CMU Energy Science Policy vs. MIT Technology and Policy

[sanraymond]

Hey everyone, this is Ray. I am an environmental chemistry and public policy major in college and looking to switch into power and energy field. I was looking for a master program that may better train me in this field and eventually help me get into PhD. I was committed to CMU until I woke up this morning to find a post April-15 admission to MIT that really struck me off balance.

Back in February I was placed on Waitlist by the MIT Technology and Policy Master Program (TPP) and was told that I will be notified before April 15^th. I was later admitted by Carnegie Mellon’s Energy Science Technology and Policy (ESTP), with concentration in Electrical and Computer Engineering and had a month to make a decision before their April 5^th deadline.

Thinking there is basically no prospect of getting into MIT from the waitlist, I accept the admission at CMU. But yesterday I decided to send an email to MIT just hoping to get a definitive answer, like a formal rejection. But I woke up this morning to find an admission letter. The program director said then had sent me the admission in March but apparently it never landed in my Hotmail (same thing happened to my Duke decision) and April 15^th was their decision deadline. Nevertheless, the director is still willing to extend this offer.

Here are some break downs for the two programs. I will really appreciate if some of you may help me a bit with making the decision. Thanks!

[sanraymond]

Realized that I made a really long post, so maybe its slightly better that I separate it into to posts

Reasons for CMU

1. Commitment: By now I feel I am fairly committed to the school. Not only that I have accept their offer, I actually just made class selection this morning. There is nothing about the program that I dislike so I feel really bad to pull myself out from it.

2.     Energy specific focus: both programs are sort of Engineer and Public Policy program, but ESTP was specifically designed for energy focus, and I feel I will much more likely to find like-minded people there. It offers a whole list of courses in energy and power. Energy was a theme for the technical emphasis of the MIT program, but nothing is formalized and I energy and grid research doesn’t seem big at MIT’s electrical engineering department. Moreover, the CMU program is part of the Engineering School, whereas the TPP program seems to be rooted in the Institution of Data Science and Society. Considering the relative autonomy of MIT departments, I may not have a lot of exposure from the energy science studies.

Reasons for MIT

1.     Program length: the two-year program at MIT would give me more time to learn that the 1.5 year CMU program. Considering that I am switching field, 1.5 year is really quite short to build anything from ground zero in electrical engineering. I had taken classes in energy and interned in the field, but I am definitely lacking the technical knowledge in electrical energy. I fear that I may not gain as much as I would like at CMU.

2.     Prospect for PhD and research: This one is kind of tough to say. While CMU has focuses specifically on Energy, its more professional oriented. The program was originally 1-year pure course program and only last year they established an “applied study” focus on research/project. On the other hand, MIT TPP may not give my many exposures to energy study and research, it had an embedded thesis component in every semester so I will likely to come up with a more polished research product in the end when going into PhD.

3.       Reputation: CMU is definitely famous, but there are very few schools that can compete with MIT. But this mostly concerns the two programs. The MIT TPP program was established back in 70s, whereas the ESTP program at CMU is only 6 years old and definitely less recognized. I am actually worried that this can cause problem within the University when competing for class and research opportunities with actual ECE students.