The 20 Smallest B.S. Biomedical Engineering Graduating Classes In 2007

There are any number of reasons why these are small graduating classes.  The most likely is that the listed schools have only recently inaugurated their Biomedical Engineering programs.   A number of schools took advantage of the Biomedical Engineering program grants by the now defunct Whitaker Foundation before it ceased to exist in 2005.   The foundation supported the creation of at least 30 programs.  Personally I don’t believe that a small graduating class has anything to do with the quality of a program.  It would be wise for prospective students and their parents to ask about plans for accreditation at these schools.  It will be interesting to see the statistics when the 2008 data becomes available to the general public.

School Total Graduates Males Females
Louisiana Tech University 17 10 7
Brown University 16 8 8
Wright State University-Main Campus 16 10 6
University of Akron Main Campus 14 9 5
Bucknell University 13 5 8
CUNY City College 12 9 3
University of Central Oklahoma 12 9 3
University of Alabama at Birmingham 10 6 4
Washington State University 9 5 4
University of Rhode Island 8 6 2
University of Idaho 8 7 1
George Washington University 8 6 2
Western New England College 8 4 4
Catholic University of America 7 5 2
University of Houston 6 4 2
Alfred University 4 3 1
LeTourneau University 3 2 1
University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign 1 1 0
California Polytechnic State University-San Luis Obispo 1 1 0
Dordt College 1 0 1

Business: Is Corporate America Trying to Drive a Message Home to Academia?

The academic community appears is getting increased attention from Corporate America.  In 2008 a large technically focused business and a respected business magazine have both made an effort to make a statement to academia about what they value.

In 2008 Boeing distributed its ranking and critiques of 150 engineering departments based on the performance of their graduates at the corporation to the universities and colleges privately.  Why privately?  Apparently many of the deans of the engineering programs and institutions didn’t want the information to be public and Boeing acquiesced.  Why would the deans of these engineering programs be so sensitive to this particular ranking when others such as those by News and World Report are already available?  The answer is suggested by a statement in the Chronicle of Higher Education article  “Boeing to Rank Colleges by Measuring Graduates’ Job Success”, September 19, 2008.

“…some lesser-known institutions will be revealed as having done an  “excellent” job of producing high-performing Boeing engineers, Mr. Stephens said, without identifying any such colleges ahead of their expected notification.”

Of the “colleges receiving Boeing’s employee analysis, said Ms. Oldham, who was executive director of the Spellings Commission, “it’s exactly what they would want to know about how well they are preparing their students to go out into the business world.”

If this is the case then it is reasonable to expect that there were a number of other surprises in the rankings.  Although the deans surely prized the information it is apparent that they didn’t want to be held accountable to the public for the results.  Their need for secrecy suggests that a number of engineering programs are not meeting the expectations of the students and parents that invested in them.

In addition Forbes, a respected business magazine, inaugurated a new college ranking report in 2008.  Its ranking has a decidely business approach.  Here is a quote describing its rationale and the method used to rank the colleges.

“In conjunction with Dr. Richard Vedder, an economist at Ohio University, and the Center for College Affordability and Productivity, Forbes.com inaugurates its first ranking of America’s Best Colleges, an annual list. In this report, the CCAP ranks 569 undergraduate institutions based on the quality of the education they provide, and how much their students achieve.

The best school in the nation? Princeton University, followed closely by the California Institute of Technology, Harvard, Swarthmore and Williams. The U.S. Military Academy at West Point came in sixth on our rankings, spearheading a generally strong showing by all the service academies.

Top 50 U.S. Colleges
Top Private Colleges
Top Public Colleges
Complete College Rankings

CCAP’s methodology attempts to put itself in a student’s shoes. How good will my professors be? Will the school help me achieve notable career success? If I have to borrow to pay for college, how deeply will I go into debt? What are the chances I will graduate in four years? Are students and faculty recognized nationally, or even globally?”

