Columbia University vs. University of Michigan

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
81

<p>LazyKid, that is why I said “that to people that matter”, there is no difference between Columbia and Michigan. Your world is made up entirely of what high school kids and college students think. In such a world, I would agree that Columbia would have an advantage over Michigan, although I am not sure I can agree that 99% would think that Columbia is better. However, and I do not mean this in a negative way, high school kids and college students do not really matter. They are not decision makers. They neither hire college students for work, nor do they admit them into graduate school, nor are they part of society’s intellectual and industrial elite. In such circles, however, as all the polls would suggest, Michigan and Columbia are pretty much equal. Just ask the big wigs at those Big Law firms; they rate Michigan among the top 5 Law schools…tied with Columbia.</p>

82

<p>

</p>

<p>Then, following your logic, there is no difference between Columbia and Tufts, Columbia and Boston College, Columbia and UCLA, Columbia and USC, and Columbia and UNC. You are certainly entitled to your opinion. We shall agree to disagree. In my opinion, Columbia is a peer of HYPS, Dartmouth, Penn, MIT, Brown, etc. Michigan being a peer of UNC, UCLA, Tufts, Boston College, and USC. However, I can’t help but think you are in minority with your opinion that Michigan = Columbia. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Why not? High school kids and college kids are exactly the folks who consume the product: education offered by colleges. They are the ones whose opinions should matter the most in terms of college search or selection. Not some 60-year old tenure Sociology professor who thinks Michigan is top notch just because he likes the scholarly articles that Michigan faculties produce each year, most of which, nobody else outside of academia care about.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>No, No, no, and no. Not even close. I now work as Biglaw paralegal and am heading to Columbia Law in near future. I interact with tons of lawyers on daily basis. HYS + Columbia + Chicago + NYU are the tops in legal prestige. With Penn following after, and UVA, Michigan, Cornell, and Berkeley being a lower tier. Michigan is NOT top 5 law school, has never been, and never will be.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>If you make the claim that Columbia = Michigan citing all those PA scores, maybe you should note that Michigan’s PhD programs are seen equal to Columbia PhD programs, and this only by professors. But, who cares about the views of professors?? They live in their own world, outside of the real world. The view of college students, college alums, adults in working world matter more. </p>

<p>Like I mentioned before, the prestige of an institution is highly correlated to selectivity, just like any other product, organization, job, or company. It is nearly undisputed that Goldman Sachs IBD and McKinsey are among the most selective employers, and they are seen to be uber prestigious. Same logic goes to any other product.</p>

<p>Imagine Harvard having an acceptance rate of 50% like Michigan does. Nobody will ever think Harvard is Harvard. Harvard’s rep would go into toilet within a day or two. </p>

<p>AND just because X, Y, Z employers recruit at Michigan, don’t kid yourself that Columbia = Michigan. Many IB’s recruit at University of Indiana and University of Illinois, too, yet would you say that Columbia = Indiana U or U of Illinois? This is laughable. Employers go to Michigan to recruit because it is a good enough of a school and has tons of students. Do not draw any more speculation from it than that.</p>

<p>And, grad schools… they don’t care if you come from Southern Alabama U or Harvard, as long as you have high GPA + LSAT/ MCAT. Again, the fact that you can get into Harvard Law from attending either Michigan or Columbia undergrad doesn’t mean anything.</p>

83

<p>LazyKid, you have very little understanding of the world or of the history of universities in general. You are certainly entitled to your opinion, but it is not welcomed on this forum. Here, we tend to focus on facts, not fantasy. All the best to you in the future.</p>

84

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry if I bothered you. Hey, this is just internet forum, relax, and I think people should be free to express their opinions without being censored, as long as someone stays away from attacking others, right??</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Your opinions are ‘Facts’, and my view, along with many others’ view in opposition… are hearsay or ‘fantasy’… How about ‘Facts’ such as the acceptance rate? ‘facts’ such as US News rankings… You seem to ignore those ‘facts’ and only religiously seem to depend on PA scores as relevant ‘facts’ in this discussion… And, Michigan is not top 5 law school. Sir, that is a fact, I just checked the law school rankings.</p>

85

<p>LazyKid, the peer assessment rating was only brought into this discussion because you claimed that 99% of the people think Columbia is far better than Michigan. Clearly, that is not the case.</p>

