“Conspiracy theories abound when your college is under siege, however the reasons for the slide have not changed and will not change in the near future”
UCLA just moved up to 21 at USNWR. So much for your “slide” theory of public universities…
“I am not sure what you are basing that on.”
I am basing it on the fact that according to academe, Columbia and Michigan are considered peer institutions. Over 200 Michigan undergrads are admitted into Michigan’s top ranked graduate professional programs annually, and many more are admitted into other top graduate programs around the nation. When it comes to professional placement, there are plenty of reports that show that Michigan is very well recruited. Columbia does not publish placement data, but Penn does. Last year, 36 Michigan engineering/CS graduates were hired by Google, compared to 19 Penn engineering/CS graduates. Another 33 Michigan engineering and CS graduates were hired by Apple compared to just 3 Penn engineering/CS graduates. 41 Michigan engineering/CS majors were hired by Microsoft, compared to 10 Penn engineering/CS graduates. 49 Michigan engineering/CS majors were hired by Amazon, compared to 6 Penn engineering/CS majors. In total, 149 Michigan engineering/CS graduates were hired by those four Tech giants, compared to 38 Penn engineering/CS graduates. I am not sure what more proof you want that Michigan does just as well as schools like Columbia and Penn when it comes to placement.
But like I said, there are several sources that seem to think that Michigan holds its own, at least with tech firms are concerned:
http://www.businessinsider.com/schools-with-the-most-alumni-at-google-2015-10
https://poetsandquantsforundergrads.com/2017/04/27/top-feeder-schools-silicon-valley/
“U of M receives limited state money and has to take most of its undergrads from the state of Michigan. Making matters worse, the State of Michigan’s public education is in a death spiral which is making qualified in-state candidates scarce (see link below).”
First of all, the University of Michigan no longer takes most of its undergraduate students from the state of Michigan. Last Freshman class was roughly 50% OOS. Secondly, while many public high schools in Michigan are not doing well, the ones that feed into Michigan are doing just fine. Second, Michigan receives $300 million from the state annually. While that is by no means enough on its own, when you combined it with its considerable endowment and the money Michigan generates from tuition thanks to its large OOS student body, the University is perfectly fine.
“Historically, U of M’s advantages are their strong alumni base, its large endowment, and sports. However, sports seems to be sliding with the football team losing 12 out of the last 13 games to Ohio State and 8 out of the last 10 games to Michigan State.”
What does football have to do with anything? Michigan is, first and foremost, one of the most intellectually supercharged communities in the country. Both Ann Arbor (which has the highest percentage of college education residents than any city in the US) and the University have an incredibly vibrant intellectual feel. Michigan is known for that. Michigan is also known for its very well rounded academic excellence. In fact, it is arguably the most well rounded academic institution in the country. Michigan is ranked among the top 15 in virtually every single field of study, and among the top 10 in most, including Business, Law and Medicine, as well as most traditional disciplines, such as English, History and Mathematics. In Anthropology, the Classics, Engineering, Philosophy, Political Science, Psychology and Sociology, Michigan is among the top 5 nationally. Michigan is also known as a medical center, and its hospital is considered one of the top 10 in the nation. So to suggest that Michigan is mostly known for football is a crude statement. That may be true of the uneducated masses, but then again, in those circles, most universities are not even recognized. But if you are insinuating that’s Michigan’s alumni are only loyal to the University if the football program is winning, you are mistaken. Michigan raised more from its alumni this year than it ever has. Michigan alumni are loyal to the university regardless of its football record.
But putting its record vs OSU and MSU aside, which is difficult considering how lopsided it has been, Michigan football is still doing well. It had back to back 10-3 seasons in 2015 and 2016, finishing #11 in the nation in 2015 and #10 in 2016. In 2015, two of Michigan’s three losses were by 7 points or less, and they beat Florida 41-7 at the Citrus Bow. In 2016, Michigan lost 13-14 at Iowa, 27-30 in double overtime at OSU and 32-33 against Florida State at the Orange Bowl. 9 of Michigan’s 10 wins in 2016 were by 9 points or more This year was supposed to be a rebuilding year, with 11 players drafted by the NFL last year. Still, the team is 4-1 (including a 33-17 win against Florida) and ranked #17 in the nation. Its four wins were all by a 16 point margin or better. While Michigan is struggling on offense this year, the Defense is ranked #1 in the nation. Another 10-3, top 10 season is certainly possible. Michigan also recruited back to back top 10 classes. I would say the future of Michigan football is looking good.
