UT Austin thoughts?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC is at UT Austin for CS and in an honors program. Loves it and it has been great. I’ve become a big fan as well. DC has had challenging courses and learned a lot. DCs also had great and multiple internship opportunities. Austin is a tech hub - Tesla and Oracle HQed in Austin. BTW - DC also got into Michigan and Cornell for CS but decided to go UT.

Pros- they take many by HS credits. DC will finish in 3 years. Tuition - even OOS - is reasonable and he was able to become instate. Climate during the school year. It’s the south, and everyone is nice and welcoming.

Cons - it’s far from the DC area. Housing is not guaranteed, even freshman year. Apts are beautiful with rooftop pools, etc but expensive. Large campus.

For those who say UT Austin is second tier. Here’s the list from the UK Govt with “prestigious” universities. UT Austin is listed alongside Michigan, HYP, and Berkeley.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list-2022

where is UVA and UNC?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC is at UT Austin for CS and in an honors program. Loves it and it has been great. I’ve become a big fan as well. DC has had challenging courses and learned a lot. DCs also had great and multiple internship opportunities. Austin is a tech hub - Tesla and Oracle HQed in Austin. BTW - DC also got into Michigan and Cornell for CS but decided to go UT.

Pros- they take many by HS credits. DC will finish in 3 years. Tuition - even OOS - is reasonable and he was able to become instate. Climate during the school year. It’s the south, and everyone is nice and welcoming.

Cons - it’s far from the DC area. Housing is not guaranteed, even freshman year. Apts are beautiful with rooftop pools, etc but expensive. Large campus.

For those who say UT Austin is second tier. Here’s the list from the UK Govt with “prestigious” universities. UT Austin is listed alongside Michigan, HYP, and Berkeley.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list-2022

Did he get Turing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC is at UT Austin for CS and in an honors program. Loves it and it has been great. I’ve become a big fan as well. DC has had challenging courses and learned a lot. DCs also had great and multiple internship opportunities. Austin is a tech hub - Tesla and Oracle HQed in Austin. BTW - DC also got into Michigan and Cornell for CS but decided to go UT.

Pros- they take many by HS credits. DC will finish in 3 years. Tuition - even OOS - is reasonable and he was able to become instate. Climate during the school year. It’s the south, and everyone is nice and welcoming.

Cons - it’s far from the DC area. Housing is not guaranteed, even freshman year. Apts are beautiful with rooftop pools, etc but expensive. Large campus.

For those who say UT Austin is second tier. Here’s the list from the UK Govt with “prestigious” universities. UT Austin is listed alongside Michigan, HYP, and Berkeley.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list-2022

where is UVA and UNC?

The ones that are on the list (UT, Cal, UCLA, UCSB, UW, Illinois, Michigan) are more or less the schools the UK sees as putting out a number of high quality graduates in strategic fields like computer and data science, biotechnology, etc. More than UVA, UNC, and Florida, it is a bit surprising that Georgia Tech is not on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC is at UT Austin for CS and in an honors program. Loves it and it has been great. I’ve become a big fan as well. DC has had challenging courses and learned a lot. DCs also had great and multiple internship opportunities. Austin is a tech hub - Tesla and Oracle HQed in Austin. BTW - DC also got into Michigan and Cornell for CS but decided to go UT.

Pros- they take many by HS credits. DC will finish in 3 years. Tuition - even OOS - is reasonable and he was able to become instate. Climate during the school year. It’s the south, and everyone is nice and welcoming.

Cons - it’s far from the DC area. Housing is not guaranteed, even freshman year. Apts are beautiful with rooftop pools, etc but expensive. Large campus.

For those who say UT Austin is second tier. Here’s the list from the UK Govt with “prestigious” universities. UT Austin is listed alongside Michigan, HYP, and Berkeley.

https://www.gov.uk/government/publications/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list/high-potential-individual-visa-global-universities-list-2022

where is UVA and UNC?

The ones that are on the list (UT, Cal, UCLA, UCSB, UW, Illinois, Michigan) are more or less the schools the UK sees as putting out a number of high quality graduates in strategic fields like computer and data science, biotechnology, etc. More than UVA, UNC, and Florida, it is a bit surprising that Georgia Tech is not on.

