<p>My son has been accepted to Texas and Michigan, and I think has a decent chance at Cornell and UCB. He will most likely major in CS. He's in state for Texas, was offered $10,000/yr at Michigan. He likes all 4 schools but wants to go to the school with the best program. In my mind, I have a hard time justifying the extra expense over UT. We could afford it but it would delay retirement by a year or 2. He's a long shot at Stanford and MIT but they would be worth the extra expense in my mind. Anyone have any advice?</p>
<p>I would wait for the acceptances and any offers of merit/need based aid. Personally, texas in-state seems like the obvious choice to me. Save the money.</p>
<p>I think for EECS, Cal is also worth the extra cost, especially if he wants to work in Silicon Valley. But Austin is a pretty sweet deal for IS students. I would not choose Cornell or Michigan over Austin if cost is a concern.</p>
<p>UMich is great for computer science but not better than the other 3 schools’ programs.
UCB probably has the best program out of the 4 but the gap isn’t that big.
UT seems like the best choice unless you’re willing to dole out money for UCB or if your son gets a good aid package.</p>
<p>In CS, the pecking order is Berkeley>Cornell>Texas>Michigan so I’m not sure why Michigan is still in the equation given its expense for OOSers. Berkeley is an option because of its ties to Silicon Valley, Cornell should be a factor since its perhaps more undergraduate focused, and UT Austin should be the leader since it has an excellent Computer Science program and would be far cheaper IS.</p>
<p>at texas, they don’t have CS in the Cockrell Engineering school. I would say that Mich’s Engineering school looks better than Texas’ College of Natural Science. If you are from Texas, it’s probably better to stay in-state unless your son doesn’t want to be in this region for a job after graduation.</p>
<p>Although graduate rankings would dictate that #1 (Cal) > #5 (Cornell) > #8 (UT) > #13 (Michigan), at the undergraduate level, I would say that Cal is the only one that separates itself from the other three. If cost is a concern, UT is the way to go. If cost is not a concern, I would go for fit, keeping in mind that Cal has the edge. Something to keep in mind is regional placement opportunities. Silicon Valley and Austin are both home to great tech companies and give graduates from Cal and UT a leg up in terms of professional placement.</p>
<p>Class size and undergraduate focus does not vary that much between those four schools, particularly in the sciences. Faculty at major research universities will not give underclassmen much attention. That’s the tradeoff one must accept when attending a worldclass university such as Cal, Columbia, Cornell, Harvard, Michigan, Stanford etc…</p>
<p>Thanks for the advice. I tend to agree that UT is the best choice. My son would prefer to go to school out of state and liked Cornell’s campus better that the urban campus of UT. One thing he doesn’t like about CS at UT is that CS is not in the engineering school but in the college of natural sciences which isn’t as selective or prestigious and he wouldn’t be able to take other engineering courses (he was actually accepted into Cockrell but could easily transfer into CNS) The academic quality of the overall student body is also slightly better at the other schools compared to UT. I think he would be happy at any of these schools and they all offer every opportunity to be very successful. If he gets accepted into the CS Turing Scholars program at UT that might seal the deal.</p>