| |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
RANKING TOP UNDERGRADUATE CONSTRUCTION PROGRAM BY RECRUITER INTEREST PER GRADUATE |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
NATIONAL RANKING |
INSTITUTION/SPONSOR/PROGRAM |
BS GRADS |
NO. OF ORGS. RECRUITING |
RECRUITING TEAMS PER GRADUATES |
|
|
1 |
Virginia Polytech. Inst. & State U., Blacksburg |
25 |
128 |
5.12 |
|
|
2 |
North Dakota State U., Fargo |
24 |
93 |
3.875 |
|
|
3 |
California State Polytechnic U., San Luis Obispo (Arch) (ConM) |
60 |
200 |
3.333 |
|
|
4 |
Florida International U., Miami |
44 |
100 |
2.273 |
|
|
5 |
North Carolina State U., Raleigh |
40 |
90 |
2.25 |
|
|
6 |
Purdue U. Calumet, Hammond, Ind. |
19 |
40 |
2.105 |
|
|
7 |
California State U., Sacramento (CofE) (ConM) |
19 |
40 |
2.105 |
|
|
8 |
U. of Nevada, Las Vegas |
5 |
10 |
2 |
|
|
9 |
U. of New Mexico, Albuquerque |
3 |
6 |
2 |
|
|
10 |
Alfred State College, Alfred, N.Y. |
10 |
20 |
2 |
|
|
11 |
U. of Southern Mississippi, Hattiesburg |
22 |
40 |
1.818 |
|
|
12 |
Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta |
25 |
45 |
1.8 |
|
|
13 |
U. of Florida, Gainesville |
130 |
205 |
1.577 |
|
|
14 |
U. of Cincinnati, Cincinnati, Ohio |
28 |
44 |
1.571 |
|
|
15 |
Milwaukee School of Engineering, Wis. |
16 |
25 |
1.563 |
|
|
16 |
Roger Williams U., Bristol, R.I. |
9 |
14 |
1.556 |
|
|
17 |
Central Connecticut State U., New Britain |
26 |
40 |
1.538 |
|
|
18 |
U. of Arkansas, Little Rock |
16 |
24 |
1.5 |
|
|
19 |
Purdue U., West Lafayette, Ind. (CofE) (ConE and M) |
156 |
225 |
1.442 |
|
|
20 |
Purdue U., West Lafayette, Ind. (CofTech) (ConM) |
29 |
40 |
1.379 |
|
|
21 |
U. of Nebraska, Lincoln |
53 |
73 |
1.377 |
|
|
22 |
U. of Maine, Orono |
15 |
20 |
1.333 |
|
|
23 |
California State Polytechnic U., Pomona (CofE) (ConE) |
26 |
34 |
1.308 |
|
|
24 |
Murray State U., Murray, Ky. |
4 |
5 |
1.25 |
|
|
25 |
Kansas State U., Manhattan |
40 |
48 |
1.2 |
|
|
26 |
Michigan State U., East Lansing |
64 |
75 |
1.172 |
|
|
27 |
Arizona State U., Tempe |
46 |
52 |
1.13 |
|
|
28 |
Boise State U., Boise, Idaho |
18 |
20 |
1.111 |
|
|
29 |
U. of Oklahoma, Norman (Arch) (ConScience) |
32 |
35 |
1.094 |
|
|
30 |
Clemson U., Clemson, S.C. |
54 |
58 |
1.074 |
|
|
31 |
Bradley University, Peoria, Ill. |
29 |
31 |
1.069 |
|
|
32 |
Oregon State U., Corvallis |
43 |
45 |
1.047 |
|
|
33 |
Iowa State U., Ames |
59 |
60 |
1.017 |
|
|
34 |
Texas Tech U., Lubbock (CofE) (ConE) |
20 |
20 |
1 |
|
|
35 |
U. of Wisconsin-Stout, Menomonie |
50 |
50 |
1 |
|
|
36 |
Wentworth Institute of Tech., Boston, Mass. |
40 |
40 |
1 |
|
|
37 |
Auburn U., Auburn, Ala. |
77 |
77 |
1 |
|
|
38 |
Colorado State U., Fort Collins |
120 |
120 |
1 |
|
|
39 |
Ferris State U., Big Rapids., Mich. |
40 |
40 |
1 |
|
|
40 |
Louisiana State U., Baton Rouge |
86 |
85 |
0.988 |
|
|
41 |
U. of Southern California, Los Angeles |
51 |
50 |
0.98 |
|
|
42 |
U. of Wisconsin, Platteville |
51 |
50 |
0.98 |
|
|
43 |
Temple U., Philadelphia, Pa. |
16 |
15 |
0.938 |
|
|
44 |
Washington State U., Pullman |
39 |
36 |
0.923 |
|
|
45 |
Indiana State U., Terre Haute |
22 |
20 |
0.909 |
|
|
46 |
California State U., Chico (CofE) (ConM) |
93 |
80 |
0.86 |
|
|
47 |
Eastern Michigan U., Ypsilanti |
35 |
30 |
0.857 |
|
|
48 |
Oklahoma State U., Stillwater (CofE) (ConM) |
44 |
35 |
0.795 |
|
|
49 |
U. of Washington, Seattle |
51 |
40 |
0.784 |
|
|
50 |
U. of Nebraska, Omaha |
26 |
20 |
0.769 |
|
|
51 |
East Tennessee State U., Johnson City |
19 |
14 |
0.737 |
|
|
52 |
Texas A&M U., College Station (Arch) (ConScience) |
154 |
110 |
0.714 |
|
|
53 |
Penn. State Harrisburg |
34 |
24 |
0.706 |
|
|
54 |
Central Washington U., Ellensburg |
30 |
20 |
0.667 |
|
|
55 |
U. of North Florida, Jacksonville |
30 |
20 |
0.667 |
|
|
56 |
Georgia Southern U., Statesboro |
37 |
24 |
0.649 |
|
|
57 |
Indiana U.-Purdue U. Indianapolis |
50 |
30 |
0.6 |
|
|
58 |
Pennsylvania College of Tech., Williamsport |
19 |
10 |
0.526 |
|
|
59 |
Southwest Texas State U., San Marcos (CofScience) (ConE) |
20 |
10 |
0.5 |
|
|
60 |
New Jersey Institute of Technology, Newark |
20 |
10 |
0.5 |
|
|
61 |
Bowling Green State U., Bowling Green, Ohio |
40 |
20 |
0.5 |
|
|
62 |
Northern Arizona U., Flagstaff |
40 |
20 |
0.5 |
|
|
63 |
Brigham Young U., Provo, Utah |
117 |
53 |
0.453 |
|
|
64 |
Northern Kentucky U., Highland Heights |