<p>Back to discussing facts. You seem to think that Michigan cannot possibly be highly regarded because it accepts 50% of applicants. Let me start by saying that Michigan’s acceptance rate was 40% last year and will probably drop to less than 35% this year. You probably don’t know this because you are young and not very knowledgeable, but until recently, (mid 1990s), universities such as Columbia, Cornell and Penn had acceptance rates that ranged between 40% and 45%. The University of Chicago and Johns Hopkins had such acceptance rates well into the 2000s. Do you really think that all those universities were not as well regarded then as they are now? Michigan’s acceptance rate of 40% does not make impact its reputation in academe or industry. Face it, institutional reputation was never based on acceptance rates.</p>

<p>You stated above that Michigan Law was never ranked in the top 5 and will never be ranked in the top 5. First of all, Michigan was ranked among the top 3 Law schools by the USNWR until the early 1990s. In fact, Michigan Law, along with Harvard and Yale Law schools, was part of the “holy trinity” of Law schools in the 70s, 80s and early 90s. So much for your facts. Secondly, I never said Michigan was ranked in the top 5 by the USNWR today. I said that according to Big Law, Michigan is rated (not ranked) as high as Columbia. In the latest USNWR rankings, Michigan Law was ranked #7. Like any ranking, there is no clear-cut accurate ranking. But it is important to note that the difference between #4 and #9 is negligible. According to the three groups that were surveyed by the USNWR, Michigan Law did well: </p>

<p>RATING ACCORDING TO LEGAL SCHOLARS:

  1. Harvard 4.9
  2. Stanford 4.8
  3. Yale 4.8
  4. Columbia 4.7
  5. Chicago 4.6
  6. Cal 4.5
  7. Michigan 4.5
  8. NYU 4.5
  9. Penn 4.5
  10. UVa 4.5</p>

<p>ACCORDING TO LAWYERS AND JUDGES

  1. Harvard. 4.8
  2. Stanford 4.7
  3. Yale 4.7
  4. Chicago 4.6
  5. Columbia 4.6
  6. UVa 4.6
  7. Michigan 4.5
  8. Penn 4.5
  9. Cal 4.4
  10. Duke 4.4
  11. NYU 4.4</p>

<p>ACCORDING TO BIG LAW

  1. Harvard 4.9
  2. Stanford 4.8
  3. Yale 4.8
  4. Columbia 4.7
  5. Michigan 4.7
  6. NYU 4.6
  7. UVa 4.6
  8. Cal 4.5
  9. Chicago 4.5
  10. Cornell 4.5
  11. Duke 4.5
  12. Northwestern 4.5</p>

<p>AVERAGE REPUTATIONAL RATING

  1. Harvard 4.9
  2. Stanford 4.8
  3. Yale 4.8
  4. Columbia 4.7
  5. Chicago 4.6
  6. Michigan 4.6
  7. Cal 4.5
  8. NYU 4.5
  9. UVa 4.5</p>
86

<p>Alexandre, your own rankings have Columbia ahead consistently. To say that it’s a slight advantage is to miss the point that a few spots below the top 5 is actually a big deal reputationally. taking your own list, i think very few would argue with a straight face that Notre Dame and Yale are in the same league, and yet they are only 3 spots apart in your gallup poll. In the same way, Umich and Columbia are only 4 spots apart in USNWR, but its the same massive difference. I also admit that the difference is amplified if you want to get a good job on the east or west cost. In the middle of the country or down south, UMich is close enough.</p>

87

<p>Actually jgerson, the 3 spot difference between Notre Dame and Yale is according to the general public. I would not be surprised with that result since to the masses, Notre Dame is very famous, not thanks to its academics but to its athletics. That is why Michigan also does well in Gallup. But if you look at what the educated potion of the public thinks, Notre Dame is nowhere near Yale. Besides, there is a significant dip between the top 3 and the rest according to the general population of the Gallup Poll, so Notre Dame and Yale are not that close, even where the masses are concerned. If you had actually taken the time to click on the link I provided, you would have noticed the difference.</p>

<p>As for your statement that there is a “massive difference” between universities ranked 4 spots appart in the USNWR, that simply not true. If that were the case, Princeton would be “massively” better than MIT and Stanford and WUSTL would be massively better than Brown and Cornell. The USNWR ranking does not measure academic quality or presitge. If it did, Cal would be ranked between #6 ane #9 in the nation and Michigan between #10 and #17.</p>

<p>Finally, do you really want to compare job placements between Columbia and Michigan in the East Coast and West Coast? How about graduate school placements? I have no objections to doing so I assure, but I am fairly certain that you will not like the results and make other excuses why Michigan is not as good as it really is.</p>

88

<p>

</p>

<p>Ok, here is the deal. You are citing ‘useless’ stats here. You know why? Those stats don’t matter. What matters is the BigLaw placement from each school. The higher ranked and more reputable the law school, the better one’s odds of getting a big firm job.</p>

