There are so many factors here, I’m not sure where to begin. Rankings obviously drives differences in popularity among OOS applicants between Iowa and Michigan, for example. Other factors like the physical campus, location, published outcomes, school spirit and stereotypes come into play. University of Michigan is ranked #21, is strong in most academic disciplines, is located in a nice town, has amazing school spirit, and has great outcomes, but has a reputation for being crunchy. In contrast, Iowa is ranked #93, it’s strongest programs are nursing and writing, it is in Iowa City, and frankly, it does not enjoy as strong a reputation as UM. That said, if you are looking at OOS publics I recommend looking at Big10 schools like UofM, Purdue, UIUC and Minnesota, depending on your desired major.
Regarding your second question, that is driven by your finances, desired career path, and geographic preferences. If you want to escape California, a good transition point would be selecting a school where you want to land. If you want to be in TX or FL, where there is a lot of private sector job growth apply to UT Austin or UF. If you want to stay in CA, I think you would be better served attending a second tier CA public than going to an out of state public that is not among the top in the country like UofM.
It’s nice talking “rankings,” “reputation,” “atmosphere,” and such, but it boils down to one thing…money. That’s why roughly 80% of students go in-state. Unless it’s some kind of highly specialized program with ridiculously high demand(extremely rare for a bachelors degree), there really isn’t a big enough incentive for the vast majority of people to spend the money going out of state. Success after college depends on experience, job opportunities, and effort. Some switch careers. After 10 years it’s generally impossible to conclude if your college prestige had anything to do with your success.
If you want to look at where school grads land, select the school, click the alumni tab, choose the major you’re interested in under what they studied, or put it in the search box if it isn’t listed and then look at where they work.
If you want to look at where companies employees went to school, look up the company, click the people tab, select the major you’re interested in under what the studied or enter it into the search box if it isn’t listed and then look up where they studied.
There are some caveats. LinkedIn harvests all jobs listed, including internships, so the list likely doesn’t represent current day completely.
Bigger programs place more grads. Pomona for example might place a higher percentage of their CS grads at Apple than Stanford or UCB, but it might not make the list because the program is so small.
Someday there will be a CC thread explaining why buying a car for a 17 year old is ridiculous. Or why staying at a Westin is just crazy when you can sleep just as well at a Red Roof Inn. Or that taking on debt to buy a house is insane when you’d do MUCH better financially putting your money into a no-fee fund and living in a one bedroom apartment with your kids sharing a sleep sofa in the living room.
Until that time, perhaps the “nobody should ever spend money going out of state” crowd can moderate their vociferous statements. There are some people for whom paying for college has been the number one financial goal since the kids were born. And I say- have at it. You’ve saved, you’ve sacrificed other things-- you do you.
Why criticize people whose decision-making is different than yours?
My kids could have gotten a “perfectly adequate” education at our flagship U. We all chose otherwise, and have never regretted it. The biggest financial sacrifices were NOT retiring when we could (both love our jobs, so it was hardly a sacrifice) and NOT going on the “mommy track” when every other kid in pre-school boasted a SAH parent. Don’t regret it. Have never regretted it.
But it is really lunacy to pretend that every college offers the same programs, the same peer groups, the same opportunities, and the same outcomes.
No one is saying they do. The question is whether the cost-benefit analysis says it’s worth the extra money. For most of us, the answer would be no. And I would call that a sound decision. If some people have the money and it’s worth it, good for them, but for me that would be a hard stop, even if I could afford it.
The disagreement here has been discussed many times, which I believe stems from most posters on CC not being representative of the general public. There is a selection bias going on. @coolguy40 is right that 80% of families, especially those from larger states in the middle of the country, send their kids in-state because OOS is simply not an option financially and because the ROI is good. The other posters are also right that, when financially feasible, sending kids to selective OOS schools with better reputation/ranking/etc. opens up opportunities that are otherwise not available. But these posters, myself included, are admittedly not among the majority. Put it another way, majority of families don’t care, or cannot afford to care, about the nuances that come with different colleges.
I am neither in the go as cheaply as you can crowd, or in the go as highly ranked as you can crowd. The camp I am firmly in is the understand the financial ramifications crowd and choose fit if you can afford it. You clearly are too.
The opposite though of the you’re crazy if you don’t choose Cheapo U, is the you’re crazy if you don’t choose Brand X crowd. I’ve read advice suggesting parents should go deeply in debt, essentially to do whatever they can, for the great opportunities that Brand X will bring them.
Neither are correct. This is a nuanced decision, based on each family’s individual circumstances.