“Given their situation, I don’t see how they can improve their undergrad situation significantly unless the State allows them to go private, which I think is unlikely.”
Michigan’s situation is good. The University is in very high demand as is evidenced by the annual increase in its applicant pool and 45% yield rate despite not enjoying the benefits of Early Decision admissions. Its endowment is one of the largest and growing by a healthy margin. The alumni are very loyal. Ann Arbor is a very nice college town.
"This is fact, not opinion, state colleges are woefully underfunded by states and not allowed to raise in-state tuition, so they increase the student body size. Doesn’t matter what any ranking says, this is a deteriorating situation.
Alexandre, do you deny this?"
CU123, many state universities are hurting, just as many private universities are hurting. But we are not discussing public universities on this thread. This thread is about Michigan. Michigan is not hurting. Financially, Michigan is doing very well. The University’s endowment has at the fastest pace of any university in the nation between 1990 and today. In 1989, Michigan’s endowment was not even among the top 30 in the nation. Today, it is the 8th largest. In 2009, in the midst of the financial meltdown, Michigan spent $100 million to buy Pfizer’s global research HQ campus, made up of some 25 buildings and over 2 million square feet of lab space. Naturally, all universities save HYPS can use more money, and Michigan is no exception, but Michigan is very well off…as well off as Columbia.
To address your question, yes, I deny this. According to its CDS, Michigan’s student body in programs that enroll both undergraduate and graduate students has indeed increased from 33,481 in 2007 to 38,076 in 2016. But the size of its instructional faculty in programs that enroll both undergraduate and graduate students has also increased from 2,063 in 2007 to 2,583 in 2016. The student to faculty ratio has remained steady at 15:1. So yes, I deny it, and I have the facts to prove it.
http://obp.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/pubdata/cds/cds_2007-2008_umaa.pdf (Section I2)
http://obp.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/pubdata/cds/cds_2016-2017_umaa.pdf (Section I2)
But tell me again, how do you justify Columbia’s shameless claim that it has a 6:1 student to faculty ratio when it omits 6,500 graduate students from its calculation? Oh, that’s right, Columbia does not publish a CDS report. In fact, it is the only Ivy League institution that doesn’t. But one thing is clear, Columbia is omitting 6,500 graduate students from its student to faculty ratio and that puts into serious question its ethical practices, as well a the integrity of the data it publishes. Columbia’s actual student to faculty ratio would likely double if it were being honest, and its ratio would be 12:1 rather than 6:1. But that would mean a drop in the rankings, so obviously, Columbia and its private peers have little incentive to be honest. And what of the very flawed rankings methodology? Do you deny that private universities are gaming the rankings and that the methodology is seriously flawed?
Except Michigan has ~ 45,000 students of which 28000 are undergrads, compared to 31000 at Columbia of which 6000 are undergrads. This isn’t even close, I simply not convincing you af anything even though the facts bear it out. There is no comparison at the undergrad level.
U of M and Columbia are both relatively strong in CS, but most would say Michigan is better for it ever so slightly. Columbia is best in specialized theory areas at a graduate level, so for undergrad, that would make me lean more Michigan for a typical CS student.
This thread has gotten way too sidetracked. Michigan is the obvious choice when it’s so economically superior and arguably better in the subject being studied as a major. Michigan may not have all the qualities of an ivy, but in no way do those make up a difference of 100K or more.
“Except Michigan has ~ 45,000 students of which 28000 are undergrads, compared to 31000 at Columbia of which 6000 are undergrads. This isn’t even close, I simply not convincing you af anything even though the facts bear it out. There is no comparison at the undergrad level.”
The 6,000 undergraduate students (I am fairly certain it is closer to 8,000 when you include General Studies) still have to share the faculty and resources with those 23,000 graduate students. At any university, undergraduate students do not exist in a vacuum. I don’t see how there’s any difference CU123. Columbia has limited resources, and 31,000 students to look after. Your facts are not convincing at all. A university’s endowment is shared by all of its students, graduate and undergraduate, not just by the undergraduate students. Same with a university’s faculty.