<p>Check it out:</p>

<p><a href=“http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/20080414employment_trends.pdf[/url]”>http://pdfserver.amlaw.com/nlj/20080414employment_trends.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>[LAW</a> SCHOOLS REPORT](<a href=“http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202483173162&LAW_SCHOOLS_REPORT&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1]LAW”>http://www.law.com/jsp/nlj/PubArticleNLJ.jsp?id=1202483173162&LAW_SCHOOLS_REPORT&slreturn=1&hbxlogin=1)</p>

<p>Note: Stanford and Yale in this study have lower BigLaw placement because, as it is shown in the study, large chunk of their graduates go to judicial clerkships. (After which, they will try to get BigLaw)</p>

<p>As you can see, Columbia places better into BigLaw, by a noticeable margin, and we are talking about recent stats.</p>

<p>When law students make the enrollment decisions between schools, they only care about the BigLaw placement rate and how successful the schools are in placing their grads to desirable jobs and law firms. This is a fact. And, your ‘facts’ here are highly irrelevant here. </p>

<p>You may see that U of Virginia and NYU actually place better into BigLaw than Michigan. However, according to your poll of ‘judges’ or ‘legal scholars’ ranking, Michigan is ranked higher than University of Virginia and NYU (What the heck?? Michigan is better than NYU??). Let me tell you, any poll or ranking that ranks Michigan Law higher than NYU law is outrageously wrong and useless. Just ask any lawyer or law student. They will confirm that NYU is a legit top 6 law school and is ranked higher than Michigan and is more prestigious. Most law students would choose NYU over Michigan, unless Michigan offers substantial scholarship money.</p>

<p>Like I said, the most relevant ‘fact’ in discussion here is how good a school is in successfully placing its students to big firm jobs or clerkships. And, that is the true reflection of how Big Law firms perceive each law school. I hope you get that.</p>

<p>Within circle of law students and lawyers, the popular acronym is ‘HYSCCN’: Harvard, Yale, Stanford, Columbia, Chicago, and NYU. These are undisputed top 6 schools with the most prestige and highest success rate in placing their graduates into desirable jobs.</p>

<p>The cold hard truth is that Big Law firms dig DEEPER into Columbia Law than Michigan Law. And, it is a fact that Columbia is ranked higher than Michigan and is seen to be more prestigious by BigLaw firms, as evidenced by higher ratio of their graduates successfully attaining firm jobs.</p>

<p>Hence, I think your assertion is wrong that Michigan Law = Columbia Law.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Nope, it is not negligible. Columbia usually places 15% or more of their graduates into BigLaw firms than Michigan, as evidenced by the study above. </p>

<p>This means that as an individual, you have a higher success rate in getting your foot in the door out of Columbia vs. Michigan. In law, the prestige of the institution you attend is paramount for your career and job placement. Whether it is fair or not, that is a different question.</p>

89

<p>

</p>

<p>Even from the peer assessment rating you cited, Columbia is ranked higher than Michigan…Am I missing something here?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sir, what you are missing from your argument is that the selectivity is a ‘relative’ term. Meaning, how much more is an institution selective, compared to others??</p>

<p>Back in 50s, Harvard had acceptance rate over 50%, too. But, it was still, one of the most difficult schools to get in back at that time and the most prestigious institution. Many who got into Harvard even 20 years ago wouldn’t stand a chance if they apply today. But, it doesn’t change the fact that 20 years ago, still, Harvard was harder to get in relative to other schools at that specific period, hence retaining its elite image.</p>

<p>The colleges became increasingly more difficult to get in over the years, each and every single college, and I think you know that, too. Nowadays, more people are heading to colleges than before, and as a result, the applicants soared. What matters is that Columbia is much more selective than Michigan today, and is more elite.</p>

<p>But, how about this:
[National</a> University Rankings | Top National Universities | US News Best Colleges](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities]National”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/rankings/national-universities)</p>

<p>At undergraduate level, Columbia is ranked #4 best institution in the country. Michigan is ranked #28.</p>

<p>This is a tremendous difference. From this ranking, Columbia is in a complete different league from Michigan. The fact is that Columbia is a more prestigious school. It is more elite. It is more selective, and the differences in ranking is pretty significant, if you ask me. There is much larger difference between Columbia and Michigan, than between Columbia and Harvard, at least according to the rankings.</p>

90

<p>“Even from the peer assessment rating you cited, Columbia is ranked higher than Michigan…Am I missing something here?”</p>

