<p>57k is a lot of money, I'm not going to deny that. Those numbers are very good for both schools. I already said it before, it makes no difference in the long run which school you go to in this case. It is more about fit and course of study.</p>
<p>NU, you and I both know that those are the students that had something to report. If I were to pick the job placement of the top 500 students (NOT including Ross) at Michigan, the list would probably look just as impressive.</p>
<p>I DO RESPECT UMICH. I just do not think it is on the same level as some other schools. I do not buy this "its peer assessment puts it on the same plane as brown and dartmouth, etc.)</p>
<p>Michigan is a legitimate top 25 or 20 school. But is it a top 15 school?</p>
<p>I think there are just too many "good" schools that are better for undergraduate quality.</p>
<p>If you want to go into I-Banking, go to Ross. NUGrad, the stats for the Ross class are far different from the genral popultation.</p>
<p>NUGrad, I "buy" the peer assessment score. And yes, like you, I believe that Michigan is a top 20 university. I believe you have 5 universities that are in a league of their own and then, after those 5, you have a group of 15 or so universities that make up the next level. Michigan is one of those 15.</p>
<p>this is the last thing I will say: Peer assessment scores provide a general image of the pecking order for schools. They, however, have some blatant errors and are incredibly biased in favor of east coast schools, as most of the prominent universities are located in the east. With that said, US News has a place like Univ of Wisconsin above Georgetown, Rice, and Tufts. With all due respect, this alone makes me think twice about these assessment scores. How can one even fathom for a second that Wisconsin provides a better undergraduate education than does a place like Rice. Rice has like 1/10 the students, a larger endowment with those smaller students, more accessible professors, A MUCH more talented student body, etc.
The fact that these ratings can make such an egregious blunder with that leads me to believe that other ratings it provides are not so accurate either.</p>
<p>NUGrad, i chose michigan over columbia and wharton, and i think an average student would choose columbia and wharton over NU anyday, coz seriously, NU doesnt even compare, but does it matter? why do i want to be the average sheep?</p>
<p>NUGrad, you cannot prove that Northwestern is better than Michigan because it isn't. In some ways, Michigan is bettrer than Northwestern and in other ways, Northwestern is better than Michigan. Inb most ways that REALLY matter, they are equal. So admit you were wrong when you said that Northwestern was superior to Michigan and stick to the official story; between those two peers, one is best served chosing the school that best suits his personality.</p>
<p>Haha Alexandre, out of curiosity, did you notice during your 4 years at Michigan how a lot of out-of-staters and internationals held Michigan in higher regard than the in-staters? UM is definitely an AWESOME school but I think part of the reason it doesn't get the credit it deserves is because of its lack of selectivity. I go to a public feeder high school from Michigan and we probably have 50-60 kids going to UM this year. Out of those 50-60 kids, only about 3-4 of them got into Michigan's so called "peer" schools such as Northwestern, Rice, Cornell, etc. etc.</p>
<p>My own take on Michigan is that the opportunities are out there for those that are willing to pursue them. However, it is also much easier for one to "fall through the cracks" so to speak especially when some super intelligent kids who decide to attend UM are forced to intermingle with some not-so-intelligent students, who were only admitted to the school since they are in-state, and get corrupted as a result or lose motivation. After all, in a school of 20,000-25,000 students, you are going to have students with a wide range of academic ability.</p>
<p>I haven no doubt in my mind that the top 100 kids at UMich are stronger academically than the top 100 kids at NU and consequently get better job offers as a result. The difference is that the remaining 80% of Northwestern's student body still do extremely well in terms of professional placement and grad school admission. The same cannot be said of Michigan's bottom 50% students. A NU student can be mediocre and still end up successful while a Michigan student on the other hand will have to stand out much more in order to receive the same results.</p>
<p>in response to alexandre, I still stick by my argument. Michigan is a top 20 school. There are 15 schools that easily outdo it in terms of undergrad quality, placement, etc. I do not know what your background is like, but I have in addition to my b.a. in econ from NU a J.D. from Duke University. I now work in a upper level corporate law firm in the north east. I know one or two things about academic quality of various undergrad schools, as evidenced by the performance of some of my peers.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UM is definitely an AWESOME school but I think part of the reason it doesn't get the credit it deserves is because of its lack of selectivity.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disagree. Michigan is quite selective. I know quite a few people that had amazing stats in high school but were waitlisted by UMich. Because UMich is a public school, in-state students have an easier time getting in than out of state students, which is why people say the school isn't selective enough. </p>
<p>IMO, internationally, UMich is as highly regarded as other top US schools like Columbia, Northwestern, Cornell, etc (definately not Harvard, Yale, Princeton or Stanford...but other top schools).</p>
