<p>Hi, so I currently go to UIUC as an in-state student, but I"m seriously thinking about transferring. Would it be worth it to pay the higher tuition and transfer to either UVA, UMICH, or Northwestern? Thanks.</p>
<p>It depends on what you want to do, you can probably achieve very similar things from UI engineering, accounting, etc. Also, I recommend looking at UNC-CH. Its up there with UM and UVA.</p>
<p>Thanks slipper. The subject I want to study is part of the reason why I want to transfer. I'm not really interested in engineering or accounting. I'm leaning more towards economics, and from what I can see here, UIUC doesn't place too much emphasis on its undergraduate economics department.</p>
<p>UMICH econ is good; their business school is better.
NW econ is alright, but they purposely make double majors easier.</p>
<p>UMICH i think is a BS degree (more math intensive) NW is BA degree (less math intensive)</p>
<p>Therefore, UMICH is a lot more difficult, but easy to transfer into. (please don't ask me for the stats)</p>
<p>It's also important to take into consideration what you want to do in the future. If you want to work on wall-street, UMICH is the one for you.. only consulting firms recruit at NW. In addition, I would guess UMICH is mostly TA taught, whereas NW is more professor based. The NW fact I know for sure; I know the econ undergrad director there. (Don't ask me why)</p>
<p>I am applying to UMICH. I got too lazy and decided not to apply for NW</p>
<p>I think you're mislead in your evaluation of the two schools. I applied to both University of Michigan and Northwestern, and I was accepted to both schools; so I know quite a bit about the schools (not to say that you don't). </p>
<p>NU and University of Michigan both have excellent economics programs, but I would give the slight edge to Northwestern. Michigan obviously has a better business curriculum because NU doesn't even have one. Both schools would be excellent choices for a business career. Personally, I picked Northwestern because I would rather take economics instead of undergraduate business (because I am going to get an MBA later). </p>
<p>I'm not quite sure where you're getting your information about recruiting either. Northwestern recruits similar amounts to wall street and investment banking as Michigan does. After all, Northwestern is 12 miles away from the 3rd largest city in the country: CHICAGO. Most big Wall Street firms have branches in Chicago. If you don't believe me, go look on Goldman Sachs or JP Morgan's recruiting schedules. Like I said before, you can't go wrong with either school because they attract the same recruiters.</p>
<p>I agree with benz...</p>
<p>I personally talked to NW econ students at a recent competition, because I was considering transfering there. They told me that it is mostly consulting firms that recruit in the mid-west. I KNOW the NW econ's undergrad director, and he referred me to the career services website.</p>
<p>My friend is a senior at UMich. UMich microeconomics is almost as difficult as MIT microecon. UMich intermediate micro is probablly the second hardest intermediate micro course in the country.</p>
<p>I agree with you that either school is good. BUT, if you want a BS DEGREE, go to MICHIGAN, if you want a BA degree, go to NW. One caveat: (This is straight from the NW girl that I talked to) Double-majoring is easy. Thus, you can get a BA in econ, but make up for the lack of math with a degree in Applied Math. </p>
<p>There is a MARKED difference between BS and BA degrees. </p>
<p>For instance, if you actually want to learn how to do econometrics the real way, and not the sissy way, you go get a BS degree. BA degrees rely too much on those stupid AS/AD curves, which are useless.</p>
<p>In my view, I think BA degrees in econ are worthless.</p>
<p>The economic indicators that you would observe completely diverges from what the textbook theories would predict.</p>
<p>I guess BS degrees retain some of its validity because it is more math intensive.</p>
<p>I don't know why I am majoring in econ these days.
I can understand the macroeconomy better in real life anyway.</p>