<p>Mistasuggs - Michigan will be as expensive as other top tier universities where you would receive a tremendous education. What is the difference to you if it is public or private?</p>
<p>FYI: here’s the overall NRC engineering ranking by averaging the midpoints of R-rankings for all engineering departments:</p>
<ol>
<li>MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-BERKELEY</li>
<li>UC BERKELEY/UC SAN FRANCISCO</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-SANTA BARBARA</li>
<li>HARVARD UNIVERSITY*</li>
<li>STANFORD UNIVERSITY</li>
<li>NORTHWESTERN UNIVERSITY</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF MICHIGAN-ANN ARBOR</li>
<li>GEORGIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY</li>
<li>PRINCETON UNIVERSITY</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF TEXAS AT AUSTIN</li>
<li>CALIFORNIA INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY</li>
<li>PURDUE UNIVERSITY MAIN CAMPUS</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF COLORADO AT BOULDER</li>
<li>UNIVERSITY OF CALIFORNIA-LOS ANGELES</li>
</ol>
<p>*One department only</p>
<p>^^^^Which just goes to show you that it cannot be done correctly that way. Seriously, UCSB over Caltech or even Northwestern?</p>
<p>@Sam Lee, thanks for clarifying, apology accepted.</p>
<p>The NRC is obviously ranking something other than quality. I do not say this because of NU’s ranking but because of other schools’ rankings. </p>
<p>RANKED WAY TOO HIGH</p>
<h1>4 UCSB</h1>
<h1>5 Harvard</h1>
<h1>14 Colorado-Boulder</h1>
<p>RANKED WAY TOO LOW</p>
<h1>6 Stanford</h1>
<h1>12 Caltech</h1>
<p>Cornell - out of the top 15
UIUC - out of the top 15</p>
<p>That’s way too many departures from current reality to be taken seriously.</p>
<p>Haven’t really look at the ranking methodology. I just got the huge amount of data on excel when they first came out and were free to download.</p>
<p>If the scope of their offerings is narrow (e.g. Harvard), then the rank of their overall Engineering school can not be taken in the same vein as one as comprehensive as UCB, UMich, UICU, etc.</p>