Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
"Good" and "Excellent" are somewhat ill-defined terms, and therefore there is little point to arguing with someone's personal sense of "good" and "excellent". However, "average" is a term with a more precise meaning. And with 262 "national universities" in the rankings, to claim that the "average" range is those universities ranked from #50 to #100 is simply misusing the term.
Anyhow, I have no idea what field you're working in but it does not sound like its engineering, computer science or any related field. Saying that English majors at CMU aren't any better than those at Pitt after all isn't very interesting. Anyhow, my comment was directly related to CS, engineering etc as this is what the OP is interested in. When Pitt CS, computer engineering etc students take courses at CMU they usually get killed, because the courses at CMU are far more rigorous. This shouldn't be surprising considering CMU has one of the highest ranked CS departments in the country.
I think this is just rather silly. CMU is getting the best of the best in computer science, computer engineering, etc ...Pitt well...not even close. The undergrads in the computing related fields at CMU are extremely smart, if you are trying to judge their intelligence by their writing......I don't know what to tell you.
It was not clear in the post I originally responded to that you were specifically referring to the difference between CMU's computer science department and Pitt's computer science department. In fact, throughout this discussion it seemed as though you were discussing differences in academic rigor between the two schools in general, across departments.
If it is the case that you are only discussing computer science, then I completely agree with you that CMU probably has much higher standards and its undergraduate students are stronger academically than those at Pitt. And it very well might be the case that CS Pitt students do have trouble with CMU CS courses.
Re: my field - In fact I am doing some collaborative research with people at CMU that could technically be categorized as computer science, although I do not have a CS degree myself. Many of my collaborators (but not all of them) are housed in a CS-related department, so my anecdotal tales above are still relevant to your preferred topic. As Katiana herself would tell you, be careful with those assumptions about people you only know through their posts on the internets...
As far as judging the relative scholarly merit (note: I didn't say "intelligence") of students, I personally feel after many years of teaching that writing is a good measure of academic competence for undergrads in many disciplines. Clear written expression of thought generally reflects clear thinking and an overall sense of care for one's academic work. Even engineers and the like, who can reasonably be held to lower general standards than English majors, should be able to express themselves effectively within their discipline. And I personally do not feel that it is possible to have an academic career like the one BrianTH discussed - in ANY discipline - without being a good writer. Your opinion clearly differs, and (as people often say to you here) it has been duly noted by others (but does not necessarily represent fact).
According to this report on research universities, Pitt is in pretty elite company (and ranks higher overall than CMU, by the way): http://mup.asu.edu/research2007.pdf
My opinion has been changed. The above document ranks research universities. As far as I'm concerned, this is a superior ranking, as it discards those subjects that don't directly contribute to economic expansion. (Although an argument could be made for an affimative contribution from service fields like accounting, law, etc....but that's not what I'm talking about here.)
Anyway, here are the Ph.D. factories. Here are the schools that underpin the national economy. Here are the schools that drive technological advancement. Here are the schools that attract the best and brightest faculty and students.....
I've listed the top performers.....and Pitt is right there.
Columbia University
Harvard University
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Stanford University
University of Pennsylvania
Duke University
University of California - Berkeley
University of Michigan - Ann Arbor
Johns Hopkins University
Yale University
University of California - Los Angeles
University of Washington - Seattle
University of Wisconsin - Madison
University of Minnesota - Twin Cities
Washington University in St. Louis
University of California - San Francisco
Northwestern University
University of Chicago
University of California - San Diego
Univ. of North Carolina - Chapel Hill
Princeton University
Cornell University
University of Southern California
Ohio State University - Columbus
Pennsylvania State Univ. - Univ. Park
University of Florida
Univ. of Illinois - Urbana-Champaign
University of Texas - Austin
University of Pittsburgh - Pittsburgh
Vanderbilt University
California Institute of Technology
Texas A&M University
I don't know much about computer engineering and electrical engineering, but I'd like to make a couple of observations:
1) In engineering in general--in most rankings--Pitt seems to be about in the middle of the pack nationally. Is that good? or bad? or average? Sounds average to me.
2) In comparison to CMU as the other local research university with engineering, well, yes, CMU far outranks Pitt on nearly every measure. CMU began as "Carnegie Tech" and ranks with schools like MIT, Caltech, etc. And CMU is usually considered the top-rated computer science program in the country, so yes, it's going to outrank Pitt. (However, forgive me if I'm wrong about this, but aren't "computer engineering" and "computer science" different albeit related fields, like "mechanical engineering" and "applied physics"?)
3) I'm sure it would be interesting to speculate about why Pitt's engineering programs are not top-rated nationally and how much of it is related to having CMU next door. Anyone know the history of engineering at Pitt? (I would note that up in Cambridge, MA, aka the "Oakland of Boston," Harvard pretty much went out of the engineering business for a long time--I think they recently created or re-created an "engineering and applied science" division to try to beef things up. In any case, I don't think anyone thinks this means that Harvard is overall a mediocre school or that Harvard students wouldn't be able to handle a course at MIT.)
4) I'm pretty sure this ranking site is tongue-in-cheek, but it's interesting that Pitt shows up in the top group in computer engineering which is one of the areas that the OP asked about: Google-based Ranking of Computer Science and Engineering Departments.
And while the measure used is silly overall, it does suggest that Pitt is fairly active in this area, at least.
