<p>I'm in a little bit of a quandary and am hoping someone can help me out!</p>
<p>I received a last minute offer from the University of Michigan this past Friday. Before the option was on the table, I was happily planning on attending UCLA (Masters in Public Health). While Michigan has a slight advantage as far as program and reputation go, I'm not convinced it's worth the extra money.</p>
<p>However, because MPH programs are for the most part unfunded it will cost be approximately 40K more (!) to attend UMich than UCLA.</p>
<p>I'm of the opinion that because I'm entering a field where there will likely never be lucrative pay (starting salary is 40-60K), I simply can't disregard the amount of debt I'd be taking on in accepting Michigan's offer and, consequently, should attend the cheaper program. It's not like I'm comparing a first-tier school to a third-tier one; I'm deciding between two schools that are both ranked in the top ten in the field.</p>
<p>My mother thinks I should attend Michigan (even though she won't be the one paying the bills) because it's considered more "prestigious".</p>
<p>Am I underestimating the "prestige" factor of Michigan? Is it really worth an extra 40K (and relocating)? My logic says no, but I'm definitely open to advice!</p>
<p>Well… the LOC in Ann Arbor is very cheap in contrast to LA ($700-800 rent for one bedroom or $400-$600 for a room in house/apartment with peeps) … But if that’s huge of a difference, maybe you should look at the alumni network? Where do they go? But UCLA is big name anyway.</p>
<p>The 40K differential is based on the estimated cost of attendance provided by each institution, so while the cost of living is lower in Michigan, tuition is almost 3x as much as UCLA.</p>
<p>How are you enjoying Michigan, ticklemepink? Pros/cons? Likes/dislikes?</p>
<p>Stickpenguin, how much financial aid did you receive from both schools? Did UCLA or Michigan give you scholarships/grants/loans? Once we see the numbers, we can honestly assess which school you should attend.</p>
<p>I am a Michigan resident, and my total COA of $33,000. I believe OOS COA is $50,000 at Michigan.</p>
<p>Since there is a good chance you might end up where you do your masters, I would suggest you think very hard about placing yourself in Michigan. Once you get past the depressed economy and freezing climate, Michigan is somewhat geographically isolated.</p>
<p>You didn’t get any Stafford/Perkins Loans or Work-Study?</p>
<p>As belevitt stated, think very hard where you want to be. Does UCLA offer the same concentrations as Michigan? Which school do you prefer to attend? Do you prefer sunny weather near the beach or a four-season climate that changes every three months? Environment is very important: choose the place that would make you socially and academically happy. Prestige is not the most important factor here. Your well-being (emotional and financial) is.</p>
<p>Although Michigan is located in the Midwest, nearly 50% of the graduate student population is non-Michigan residents. With a large (international) alumni network, they face few problems finding internships and permanent jobs.</p>
<p>Either way I’d receive about 30K in federal loans (students in health professions) and 2-4K in work-study. If I went to Michigan I’d have to take out additional loans.</p>
<p>UCLA is probably the easier choice - I’ve lived in SoCal since beginning undergrad, have a support system of friends and family out here, and, being from the Midwest, I won’t say I don’t enjoy the weather. However, I’m not against seasons or making new friends (I’m just against taking out tons of loans if the difference really isn’t going to be that significant).</p>
<p>In all honesty, despite U of M being one of the best schools in the world, UCLA is well known as well. I don’t think it’s worth the extra money. Most of the people out there that will be hiring you won’t have a derogatory view of UCLA just because it’s not exactly at U of M levels.</p>
<p>UCLA and Michigan are both in the top 10 public health programs, and I don’t think one will be a clear advantage over the other. I’m in public health myself and I honestly don’t think the difference will be huge enough to warrant paying that much more at Michigan. Michigan is five and UCLA is tied for 8 with Berkeley – the difference is negligible.</p>
<p>Both places offer virtually the same concentrations (most schools of public health do) and epidemiology is epidemiology no matter where you go. Honestly, with the low salaries in public health I’d be hard-pressed to take out $40,000 more in loans for a 3-spot difference in rank.</p>
<p>not to mention the only rankings are based on peer assessments and nothing else; its hard to distinguish what one’s “reputation” really is</p>
<p>plus, different concentrations can be viewed differently, too</p>
<p>although not likely, drexel could very well have the #1 epi program but how would anyone know? no one but usnews wants to review public health anyway and they are mediocre at ranking at best</p>
<p>That said in your last comment about debt, as an grad student at Michigan, it’s a huge pain. Yes, Michigan is wonderful and generally it’s worth the money. But given the type of degree that I’m earning (there are practically no funded masters program in my field), and comparable COA at different places, I might as well just go to one of the best places that I could get in.</p>
<p>However, as an in-state resident that you are, you might as well take advantage of it. 3-4 semesters really aren’t very long. This past year just flew! As much I love and enjoy Ann Arbor, I’m looking forward to being done with paying for Michigan’s tuition out of my pocket this summer for my final semester of coursework in the fall (graduating one semester early to avoid further debt).</p>
<p>Just go to UCLA. You’ve got your place there. You don’t have to worry about moving and start-up costs (as opposed to moving half-way across the country). Once you’re done there in less than 2 years, you can pick yourself up and go where you really want to go.</p>