<p>Obviously this year has been the most competitive year for admissions at UM:</p>
<p>Acceptance Rate: 47%
25-75% SAT Range: 1260-1480</p>
<p>I can only imagine what it'll be like next year!</p>
<p>Any chance UM will move up in the rankings?</p>
<p>i hope it moves up into the top 20 :]</p>
<p>That would be awesome.</p>
<p>USNews uses ACT for Michigan because it receives more ACTs than SATs. Last year, the middle 50% ACT was 26-30. Standardized test scores only account for 7.5% of Michigan's USNews rank.</p>
<p>Here are the criteria they use to rank:</p>
<p>Peer assessment (weighted by 25 percent). The U.S. News ranking formula gives greatest weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school's academic excellence. The peer assessment survey allows the top academics we contact--presidents, provosts, and deans of admission--to account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching. Each individual is asked to rate peer schools' academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those who don't know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly are asked to mark "don't know." Synovate, an opinion-research firm based near Chicago, collected the data; 57 percent of the 4,098 people who were sent questionnaires responded.</p>
<p>Retention (20 percent in national universities and liberal arts colleges and 25 percent in master's and comprehensive colleges). The higher the proportion of freshmen who return to campus the following year and eventually graduate, the better a school is apt to be at offering the classes and services students need to succeed. This measure has two components: six-year graduation rate (80 percent of the retention score) and freshman retention rate (20 percent). The graduation rate indicates the average proportion of a graduating class who earn a degree in six years or less; we consider freshman classes that started from 1995 through 1998. Freshman retention indicates the average proportion of freshmen entering from 2000 through 2003 who returned the following fall.</p>
<p>Faculty resources (20 percent). Research shows that the more satisfied students are about their contact with professors, the more they will learn and the more likely it is they will graduate. We use six factors from the 2004-05 academic year to assess a school's commitment to instruction. Class size has two components: the proportion of classes with fewer than 20 students (30 percent of the faculty resources score) and the proportion with 50 or more students (10 percent of the score). Faculty salary (35 percent) is the average faculty pay, plus benefits, during the 2003-04 and 2004-05 academic years, adjusted for regional differences in the cost of living (using indexes from the consulting firm Runzheimer International). We also weigh the proportion of professors with the highest degree in their fields (15 percent), the student-faculty ratio (5 percent), and the proportion of faculty who are full time (5 percent).</p>
<p>Student selectivity (15 percent). A school's academic atmosphere is determined in part by the abilities and ambitions of the student body. We therefore factor in test scores of enrollees on the SAT or ACT tests (50 percent of the selectivity score); the proportion of enrolled freshmen who graduated in the top 10 percent of their high school classes for all national universities and liberal arts colleges, and the top 25 percent for institutions in the master's and comprehensive colleges categories (40 percent); and the acceptance rate, or the ratio of students admitted to applicants (10 percent). The data are for the fall 2004 entering class.</p>
<p>Financial resources (10 percent). Generous per-student spending indicates that a college can offer a wide variety of programs and services. U.S. News measures the average spending per student on instruction, research, student services, and related educational expenditures in the 2003 and 2004 fiscal years.</p>
<p>Graduation rate performance (5 percent; only in national universities and liberal arts colleges). This indicator of "added value" shows the effect of the college's programs and policies on the graduation rate of students after controlling for spending and student aptitude. We measure the difference between a school's six-year graduation rate for the class that entered in 1998 and the predicted rate for the class.</p>
<p>Alumni giving rate (5 percent). The average percentage of alumni who gave to their school during 2002-03 and 2003-04.</p>
<p>P.S. USNews runs a year behind, so this year's ranking will be based on statistics for the fall of 2005 rather than 2006.</p>
<p>Well then Michigan most likely will not move up then.</p>
<p>also note that acceptance rates went down and applicant qualifications went up at every school, just as michigan's acceptance rate moved from 50 something to 47 so too did yale, princeton, columbia accpetance rates drop to 7...if every school in the country got more applicants, then other factors besides acceptance rate will have to move schools in the ranking</p>
<p>Lville, few schools have had a 10% drop in acceptance rates like Michigan did (from 57% to 47%). Some universities had extreme drops of 4% or 5%, but 10% is not very common.</p>
<p>yeah but also a drop from 57 to 47 is proprtionally equivalent to smaller drops in lower acceptance rates, also i would have to imagine if you were to draw a function for this sort of thing acceptance rates would drop at a steeper rate when they are higher and shallower rates as the acceptance rate itself gets lower</p>
<p>We may move up because we outperformed our predicted graduation rate by +8%. UCLA, which was tied with us, outperformed by +2%. Carnegie Mellon, which is 2 points ahead of us, underperformed by -5%. UVA, which is 1 point ahead, outperformed by +7%. This suggests the our retention score, which constitutes 20% of the ranking (and 80% of the 20% is based on graduation rates), will go up relative to others. All else being equal (which we don't know), the available data suggest we will move ahead of UCLA and maybe CMU. UVA will likely stay 1 point ahead unless we get the benefit of rounding.</p>
<p>Of course, the emphasis is on "all else being equal" since we have only one variable to deal with.... enough mental gymnastics for tonight.</p>
<p>Good point. And that pretty much speaks to what I touched upon above. All universities are getting more selective because they cannot keep up with the demand from qualified applicants. As such, all universities ranked in the top 50 are going to have very low acceptance rates in the years to come.</p>
<p>Where did you find the class of 2010 numbers from?</p>
<p>I found it on the website</p>
<p>Acceptance rate only counts for 1.5% of a university's USNews ranking. So, this likely will not affect our ranking.</p>
<p>students and alumns should be more excited about the rapid growth of the endowment, an increase in endowment and a continued imporvement of the physical plant of the school probably counts more towards ranking</p>
<p>please post the link to where you saw this information</p>
<p>lville, Michigan's endowment is growing at a very rapid rate. Over the last 20 years, Michigan's endowment has grown faster than any other university's endowment, from $500 million to $5 billion. In 1990, the University's endowment was not among the top 20 in the nation. Today, it stands at #6 or #7 in the nation.</p>
<p>Wow, I had no idea Michigan's endowment was that high. Even though it doesn't officially factor into the rankings, it certainly bodes well for our future. This is more important than rankings anyway. However, even for those who are more concerned with rankings, this will help increase our rankings in the long run. </p>
<p>Off subject, but I just realized I have started calling Michigan "our" or "my." I think I'm growing attached and I haven't even attended my first class yet. ;)</p>
<p>So are the admitted students 06 stats a lot higher than us 05 students? I'm glad michigan is becoming more selective.</p>