<ul>
<li><p>Rising senior</p></li>
<li><p>Planning on majoring in engineering with a minor in business or accounting</p></li>
<li><p>2320 SATI, 800 SAT Math IIC, will take SAT Chem in October</p></li>
<li><p>3.9x UW GPA (one B in AP Bio), 4.2x weighted</p></li>
<li><p>5 AP classes taken, all 5s - basically the most rigorous schedule available</p></li>
<li><p>Will take 5 more APs next year</p></li>
<li><p>Decent but not remarkable ECs</p></li>
<li><p>Already applying to Georgia Tech, Purdue, Cornell, Northwestern, Minnesota, and U Tulsa with Oklahoma as a safety if needed</p></li>
<li><p>Some other reach schools may be added</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Cost isn't a deciding point, but higher costs must be justified from an ROI standpoint. I don't think rack-rate OOS tuition at Michigan would be worth it, so a scholarship would be a must there.</p>
<p>Likes: walkable campus, easy access to major airport, strong career services, social housing, four seasons (esp. good fall colors), good hockey team :)
Dislikes: strongly political campus (either right or left), common use of illegal drugs or anything that is smoked</p>
<p>I'm a very conventional sort of person, not really quirky or anything like that. All of these schools have a Target and some sort of Thai restaurant nearby, and those are the only two things I really need from the surrounding area :)</p>
<p>You can suggest others, but I've probably already thought of them.</p>
<p>Given that Tulsa and Oklahoma are on your list I’ll assume that that’s your state of residence. From an ROI perspective I doubt that any of your schools can be “justified” when compared to Oklahoma in-state tuition. Without knowing all your financial aid offers it will be impossible to guess which will be the most viable ROI prospect after OU. Also, many of your schools are state flagship/public universities making it hard to guess how much, if any, merit aid is available to OOS students; this puts Wisconsin, Michigan, PennState, GT, Purdue and Minnesota pretty much in the same scholarship boat.</p>
<p>Concentrating on the one interesting criteria you offer - Michigan, Wisconsin, Cornell & Minnesota are the only schools that qualify on the “good hockey team” front. If it wasn’t for that, I’d suggest adding Carnegie-Mellon to your list. Another possibility meeting most of your criteria would be Notre Dame.</p>
<p>^ No, I’m from AK. I’m a probable NMF, so I would be guaranteed very generous merit aid at OU (and Tulsa, but it’s there for other reasons).</p>
<p>Not all state schools charge equal OOS fees and they do not all offer equal merit aid. I’ve done my homework with regards to those that are already on my list. Wisconsin and PSU both offer little merit aid but are cheaper than UMich to start.</p>
<p>I think you should add some extra ultra reaches…you’ve got great stats and you’re from Alaska. I’d add Princeton or MIT to the list.</p>
<p>You already have some good matches…I think I’d only apply to either Tulsa or Oklahoma…I’d probably drop Georgia Tech given your criteria and substitute Wisconsin and/or Michigan.</p>
<p>If you want another option that has strong engineering and financial aid for OOS (but no 4 seasons and hockey) I’d look at Rice and USC.</p>
<p>^ I’m considering MIT, Stanford, and Princeton. The Stanford application is a drag and they don’t really have seasons there, but it’s obviously a great school. MIT might be a little too techy for me, although I think they’ve been trying to change that a little over the past few application cycles. For some reason I just haven’t thought that much about Princeton, but I will now.</p>
<p>I’m not planning on applying to Oklahoma unless I’m unhappy with my other choices (the “if needed” in my OP might have been vague). If I get into Minnesota or Purdue I probably wouldn’t bother. Tulsa is there because my parents pushed for a small school option and they have very good engineering for a less reachy small institution.</p>
<p>I’ve thought about Rice, but Houston is a real problem climate-wise. It’s consistently hotter and more humid than Tulsa and Atlanta, and even those are a bit of a stretch.</p>
<p>While I’m undecided about my specialization, my interests in both engineering and business steer kind of naturally towards industrial/systems engineering and GT has the absolute best academics in that area.</p>
<p>I appreciate the opinion. Returning to the original question, do you see any reason Wisconsin might be better than Michigan (or vice versa)?</p>
<p>Both are fantastic…yes, Mich gets the nod for engineering and biz combo reputation, but Wisconsin is fantastic as well (more of a bioscience strength). </p>
<p>Mich is now on the common app, right?..That’ll make it easier to apply…don’t know about your others since I haven’t been involved in the app process for a long time.</p>
<p>Apply to what you feel comfortable with…you’re only going to be able to make the ultimate decision when you have all your financial aid and acceptance cards dealt to you.</p>
<p>And costs over $10,000 more/yr. Also depends which area of engineering or business you are looking at. UW Chem E is top notch and most areas are still very solid. UW is better in marketing, real estate investments, and actuarial science and a push in accounting. UM is better for finance and consulting outside the big accting firms. UW allows for an eng degree and a certificate in business. Not sure what UM allows.</p>
<p>^ The state of Illinois has been slammed economically and I think the school is hurting because of it. Berkeley doesn’t strike me as worthwhile OOS (sorry, UCB ;)).</p>
Fair enough, but let me give you a list of ideas why it should…</p>
<ol>
<li>Fantastic, top ranked undergrad engineering and business programs - these programs have seen negligible impact of reduced budget.</li>
<li>Easier to get into than some of the super reaches you’re considering, especially with Berkeley planning to increase OOS enrollment.</li>
<li>With your AP credits via 5 scores, Berkeley would allow you to waive out of Math 1A and/or 1B and Physics 7A…saving you time and possibly a semester.</li>
<li>Accessible to two (2) public airports (SFO and OAK) via BART train station one block west of the Berkeley campus.</li>
<li>Alaska/Horizon Air flies to SFO and OAK daily (via Portland and Seattle)…cheaper airfare for the shorter flight too. </li>
</ol>
<p>Granted, Cal will not have the four seasons or hockey…but we do have a hockey club team that you actually would be able to play for…</p>
<p>Thanks for posting your thoughts, UCBChemEGrad. UCBerkeley is getting pummeled over the state’s economic problems and I couldn’t agree more that, for the most part, the school will be unscathed. That’s why they raised their tuition this year. And noimagination, if it’s any consolation to you, you’ll be doing my son a huge favor if you DON’T apply-- his SAT/uwGPA stats are not of your equal and he is also an E-major. Fortunately, we are in-state…</p>
<p>^^ Fair points. Cal just faces very tough competition. It doesn’t offer any real cost savings over the elite privates, and given that the location is actually less attractive than MIT or Princeton I would probably be inclined to select one of the latter.</p>
<p>I’m a terrible hockey player; I just find it one of the few spectator sports that is actually enjoyable to watch.</p>
<p>USC is more interesting than I expected given the relatively unattractive location. I will certainly think about it.</p>
<p>Since you’re all here, I might as well nail down the high reach selection(s) as well. Here’s what I’m considering:</p>