Anonymous wrote:The attention a student gets at a public or private in terms of job opportunities, research opportunities etc is very much up to the student and how motiviated and a"go getter" they are. We have had kids at both public and private and the opportunities were similar and what each of them made of it.

In part. I have a Freshmen at an Ivy (not HYP). He won a departmental award in a subject we always assumed was his weakest subject--open curriculum allowed for him to branch out. From there, faculty set him up with a sophomore study abroad at a renowned university. They have provided so much 1-on-1 advising/counseling throughout the year (they set it up- for all students--you aren't requesting it), very much promoting his trajectory. Re the award: not something he even knew about until he was awarded it. Many of these courses are 6-1; student-faculty. Without much effort, opportunities make themselves very much available. Another child interested in music-but never fed that interest--gets free weekly lessons with a faculty member in the music department--an instrument he had interest in but course was cancelled in middle school. The career advising and help with internships are there. Undergrad focus. So even if you aren't a 'striver' (word dcum seems to love) or looking/go-getting---the opportunities show up.

I went to a large (very good) public state university and my experience was very generic in comparison. I cannot remember the name of a single professor. I was sTEM so it got the job done- but the quality of education at my school was McDonalds compared to my son's Michelin star one. Even 'go-getting' given the share volume of students at my public, nothing like what my child is receiving w/out having to stress over it. I don't doubt kids can get a great education at a public, but when you talk the quality of the experience and the connections--speaking from experience--it is different.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are considering between OOS public university and top10 private university.
One of the common advices I received is that public universities will make it difficult for students to get a personal attention and care.
I'm curious how much this is true compared to private universities.
Also, another advice I received is that the brand name of the private university will make a difference in the career.
I can see this in the case of HYPSM but other top10-20 private schools do really have a brand name recognition and advantages?

Would you like your student to get tucked in at night?

An unreasonably high percentage of people here would unironically answer yes to this question.

Oh please, people are talking about being able to graduate in 4 years as they don’t have to fight for classes they need. Quality and personalized advising for med, law, grad school. Smaller class sizes where you can have closer relationships with profs for LOR, and so on.

These myths are constantly pushed on this forum. My kids attend large state schools, have had excellent advising, gotten the classes they need to graduate in four years, and have established relationships with professors who have written their LORs for internships, etc. It's clear you have no experience with a great public university, so you continue to push idiotic stereotypes.
DP

My favorite thing about the “graduate in 4 years” BS is that we actually have the data on it. And it shows us that 1) the vast majority of these kids are graduating in four years and 2) top publics tend to do really well, and certainly no worse, than top privates. UVA is number 2 overall at 92%. UNC and UCLA the same as Chicago and Tufts at 86%. Michigan and Florida the same as MIT at 82%. Cal the same as USC at 81%. All of them higher than Brown, Princeton, Cal Tech, Williams, and a whole slate of others.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/highest-grad-rate

In defense of schools with a larger percentage of students enrolled in Engineering, which requires additional credit hours to graduate, that tends to lower 4 year rates a bit. MIT, Caltech, UCB, Michigan, and some others listed above, fall into that category.

BS. At the top E private schools (MIT, stanford penn columbia princeton hopkins duke) 4+1 masters/BSE are popular (15%)which affects the “4 year” published rate, but of the students just doing an Engineering undergrad 95% graduate in 4 years. There is no problem getting classes at these schools; the engineering cohort is typically 300-500 undergrads per year the support is phenomenal and it is very rare to get below a C+. Some of these schools have median BSE gpa of 3.7 others have 3.5. These Eschools select for students who can handle 5 classes a semester

Do you have any evidence for your strange claim that graduating with a bachelor's in 4 years and then graduating with a master's a year later isn't counted as graduating with a bachelor's in 4 year?

“BS. At the top E private schools (MIT, stanford penn columbia princeton hopkins duke) 4+1 masters/BSE are popular (15%)which affects the “4 year” published rate,…”

Same applies to top publics like Michigan and UCB. It’s not just a private school phenomenon. Top publics hang with top privates, particularly in Engineering.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Opinions on Michigan vs Northwestern? Something like poli sci/IR. Choose based on student preference, or is the larger Michigan alumni network a plus, as in, they're loyal and potentially useful to new grads?

Michigan obviously has the bigger alumni network, but Northwestern carries more weight with employers.

+1

I’m not hiring a NU alum over a Michigan alum, or visa-versa if one is more qualified than the other.

Um....

Larger schools have more faculty staff.

Same attention and care per student

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Opinions on Michigan vs Northwestern? Something like poli sci/IR. Choose based on student preference, or is the larger Michigan alumni network a plus, as in, they're loyal and potentially useful to new grads?

Michigan obviously has the bigger alumni network, but Northwestern carries more weight with employers.

