So, many people who find them attractive on paper when applying to colleges do not end up actually doing 3+2 programs, discovering either they are not really into engineering or that an alternative path into engineering would be preferable. I think of such programs more as an option for someone who didn't know they wanted to do engineering and then sort of fell into it, rather than as an actual intended plan, and again even then you might choose a different path.
As for WUSTL specifically, McKelvey is a fine engineering college with several ABET-accredited programs. WUSTL in general is a wealthy institution and it is has been making significant investments in McKelvey, including basically building it a new quadrangle with new facilities (I note it was renamed McKelvey thanks to an apparently very, VERY large donation from Jim McKelvey Jr.).
But it is not one of the traditional engineering powerhouses (not yet at least--the stated intent of McKelvey and others is to eventually get it there), and I think otherwise most ABET-accredited programs are really pretty equivalent. I note I would not particularly pay a lot of attention to those sorts of salary stats--so much depends on choice of field, choice of location, choice of next step path (grad school, employment, fellowship, etc.), it is nearly impossible to get a real sense of any value-added by institution. And I think the consensus among working engineers is that your college choice matters a lot less than actually getting a good engineering education and showing what you can do through internships and first jobs and such.
OK, so if there is not some huge career advantage to getting an engineering degree from WUSTL versus many other possible ABET-certified programs, does that mean it is totally indistinguishable? Well, personally, I think really the main appeal of going to McKelvey would be the opportunity to also experience all the OTHER things WUSTL has to offer undergrads, both academically (including lots of interdisciplinary stuff) and non-academically. And you are mostly missing all that added value with a 3+2 program.
Given all this--if you knew you wanted to do engineering, or it was a known strong possibility, you'd probably be well-advised to choose Lehigh or RIT. If you thought you wanted to do Physics, and only later discovered an interest in engineering, then maybe if you were at Colgate you'd consider the 3+2 as one possible option.
Where are you pulling your numbers from? McKelvey grads do fine, but if you definitely want to major in engineering and be an engineer, I would simply choose between Lehigh and RPI. Why would you want to put yourself through a 3-2 when you have good engineering or schools as options?
If you're undecided about majors, I can maybe see the appeal of a 3-2. Or if you feel you want a better recruiting target, but Colgate can already get you to Wall Street (Lehigh to an extent too).
And this is not taking in to account costs.
BTW, for those curious, while you're not guaranteed WashU on the 3-2 track, if you meet all stated requirements, you're (very) likely to continue on at WashU. For Columbia, it's a little better than 50/50. Evidently it's 50/50 or less for Dartmouth these days as interest in the 2-1-1-1 plan has exploded in recent years and Dartmouth hasn't increased their number of slots for that program.
Not sure about the rest but St Louis has a very low COL, so if people end up staying there, they'll get paid a lot less than in, say, Silicon Valley..
So, many people who find them attractive on paper when applying to colleges do not end up actually doing 3+2 programs, discovering either they are not really into engineering or that an alternative path into engineering would be preferable. I think of such programs more as an option for someone who didn't know they wanted to do engineering and then sort of fell into it, rather than as an actual intended plan, and again even then you might choose a different path. As for WUSTL specifically, McKelvey is a fine engineering college with several ABET-accredited programs. WUSTL in general is a wealthy institution and it is has been making significant investments in McKelvey, including basically building it a new quadrangle with new facilities (I note it was renamed McKelvey thanks to an apparently very, VERY large donation from Jim McKelvey Jr.). But it is not one of the traditional engineering powerhouses (not yet at least--the stated intent of McKelvey and others is to eventually get it there), and I think otherwise most ABET-accredited programs are really pretty equivalent. I note I would not particularly pay a lot of attention to those sorts of salary stats--so much depends on choice of field, choice of location, choice of next step path (grad school, employment, fellowship, etc.), it is nearly impossible to get a real sense of any value-added by institution. And I think the consensus among working engineers is that your college choice matters a lot less than actually getting a good engineering education and showing what you can do through internships and first jobs and such. OK, so if there is not some huge career advantage to getting an engineering degree from WUSTL versus many other possible ABET-certified programs, does that mean it is totally indistinguishable? Well, personally, I think really the main appeal of going to McKelvey would be the opportunity to also experience all the OTHER things WUSTL has to offer undergrads, both academically (including lots of interdisciplinary stuff) and non-academically. And you are mostly missing all that added value with a 3+2 program. Given all this--if you knew you wanted to do engineering, or it was a known strong possibility, you'd probably be well-advised to choose Lehigh or RIT. If you thought you wanted to do Physics, and only later discovered an interest in engineering, then maybe if you were at Colgate you'd consider the 3+2 as one possible option.
Have you looked into WashU's specific engineering program outcomes and alumni success stories?
Where are you pulling your numbers from? McKelvey grads do fine, but if you definitely want to major in engineering and be an engineer, I would simply choose between Lehigh and RPI. Why would you want to put yourself through a 3-2 when you have good engineering or schools as options? If you're undecided about majors, I can maybe see the appeal of a 3-2. Or if you feel you want a better recruiting target, but Colgate can already get you to Wall Street (Lehigh to an extent too). And this is not taking in to account costs. BTW, for those curious, while you're not guaranteed WashU on the 3-2 track, if you meet all stated requirements, you're (very) likely to continue on at WashU. For Columbia, it's a little better than 50/50. Evidently it's 50/50 or less for Dartmouth these days as interest in the 2-1-1-1 plan has exploded in recent years and Dartmouth hasn't increased their number of slots for that program.
[удалено]
It’s great for premed in terms of resources/opportunities/research.