Perhaps the UK isn’t as enamored with Georgia Tech as USNWR?

[Anonymous]

Hard admit and very popular. Dumb to just try to find a category for it to rank it in your mind.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with other posters than Cal is in its own league, with UCLA and Michigan close.

UT is a tough admit, but so are UCs. IMO the “elite level” is static. 10+ years in the future it will actually be easier to get into college as we see declining birth rates.

I don’t think UT is better or worse than UCSD, UCSB, UCI, UF, UIUC, UW-M. These schools will always be in the T25-T50 range with some slight movement year over year.

I know UT has strong engineering and business programs. But the other “tier 2” schools also have their own strong programs. TBH, UT has never really been on my radar until the last few years, so no it will never catch up to Berkeley or Michigan.

I’m sure Austin is awesome and is becoming more and more of an attractive city! But I have a slight bias for West Coast and Midwest schools Can’t pay me to move to TX.

And anyone here should care about which schools are on your “radar” because…? UT-Austin has been a top public university for many years.

It has for Texans who make up 90% of the student population . Way too many cowboy hats and country music.

[Anonymous]

90% instate? Why bother applying? It’s not like it’s an elite public.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with other posters than Cal is in its own league, with UCLA and Michigan close.

UT is a tough admit, but so are UCs. IMO the “elite level” is static. 10+ years in the future it will actually be easier to get into college as we see declining birth rates.

I don’t think UT is better or worse than UCSD, UCSB, UCI, UF, UIUC, UW-M. These schools will always be in the T25-T50 range with some slight movement year over year.

I know UT has strong engineering and business programs. But the other “tier 2” schools also have their own strong programs. TBH, UT has never really been on my radar until the last few years, so no it will never catch up to Berkeley or Michigan.

I’m sure Austin is awesome and is becoming more and more of an attractive city! But I have a slight bias for West Coast and Midwest schools Can’t pay me to move to TX.

And anyone here should care about which schools are on your “radar” because…? UT-Austin has been a top public university for many years.

It has for Texans who make up 90% of the student population . Way too many cowboy hats and country music.

Says someone who has never been to Austin.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the Ters

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UT Austin, UNC, UVA, GTech, UCSB, UCSD




UF UGA Wisc, UCI, UCDavis,

UIUC

Close. More like:

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UNC, UVA, GTech
UF, Wisco
UGA, UIUC, Purdue

Notice all those other UC schools are absent. Just because U.S. News & Woke Reports ranks them highly now because of Pell Grant and first-gen data doesn't mean they're elite schools. Solid, yes, but not among the 10-12 best publics -- no way.

Why did you leave UT-Austin (the school this thread is actually about) off your list? It belongs somewhere in between your 2nd and 3rd groups of schools.

Oversight. It should be with UF and Wisco despite its impossible admissions from OOS. That is balanced by the fact that anyone from Texas can get in, even with a 900 SAT, if they finish in the top 6% of their hood/trailer park high school.

No one who gets a 900 on the SAT is finishing in the top 6% of their high school class...no matter how hood/trailer park.

The average SAT in Texas is 1037. The low performing schools have average 900 scores. That means top students in these lowest performing schools in the top 6% might be 1200.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Agree with other posters than Cal is in its own league, with UCLA and Michigan close.

UT is a tough admit, but so are UCs. IMO the “elite level” is static. 10+ years in the future it will actually be easier to get into college as we see declining birth rates.

I don’t think UT is better or worse than UCSD, UCSB, UCI, UF, UIUC, UW-M. These schools will always be in the T25-T50 range with some slight movement year over year.

I know UT has strong engineering and business programs. But the other “tier 2” schools also have their own strong programs. TBH, UT has never really been on my radar until the last few years, so no it will never catch up to Berkeley or Michigan.

I’m sure Austin is awesome and is becoming more and more of an attractive city! But I have a slight bias for West Coast and Midwest schools Can’t pay me to move to TX.

And anyone here should care about which schools are on your “radar” because…? UT-Austin has been a top public university for many years.

It has for Texans who make up 90% of the student population . Way too many cowboy hats and country music.

