get their students safety certified in all the shops in the first week, have industry execs coming in to judge projects while others are just a superficial introduction to the different majors. Some schools have their exam questions be âreal lifeâ problems from industries; do âfield tripsâ to companies; bring in industry experts as speakers. Look at the what concentrations, minors, and technical electives are offered to upperclassmen. Pay attention to what kinds of research is being conducted on campus and accessibility for undergrads. Can undergrads take graduate level courses? What do the typical senior design projects entail? (My D has a number of friends who were engineers at other schools and there was a huge difference in what was expected).
Then look at the percentage of students that go to grad school and straight to the work force. Talk to the career center. Look at first destination surveys if they are robust. Does the school have certain specializations or certain industry partnerships that are over represented. Do those align or not to your studentâs interest.
Again, the fundamental courses for an engineering major will be very similar amongst ABET programs. The differences are in the details and approach.
This is, unfortunately, a common misconception about ABET. According to ABETâs 2025â2026 criteria for accrediting engineering programs (link):
Criterion 5. Curriculum
The curriculum requirements specify subject areas appropriate to engineering but do not prescribe specific courses. The program curriculum must provide adequate content for each area, consistent with the student outcomes and program educational objectives, to ensure that students are prepared to enter the practice of engineering. The curriculum must include:
- a minimum of 30 semester credit hours (or equivalent) of a combination of college-level mathematics and basic sciences with experimental experience appropriate to the program.
- a minimum of 45 semester credit hours (or equivalent) of engineering topics appropriate to the program, consisting of engineering and computer sciences and engineering design, and utilizing modern engineering tools.
- a broad education component that complements the technical content of the curriculum and is consistent with the program educational objectives.
- a culminating major engineering design experience that 1) incorporates appropriate engineering standards and multiple constraints, and 2) is based on the knowledge and skills acquired in earlier course work.
Note that the wording provides a lot of wiggle room for professors in each engineering department to structure their courses as they see fit, let alone what is covered in each course.
To further show that there is indeed a huge amount of flexibility, consider for example the section on âMechanical and Similarly Named Engineering Programsâ near the bottom of the linked page:
- Curriculum
In preparation for professional practice, the curriculum must include:
- principles of engineering, basic science, and mathematics (including multivariate calculus and differential equations);
- applications of these topics to modeling, analysis, design, and realization of physical systems, components, or processes;
- coverage of both thermal and mechanical systems; and
- in-depth coverage of either thermal or mechanical systems.
Note that even in a section specifically devoted to ME, only âthermal and mechanicalâ is stated. There is not a single mention of ME areas such as fluid mechanics, thermodynamics, heat transfer, dynamic systems and control, combustion, mechanical design, manufacturing, etc., much less topics to be covered in each area. Itâs totally up to the professors within an ME department to decide what courses adequately prepare their students for the workforce.
As many as 4,773 programs at 930 colleges and universities in 42 countries have received ABET accreditation (link). MIT mechanical engineering with 100+ professors offering an amazing collection of ME courses is one of those programs, but so is a directional school with 15 professors offering the bare minimum.
ABET is a valuable standard, but not one that makes me think as long as my child attends an ABET accredited engineering program, they would be receiving an engineering education similar to those at all other ABET schools.
One post asked if it is theoretical colleges or hands on colleges or a continuum. I donât have a lot of colleges that I have enough knowledge to compare but have some. It does seem to me to be more of a continuum. All engineering programs that I know about have some level of hands on
My somewhat detailed knowledge is of three colleges: MIT where I went to college, CalPolySLO where my son went and WPI where my daughter went.
MIT was quite theoretical but did have some level of hands on required. CalPoly had a final project and required a lab course. WPI had two required projects, one outside your major and a longer one within your major. IMHO, some but not a heck of a lot of difference between the three.
It does also come down to how much the student wants to get involved in hands on projects and what the opportunities at a particular college are. Of the three, I (at MIT) probably did the most hands on. I got involved with a professor and a small group of students. We ended up getting a NASA research contract and I did a fair amount of lab work. MIT, although mostly theoretical, probably had the most opportunities (read $$$) for hands on research.