If anything, I have provided more facts. Where are the placement figures for Columbia that show that Columbia places more graduates in Silicon Valley? I have shown how many Michigan graduates are placed in major tech firms, and I even provided comparative data from Penn. Sadly, Columbia does not publish such data. Where are the peer ratings that prove that Columbia is a far superior university to Michigan? According to the US News Peer Assessment score, Columbia’s rating hovers between 4.6 and 4.7, while Michigan’s hovers between 4.4 and 4.5. That makes them peers in the eyes of university presidents, deans of undergraduate colleges and provosts. And how do you prove that Columbia has a 6:1 student to faculty ratio when Fu has a 25:1 ratio and the 4,500 College students share their faculty with 3,500 Graduate School of the Arts and Sciences? Those are the facts I want addressed…and they are facts.
I am still waiting for the evidence to support your claim that Columbia is a vastly superior university to Michigan to the extent that it is insulting to you that one would even suggest that they are peer institutions.
Thread title- “Ivy League full price vs. UofM instate tuition”. For probably 95% + of the population, this is probably a no brainer. This is not Michigan instate vs. need based aid at Columbia that brings the cost down to at or near instate costs. These are both great schools . The major tech firms recruit at both . With a CS degree , you may not even need a graduate degree. But, if you decide that you want or need one, you might be glad to have the funds available to pay for it. If your parents are made of money though , there are no siblings to consider, it’s a non issue. Go where you prefer. Good luck with the decision.
Ouch. Low blow.
I have seen both the universities from very close quarters. The family has strong connection with both CU and Michigan. Children attended thses schools, though not CS, and are doing well. We often have similar discussions at home now that the fourth generation is entering the colleges. I will write what all of you know, but are debating based on personal preferences and bias.
- In terms of placement, Michigan is pretty good. CU is equally good,could be better in programs offered in liberal science and arts.
- The top tech companies, are not so concerned about the Ivy Tag, and will recruit the best irrespective of the brand. Just not Michigan or Berkeley, even UIUC, Georgia Tech, UT Austin are very favourite grounds of the top tech companies.
- Many of the lead recruiters are not from Ivy League and have firsthand experience of students coming from public or non-ivy private universities.
- It is true many parents would like to see their children attending Ivy league or top private universities over top public universities. It is based on the value that we attach to a brand that fits into overall public perception.
- Good students excel any way and the decision of the schools they attend is also based on the cost of attendance and other preferences, be it place, sports, music, culture. My grand nephew preferred Northwestern over Columbia because he felt the Evanston campus will provide him with better college experience that the CU campus. Very personal and I don't think, we can say whether he was right or wrong.
- Lots of statistics are being dished out. In my opinion, these things are not the core reasons for choosing the place for undergraduate education.
@payubisoft1 Please check out the on topic Post #65 from @PengsPhils
The OP hasn’t even been back since the day the thread was started. How do you make a decision in October between two schools before decisions are even out?
Guess no one else remembers the 70s when Columbia almost closed due to student revolution, lack of interest (and danger of “Harlem…”! Lol…) Times change. And they will change again. And some more after that.
Go where you feel you’ll most at home (or, if you’re not sure, go to UMich - {and for sure don’t listen to the chicken littles around here, UMich is not going anywhere, certainly not in 4 years… It’s a lot of money if you don’t love Columbia/NYC, even if you just save it for your parent’s retirment.) Or as if you can use the extra money to go abroad, or do something cool.
@sevmom This thread forgot about the OP (if they really existed) long ago anyway!
btw @CU123 @Alexandre
Thought this might interest, since we seem well off the rails.
As someone who’s hired and knows a lot of hiring managers in Silicon valley across companies, Michigan is regarded higher out here than Columbia, like a lot higher. I haven’t even run across a Columbia undergrad here and at my stints in NY and Seattle, even taking into account the size of the schools. Now the co-founder of Google and one of the co-founders of Sun having gone to UM undergrad helps with this or course. The top five schools in terms or prestige out here for CS/engr are Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, CMU, Michigan.
@theloniusmonk post is why we really need to wean aspiring college students off “chasing rankings” - different schools are good for different things (and different types of kids.) especially when they are among the top 20 or 30 research institutions in the world.
With curriculum on-line for most school programs and things like “rate my professor” and tons other social media, kids that have a good idea of what they want to study can often plot out 50% or more of the courses they are going to take, even going so far as IDing some of the profs they’d like to study with, or alternatively IDing the profs they want to avoid (One of my kids, for instance, was really insterested in a fairly specific minor where 50% of the required courses are taught by the same prof. I made them email a bunch of current students to make sure the teacher was someone they wanted to spend 6 courses with.)