<p>NUGrad, my experience is pretty substantial. I have yet to see any evidence that Northwestern, or 14 other universities, easily outdo Michigan. I can think of 5 universities, and that's about all.</p>
<p>EAD, the average success rate of the Michigan alumn is impressive. I will not go through the numbers, but you are incorrect in assuming that Michigan students fall through the cracks.</p>
<p>choose ross</p>
<p>honestly, if the question was michigan econ v. northwestern econ i cud see an argument, however if you are serious about business go to a business school and learn your field. in my opinion majoring in economics is pussy footing your way around your path. if you go to ross and do mediocre to well you will be an investment banker. furthermore, michigan is 100x better in every other aspect.</p>
<p>I have had to make this exact decision in the past few days. In the end, I chose Northwestern. Both schools are great, and from what I have gathered, roughly equal in the long run. I chose NU because of its campus environment, location, social life, etc. Also, I think an econ degree is generally more versatile than a Ross degree. Certainly, going to Ross and performing well will shuttle you into I-Banking, but so could Northwestern. And at the same time, with an econ degree you could more easily go for a PhD, go down a path other than I-Banking, go to law school, or if you decide that you do want that business degree, just go to a grad b-school (it shouldn't be too hard to get into a superb one out of NU). Altogether, I just didn't want to launch myself into the narrow path of I-Banking at the age of 18 when I still have a lot to learn about what I want to do. I don't think this is pussyfooting around my career path, but rather its a wise course of action for me.</p>
<p>
Are you serious? How in the world did Ross admit someone like you? A thorough study of Economics at a school like UChicago or Northwestern is MUCH more rigorous than any sort of training in finance/management that you will receive at Ross. This is because Economics is much more theoretical and requires more math than any of those practical pure business fields. </p>
<p>Business schools are completely pre-professional and are in no way required or even recommended if you want to eventually go into business. Most people who go business school at the undergraduate level end up becoming accountants/bank workers/budget planners and not investment bankers/consultants/hedge fund managers except at Wharton of course. Investment banks are looking for individuals with special qualities like strong quantitative skills/leadership/creativity and don't particularly care what field of study you pursue. In fact, they RECOMMEND that you don't do business at the undergraduate level since they prefer interns and employees who have taken a strong liberal arts curriculum in college and are thus exposed to other areas of study like politics/public policy/economics/math/history.</p>
<p>Business school isn't for anyone and DEFINITELY not for those who seek a well-rounded educational experience in college before jumping into the professional world. That's what MBA's are for buddy.</p>
<p>Ross. Recruitment at Ross is great. From what I've heard, you don't really learn much of anything at Ross, it's pretty much a three-year program grooming you for the business world, and that's why the job placement is so great. Everyone recruits at Ross.</p>
<p>If you want a great liberal arts education, I'd probably say go with NU. Since it sounds like you are OOS, I can't use the "save your money" argument. The b-school here pretty much guarantees great placement though. If you just want placement, Ross is probably your place.</p>
<p>I chose Michigan over Northwestern.</p>
<p>"From what I've heard, you don't really learn much of anything at Ross, it's pretty much a three-year program grooming you for the business world, and that's why the job placement is so great."</p>
<p>Obviously, that's not what the business what believes... you learn information that will be very helpful in the business world.</p>
<p>Unlike some other business programs, the Ross 3-year program is designed to spread the business program over a longer period of time to allow B-School students the opportunity to minor in other liberal arts subjects. Ross reports the number of minors has increased significantly since the program switched from 2 years to 3 years.</p>
<p>A Ross student can have his or her cake and eat it too. Not only does it have distribution requirements, many students choose to go beyond those requirements. I'm have taken, or am planning to take, classes well beyond the foreign language requirements, and History (especially a particular period that interests me), together with a smattering of classes from different areas like Philosophy and Statistics. I likely won't pursue a minor in any of them (but I might)... yet I fully intend to have a solid liberal arts program by the time I graduate from UM. In fact, the ability to pursue a broad liberal arts program is one of the reasons I chose Ross over some 4-year B-School programs.</p>
<p>" Most people who go business school at the undergraduate level end up becoming accountants/bank workers/budget planners and not investment bankers/consultants/hedge fund managers"</p>
<p>WHAT?......all you need to do is look at the placement of the top 10 business schools at IBanks and you'll see that unless all of those people were fired, undergraduate business students overwhelmingly become IBankers not just at Wharton my friend.</p>
<p>Furthermore, you can check the ross school of business page on Wikipedia and see the list of Hundreds of notable financial analysts and CEOs to see how far off base evil asian is concerning Ross, not to mention the 4 billionaires Ross has produced with 2 of them coming from the BBA program</p>