“That remark by the U of C professor that “ABET is bean counters …” simply betrays his/her lack of knowledge of what accreditation is.”
Um, no. What it reveals is that the profs who recruit students into a decent graduate program don't care about ABET in the least. As @CU123 was saying upthread.
“ABET provides a standard of quality and thoroughness for the first professional curricula. Chicago’s program is not a “first professional” program, so ABET is not a factor for the same.”
-That may be true (whatever that means, and wow - I wasn’t aware, as my friend seems to be, that some pretty mediocre programs can also be ABET-accredited :neutral: ). However, for doing GRADUATE STUDY, the criteria laid out seems to be having the correct aptitude for and exposure to stuff like physics and chem. Not necessarily engineering.
“I agree with @Parent0347. I’m familiar with ABET accreditation because my dad was head of an engineering department for many years. He would not agree with the other professor’s characterization of the program. Dad is in the National Academy of Engineering and the Russian Academy of Engineering. He worked with graduate students for 50 years.”
That could well be and your dad sounds like he would be quite expert on this topic. However, my friend is a bit younger and his thinking kind of reflects some of the same thinking that @CU123 was saying - and what schools such as Stanford and Cal Tech are currently doing even at the undergraduate level. ABET may not be as relevant as it once was. And for graduate work, it may not be relevant at all.
@JBStillFlying He’s an authority with graduate students, but not to engineers. The goal for you is to be an engineer, right? To be an engineer, you need sufficient job training for employers to take you seriously. If you want to be licensed, ABET is a requirement. That type of program at UChicago would be fine for computers or IT, because you don’t necessarily need a core knowledge to code in SQL or C#. For engineering, employers check for ABET accreditation. If you don’t have that, they won’t hire you.
OP - The one thing that is clear from all the back and forth on your thread is that that there isn’t consensus from a number of knowledgable posters. IMO, that could indicate that there won’t be consensus amongst potential employers or graduate programs and you could potentially be limiting your options with an undergraduate degree from U of C.
Have you considered a school like Notre Dame? They have a great engineering program but we found the focus to be more theoretical and broad than others. They also have theology and philosophy requirements. Cornell is another school with a strong liberal arts emphasis even for engineers.
Especially since we’re talking about a high school student and leaping forward to grad school admissions. A lot more is going to go into a grad program acceptance than whether it’s an ABET degree or not.
There’s no guarantee that this student would be eligible for admissions to a top 15 aerospace grad program 4 yrs from now. We don’t even know if he is a good match for UCh for UG. No info was shared. Shouldn’t the focus be on helping a high school student achieve their short-term goals that lead more definitively to their long-term goals?
“He’s an authority with graduate students, but not to engineers. The goal for you is to be an engineer, right?”
OP's question was whether an undergraduate degree in Physics from UChicago qualified him/her for graduate study (master's level) in aeronautical or mechanical engineering. My authority, who is a professor of aeronautical engineering, works with graduate students in aeronautical engineering - and admits grad students to the aeronautical engineering program - (and so should actually know the answer to this question) says "Yes." He did qualify this answer: it depends on the program. Perhaps things are different over in Civil Engineering.
People are stuck on the professional question; specifically, who would hire someone who doesn’t have an undergraduate degree in engineering? May I suggest: someone who sees that the applicant holds a GRADUATE degree in engineering. Or does that simply not make sense? And if not, why not?
No, it’s “who would hire someone who doesn’t have an ABET-accredited undergraduate degree in engineering?” Speaking as a structural engineering employer, I want someone who can get his/her PE license and that usually requires an ABET-accredited undergraduate degree. The graduate degree doesn’t matter in that case (the graduate degree doesn’t trump the accreditation requirement). Also, I want someone who has taken lots of design classes as an undergrad - masonry, steel, concrete, and wood. Someone who goes straight to a graduate degree probably hasn’t taken all those courses. Sure, it’s great if he/she takes an advanced seismic design class in grad school, but those basic design classes are equally or more important.
The one thing that is being missed in this discussion is that is one professor’s view. The OP should call a few schools himself or email the departments and just ask.
I know someone at UChicago and teaches there. She goes to administration meetings. She told me two years ago that UChicago does not see engineering as a peer profession. They are like workers per se and that UChicago would never have traditional engineering. Molecular Engineering is more like becoming a scientist in this subspecialized field,an important one at that.