5) As far as the OP is concerned, we don't know whether he is a PA resident. If so, and he is looking to finish an undergraduate degree, transferring to Pitt for those two engineering fields sounds like a reasonable economic decision. If he can get into CMU for those fields and is out-of-state (or in-state and wealthy or can get financial aid to make up the difference between the cost of Pitt and CMU), then yes, I would say that he ought to be looking at CMU as well as Pitt. If he goes to CMU, he's at the top computer science school in the country and at one of the top engineering schools in the world. Otherwise, if he goes to Pitt, he will end up at a middle-ranked engineering program at a major research university with a growing national reputation in science and technology. That doesn't sound so bad either.
6) One last note: if engineering works like other fields, where ones goes as an undergrad matters somewhat less then how one does in school, what kinds of internships one does, etc. Yes, if one goes to a school that an employer or grad school admissions committee has never heard of, there could be a problem, and yes, if one's resume is being compared to someone's resume from a significantly higher-ranked school, the resume from the "name" school might get looked at first. But could someone with more expertise in scientific and technical fields tell us: is a resume with Pitt Engineering on it going to get tossed in the circular file? Somehow, I doubt it.
if one's resume is being compared to someone's resume from a significantly higher-ranked school, the resume from the "name" school might get looked at first. But could someone with more expertise in scientific and technical fields tell us: is a resume with Pitt Engineering on it going to get tossed in the circular file? Somehow, I doubt it.
It depends on what kind of jobs is being applied for and the number of slots the hiring party is trying to fill. But with things like grad school applications or serious full time research positions I would replace "might get looked at first" with "will most likely get looked at first"...
But any reasonable resume isn't going to get tossed until the end of the current hiring cycle. And you can strengthen your resume with strong reference letters (e.g. from faculty whose research you've worked on, or from technical summer internships). Co-authoring a paper that gets accepted to a good research conference will also be quite helpful (and will make your reference letters even stronger).
is a resume with Pitt Engineering on it going to get tossed in the circular file? Somehow, I doubt it.
It's like you said.....Internships and what professor you work for play very important roles, as does reputation.
This kicker is that, the best professors are overwhelmingly in the top departments, and the best students are overwhelmingly attracted to the name-brand schools, so the best companies mine these departments for the best interns, etc....So while it's certainly possible to go to a mediocre school, work for a great professor, and get great interships. It's much much harder.
One other question, then: is Pitt's engineering and computer science faculty better than expected given where the school ranks (and do human resources officers know this if it is true)?
In other words, can we expect that a new PhD might turn down a job at a higher-ranked school (say in a midwestern college town) for a job at Pitt in order to a) live in a major city and/or b) be close to CMU faculty [and other sci/tech/engineering researchers at private companies] for possible collaboration, conversation, intellectual community, etc.
6) One last note: if engineering works like other fields, where ones goes as an undergrad matters somewhat less then how one does in school, what kinds of internships one does, etc. Yes, if one goes to a school that an employer or grad school admissions committee has never heard of, there could be a problem, and yes, if one's resume is being compared to someone's resume from a significantly higher-ranked school, the resume from the "name" school might get looked at first. But could someone with more expertise in scientific and technical fields tell us: is a resume with Pitt Engineering on it going to get tossed in the circular file? Somehow, I doubt it.
I don't know anything about engineering or Pitt engineering, but in my field (arguably scientific/technical depending on how strict one's definition is), many factors contribute to a successful graduate school admission. One of these factors is indeed the prestige of a school. Someone coming in from Harvard is going to get a more serious look than someone coming in from Small State U. However, it's not even close to being the most important factor. This is just my own personal opinion, of course, but if I had to take a guess at how various factors were ranked, they would go like this:
1) Grades
2) GRE Scores
3) Letters of rec - an applicant with research experience in the lab of a famous or well-respected person in the field will have a *huge* boost vs. the competition
4) Quality of the writing sample or applicant statement submitted
5) Match between stated applicant interests and the interests of the lab he/she is applying for
6) Prestige of undergraduate institution
Although some of these factors are more important than others, successful applicants in my field typically have all or most of them to one degree or another. Being very strong in a higher ranked category (like GRE scores) can easily make up for a lack in another category (like the prestige of one's undergrad institution).
So if engineering is anything like my field, the OP shouldn't worry as much about enrolling at a mid-range school like Pitt as he/she should about getting good grades, studying hard for the GREs, and forging good relationships with his/her professors.
Edited to add: in my field, at least, the labs with the most prestige are not always at the top ranked schools, or even the top ranked programs within the wider discipline. If an undergrad was asking my opinion about whether it would be more pragmatic to go to a very prestigious school where there are no famous scientists vs. a mediocre school where they would work in the lab of someone very well-respected, I would definitely suggest the latter choice with no hesitation. This goes for choosing grad schools too.
In other words, can we expect that a new PhD might turn down a job at a higher-ranked school (say in a midwestern college town) for a job at Pitt in order to a) live in a major city and/or b) be close to CMU faculty [and other sci/tech/engineering researchers at private companies] for possible collaboration, conversation, intellectual community, etc.
Humanoid will undoubtably tell you that this idea is laughable and that he can't fathom anyone ever doing this.
I will tell you that I personally know someone who did this, and for the reasons you stated (but it wasn't a midwestern college down - it was a very fancy schmancy expensive private school in New England). His Pitt career seems to be going well so far.
Please register to post and access all features of our very popular forum. It is free and quick. Over $68,000 in prizes has already been given out to active posters on our forum. Additional giveaways are planned.
Detailed information about all U.S. cities, counties, and zip codes on our site: City-data.com.
Please register to participate in our discussions with 2 million other members - it's free and quick! Some forums can only be seen by registered members. After you create your account, you'll be able to customize options and access all our 15,000 new posts/day with fewer ads.