Granted ranking universities and colleges is a tricky process which is full of potential pitfalls.  For instance this particular  ranking is limited to 569  of the 4000 colleges in the U.S.   However the U.S. News and World rankings use the opinion of  Academic Deans as one of the basis for their ranking.  The choice of resources and the methodology used to create the rankings by Dr. Vedder and his student researchers appears to be fair.   They reflect the type of customer oriented information that can help consumers to make an educated decision.  Institutions could help the consumer in this process if they published student outcomes statistics of their own.  Some for-profits, for instance, do publish their graduates success rates at obtaining a job. However until that changes it appears that the public will have to do with indirect measures and their own gut feelings about an engineering program and a university.

Forbes College and University Rankings 2008

Some interesting surprises occurred this year.

Forbes College and University Rankings 2009

Bookmark and Share

Education: Parents and Students Should Insist On Seeing Student Outcomes Statistics for Biomedical Engineering Programs

Over the last decade there has been a shift in focus by regional post secondary school accrediting agencies to require colleges and universities to demonstrate how their programs positively impact there students after graduation.  The term used to identify this type of activity is “student outcomes”.  In my opinion the reason parents and students decide to get a post secondary education is to improve the students chances of getting a good paying job.  As a result the ultimate student outcome to track would be how well students graduating from university fair at getting a job after graduation.  A number of for-profit institutions publish this type of student outcome information publicly.  Unfortunately, as the article below notes, many traditional universities have fought against reporting this type of information during the last decade.  But things may be changing. Recently a group of educational institutions have taken a small step forward by agreeing to publish their students results on standardized tests designed to measure how much they have learned during their education.  They haven’t decided to report how well their graduates fair in getting a position after graduation but it is an important first step down that path.

The willingness of a university or a department to provide student outcomes information should be taken into account when making the final choice of which college and program to attend.   In my opinion, its availability and quality speaks volumes about the attention the department/program pays to careers in its field and its attention to the welfare of its students after graduation.  Parents and students don’t have to wait for a program to decide to produce this information.  They can ask for it during the orientation.  Please feel free to reference the article below when you do.

How Much Do Colleges Really Teach Students

Bookmark and Share

Engineers Trounce Other Degrees and Make Up Largest Number of S&P 500 CEO’s

Here are some interesting statistics about the educational make up of the S&P 500 CEO’s in 2008. It turns out that 22% of the 500 CEO’s received an engineering degree. Even more interesting is the observation that 47% of the CEO’s had received degrees which rely heavily on mathematics – Engineering, Economics, and Accounting. The most common thread among the CEO’s was that 40% had worked in operations. Most CEO’s held either operations (31% ) or finance ( 17% ) positions just before getting their current position.

This result is an interesting contrast to the education that engineering programs give their graduates. What would the percentage of engineers as CEO’s and managers be if programs required a single course in business?

See 2008 Route to the Top

Bookmark and Share

Biomedical Engineer: Senior Engineering Position Requiring Solid Core in Traditional Engineering

I have suggested a number of times on this blog that biomedical engineering programs need to increase the level of traditional engineering content.  Here is an anecdotal example of a corporation asking for this type of experience for a senior Principal Research Engineer position. Whoever created the description had been told or had decided that only Biomedical Engineer/Bioengineer degrees with a “solid core” of traditional engineering would be acceptable. Note the degree level to which this applies to is M.S. and Ph.D. No similar requirement was given for the other engineering degrees. The requirement can’t be used because the other acceptable degrees are traditional engineering degrees. The description clearly implies that they are not interested in seriously considering the qualifications of individuals without significant traditional engineering coursework or experience applying traditional engineering theory. I think the implications are clear for newly graduated B.S. Biomedical Engineers/Bioengineers as well. New hires and advancement at this corporation need to demonstrate significant traditional engineering education or experience.

This is only one corporation for a sampling of similar feedback from engineers working in the medical device and pharmaceutical field see:

Biomedical Industry Feedback

Excerpt from job announcement;

“SOURCE: Respironics
POSITION: Principal Research Engineer(2309BR)
REQUIREMENTS:
Education: MS or PhD in Electrical Engineering, Mechanical Engineering,
or Materials Science; or Biomedical Engineering (BME) / Bioengineering
with solid core in traditional engineering disciplines.”

Bookmark and Share