+1

I’m not hiring a NU alum over a Michigan alum, or visa-versa if one is more qualified than the other.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are considering between OOS public university and top10 private university.
One of the common advices I received is that public universities will make it difficult for students to get a personal attention and care.
I'm curious how much this is true compared to private universities.
Also, another advice I received is that the brand name of the private university will make a difference in the career.
I can see this in the case of HYPSM but other top10-20 private schools do really have a brand name recognition and advantages?

Would you like your student to get tucked in at night?

An unreasonably high percentage of people here would unironically answer yes to this question.

Oh please, people are talking about being able to graduate in 4 years as they don’t have to fight for classes they need. Quality and personalized advising for med, law, grad school. Smaller class sizes where you can have closer relationships with profs for LOR, and so on.

These myths are constantly pushed on this forum. My kids attend large state schools, have had excellent advising, gotten the classes they need to graduate in four years, and have established relationships with professors who have written their LORs for internships, etc. It's clear you have no experience with a great public university, so you continue to push idiotic stereotypes.
DP

My favorite thing about the “graduate in 4 years” BS is that we actually have the data on it. And it shows us that 1) the vast majority of these kids are graduating in four years and 2) top publics tend to do really well, and certainly no worse, than top privates. UVA is number 2 overall at 92%. UNC and UCLA the same as Chicago and Tufts at 86%. Michigan and Florida the same as MIT at 82%. Cal the same as USC at 81%. All of them higher than Brown, Princeton, Cal Tech, Williams, and a whole slate of others.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/highest-grad-rate

In defense of schools with a larger percentage of students enrolled in Engineering, which requires additional credit hours to graduate, that tends to lower 4 year rates a bit. MIT, Caltech, UCB, Michigan, and some others listed above, fall into that category.

BS. At the top E private schools (MIT, stanford penn columbia princeton hopkins duke) 4+1 masters/BSE are popular (15%)which affects the “4 year” published rate, but of the students just doing an Engineering undergrad 95% graduate in 4 years. There is no problem getting classes at these schools; the engineering cohort is typically 300-500 undergrads per year the support is phenomenal and it is very rare to get below a C+. Some of these schools have median BSE gpa of 3.7 others have 3.5. These Eschools select for students who can handle 5 classes a semester

That’s doesn’t change the fact that they aren’t graduating in 4 years now does it? You do realize that it takes more credit hours of education to graduate with a degree in Engineering than in liberal arts right? It’s very common for students to take an extra semester/quarter to accomplish this. It has little to do with attending top privates and everything to do with this simple fact. I’m defending tech heavy schools, both private and public, and trying to explain why the graduation rate is lower. It’s hardly BS

“While a standard bachelor's degree often requires 120 credits, engineering programs can range from 120 to 133 or more, depending on the institution and specific engineering discipline.”

The attention a student gets at a public or private in terms of job opportunities, research opportunities etc is very much up to the student and how motiviated and a"go getter" they are. We have had kids at both public and private and the opportunities were similar and what each of them made of it.

I think it depends on the schools in question. W&M is public with a 13:1 ratio and is ranked among the top national universities for undergraduate teaching, internships, and job placement.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Opinions on Michigan vs Northwestern? Something like poli sci/IR. Choose based on student preference, or is the larger Michigan alumni network a plus, as in, they're loyal and potentially useful to new grads?

Michigan obviously has the bigger alumni network, but Northwestern carries more weight with employers.

+1

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are considering between OOS public university and top10 private university.
One of the common advices I received is that public universities will make it difficult for students to get a personal attention and care.
I'm curious how much this is true compared to private universities.
Also, another advice I received is that the brand name of the private university will make a difference in the career.
I can see this in the case of HYPSM but other top10-20 private schools do really have a brand name recognition and advantages?

Would you like your student to get tucked in at night?

An unreasonably high percentage of people here would unironically answer yes to this question.

Oh please, people are talking about being able to graduate in 4 years as they don’t have to fight for classes they need. Quality and personalized advising for med, law, grad school. Smaller class sizes where you can have closer relationships with profs for LOR, and so on.

These myths are constantly pushed on this forum. My kids attend large state schools, have had excellent advising, gotten the classes they need to graduate in four years, and have established relationships with professors who have written their LORs for internships, etc. It's clear you have no experience with a great public university, so you continue to push idiotic stereotypes.
DP

My favorite thing about the “graduate in 4 years” BS is that we actually have the data on it. And it shows us that 1) the vast majority of these kids are graduating in four years and 2) top publics tend to do really well, and certainly no worse, than top privates. UVA is number 2 overall at 92%. UNC and UCLA the same as Chicago and Tufts at 86%. Michigan and Florida the same as MIT at 82%. Cal the same as USC at 81%. All of them higher than Brown, Princeton, Cal Tech, Williams, and a whole slate of others.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/highest-grad-rate

In defense of schools with a larger percentage of students enrolled in Engineering, which requires additional credit hours to graduate, that tends to lower 4 year rates a bit. MIT, Caltech, UCB, Michigan, and some others listed above, fall into that category.