Says someone who has never been to Austin.

Been there. Yes it’s so progressive! Still Texas.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the Ters

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UT Austin, UNC, UVA, GTech, UCSB, UCSD




UF UGA Wisc, UCI, UCDavis,

UIUC

Close. More like:

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UNC, UVA, GTech
UF, Wisco
UGA, UIUC, Purdue

Notice all those other UC schools are absent. Just because U.S. News & Woke Reports ranks them highly now because of Pell Grant and first-gen data doesn't mean they're elite schools. Solid, yes, but not among the 10-12 best publics -- no way.

Why did you leave UT-Austin (the school this thread is actually about) off your list? It belongs somewhere in between your 2nd and 3rd groups of schools.

Oversight. It should be with UF and Wisco despite its impossible admissions from OOS. That is balanced by the fact that anyone from Texas can get in, even with a 900 SAT, if they finish in the top 6% of their hood/trailer park high school.

No one who gets a 900 on the SAT is finishing in the top 6% of their high school class...no matter how hood/trailer park.

The average SAT in Texas is 1037. The low performing schools have average 900 scores. That means top students in these lowest performing schools in the top 6% might be 1200.

Exactly. There aren't going to be a lot of kids at UT who have SATs in the 900 range. I guess it's possible there are a few kids with a 900 SAT there because of the top 6% rule but it wouldn't be very many kids. Majority of top 6%ers, even from really bad high schools will score higher than 900.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:These are the Ters

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UT Austin, UNC, UVA, GTech, UCSB, UCSD




UF UGA Wisc, UCI, UCDavis,

UIUC

Close. More like:

Cal, UCLA, Mich
UNC, UVA, GTech
UF, Wisco
UGA, UIUC, Purdue

Notice all those other UC schools are absent. Just because U.S. News & Woke Reports ranks them highly now because of Pell Grant and first-gen data doesn't mean they're elite schools. Solid, yes, but not among the 10-12 best publics -- no way.

Why did you leave UT-Austin (the school this thread is actually about) off your list? It belongs somewhere in between your 2nd and 3rd groups of schools.

Oversight. It should be with UF and Wisco despite its impossible admissions from OOS. That is balanced by the fact that anyone from Texas can get in, even with a 900 SAT, if they finish in the top 6% of their hood/trailer park high school.

No one who gets a 900 on the SAT is finishing in the top 6% of their high school class...no matter how hood/trailer park.

The average SAT in Texas is 1037. The low performing schools have average 900 scores. That means top students in these lowest performing schools in the top 6% might be 1200.

Exactly. There aren't going to be a lot of kids at UT who have SATs in the 900 range. I guess it's possible there are a few kids with a 900 SAT there because of the top 6% rule but it wouldn't be very many kids. Majority of top 6%ers, even from really bad high schools will score higher than 900.

I would certainly hope so! A 900 SAT score is ridiculously low for a highly ranked school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

That said, UT Austin unfortunately is a public school in TX which means that it has to abide by state law. Texas' open carry and abortion policies would be a hard no from my standpoint.

It’s not unfortunate for the people of Texas. The school is trying to reach potentially excellent students who weren’t lucky enough to get a quality education. It’s good for the state. Not for northerners looking for a cheap education.

[Anonymous]

We went to in info session for the Arts & Sciences school. It was disappointing. The presentation was totally focused on outcomes - jobs, internships etc. Barely a word was said about classes, learning, books, discussion etc. you would think Arts & Sciences would focus on the excitement of learning. Campus is massive and core classes in the first year are 400+ kids. May be a good school for pre professional kids who just want a job, but I doubt many kids come out of there with a thirst for learning/curiosity etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We went to in info session for the Arts & Sciences school. It was disappointing. The presentation was totally focused on outcomes - jobs, internships etc. Barely a word was said about classes, learning, books, discussion etc. you would think Arts & Sciences would focus on the excitement of learning. Campus is massive and core classes in the first year are 400+ kids. May be a good school for pre professional kids who just want a job, but I doubt many kids come out of there with a thirst for learning/curiosity etc.

southern schools are more outcomes driven than northern schools

but lets be honest, most dc area kids aren't really 'life of mind' types either