Top private vs public universities: quality of college experience and future job prospects
![[Post New]](/jforum/templates/default/images/icon_minipost_new.gif){kind=icon}
Anonymous
| Privates>Publics |
Anonymous
THis 1000% The perks of a smaller private university are huge. Not having to fight for the courses you want/need, great advising and advisors that know your student. For ex: my kid was at a T100. Spent 1 year in Major X, then needed to switch. The "main advisor for Major X/School X" only knew my kid for less than 1 year, as they helped my kid figure out how to switch majors in April of Freshman year (on the day of Registration, 2 hours before reg none the less--so under intense pressure). That Advisor saw us at graduation and came over to talk. They knew my kid's name and remembered what major they were switching to. This isn't a school with 2k students, it's a school with about 8K undergrads. That's what some of us want for our kids. When you have an ADHD kid, Anxiety ridden kid with Zero EF (except what you have trained them in), sometimes we and our kids know they need a bit extra care. The benefits of providing that means they excel in life. |
Anonymous
They are already at a top private that doesn’t take AP credits. Can only use to bypass intro classes and you aren’t graduating faster as no credit. Wouldn’t want to anyway. Honors colleges will have some of the perks, agree with that part. |
Anonymous
|
I think outcomes are often pretty similar—same job offers and salaries.
But I think the big difference is in the residential experience. On campus housing (and food) or apartment/self cooking with roommates. There are advantages to both but it seems like one of the differences btwn private and public schools. For example UC Berkeley and Virginia Tech might has on campus housing for first year only. |
Anonymous
|
I went to Cal. My firstborn is at Williams.
Aside from cost, I think large publics reward kids with hustle and kids in the top 10-20% of their class. While there's little handholding, a school like Cal actually has a crazy amount of resources available to kids with the gumption to seek them out. And the kids at the top of publics, at least in California, are generally Ivy quality. Most of my peers saw little point to leaving California to pay more at a East Coast school. While I had some auditorium classes, I was also able to develop close relationships with a few professors in my major and minor. Class registration was a minor irritant and not the massive issue it's often made out to be on this forum. On the other hand, Williams provides a crazy amount of resources to its students. If one has to climb the Cal tree a ways to reap its fruit, Ephs have the fruit falling on their heads. And the professorial relationships are real. DC's profs have gone out of their way to help DC with internship and job opportunities. I also think Williams is more rigorous academically across the board. While there is definitely a lot of grinding at Cal, one could also skate by in certain subjects if they were content with B grades. At Williams, I don't think it's possible to skate by in any subject. I also think there are regional differences in perceived prestige. The West Coast has more quality public schools and thus more alumni from such schools. Few people look down on a Cal, UCLA, or Washington grad or assumes that they were necessarily the "best" schools the grad got into. But it seems like college prestige plays a larger role on the East Coast, where for a long time there seemed to be a perception that one should almost always pick the best, most prestigious college possible. (This, however, seems to be changing.) |
Anonymous
Of course that NEVER happens at large publics. Enjoy your fantasy world. |
Anonymous
This has and will always be the case. Yes, you will always have DCUMers that fight you on that because their kid is at a Public….Who cares. Elite Privates will ALWAYS > then Publics…. |
Anonymous
+1 |
Anonymous
As an (originally OOS) Michigan MBA grad, the Northwestern students and grads I have met are very similar types of people. Friendly, chill, smart, not elitist and yes, often Midwestern. I have read people saying that Northwestern kids are pointier and quirkier now due to admissions patterns. But you can decide if you think that matters. I gather the OOS students at Michigan are pretty similar from the bits of info I pick up. My kid is an in-state freshman with a poli sci focus at Michigan and has had good conversations and encouragement from profs in his small and specialized classes. He is a serious and friendly student who regularly participates in class discussion. Profs like that. I don't think it would be going so well for a quiet kid who has to be drawn out. I think Michigan has more of a tradition of public service careers and DC focus. Also tighter connections with some parts of Asia. I feel that it has been a globally connected school a lot longer than Northwestern. Poli Sci and IR are not fully interchangeable. I'm curious about what area of IR is of interest. If your student has language and culture areas of interest, schools vary in strength related to that. I would also say that Michigan's best connections are to DC. I wouldn't necessarily pick Michigan to get a job at the UN in NYC, for example. But to go to the Peace Corps or eventually to the Foreign Service (I hear they like work experience first), Michigan would be a good choice. Another observation...Michigan has a lot of really cool classes for people interested in the intersection of culture/history/politics, but they are not in the poli sci department. The IR classes to me look actually less mind-expanding than the ones that would be more history and area studies oriented. But that's a personal reaction. There certainly are enough courses to fill out a Poli Sci IR track as a sophomore-senior. I guess I'm more interested in why cultures and countries are the way they are than the exact structure of their governments, political parties, founding docs, etc. I think students should carefully figure out what's different about the schools related to their specific interests. I think both schools are equal in many ways that make it too difficult to make a judgment here. About size of alumni network...that is a very tertiary consideration right now. You should look at the prominence of alums in the desired fields, if anything. Sometimes small schools have stronger, tighter networks because there are fewer people and they know each other better. It's actually impossible to predict how that might play out for your kid unless you are looking at the level of "Is there an alumni club in City X" or my kid wants to work at X organization. Poke around on LinkedIn...that's the best most people can do. It's my impression that foreign language classes beyond Spanish, French, and German are really losing ground in the US broadly across academe. So if your kid has a heritage language to perfect or an area studies interest, they need to factor that in to plans. Be aware that IR may be a field, like Public Policy, where you get low-paid jobs out of college then need a Master's. Do look into the risks there. Obviously the whole institutional environment is in turmoil right now. |
Anonymous
| PP. Realized this thread came alive again and I already answered some of this previously on page 1. But have added some nuances. |
Anonymous
| Top privates are always better than top publics. Classes are smaller and networks are tighter. Sure, Michigan has a bunch of alumni, but most of them are doing ho-hum jobs in the Midwest. It’s not the quantity, but the quality of alumni. |
Anonymous
Maybe for some majors but not for others. The top eight engineering schools in the Big Ten clean up on the top eight Ivies for engineering. |
Anonymous
Most Northwestern, WashU and UChicago grads I know are also doing ho-hum jobs. |
Anonymous
But they got them faster and are paid more. |
Anonymous
 This made me laugh. Clearly, this PP doesn't get out much.
|