So that is the culture of the school. I love UChicago, don’t get me wrong.
Abet is the standard. Not every program has to abide by it. It’s like the number one question asked at every engineering university visit. So it seems very important to a lot of families sending their kids off to college.
I don’t “need” to be board certified either as a doctor. But it seems patients like and expect that. But there are many good doctors that are not. But many hospitals these days might not hire them either.
“The graduate degree doesn’t matter in that case (the graduate degree doesn’t trump the accreditation requirement).”
I think that's another area where we will have to agree to disagree.
“Also, I want someone who has taken lots of design classes as an undergrad - masonry, steel, concrete, and wood. Someone who goes straight to a graduate degree probably hasn’t taken all those courses. Sure, it’s great if he/she takes an advanced seismic design class in grad school, but those basic design classes are equally or more important.”
It sounds like you may not assign any "value-added" for a master's over and above an ABET-accredited B.Eng. That certainly could make sense for some types of engineering jobs. However, my guess is that the rigor of graduate work will speak for itself in terms of hirability. There would be no need for a Master's or PhD program if an ABET-accredited undergraduate program took care of every aspect of engineering demand.
This thread exists in a sort of bizarro world. I am an enormous fan of the University of Chicago and its undergraduate program. But there is one correct, noncontroversial answer to the OP’s question about whether it is a good idea for someone who wants to be a mechanical engineer to study physics at Chicago and then apply to engineering graduate programs?
No, it isn’t. Not if you want to be a mechanical engineer. If you want to be something else, maybe it would work.
If you are a Chicago-quality student, and if you want to combine strong humanities with engineering training, there are lots of colleges where you can do that, starting with MIT. You can look at Columbia, Brown, Penn, Princeton, Stanford, Johns Hopkins, Duke, CMU. You can look at Harvey Mudd. You can look at Swarthmore, or Smith (if you happen to be female). You can look at Harvard or Yale. I know less about what’s possible at Michigan, Berkeley, Purdue, but I bet you could make it work at those schools, too.
Chicago is just too far down the list to make it onto the list, except as an alternative in which you don’t grow up to be an engineer. (There’s nothing wrong with being something other than an engineer.) All the theoretical stuff being debated here really just goes to whether it’s absolutely impossible to accomplish your goals from Chicago or just extremely difficult. Chicago is great, but it doesn’t have exclusive rights to intellectual breadth, critical thinking, or respect for Western civilization. There are so many places where you can get that plus engineering, why would you waste time on a place where you could get that but not engineering?
“Chicago is great, but it doesn’t have exclusive rights to intellectual breadth, critical thinking, or respect for Western civilization.”
OP wasn't asking whether it did, and no one suggested such. All the other schools mentioned here are great schools. Maybe OP asked the same questions on those threads. This is the UChicago thread and OP's question was specifically in reference to that school. That's why the thread is all about UChicago (and not about MIT, Columbia, UND, etc.).
“There are so many places where you can get that plus engineering, why would you waste time on a place where you could get that but not engineering?”
OP indicated that it was the academic experience that he/she liked at UChicago - that's kind of what was behind the question. Some people might feel that one school is a better fit than another. But should OP be checking out other schools - even other top schools? Absolutely.
I know nothing of engineering (unless my brother’s being one counts!) but have followed this discussion with interest all the same. If OP could know with certainty at this early stage of his life that he was destined to be a non-theoretical sort of engineer designing widgets or building bridges (with a taste for classics on the side), then he surely ought to go to an engineering school in which he could also read Homer and think about Aristotle. But his interest in doing a masters degree suggests already a more theoretical interest and therefore the importance of taking courses in the underlying physics, chemistry and/or math at the most rigorous institution he can get himself in to. Some very rigorous institutions (as named by JHS above) offer engineering degrees, so, again, one of them in which he could read his Homer and parse his Aristotle could still be a better choice than Chicago. But the added piece that gives me pause in this is his special interest in the undergraduate experience of the U of C. He might not be satisfied in just any school in which he could dabble in classics while taking rigorous science/engineering courses. Does he know something about the culture of Chicago that has hooked him on it? In any event - but especially if he comes with these divided objectives - it is not unlikely that engineering will not be the last station on the line. Many undergraduate engineers wind up doing other things anyway - quite a few go to law school. Almost everyone in my experience (and not just at Chicago) changed course a time or two during their college years - and many of those did not start as OP is starting with a strong interest in other fields.
