Hi! I got into Michigan in December into LSA, and McGill yesterday. (Only applied to three schools). Looking to major in poli sci and comp sci - one for the money, the other enjoyment. I could also entertain the notion of applying to Ross, as it would be stupid not to at Michigan. After estimates, I will be paying 13,000 more a year for Michigan (with aid). I like urban areas, but Ann Arbor aint too shabby. I like large universities where teaching can be personal and individualized. The most important thing for me is quality of education and employment opportunities that will follow. That being said, what would you guys recommend and why?
Looking at the same schools. You have any other thoughts?
Michigan is a powerhouse in both domains (comp- and poli-sci). The rankings for both departments are quite strong, circa top 10-15 for comp and circa 1-4 for poli-sci. McGill is a known and respected degree, but I would guess the alumni cohort in Washington would be stronger for Michigan (check LinkedIn) on the poli-sci side (there is also the Carson Scholars program which involved kids with DC). The comp sci will get you jobs in most markets including CA. Obviously, I don’t know much about McGill beyond its generally strong reputation, and am a biased Michigan graduate, but would guess Michigan would edge McGill in both categories and would provide better forward employment opportunities.
McGill has an excellent reputation, but its network is Canadian focused. While McGill is a better deal today, it may not look the same if the CAD rises (it was a parity a few years ago). In CS Michigan is far superior. You could easily double major.
Would you need to take out loans or could your family afford the extra $50K for Michigan?
Due to your interest in poli sci I’d go with Michigan.
large universities are the opposite of personal and individualized, and they’re not about teaching undergraduates. Neither university will be good for this, so, focus on other aspects.
“large universities are the opposite of personal and individualized, and they’re not about teaching undergraduates.”
That is not quite correct. There are two things that determine “personalized and individualized”
- Faculty commitment to fund raising, research, paper publication and graduate student advising. Harvard and Stanford have smallish undergraduate student populations, but their faculty is hardly focused on undergraduate students. They are more likely to focus on their research and graduate students.
- Popularity of the major. Even at a large university, most majors will only attract 10-50 majors annually. Classes in such majors will generally be small and faculty will be able to provide those students will relatively personalized and individualized experiences, especially at the intermediate and advanced levels. The intermediate and advanced Mathematics classes I took at Michigan had fewer than 20 students and were taught by some of the best professors. However, the more popular majors (such as Economics, Political Science and Psychology) will attract anywhere from 200-600 majors annually. When you combine research and graduate student focus, undergraduate students in those majors will not receive a personalized and individualized experience, no matter the size of the university.
Overall, undergraduate students at Michigan receive the same personalized and individualized experience as students at any other top research university, small, medium or large.
Michigan is a large university but it is made up of many divisions and schools. Other than some very basic, “intro” courses, classes are not that large. And most upper-level courses and seminars are quite small.
There is a crazy amount of blather historically about class size, given that the data can be found on the common data set on page 21 out of 30. Unfortunately, it seems that the page can’t be copy/pasted so I’ve physically lifted the numbers and thrown in a few quick calculations.
Class sections:
% cumm%
2-9 ===> 689 17.7% 17.7%
10-19 ===> 1539 39.54 57.24
20-29 ===> 653 16.78 74.02
30-39 ===> 214 5.5 79.52
40-49 ===> 155 3.98 83.5
50-99 ===> 384 9.86 93.4
100-100+ ===> 258 6.6 100
Total ===> 3892
Subsections: % cumm%
2-9 ===> 187 7% 7%
10-19 ===> 855 32% 39%
20-29 ===> 1248 47% 86%
30-39 ===> 258 10% 96%
40-49 ===> 78 3% 99%
50-99 ===> 18 1% 100%
100- 100+ = 4 0% 100%
Total ===> 2648 100%
I’m sure if you are in intro to political science or intro to astronomy or intro to anything, you will be looking at large classes. That said, the theory that because Michigan is a huge school all of the classes must be huge is a myth…the overwhelming majority of classes will be under 50. From personal experience, I can tell you that if you know how to raise your hand, 50 is not a big number; if you know how to find your professor’s office, again in my experience, a sincere show of engagement will reap big dividends and reciprocal engagement.
@blue85 Rather than do “analysis”, you can ask current students or visit. Upper level courses are not large. That includes political science where there are literally hundreds of options. When I visited, I sat in on a couple of upper level political science courses. None had more than 20-25 students.
Klingon: I’m way past the point where this is of interest to me…trying to help out the potential pool of interested candidates, so I am unlikely to visit. As a separate thought, I’m a fan of the phrase that the plural of “anecdote” is not “statistic”. While your anecdotal evidence squares with the statistics, not many kids will be able to do a relevantly large sampling of nearly 4,000 sections. For such people (people who can’t afford to travel to visit; those who like math), knowing the numbers may be of service.
That said, thanks for your contribution to the thread.