?
I know you pulled that offline as a joke, but I still went from 6 to midnight.
Of course you did.
Ain't happening though.
What a tease.
That's the downside of "out of your league."
Very few regrets. Michigan undergrad is an unbeatable experience, wouldn't trade that for anything. If comparing Booth and Ross MBA, I would go Booth for all the ranking factors you can look up: Nobel winning professors, post-MBA salaries, etc. But in my opinion there's no comparison to comprehensive experience you get at Michigan undergrad.
One thing I might suggest if he's thinking about an eventual MBA is doing something different with undergrad. With BBA Ross and MBA Booth I took a lot of the same classes, and missed an opportunity to have dual expertise. CS undergrad and MBA is a highly sought-after combination, do it all over again I would have done that or some other form of engineering undergrad. That would significantly open up the options down the road.
Industrial and Operations Engineering, while kinda laughed at in the engineering school, sets up really well for an MBA.
Yes. In a similar vein, when I was an MBA at Michigan, people from General Motors Institute did very well there and were in high demand by the MBA admissions office, and by employers afterward. They really liked that mix.
Michigan, hands down.
Leverage Booth acceptance to get more financial aid at Ross. BBA at Ross, MBA at Booth.
Chicago doesn't have an undergraduate business program at Booth.
As a Ross alum, it is sad to say that for Finance and Econ Chicago is much better. Too much turnover in finance dept at Ross. Ross is better for strategic mgt and marketing.
Isn't Uchic top 5? As a Michigan alum, I feel like you're describing Michigan more than Uchic
Chicago has some fantastic departments -- econ, soc, anthro are all near or at the top of their fields, and I'm sure there are others. But the calculus of undergrad attendance is as I describe it, with predictable results: in my (admittedly very partial and likely biased) opinion, you get a lot of rich-kid strivers who aren't uniformly the sharpest of tools. The calculus is a lot different at Michigan, though obviously no school is without its assholes (I, for one, have spent time on several campuses)
From what I hear, the kids who get admitted for undergrad at Ivies aren't necessarily the smartest, but ones who went to the top high schools and who thus went to pipeline schools (like IMG academy for sports). So I'm not sure I agree that kids who go to U Chicago are not as smart as those who go to Ivies...it's kind of like splitting hairs. I would say the kids at the Ivy school I went to were about the same as kids at Umich honestly
Chicago's acceptance rate is 7.2% this year. For comparison, Yale is 6.3% and Penn is 8.4%. I'm not sure many kids are juggling more than one hyper-selective offer, nor can they pick and choose where exactly they want to attend. I think most go about app process with a spray and pray gameplan.
https://www.chicagomaroon.com/article/2018/5/3/university-chicagos-acceptance-rate-plummets-7-2-c/
Yea exactly. Chicago is on par with Ivies in terms of acceptance rate and prestige. The only reason they aren't an Ivy is because of geography...same with Stanford
My experience was the opposite. I think there were three kids from my grade that went to UChicago and they were all pretty nerdy.
Michigan has a ton of rich kids too...
If he is very interested in business, especially at the leadership level, and knows he is destined to get an MBA, he is better off not going to Ross for a BBA.
He would be better off at a place like U Chicago with an undergrad in economics or some other non-B school specific field.
Then he could go for an MBA at a place like Ross.
Top MBA programs prefer a non-BBA specific undergrad, especially if you do not have a number of years of significant work experience between the two.
I've seen several comments similar to this in the thread, and it seems idiotic. The value of an engineering degree + MBA is substantial, but it's for those with a proclivity and interest in engineering first and foremost. Is the expectation that young kids with a primary interest in business would put that off for 4 years, so they could get a degree in something they have less interest in, then get an MBA where they can study what they actually wanted to? That would be the message if Ross and other top schools prefer non-BBAs, and it's silly if they are. Getting much too cute.
Nonetheless, it's true. The top MBA programs prefer undergrad degrees that are not BBA. They view it as redundant.
When I got my MBA at Michigan, we had a lot of BBA's running around taking a lot of courses that were almost identical to ours.
It's not that you can't make it work (my undergrad was business and I got an MBA from Michigan), but it's not going to give you any kind of an advantage at admissions time. In fact it's the opposite. What got me in in spite of my "redundant" undergrad business degree was I had a couple of years of odd-ball small business experience that they liked.
You can still have an undergrad degree that is tangential to business, or take some business classes along with some kind of technical degree.
But yes, at the end of the day you've got to follow your heart. You can only do so much to game the admissions process and still stay true to yourself.
If your life-long passion is Accounting, then by damn, get that BBA and let the chips fall where they may.
But if you think you want to be a CEO someday and you think you have what it takes, then you have to think long term. You should probably do something else for undergrad other than a BBA. Hell, you should probably do something completely different like go into the military.