Itâs really early in this journey for him. Weâre just trying to get a basic sense of the landscape, and what factors matter, and so Iâm trying to figure out if this is actually a factor to take into account, and if so what it means, and what he might like.
Eventually all the other things will come into play â big/small, close/far, urban/rural, and definitely money.
Can someone give some examples of schools that arenât particularly project based. Iâm thinking maybe we should look at some examples.
I agree that looking at the actual curriculum is probably a good starting point. You can also often find detailed information online (syllabi, exams, project descriptions, grading breakdown etc) for beginning courses in the curriculum.
My S23 is at UC Berkeley, which is a great school but is definitely more academic and theoretical, not a project-based learning model. Classes have projects of course, but mostly these seem to be there to supplement the academic content in the class. He has only had a few classes that were primarily project based, and it sounds like most classmates in these classes were juniors / seniors (and a few grad students).
Students do get practical experience outside of the curriculum by participating in teams and clubs and research labs, and it sounds like a lot of kids get involved in startups. My son is on one of the Formula SAE teams (student built race car) and has learned a tremendous amount from this experience, although itâs definitely time consuming and sometimes frustrating when things go wrong or people are flakes.
Your description sounds more like what my son is experiencing, with a mostly theoretical curriculum but lots of opportunities outside the curriculum. He is clearly getting a good education, but I can also imagine that studentsâ experiences at his school can vary a lot, depending on whether they manage to take advantage of opportunities. So I can also see the appeal of a fundamentally project based curriculum starting in freshman year for all engineering students.
Yes, just as Cal Poly is frequently held up as one of the âgold standardâ schools for project-based learning, the other side of that coin for California students is the UC schools, which tend to lead with quite a bit of theory before things get hands-on. This is a big reason that many students choose Cal Poly over UCâs.
Things can vary by program within the same school, though. For example, I think of UW-Seattle as being more UC-like generally, but they have the Human-Centered Design and Engineering major which is almost an Olin-like program within the engineering school.
maybe? We just toured there last week and that was not mentioned. Our facilitator was the assistant director of admissions in the engineering school. He just said you are on the âmain campusâ the first year and switch to engineering campus after that.
Alabama - per my son - is math, math, math. He claims not even theory although I assume it has to be. I know there was a lot of lab work because he used to always talk about it.
You can see course names and descriptions but I suppose youâll never know how theyâre taught by the professors.
As you go on early visits, set up meetings with the Dean or whichever prof they designate to meet with prospective students - but still, theyâre not the teacher of each class so youâll never know 100%.
This ^^^ my engineering son did just this. When we set up our school visit my kidâs (different schools and interests 180 degrees lol) both set up short meetings with heads of departments etc. They both got insight not found on their websites. Also talk to studentâs. Facebook or whatever they do these dayâs and ask the questions. Ask the school for a department ambassador. The typical school open houses are just all rah rah. You want to find out more then that.
Thank you!
I think what weâd like to do is to visit a few schools of each type. If we were in California, I think it would be good to see Cal Poly and a UC.
I think weâre going to check out WPI when we are in Boston for something else. Is there a contrasting school to look at that is close?
We just visited Case Western and were quite impressed with their engineering program. Seems more in the project based category. Might want to check it out as well.
I think Case is the one school I have literally never heard a bad thing about. I want to go see it for that reason alone!
My kid is signed up for some ID camps at Ivy schools this summer. Where do they fall on this spectrum?
Itâs interesting. Normally you are correct but someone the other day did a write up and said classes are purposely and alarmingly large.
The CDS section I3 does not dispute this. The writer said the school made a point of bringing this up in the presentation.
They have a large maker space.
Case classes are large?
Yes. I wrote it.
It was in a Q&A section. The professor wasnt trying to highlight it. Someone asked him and he replied candidly. He taught mechanical and aerospace engineering and the smallest class he has is 77 students.