CMU's Engineering is undeclared and I got into UCLA for mat e. I toured both schools and talked to both students and advisors there. I fell in love with CMU. The engineering building aren't a concrete block, I'd go in undeclared, the engineering student atmosphere is what I was looking for, smaller classes, easier to get to know your professor and graduate students, 4-5 year bachelors - masters program, minors or doubles majors within engineering, cs, or business (ucla doesn't offer those), freedom to explore different engineering fields, and a plethora of research opportunities are reason I prefer CMU. However CMU costs $83,000 while UCLA costs $38,000. I wouldn't have to take out loans if I went to UCLA, but have to take out around $150,000 in loans my Junior and Senior year at CMU. I can't seem to justify double the cost and that much in loans to go to CMU. What do yall think?
#CMU vs UCLA for Engineering (cost is main factor)
cerulean magnet
brave marten
long void
go ucla. 45k per year is way too much to justify cmu over ucla
especially if you'll have to take student loans
if you had rich af parents and wanna spite them id take cmu tbh
oh or ucla just isn't a fit for you
like cmu definitely is the better option without taking money into consideration, and if you're hell-bent on going there i'd say take the risk cause you'll no doubt make your money back with an engineering degree from cmu
surreal sandal
UCLA
fiery relic
jaunty pumice
like cmu definitely is the better option without taking money into consideration...
Does that check out? The money ROI might be terrible