Reply to Which Top 50 colleges are weak when it comes to Engineering? And besides the obvious (MiT, Stanford, Cal), strong?

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

Reply to "Which Top 50 colleges are weak when it comes to Engineering? And besides the obvious (MiT, Stanford, Cal), strong? "

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]BC isn't weak in engineering.  Just stop.  This has to a BU or NEU troll.[/quote]

We are looking into engineering programs and think BCs is not even ABET approved yet  -

The Human-Centered Engineering program is being designed to meet the standards of ABET, the main body for accreditation of engineering programs in the United States.

An engineering program cannot apply for ABET accreditation until after it has graduated its first class. With that in mind, we expect to apply for ABET accreditation in the year following the graduation of the Class of 2025. ABET accreditation will be applied retroactively to the previous years’ classes.[/quote]

Incidentally, Stanford’s engineering programs, with the exception of CivE and MechE, are no longer ABET accredited.[/quote]

Stanford felt the ABET requirements for some of the engineering majors were too restrictive and chose to select their own major requirements.  Those Stanford grads not having trouble getting jobs [/quote]

Right. The point is that ABET accreditation doesn’t matter when selecting employees for most employers; reputation is much more important.

The only issue is that engineers without ABET degrees will find it difficult (or impossible, depending on the state) to get licensed. Licensing is required for almost all civil, and a few mechanical engineering jobs, but most graduates go into jobs that do not require licensing because of “industrial exemption.” (However, if one ever becomes a consulting engineer, usually later in their career, they will need a PE license.)

Also, Stanford faculty never liked the fact that they had to defend their program to ABET committee filled with professors (from other schools) every 7 years. That is a big reason most departments gave up accreditation.

There is a twist to the story though: [b]Stanford recently imposed a 100-unit cap on their majors (180 units are required for a BS or BA), [/b] unless more units are required for accreditation. ABET requires 120-125 units. This was opposed by almost all engineering faculty but was pushed through successfully by others. So, only CE and ME could keep their longer majors. Some other engineering departments have begun to think of re-establishing accreditation because they believe 100 units is too low to have a coherent engineering degree. However, re-accreditation process is going to be long and expensive; we’ll see where this goes.[/quote]

That is very interesting! I understand the benefits of exploring diverse areas, but placing limits on what one can learn seems contrary to the mission of a liberal arts education and would be particularly limiting in engineering. I suppose students could get over the 100-unit cap by taking related classes that are not specifically designated as engineering classes, like physics, applied math, or chemistry. This rule would make it hard to get a minor in a second engineering field. For example, a major in mechanical engineering and a minor in aerospace engineering is a useful combination, but it would be very difficult to keep one's credit hours under 100. [/quote]

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics