<p>If you go back and look at the old U-M point system, the difference in points between a 3.9 and 4.0 was the same as the difference in points between a 22 and a 36 on the ACT. Although the supreme court won’t allow U-M to use the point system anymore you would have to think that the subjective value that U-M places on GPA versus ACT hasn’t changed because of a supreme court decision. So a 4.0 would be a significant boost over a 3.8; much more so than a few points on the SAT.</p>
<p>thanks for all of the responses. you have all been very informative and helpful.</p>
<p>I think this past year was a different year for applicants because U of M was new to the common application. Kids from our school that applied early action seemed to have a better chance than those who applied later. I saw kids on these threads with way better grades, act scores, extra curric. activities that applied later get deferred and then waitlisted. This past year the rhyme or reason of who got in, did not make as much sense as in years past. But this is just my opinion from all the reading I have done on these threads-I could be way off.</p>
<p>mymay is right my friend got waitlisted with me and he had a 2100 SAT 3.9gpaUW</p>
<p>After taking a look at some of the admission data for the class of 2015. One thing struck me. The University of Chicago’s acceptance rate in the past 2 years has dropped more than 20% after switching to the common application. I strongly believe Michigan’s acceptance rate will drop to the mid twenties by next year. I think we need to revamp how we chance prospective students after we get Michigan’s admissions data for the class of 2015. Even UC Berkeley’s admission rate was barely over 20%. College admissions have gotten absolutely ridiculous.</p>
<p>Sent from my iPhone using CC</p>
<p>Well theres more to it than just GPA and test scores…</p>
<p>… you could also be a URM, your gender matters, IS vs OOS, oh and ECs</p>