If you are in Michigan, the Michigan degree means a lot more. Plus it is a lot cheaper.
However, everywhere else, I think that Chicago has a much higher reputation. Sure, we love Michigan sports. But in many ways, that is a crappy reason to go to a school. Also, you are only going to get to know so many people in any place. The number of friends and colleagues shouldn't be a reason to go to Michigan.
Regardless, I don't think you can go terribly wrong either way. I hope your kid has visited both places enough to have a feel for what he likes.
Either school on his resume will certainly not hurt.....I agree with the prior comments as far as leveraging the financial aid.
I'm sure you and the wife are bursting with pride.....that is quite an achievement.
Unless it has changed you don't get into the Michigan BBA directly as a freshman. You get in at the end of your sophomore year starting classes your junior year.
If you live in Michigan go to Michigan. There is no better value and you can get as good of an education (or better) than UofC. I think the social aspect of Michigan is much better just becuase UofC is in a sketchy area.
It has changed. BBA since class of 2021 is over 90% pre-admit.
I never understood U-M on this one. I almost didn't go to UM back in the day when pre-admits to Ross were impossible and they only took like 40% of people who applied to the school. I was set to be an accounting major at another Big10 university, but (1) got a gf who I'm now engaged to in MI; and (2) did not want my parents spending OOS tuition on me because I got directly into their B-School.
What it did was force many Ross "rejects" into Econ (what I minored in) which prepares you IN NO WAY (well maybe a little) for a career in Business.
My son is already talking in full sentences and it looks like he might be able to skip a year in preschool. Anyone else have any experience with a situation like this?
I do not, but after reading Malcolm Gladwell, it would seem the better thing to do is to keep your son where he is and not advance him a grade. Gladwell's thesis is that kids who are more advanced than their cohort group, athletically or intellectually, obtains an advantage that then accumulates over time. Better to be the smartest kid in the class, or the best athlete on the team, than the worst or being in the anonymous middle. If your son was not so precocious, the better choice, per Gladwell, would have been to keep him back a grade so that he would be more advanced per his new cohort group of younger kids. I'm not sure if Gladwell is right, but I thought it an interesting perspective.
The Mods don't think so, Putie.
the best 3 years of my life.
What's long and hard on a Buckeye?
Second grade.
I've heard far worse ideas, but I can't take Gladwell seriously. He's a hack who writes for Sparty-level people (or worse).
My oldest daughter started kindergarten early then skipped third grade. She never went to pre-school--I worked nights and weekends and took care of the children at home until they started school. She now has a PhD. I've talked to her recently about any regrets she had about being moved up two grades, and the only thing she said was a problem is that when she started grad school, she was the only one under 21 so couldn't hang out with everyone else.
As far as skipping ahead a grade for your son, I would say just make sure he is able to handle the social aspects. Our next child skipped kindergarten (different school system and they didn't allow early entry to kindergarten) and went right into first grade. The baby of the family (wife says she's the smartest of the three) was tested and not allowed to start kindergarten early--I'm sure it had more to do with her social skills than intellectual. She will have her Master's degree in EE/Computer Science next week and will probably make more money than the rest of us put together (she already makes more money than I do).
Father of three current college students (one is on the seven year plan). Skimming the responses and your initial post I don't get a sense of what your son wants to do and why. I think it is wise for you and your wife to ask questions. Equally important is for your son to do the same. He has a short window with a decision due on Monday. However, why did he apply and what was his thought if he was accepted.
Congrats to your son on being acceptanced to both schools. They each can help your son be a better person and contributor. However, both can also challenge a person. In our case, fit, not academic ranking, was an important aspect in having our children decide where they would attend.
Oh, to have a son who can get into both Michigan and Chicago without really knowing why.
Sounds like he'll do fine no matter what.
i do not really know about both. i have heard from lots that ross is the best of the best. good luck. he could come back for a masters.
This is just sharing some observations rather than any real advice.... My dad went to Loomis Chafee for prep school, Wharton for undergrad, and Ross for MBA. FWIW he said the pace and challenge of study was most difficult at Loomis of the three. This was back in the late 60's. To contrast that my mom went to a 2 year nursing program, practiced nursing as an RN for many years, went back for another 10 months for an accelerated NP program, and was an NP for many more. These two educational opportunities could not be more different, but they both had a similar salary throughout their careers, although my dad started out higher, my mom's career was much more stable and in demand and finished making roughly the same income.
I think the point of this observation is that what is most important is to follow your heart and do what you enjoy. What seems obvious from the outside or looking at programs on paper don't tell the whole story and ignores the intricies of who are, what we feel most comfortable with, and etc. There could be a great opportunity at one place, but it's just not for us. There could be what seems like a less great opportunity at another that just supports us and cultivates something in us that allows us to develop. It's a crap shoot and mostly luck anyways.