Two things are very clear though. First, no school prints the golden ticket. No school will open every door if the student doesn’t apply themselves and make the most of the opportunities in front of them. Second, drive, curiosity and horsepower will always rise, no matter the name on the paper.
My two cents is you are always on safe ground speaking for yourself and your preferences.
Once you start trying to win arguments online by claiming “most” other people would agree with you, you immediately run into all sorts of issues. Like, who exactly is in the pool of people among which you are claiming most would agree with you?
Of course what we know is true is more US four-year college students than not attend a public university, and more of those students than not attend in-state. So in that sense, it is true “most” people end up preferring an in-state option.
But the pool of people who make a different choice are not necessarily identical to the pool of people who make that choice. Some overlap, sure, but not complete.
And so I think you will find that the people who have made a different choice are typically not going to be persuaded by claims “most” people make a different choice. They know that already, they just have decided that in their individual case, the decision most people make is not necessarily the right decision for them individually.
Based on the pay levels found on College Scorecard, that level of pay may be the typical expectation for some majors at the BA/BS level (biology, most humanities, most social science other than economics) – from colleges that are not elite finance or consulting recruiting targets, of course.
This is undoubtedly true for a whole bunch of people. But if people have saved enough to pay full ride at a private school anywhere in the country – and perhaps they are evaluating whether or not a larger university might fit the bill but their kid doesn’t have the stats to get into the better-known UCs, they might start to wonder about places like Minnesota.
USN has an interesting comparison tool that I’ve been looking at this morning. It clearly shows that Michigan>Minnesota>Iowa in a bunch of different metrics. But it gets interesting when I start to plug in the UC schools. UC Santa Cruz has a 47% acceptance rate (vs UMInn 75%) but the four-year graduation rate is only 62%. They have fewer faculty and larger class sizes…and the average starting salary of a UC Santa Cruz grad (in proximity to one of the most expensive housing markets in the country) is $10K LESS than the average starting salaries of Minnesota and Iowa graduates.
(Also, out-of-state tuition for Minnesota is significantly cheaper than Michigan and most private schools, although 2x the cost of UC Santa Cruz in-state.)
Speaking of the population as a whole, yes. But this thread is not a general discussion about the merits of going to certain schools vs others (there are many other threads on this topic). This thread is specifically in response to OP’s questions and she said:
Listen it’s hard (but not impossible) to beat an instate price, but the original question, and subsequent discussion, is about more than just dollars. Many of the kids I see go out of state (to another state school or private) are at least as motivated by making a “fresh start” and or leaving to experience a new state/ region. As an adult, I can explain that just because 3/4 of your High School is attending an instate school you, my daughter, can just avoid them, find new people and clubs, branch out, and soar at your instate option. And save mom and dad a lot of money. And get a great education.
If you have a child who, for whatever reason (and there are many), did not have the best HS experience and wants a truly fresh start or new experiences in a different political or regional or geographic area, and you can afford it- I think it can be a gift to them. I’ll add, in taking this option, we have also managed expectations both financially and socially.
I would agree. My college bound daughter is interested in Boston U. We make a decent living in Texas, but on the east coast, we’re low income… That makes the BU financial aid package comparable to an in-state university.
This tool is interesting (if somewhat reductive).
Among public flagships, Rutgers seems to hit the sweet spot of being pretty selective (average test scores of admitted students comparable to many SLACs) but still having a >60% acceptance rate. The cost, even for OOS, is significantly less than most private schools. They have a much lower student:faculty ratio than the aforementioned UC Santa Cruz. And graduates seem to do better right out of the gate (nearly $50K/year avg starting salary.) Binghamton has similar stats, and both have an impressive >90% freshman retention rate. Neither has more than 10% OOS students, however. This is fascinating to me.
Starting salaries aren’t useful unless you compare major to major. Aggregate salaries, whether starting or mid career are over weighted by higher earning majors. In your specific example, Iowa is not the engineering flagship. Iowa State is. Iowa’s program is very small relative to Michigan and Minnesota, so aggregate earnings will be lower on that factor alone.
If you are looking at graduation rates, you need to dig into the factors that might push them down. At Cal Poly for example, at least when they were on the quarter system, engineering majors had to do 200 hours give or take, while the typical 4 year degree was 180. So, dig in deeper as to the why, and question if it’s germane to your student.
Rutgers is a good school, and you’re right that most grads have good outcomes.
But don’t rely on that 60% acceptance rate. That’s from two years ago. I expect they received many more applications this year than in past years (therefore lowering their acceptance rate), because two things happened this year: a) they are now on the Common App b) their USNWR rank rose to #40.
