<p>if you do moderately well, or even average, you probably dont have to worry about having to work in the state of Michigan (does not include Asian Studies majors)</p>
<p>The University opens up opportunities all over the world including some opportunities in Michigan. The economic situation will not be the same by the time you graduate.</p>
<p>I can tell from my experiences that Ann Arbor is almost immune from the economic troubles that affect most Michigan cities (larger areas such as Detroit and Flint having the most difficulties). I got my apartment unit for a really good rate (early bird special). I don’t think you will have too much trouble finding housing. However, I am a graduate student so I am living off-campus where the rents are cheaper and rooms more spacious. </p>
<p>As far as settling in Michigan, the U-M name is very well-known and most alumni live outside the state of Michigan. Ann Arbor is a college town with over 100,000 people. I have found that the city is vibrant enough that I don’t think I’m missing out on the urban experience (I did my undergrad in a suburb of Chicago with easy access to downtown, so been there, done that.) Ann Arbor is also within driving distance to many large cities (Metro Detroit, Chicago, Toronto, Cleveland, Indianapolis, etc.)</p>
<p>Whatever happens in Detroit does not affect Ann Arbor in the slightest bit. They are both their own metropolitan areas. It’s actually refreshing that I don’t have to hear about Detroit politics when I leave my apartment. :)</p>
<p>University of Michigan is doing better than most…to my surprise you really can’t tell that this the worst recession since the great depression when you are in Ann Arbor near the University of Michigan. With that being said, there are some problems. In the Engineering graduate Schools, there are fewer accepted students, fewer funded students, and the funding offers are not as generous, as well as a hand full of layoffs of staff(not faculty)…so I’ve heard.</p>
<p>^imo Texas is as good as Michigan, but most people would probably call me crazy.</p>
<p>Saying UT is equal to Michigan is like saying Columbia is as good as Harvard. Both schools are awesome and the difference is not glaring, but there is a difference.</p>
<p>“imo Texas is as good as Michigan, but most people would probably call me crazy.” </p>
<p>I’ll bite. You’re crazy! :-)</p>
<p>Texas is a fine school. Michigan is a fine school.</p>
<p>This kind of p*****g contest is silly but harmless as long as it’s kept light. </p>
<p>Example: the great majority of students at Michigan are from Michigan and those at Texas are from Texas, which has a bigger population than Michigan. Neither state is considered as having the best high schools in the country. One can argue that Texas has the bigger pool so it should have more “better” students, but it’s really all about perceptions. Take Clemson. Anyone think that South Carolina public schools are great? They don’t do well on the standard measures and yet Clemson claims to be one of the best public schools - and they admitted they game the rankings, including by saying they rank all programs other than Harvard as worse. Clemson has fewer students than Michigan or Texas but they’re drawing from a smaller pool that does worse by high school measures. How many “better” students can Clemson have when 70% come from South Carolina? Does that even matter?</p>
<p>In other words, it’s all a pile of perception and most of that is based on the reputation of the grad schools. Rankings of grad schools actually matter; where you go affects your earnings and your job opportunities - on average, of course, because any individual is unique. Michigan has a terrific law school. I went there. The law school had no meaningful impact on the undergrad education, except maybe by providing a place to study. The same is true of Yale Law - where I went to undergrad. </p>
<p>Some graduate programs do matter if they create opportunities for undergrad research and the like, but many don’t. Michigan makes a big deal out of the fact that it has a school of Naval Architecture. Do people in undergrad really benefit from that? It’s reputation.</p>
<p>When people say that a Michigan degree can get you a job somewhere, elsewhere, take that with a grain of salt. It’s not like saying you went to Harvard. It’s not Oakland Community College. Other schools also have respected, respectable degrees too; they’re not Harvard and they’re not a community college either. </p>
<p>As for Ann Arbor, great place. Lived there. Love it.</p>
<p>Lergmom, I agree with most of what you say, but I would make a couple of comments. Although a large portion of Michigan undergrads are residents of the state of Michigan, it is nowhere near the levels you have at UT-Austin. At Michigan, 65% of undergrads are in-staters, compared to 95% at UT-Austin. As such, of Michigan’s 26,000 undergrads, 17,000 are in-staters and of UT-Austin’s 35,000 undergrads, 33,000 are in-staters. If you take state proportions into consideration, I think you would have similar proportions.</p>
