Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Sure. Most are at schools already highly ranked but I’m thinking of schools where the engineering specific ranking is much higher.
University of Illinois Urbana-Champaign, Perdue, UW, VT, Texas A&M, Ohio State, UMCP, Penn State, UCSD.

Are you asking why land grant universities that were founded 150+ years ago to teach engineering by charter have well regarded engineering programs? Cause there seems to be an obvious answer to that.

+1

Who cares why they were founded but why not have a discussion on whether one or more has become simply a well endowed engineering factory with large classes taught by graduate TAs with inconsistent quality from year to year, possibility limited individualized attention from tenured faculty until junior/year year all while dealing with
hunger games type scheduling for access to superior labs…or perhaps the employment outcomes and quality of the students who graduate from these “non-elite” but well regarded land grant schools truly are a cut above…having two lists makes it difficult to know.
Weird

But do go back to boosting your favored tiny, limited schools and insisting that they're somehow offering a better education.

Based on survey responses, a college like Harvey Mudd may offer such an advantageous environment:

Best Colleges for Classroom Experience | The Princeton Review https://share.google/JyWnBPoxl4SKUrtMP

Based on the same source, undergraduate-focused colleges with strong engineering programs, such as Harvey Mudd, Rose-Hulman and Lafayette, also may offer sophisticated lab facilities:

Best Colleges for Science Lab Facilities | The Princeton Review https://share.google/8KC9oodjgXSFlmVqB

C'mon man you are trying to hard but are misdirected. For top Engineering schools we are not talking about "science labs' for goodness sakes. For Engineering it's all about Makerspaces. This is where Engineering and research is done. The Top Schools have the best and these are mostly all doctorate programs because of the research done at these schools that a lot is funded by private companies because of the value of the research coming out of these schools. Not even close

There is a middle ground between large state universities and LACs, mid-size private universities.

I can see why having a doctorate program can provide an edge to a college in terms of rankings. As in life, you always need mentors that can guide you. So undergraduates that get to work in labs with doctoral students is a huge plus IMO that has value. So - back to the question of ranking - under grads that have access to labs and doctoral students that they can work with does matter (not to mention the breadth of offerings, multi-disciplinary majors etc). The smaller schools are more limited in that regards. Where the smaller schools excel is around the faculty-student interactions. In my experience, the smaller selective colleges (without doctoral) have faculty that genuinely love to teach

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Why would it matter when deciding where to apply for engineering whether the program offers a doctorate degree?

U.S. News doesn't use such a distinction as an indicator of the quality of undergraduate engineering programs. I believe you somehow have misunderstood their rankings.

Yes, I believe they do. -DP.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-doctorate (doctorate offered)
https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/engineering-overall?myCollege=engineering-no-doctorate&_sort=myCollege&_sortDirection=asc (no doctorate offered)

U.S. News has organized engineering rankings by category without commenting on category quality.

Actually this is how all the US News rankings are. The main difference between “national” abd “regional” universities is whether they offer several PHD programs. DCUM probably considers a #1 ranked Regional University as not prestigious…..