<p>I will be applying to Cornell’s MAE and TAMU’s AE PhD program. If I were admitted into both programs, I wouldn’t really know what to choose. </p>
<p>Here’s my comparison of both universities:
Cornell:
Ranked like 11 in aerospace engineering
“Ivy League name”
Would work for newly hired assistant prof
Better location</p>
<p>TAMU:
Ranked like 8 or 9 in aero
Would work for an established full prof.
Not so great location</p>
<p>Assume both universities are the same in regards to funding. </p>
<p>There’s pros and cons for each university. I like Cornell’s location much better and the ivy league name is appealing, but the professor is only a newly hired assistant professor (possibly not as well known and doesn’t have many publications). TAMU is ranked a little hire (not enough to be a factor in my decision, however) and I would work with a more well known prof who seems to have a lot of publications (a lot of which are in high level journals), but I can’t imagine living in Texas for 5+ years.
Do you guys have any opinions on which option is better?
Also, is it not as good to work for a newly hired assistant prof. than a full and well established prof?</p>
<p>There are definitely some advantages to working for the established professor. Funding is usually more secure, his word goes a longer way if you happen to be vying for academic positions later on and they often have better connections in industry. Younger professors are a mixed bag of sorts. They may be just as secure as the full professor in every way except for the power of their recommendation, but they may not. Generally they all have decent connections in various places in the field, as they have to to get funding for their research, but they generally aren’t going to be as well-developed. The younger guys do have their own advantages though, such as not being set in their ways and being more relatable. Ultimately though, it comes down to research. You might have the choice of working for a highly clouted NAE professor whose research is a little bit interesting to but not very versus an assistant professor whose research fascinates you and I would suggest the assistant professor every time.</p>
<p>The “Ivy League name” gets you nowhere in the aerospace fields. The name Cornell itself might, not because it is Ivy League, but because it is just a good school in the field. That said, its name brand in the aerospace field isn’t really any different than Texas A&M. It’s not Caltech. In other words, the advantage of the Ivy League name in this case is almost purely for your own ego.</p>
<p>The bottom line is you need to weigh a few things: which has research that is more interesting to you, which do you feel most comfortable at and which professor do you feel most compatible with.</p>
<p>Have you visited either school? If it is really down to just those two, then absolutely visit them. I have no idea what your credentials are, but I know the aero department at Texas A&M hosts a dozen or so of their top applicants for a several-day official visit of sorts in the spring. I am sure Cornell does something similar.</p>
<p>The assistant professor has both pros and cons. One possibility is he won’t get tenure, and then your advisor (and best connection for jobs) is going to disappear from your school about the same time you will. That said, he’s probably going to be working like heck to try and get tenure, so he’ll be in the lab 24/7 to try and push out as many high profile papers as possible. He’ll probably put pretty high demands on you, and might not be as willing to give you freedom in your research since his butt is on the line with your research results. If you really click in what you want to do, though, you’d have a partner in the trenches who is really motivated to keep you working at 100%. A well established professor doesn’t have that carrot in front of him, and might be less involved in your day to day operations.</p>
<p>Honestly the location should rank very low on your priorities unless you have some extenuating circumstances which would require you stay in a certain area. Most of your time will be spent in the lab, and, sadly, you probably won’t be able to spend as much time out and about as in undergrad.</p>
<p>The only thing the “Ivy League” name might get you is an easier foot in the door if you’re looking at not continuing in engineering after graduating. People outside of your field might not be as aware of the rankings, and will be more likely to go off of the general reputation of your school. If you don’t want to keep doing aero, though, why bother going for the PhD?</p>
<p>Thanks for the replies!
I have been to College Station, but not Ithaca (Cornell’s location).
I know I will be very busy as a graduate student, but location is still a big factor for me even if I will be indoors most of the time. Living somewhere where I may not like particularly may have a negative impact on my academic work. </p>
<p>My OP is just a hypothetical comparison, although I do think I will be admitted to both schools. </p>
<p>I am applying to several other schools (Caltech, Princeton, UCB, UCSD). These schools come with the whole package (well established professors and pretty good locations or around pretty good locations IMO), so it’d be a much easier decision for me to make.</p>
<p>Well it’s not an award, it’s an appointment. Also, for the most part yes. You see some also getting into NAS instead/as well. There are also the Royal Academies in the UK that are similar.</p>
<p>Also have you already talked to these two professors or is it all hypothetical?</p>
<p>I have and they seem pretty interested. Can’t say that about the other professors I have contacted though (bunch of responses like “I am unsure if I will have funding available for that area…I encourage you to apply.” which I’m sure is what they tell everyone). I like my chances, but nothing’s a given. </p>
<p>I will avoid putting up names on the web, but if you’d like to know who, I can share through PM if you’re curious.</p>
<p>Eh, it’s not really a big deal. I was just wondering if this was hypothetical or if you’d spoken with said professors yet. FWIW, if they say they just don’t know if they have funding yet, chances are that’s the truth. Funding is rough right now in fields that use a lot of government funding.</p>
<p>That said, if you have questions about TAMU or said professor, I may be able to help since I’m currently in that program.</p>
<p>I’ve been reading up about the NAE recently.</p>
<p>I’ve noticed that the list excludes several people I consider very highly distinguished in their field. One that I have in mind is Dale Pullin from Caltech, one of the biggest names in turbulence. The other is Stephen Pope from Cornell (arguably the biggest name in turbulence?). I couldn’t find either in aero.</p>
<p>Edit-nevermind, found Pope under MECH, but still no Pullin.</p>
<p>I wouldn’t really say there is one that is stronger than the other two. All three have some really big names in their fields and all three have a dud or two.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t know all that much about Dr. Pullin, but to get into NAE you need have have showed a marked and continued major impact on your field as judged by your peers who are already in the NAE. For whatever reason, Dr. Pullin hasn’t met that criteria yet.</p>