45 |
20 |
0.444 |
|
|
65 |
John Brown U., Siloam Springs, Ark. |
7 |
3 |
0.429 |
|
|
66 |
Montana State U., Bozeman |
54 |
23 |
0.426 |
|
|
67 |
Illinois State U., Normal |
48 |
20 |
0.417 |
|
|
68 |
Tuskegee U., Tuskegee, Ala. |
5 |
2 |
0.4 |
|
|
69 |
Central Missouri State U., Warrensburg |
25 |
10 |
0.4 |
|
|
70 |
U. of Wisconsin, Madison |
50 |
20 |
0.4 |
|
|
71 |
U. of Nebraska, Kearney |
24 |
9 |
0.375 |
|
|
72 |
Minnesota State U., Moorhead |
27 |
10 |
0.37 |
|
|
73 |
East Carolina U., Greenville, N.C. |
96 |
35 |
0.365 |
|
|
74 |
South Dakota State U., Brookings |
22 |
8 |
0.364 |
|
|
75 |
Southern Polytechnic State U., Marietta, Ga. |
56 |
20 |
0.357 |
|
|
76 |
Pittsburg State U., Pittsburg, Kan. |
43 |
15 |
0.349 |
|
|
77 |
California State University, Long Beach (CofE) (ConE&M) |
41 |
13 |
0.317 |
|
|
78 |
Southern Illinois U., Edwardsville |
19 |
6 |
0.316 |
|
|
79 |
U. of Louisiana, Monroe |
35 |
11 |
0.314 |
|
|
80 |
Minnesota State U., Mankato |
32 |
10 |
0.313 |
|
|
81 |
U. of Maryland Eastern Shore, Princess Anne |
10 |
3 |
0.3 |
|
|
82 |
U. of Northern Iowa, Cedar Falls |
16 |
4 |
0.25 |
|
|
83 |
Eastern Kentucky U., Richmond |
25 |
4 |
0.16 |
|
|
NA |
State U. of New York, Syracuse |
16 |
NA |
NA |
|
|
NA |
Fairleigh Dickinson U., Teaneck, N.J. |
13 |
NA |
NA |
|
|
NA |
Southwest Missouri State U., Springfield |
12 |
NA |
NA |
|
|
NA |
U. of Denver, Denver, Colo. |
25 |
NA |
NA |
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Base data (List of Schools, BS Graduates Per School, and Recruiting Organizations Per School) were taken from a 10/29/2001 Engineering News Record (ENR) Article entitled “The Nation’s C-Schools” By David B. Rosenbaum, Debra K. Rubin with Mary B. Powers |
|
|
|
|
19November2007 at 6:04am
It is very hard to rank schools I would think considering all the variables. MSU for instance was and still is a predominate residential construction program. EMU is a Commercial/Industrial program. EMU was the first nationally accredited construction program in Michigan. So why would you even place MSU above EMU. EMU has 95% of its students working in the industry while MSU has only 5% working in the industry while attending school. To place them ahead of EMU seems rather odd to me. EMU was nationally accredited first and its graduates have far more experience in the field before graduating and on top of that I believe MSU does not have an internship requirement to graduate while EMU does.
30January2008 at 1:54pm
Are you sure about your figures for Auburn. I am in Auburn’s BSCI program and there are only thirty undergrads accepted into the program a semester. Until this years where it changed to 3o in the fall and 60 in the spring. You stated Auburn as having 77 grads when they tend to always graduate thirty to 60 depending on id the Coop students will be graduating. Also you had listed that we had 77 org recruiting, actually we average around 65. Coming from our placement coordinator, we have consistently had two job offers for each grad. Since the program has been established we have had 100% placement of all undergraduates. Just wanted to see where this would place Auburn in your rankings. Thanks
30January2008 at 2:44pm
Seaborn – Thanks for your posting. You should check out the following posting for additional information on the ranking system — including it’s limitations:
http://cschool.wordpress.com/2006/12/11/inaugural-ranking-of-the-top-undergraduate-construction-schools/
Keep in mind that these rankings are based off of data from 2001.
Auburn is a great construction school and you will be well prepared to contribute to the construction industry upon graduation.
- Mike
30January2008 at 9:37pm
Thank you,
I have really enjoyed reading all of these statistics. Will you be doing this again any time soon with the latest statistics? Regardless, very good information
thanks
Seaborn
4October2008 at 4:52pm
I love this blog site and all the information it offers. I am a CM major at Southern Polytechnic State. In my college selection process, I was constantly looking for rankings on c-schools and the only thing that I was able to find of any help was the rankings you had listed. I would love to see some newer rankings that include some more variables that are involved with construction programs. Thanks for all the information!