There are many imponderables in play here. One would have to know more about the personality and objectives of the OP to give definitive advice. But if he knows quite a lot about UChicago and fervently wants the Chicago experience he ought to go for it. If he does not, then the practical considerations outlined by so many on this board become more decisive. In any even I can at least imagine facts in which Chicago undergrad is not a bizarro move.
Many can build bridges, but few are those who love Homer and can understand Aristotle.
The disagreement here is mostly between those who are civil/structural/mech engineers, and like myself (EE/CS) and my DD’s ChemE and MolEng (ChemE), the first which I agree need a PE (and ABET is very helpful to that end) to move along in their profession and in the latter who just don’t, nor is it really applicable.
I’ll finish (for now) with one can certainly go to an ABET program and graduate with the tens of thousands of other engineers graduating from an ABET accredited universities, or one could go down the road less traveled and get a top quality liberal arts education followed by a masters in whatever engineering discipline one wanted, and be fairly unique among those with engineering degrees. I for one, know my youngest wanted a STEM education along with an elite liberal arts education which she is getting at UChicago in her double major (Molecular Engineering and Creative Writing). Anecdotally the difference in research opportunities between my older DD at her ABET flagship university and UChicago’s non ABET program were night and day in favor of UChicago. Four published research papers co-authored and interning in a National lab before her 3rd year at UChicago far outweighed by other DD’s opportunities at her university. Just saying.
So the assumption that engineering students don’t get humanities, classics etc is not correct. My sons at Michigan and the first two years is pretty much like any other student. He has had humanities etc and it is encouraged also. They want the left brain working as much as the right brain. Many engineering programs have been pushing this for years. They want the art students working with the engineering students for design projects also. Roman architecture and Greek mythology… Absolutely. This is more individual then a university requirement. If one wants to study Homer there is nothing stopping them at least at Michigan. If fact, it’s encouraged.
@CU123 - Sure, you can get a non-engineering undergraduate degree and a master’s degree from a graduate engineering school that will accept non-engineering undergrads. That is fine, but, at the end of the day you still aren’t an engineer. You are just a person holding an engineering master’s degree. As has been discussed extensively here, you do not have the design and fundamental engineering preparation needed to do engineering design work. The master’s degree gives some depth into a specific area of engineering, along with some research experience in many cases but to my view it is of limited value without the undergraduate foundation.
Biomolecular “engineering” isn’t engineering in the traditional sense. It is more of an applied science. There is no ABET program accreditation for “biomolecular engineering”, the closest would probably be chemical, materials, or biomedical engineering, so, as other posters have pointed out ABET is likely not relevant to such a program.
I’ve never seen a job ad for a “biomolecular engineer”. The OP apparently isn’t interested in doing that, so an undergrad accredited degree may not be important. Chicago actually should not be calling this an engineering program. It is more like a molecular biology/quantum science/possibly nanotechnology science program but it isn’t engineering. Biomedical and chemical engineering programs in accredited schools may have some component or electives in biomolecular/biochemical engineering or related fields. I know of mechanical/materials engineering and engineering physics programs that have nanotechnology and quantum engineering (primarily as it applies to solid state physics and devices) concentrations for example. The OP seems like he/she is more interested in becoming a research scientist than an engineer, if so, then by all means the U of C program sounds like a reasonable alternative.
@Knowsstuff - all ABET accredited schools of engineering require a significant liberal arts and humanities component. Apparently, many (not you) believe that engineering students take only engineering courses and everything else is excluded. This is of course simply not true.
He is like a pioneer in this field and the lead person at Argonne labs…
So it’s awesome to get papers done and research opportunities. They built the program this way. Not taking anything away from your child. She’s in a good place. I think UChicago is in a unique situation. But it’s great.
@Parent0347… Yeah, just huge misconception. But I learn something new every day on cc.
Again, OP should look at Linkin and the like and call companies or email them with his plan for advise. It would be interesting what they would say. There definitely will be companies willing to hire him no question. UChicago name will definitely help. If he can achieve his end goal then that’s great.
One reason my son wanted to do Industrial Engineering but plans on going into business management was that he loved the way engineers learn. This was unique to him. He did several summer and one year long engineering program in different types of engineering. His recent international internship was on the project management team with several other industrial engineers part of the company.
Different roads for different people. He won’t get a business degree and won’t need one either.