CMU vs UCLA for MS in ECE / EE

[peter007]

Hi,

I have gotten into the Masters program at CMU (ECE) , UCLA (EE) , UPenn (Emb Sys), Columbia (Comp. Engineering).

Among these schools I am looking towards CMU and UCLA right now. My field is Embedded Sensing and Sensor Networks. Now UCLA has amazing labs in this domain. Truly legendary profs in exactly my field of interest. But CMU is a great brand too especially in ECE and great faculty for Emb. Sys. but with slightly different areas than my exact domain of interest. I also know that my interests might expand after going to graduate school. Can some users shed light on which school to choose based on (higher rank->more weightage)-

1. Research and Funding opportunities

2. Job Opportunities /Summer Intern opportunities(I especially want to know how UCLA is in this regard)

3. Stepping Stone for a possible PhD at the same or a higher ranked program.

4. Cost and Living expense

5. Campus and overall student experience.

[newms]

Congratulations on your excellent choices! Does any of the two come with funding? If one did and the other didn't, then that could have a big impact on your choice. I'm not too sure about the two programs you're deciding between, but I would certainly imagine that LA has a significantly higher cost of living than Pittsburgh. Are the Master's programs you got admitted to terminal, or research-based? If they are terminal (or course work based) then that could limit your possibility of getting into a PhD program afterwards. If you want to do a PhD, then a research based MS is much better than a terminal one. Good luck!

[peter007]

Congratulations on your excellent choices! Does any of the two come with funding? If one did and the other didn't, then that could have a big impact on your choice. I'm not too sure about the two programs you're deciding between, but I would certainly imagine that LA has a significantly higher cost of living than Pittsburgh. Are the Master's programs you got admitted to terminal, or research-based? If they are terminal (or course work based) then that could limit your possibility of getting into a PhD program afterwards. If you want to do a PhD, then a research based MS is much better than a terminal one. Good luck!

Thanks for the reply.

Both are research based and without funding. On pure brand people say CMU is pretty good when it comes to jobs and internships. I am assuming it will at least give me a shot with some top PhD programs. What are your views on this and on similar opportunities at UCLA ?