The $180K that the OP would save by going to Michigan will fund a startup. There is no better way to learn CS.
@theloniusmonk “The top five schools in terms or prestige out here for CS/engr are Stanford, MIT, Berkeley, CMU, Michigan.”
What I don’t understand is that if Michigan students are being placed so well in SF, NYC and Seattle, why they report lower average salaries? It is true that Columbia does not produce detailed salary data, but Penn and Cornell do, as does Michigan, but I would assume Columbia is similar to Penn and Cornell.
Others have said it is cost of living that causes Michigan salaries to be lower, but that does not make sense to me because CS majors at top schools all seem to be moving to the same cities. I have no doubt that the best Michigan students can compete with anyone and can command salaries in the $110k - $150k range. However, I suspect that the average and below average Michigan students may not be so competitive and that may bring their average down. To me it appears that there is just not enough information to tell why the Michigan average is lower. Maybe you have some insight?
University of Pennsylvania
https://www.vpul.upenn.edu/careerservices/files/2016_Senior_Survey.pdf
Cornell University
https://www.cs.cornell.edu/undergrad/cscareers/placementreport
University of Michigan
http://career.engin.umich.edu/wp-content/uploads/sites/30/2017/02/annualreport1516.pdf
I don’t think that’s a fair assumption. Cornell and Penn have much better CS reputation in my experience, and Penn benefits from overrepresentation in the financial sector, even within tech.
I think calling Michigan a top 5 school for CS is a reach, but I think it’s safely a top 15 CS school. I don’t think you can say the same about Columbia.
The 5th in CS reputation is hotly debated on CC - I don’t think going down this road accomplishes anything.
“I have no doubt that the best Michigan students can compete with anyone and can command salaries in the $110k - $150k range. However, I suspect that the average and below average Michigan students may not be so competitive and that may bring their average down.”
Much2learn, the range of Michigan students enrolled in the CoE is similar to the students enrolled at Cornell or Penn. There is no difference in the quality of the students. There may have been a slight difference in quality in the 90s and 00s, but the gap has closed entirely in recent years.
There are simple reasons for the small gap in starting pay.
First of all, Cornell’s data is for 2017, while Penn and Michigan’s reports are for 2016 graduates. That alone accounts for a 3%-4% difference in pay.
Second, the makeup of the students in the engineering programs. For example, at Michigan, most engineering students (over 70%) major in Aerospace, Civil, Chemical, Electrical, Industrial, Mechanical etc…Those aren’t the highest paid Engineering disciplines. At Penn, roughly 50% major in CS, CE-related majors, which pay significantly more. In this regard, Cornell, Michigan and Northwestern have a more balanced concentration of majors than Penn, which seems to lean heavily on CS/CE majors.
But even then, the advantage when it comes to placing graduates in companies like Apple, Google and Microsoft clearly favors Michigan, even over the likes of Cornell:
Michigan: 149
Penn: 39
Cornell: 38
Michigan is obviously twice larger than Cornell and three times larger than Penn (although Penn has roughly almost as many CS/CE majors as Michigan), but advantage in the number placed in those tippy top Tech firms clearly favors Michigan.
Third, while many CS majors end up in Silicon Valley, the majority, certainly over 50%, will work regionally. For example, according to Penn’s report, close to 60% of Penn graduates took jobs in the Mid Atlantic (DC to NYC) and Northeast (mostly Boston). In the case of Michigan (and Northwestern), approximately 50% work in the Midwest. The cost of living in the Midwest is significantly lower than the cost of living in cities like DC, NYC and Boston, and the starting salaries will usually reflect the cost of living. Since 50%-60% of the graduates work and live regionally, it stands to reason that those take jobs in the most expensive region will have higher starting salaries. That can easily account for the 15% gap between Michigan (and other Midwestern schools like Northwestern and UIUC) and East Coast universities (like Cornell and Penn).
Below are the average starting salaries Engineering/CS graduates:
Cornell: $79,000
Michigan: $76,000
Northwestern: $70,000
Penn: $88,000
https://issuu.com/nucareeradvance/docs/beyond_northwestern_handout_2016_fi
1 Like