You get more practice if you major in CS. My kid is good at debugging her code because she had to turn in a project per week. Just like anything, the more you practice the better you are at it.
The Pro-UMich crowd is overlooking some important aspectsâŠ
There are other issues that can stop the UMich option dead in its tracks.
- The student says that she has to borrow (by herself) the $14k per year. Plus, sheâll need travel money plus maybe insurance. Those addâl costs are about $3-4k.
She can only borrow $7500âŠand thereâs a good chance that the $7500 loan is ALREADY in her FA pkg.
So, how is she supposed to pay for the rest???
- We have no idea if UMich is going to help fund that 5th year. If not, THEN WHAT??? Is she supposed to leave UMich at that point, with no degree, and get a job WHERE???
Itâs 28k, OP made a mistake.
The OP can look at UCLA career fair info such as the one this past winter at http://career.ucla.edu/Portals/14/Documents/PDF/FairsAndTargetedEvents/Winter2015/EnginTech_WedJan21_ThursJan22_2015_012315.pdf and see that many employers specifically are looking for CS or engineering students. Can someone can hired with a math degree? Sure. While they have the same breadth of choices for CS as someone with a CS degree? Probably not.
For non defense companies, Apple and Amazon hire all majors. Agree with mom2c, defense companies hire math majors. Interesting note is that Ggogle only put Computer Science major.
mom2collegekids, the âpro-UMich crowdâ has constantly asked the OP to ascertain the financials before deciding. Obviously, if the OP will have to take a whopping $60k in loans for the fifth year at Michigan, I think UCLA becomes the clear choice.
However, if the total cost difference between Michigan and UCLA is manageable (15$k per year), I think the benefit of majoring in CS and having access to the heavy recruiting activity that takes place in the CoE makes Michigan a much better option.
Boy, people are making it sound like UCLA is some little directional university in the middle of nowhere. Itâs hard to believe that recruiting at Michigan is significantly better than recruiting at UCLA. Even then, since UCLA is already in an area with so many tech jobs, a new grad would be much less dependent on companies coming to the school to recruit.
I can understand why people would naturally assume that those with CS degrees would be the most desirable candidates for software jobs, but thatâs not the case. I have a CS degree myself, and have been looking at resumes for software jobs for over 30 years. Weâre constantly tossing aside resumes of job candidates with CS degrees while bringing in candidates with other STEM degrees, as long as it looks like the latter have some programming skills. Many upper-level CS courses are so theoretical and inapplicable to real-world software development that they donât help much when it comes to getting that first job. If you have a job opening that involves something like heavy number crunching, simulation, or data science, someone with a math, statistics or engineering degree may very well be more qualified than someone with a vanilla CS degree.
Iâve worked at companies that specifically mentioned CS and Engineering degrees in their recruitment ads, but none of them would have ignored someone with a physics or math degree if their resume indicated they knew how to program.
Iâm not saying UCLA is better than Michigan, but in this situation I donât see any clear reason Michigan would be better than UCLA, either.
If it doesnât matter, toss a coin and be done with it.
âBoy, people are making it sound like UCLA is some little directional university in the middle of nowhere.â
Can you point to an instance in this thread where anybody doubted the quality or respectability of UCLA?
âItâs hard to believe that recruiting at Michigan is significantly better than recruiting at UCLA.â
Whatâs not to believe? It is not a question of Michigan vs UCLA. It is a question of Engineering vs Arts and Sciences. Look at the companies that recruit at UCLA. It is very impressive. But then look at the majors that are open to even applying to those jobs. Most of them, including Google, IBM and Microsoft, recruit almost exclusively CS/Engineering majors. Mathematics majors would not even be considered for those jobs on campus. Even companies who open their recruitment to other majors, including Mathematics majors, will still naturally gravitate toward CS/Engineering majors for tech jobs.
âEven then, since UCLA is already in an area with so many tech jobs, a new grad would be much less dependent on companies coming to the school to recruit.â
Sure, but it is not nearly as easy or likely.
Simba, Michigan and UCLA are very similar. They are both large, very respected and attract thousands of employers. Those employers will tend to compartmentalize the university to make it their recruiting efforts on campus more manageable. For example, at Michigan, if one wishes to pursue a career in IBanking, graduating from Ross is the way to go. IBanks recruit a little at the CoE and LSA, but the bulk of their recruitment efforts on campus will be conducted at Ross. When tech companies, or companies seeking tech employees, approach a university like Michigan or UCLA, they will, more often than not, recruit CS and Engineering majors. Like I said, I knew English majors at Michigan that were hired by Microsoft, but those were exceptions.
How much is the advantage worth and how much will attending Michigan cost? That is the question the OP needs to answer. If the OP assigns little weight to that advantage, and more weight to the CoA and the amount of debt accumulated, then UCLA is the clear choice. Also, if graduating from Michigan will require a full-cost fifth year, UCLA is the obvious choice, even if the OP values career placement over CoA and indebtedness. But if the OP values career placement above CoA and indebtedness, and the cost of the fifth is manageable, I think Michigan is the clear choice.
<<<
However, if the total cost difference between Michigan and UCLA is manageable (15$k per year),
[QUOTE=""]
[/QUOTE]
How would THAT be manageable if the student is getting no help from parentsâŠhe even said heâd have to borrow by himselfâŠwhich he canât. Also, even if he got the $28k in loans, it appears that the $28k gap is not the only problem. It appears that UMich may not include much/any amount in the COA for travel (from Calif)âŠalso this student may also need to buy health insurance.
the OPâs words:
[QUOTE=""]
$28k for only 2 years. However, that's still a hefty load for me considering the fact that I will be pulling out the loan myself
[/QUOTE]
mon2collegekids, you are quite right. It really depends on the individual and their risk appetite. As you probably gathered by now, I typically do not recommend taking on too much debt, and the amount of debt I think is acceptable will vary from discipline to discipline. For disciplines with low paying jobs/low demand, such as the humanities, education etcâŠ, I will recommend minimal debt. For disciplines that require graduate work, such as law or medicine, I also recommend minimal debt. However, for disciplines with high demand, high paying entry-level jobs, I think taking on some debt is an acceptable risk. CS majors start with salaries upward of $60k/year. The average CS major at Michigan starts at $85k/year. As such, I think a debt of $45-$50k is manageable, but it really depends on the OP and his family.
It should be noted that the $45-$50k debt would be the total number, including a fifth year if required, and flights back and forth (which can easily add up to $1,500-$2,000/year for 3 trips). I do not see how health insurance is a factor since the OP would would have to purchase health insurance regardless.
@alexandre the cost of health insurance does matter because the student only owes $5k for UCLA, so could more easily come up with money for insurance.
That was not my point mom2collegekids. My point is that health insurance is a constant either way. It does not widen the gap in the cost of attendance.