BS. At the top E private schools (MIT, stanford penn columbia princeton hopkins duke) 4+1 masters/BSE are popular (15%)which affects the “4 year” published rate, but of the students just doing an Engineering undergrad 95% graduate in 4 years. There is no problem getting classes at these schools; the engineering cohort is typically 300-500 undergrads per year the support is phenomenal and it is very rare to get below a C+. Some of these schools have median BSE gpa of 3.7 others have 3.5. These Eschools select for students who can handle 5 classes a semester

Williams, Dartmouth, Duke, Holy Cross, Princeton, Bowdoin will open doors and help its alumni climb the ladder. Holy Cross outperforms given its amazing track record in corporations all over the country. Lots of Duke athletes populate Wall Street. Williams stronger on the Street than corporate boards.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I don’t actually understand what parents see as the benefit of paying ooo for a school like Michigan. I get it’s a fun atmosphere but do you really think the academics and teaching are as good as a T20 private?
I understand going to a public if you are in state and / or getting merit. But I know people paying full price for these schools (UCs also) and that surprises me. Michigan is a lot more expensive than UMD or Pitt and I don’t understand what it offers in terms of quality of education for that price. I would prefer many lower ranked mid-sized private schools and LACs.

Well since you obviously worship USNWR rankings check this out:

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities/undergraduate-teaching?_sort=rank&_sortDirection=asc

Michigan #14

Its PA score at USNWR is also among the top 20.

Michigan just does so many things well.

Like cheating at football?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Northwestern > Michigan? For undergraduate academics, generally, yes if similar price. Depends on program — e.g., not for aerospace engineering.

What about UM computer engineering vs Duke? Obviously UM is higher ranked for that, but Duke is Duke.

DC loves both schools and would be thrilled with either. I can’t speak to the computer engineering program, but I do know that housing is a big difference with these two schools.

Duke is very campus-oriented and requires its students to live on campus for 3 years with the option of moving off campus 4th year, though only a small minority do. In contrast, Michigan requires first years to live on campus, but then if I remember correctly, about half move off campus for second year, with many more following third and fourth year. Much of the housing is right off campus (walkable) but it seems to vary in terms of cost and convenience.

DH and I went to very campus-focused schools, but we saw that Michigan has an off-campus housing office to help, and a website with more information, too. So that might be worth checking out. But if your DC has a strong preference one way or another, this could be a big factor. (Duke does a great job with residential life - they make the transition to second year very easy. The whole thing seems remarkably smooth and positive.)

Ann Arbor as a city is much more desirable than Durham and the central campus is integrated right into the city. Oftentimes private housing is more convenient to classrooms than university ones. Hard to compare this dynamic.

If money is no object, Ann Arbor is sprouting new dorm apartments like mad right now. They are expensive. But perhaps if your kid makes all their own meals part of that could be offset by board savings.

People for whom money is not a concern will easily find a very nice apartment that you can rent by the bedroom.

The University has a big new undergrad dorm in the construction process right now. A second one might be built if the general economic crazy settles down.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:We are considering between OOS public university and top10 private university.
One of the common advices I received is that public universities will make it difficult for students to get a personal attention and care.
I'm curious how much this is true compared to private universities.
Also, another advice I received is that the brand name of the private university will make a difference in the career.
I can see this in the case of HYPSM but other top10-20 private schools do really have a brand name recognition and advantages?

Would you like your student to get tucked in at night?

An unreasonably high percentage of people here would unironically answer yes to this question.

Oh please, people are talking about being able to graduate in 4 years as they don’t have to fight for classes they need. Quality and personalized advising for med, law, grad school. Smaller class sizes where you can have closer relationships with profs for LOR, and so on.

These myths are constantly pushed on this forum. My kids attend large state schools, have had excellent advising, gotten the classes they need to graduate in four years, and have established relationships with professors who have written their LORs for internships, etc. It's clear you have no experience with a great public university, so you continue to push idiotic stereotypes.
DP

My favorite thing about the “graduate in 4 years” BS is that we actually have the data on it. And it shows us that 1) the vast majority of these kids are graduating in four years and 2) top publics tend to do really well, and certainly no worse, than top privates. UVA is number 2 overall at 92%. UNC and UCLA the same as Chicago and Tufts at 86%. Michigan and Florida the same as MIT at 82%. Cal the same as USC at 81%. All of them higher than Brown, Princeton, Cal Tech, Williams, and a whole slate of others.

https://www.usnews.com/best-colleges/rankings/highest-grad-rate

In defense of schools with a larger percentage of students enrolled in Engineering, which requires additional credit hours to graduate, that tends to lower 4 year rates a bit. MIT, Caltech, UCB, Michigan, and some others listed above, fall into that category.