<p>At any rate, I believe UT is awesome and I did not mean any disrespect. And as great as Ann Arbor, Austin is justas good, albeit very different (larger and more happening). This said, I believe Michigan has a slight edge over UT as an academic institution.</p>
<p>^Yeah, my brother had the choice between Michigan and Texas a while ago and he chose Texas just because we lived there at the time. The reason I’d go to Michigan over Texas is because we are probably moving to Michigan.</p>
<p>Obviously, paying in-state at either of those schools would trump leavin the state for the other.</p>
<p>Alexandre, exactly. Texas has over 24M people and Michigan has about 10M. South Carolina has 4.5M and thus while Clemson has fewer students - 14-15k - they draw from a much smaller population and admit 75% instate when their public schools are ranked - and yes I hate rankings - in the mid-30’s nationwide. It’s all perceptions. Michigan is such a large research facility, one of the very largest, that it’s generally presumed all must be good. The truth is more that all schools of a certain class are good.</p>
<p>U-M topped 1 billion in research expenditures this year. Even with the economic recession, we still are pouring more money into research. I find that fascinating. UT is a great institution, but academically, Michigan wins by the slightest margin.</p>
<p>And yet Lergnom, the quality of the students at Michigan is roughly the same as the quality of the students at Texas. </p>
<p>AVERAGE SAT SCORE:
Michigan: 1970
UT-Austin: 1820</p>
<p>AVERAGE ACT SCORE:
Michigan: 29
UT-Austin: 26</p>
<p>% GRADUATING AMONG THE TOP 10% OF THEIR HS CLASS:
Michigan: 92%
UT-Austin: 70%</p>
<p><a href=“Office of Budget and Planning”>Office of Budget and Planning;
<p>[Freshman</a> Profile | Why UT? | Be a Longhorn](<a href=“http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/whyut/profile/index.htm]Freshman”>http://bealonghorn.utexas.edu/whyut/profile/index.htm)</p>
<p>Obviously, Texas’ population advantage does not translate to UT having a stronger student body. </p>
<p>But I don’t believe student body is what determines quality of student body. Overall, I think Michigan is slightly stronger than UT in most disciplines, has more resources (slightly larger endowment and endowment per student) and has a more geographically diverse student body and alumni base. Like I said, the difference is marginal, but it is, nevertheless, there.</p>
<p>We don’t disagree, though I think the “edge” conversation is absolutely silly. Michigan has higher scores because the OOS students raise the average. We know that. Other arguments are, well, silly. Example: sure Michigan has a more diverse alumni base but it’s still in Michigan, where job growth is awful, while Texas is in Texas, where job growth is better. Does it matter? Not really.</p>
<p>“We don’t disagree, though I think the “edge” conversation is absolutely silly. Michigan has higher scores because the OOS students raise the average. We know that. Other arguments are, well, silly. Example: sure Michigan has a more diverse alumni base but it’s still in Michigan, where job growth is awful, while Texas is in Texas, where job growth is better. Does it matter? Not really.”</p>
<p>It matters because Michigan make the target school list of more prestigious ibanks and consulting firms than Texas. Michigan also has much better access to Chicago/NYC finance/consulting jobs</p>
<p>I love these threads…:)</p>
<p>
Ummm, Alex, I think #6 is clearly Berkeley. And it’s not only me who is biased…that’s been established over many years by the ~2,000 academics completing the peer assessment poll.</p>
<p>And I believe it was you who once claimed (correctly) on these boards that Cal is the only school that occasionally crosses over into the HYPSM realm. </p>
<p>HTH</p>
<p>:D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Isn’t engineering on the north campus? ;)</p>
<p>UCB. The north campus is closer to central campus than many schools with similar populations. For example, it’s farther from one end of Michigan State to the other side than it is from the central to north campus’ at U-M. Duke has a west and east campus about 1.5 miles apart from each other, yet I never hear that mentioned as a negative. Furthermore, our medical school also has it’s own campus in the city of A2 and doesn’t claim a defacto campus some 15 or so miles away in another city. ;-)</p>
<p>“Ummm, Alex, I think #6 is clearly Berkeley. And it’s not only me who is biased…that’s been established over many years by the ~2,000 academics completing the peer assessment poll.”</p>
<p>Hehe! Well, it so happens that the 4 Cs (Cal, Catech, Chicago and Columbia) all make the strongest case for #6 honors. But schools like Brown, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Michigan, Northwestern, Penn etc… aren’t far behind. </p>
<p>And I believe it was you who once claimed (correctly) on these boards that Cal is the only school that occasionally crosses over into the HYPSM realm.</p>