<p>4.5 and 4.6 is pretty much the same Lazy Kid. Cal’s peer assessment is 4.7. Do you think it is more highly regarded than Columbia? Dartmouth’s peer assessment score is 4.3. Is it inferior to Michigan or Columbia? </p>

<p>Look, I appreciate your opinion LazyKid, but you should make it clear that yours is an opinion, and not based on irrefutable fact. Your arguement is supported entirely by your belief that selectivty is a determining criterion and your deeply rooted belief that Michigan is an inferior institution relative to its true standing in the academic world. You have not proven that Columbia’s reputation is stronger than Michigan’s, nor have you proven that the quality of undergraduate education is better at Columbia than at Michigan. </p>

<p>Finally, Michigan Law is second only to HYS. Columbia is no better. Placement rates into Big Law does not determine how Big Law actually views a particular program. I am sure you will receive an excellent legal foundation at Columbia, but there is no reason to insult one of its peer institutions just to make yourself feel better. Michigan was regarded as one of the top 2 or 3 Law schools in the nation for most of the 20th century. Only in the early 90s did it drop slightly.</p>

91

<p>Ok first of all… who cares about Law…</p>

<p>Second, I can’t believe anyone would think we should base school rankings based off of the opinions of students… huh?</p>

<p>Most important ranking = employers. Then peer and intellectuals in the field. Never students.</p>

<p>Acceptance rate does not directly cause to quality. That’s stupid. They may have some correlation but no more. Just because a school has a high acceptance rate doesn’t meanies crappy.</p>

92

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not sure if judging a product based on your perception of the quality of it’s consumers is a viable measurement for the quality of the product. I’ve always thought that a University’s “quality” was derived from the amount of good research it produces, the quality of the professors there,the quality of it’s facilities, and the number of opportunities and experiences it offers to its students while attending the University.</p>

93

<p>

</p>

<p>I think you are the one who is refuting against facts here, due to your bias, not me. No, Columbia Law’s placement numbers are clearly more impressive than Michigan’s. Look at the links I provided before. Columbia usually places 15-20% more of its graduates into BigLaw firm jobs compared to Michigan, which is a noticeable difference. Columbia is clearly better in law.</p>

<p>Actually, Columbia places as well as Harvard, with Yale and Stanford placing better than either Harvard or Columbia. Just look at the placement statistics.</p>

<p>I will give you that Michigan Law is close enough to Columbia Law in quality. Michigan Law has a very strong student body. Michigan Law is very selective and has very good placement into BigLaw. Michigan is ranked top 10 in law. But, Columbia is still better. Michigan’s grad school, including law, business, and medicine, is very elite. However, at undergraduate level, the difference between Columbia and Michigan is very pronounced, with regards to selectivity, quality of student body, and rankings. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, that is not the point, is it. Even from the ratings you provided so far, Columbia is rated higher than Michigan. And, peer assessment score is arguably only rating that suggests that Michigan is rated similar to Columbia. I’ll give you that the faculty and professors across the country think very highly of Michigan. And, if 4.5 and 4.6 isn’t different, you could argue 4.6 and 4.8 aren’t different, meaning, Columbia = Yale. </p>

<p>Your mentality that Ivies outside of HYP get huge downfall in quality and prestige and non-HYP Ivies are suddenly ‘equal’ to Michigan’s quality is absurd, and many wouldn’t agree with your opinion. Hence, you should expect to run into many who disagree with your opinion. I suspect I am not the only one on this board who has disagreed with your view over time. Actually, there is a very small difference between Ivies in terms of quality of education and students. There is a smaller difference in quality, in say, between Brown and Harvard, then between Brown and Michigan.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yours is opinion too, not fact. Look, many would disagree with your assertion that Columbia and Michigan are peer schools. </p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Uhm, Columbia is ranked 4th best college, with Michigan 28th. Just look at the rankings. Now, I would be the first to say that between Columbia, Dartmouth, or Penn at undergraduate level, the differences are very small in terms of quality or rankings. Between Michigan and Columbia, there is a noticeable difference. Just look at the overall objective rankings. However, like I said before, at graduate level, Michigan is much stronger than its undergrad program.</p>

<p>You seem to constantly dismiss the notion that selectivity and prestige are highly correlated to each other. Truth is, the more exclusive a company is, the more prestigious that company/job tends to be. </p>

<p>Look at Blackstone, Goldman IBD, Wachtell, Cravath, or McKinsey. Those are big names in their respective fields, and are intensely selective and generally considered to be the very best in their respective fields. People’s perception of an institution is highly correlated to the level of selectivity and the quality of people that institution attracts. If Harvard admits people of Rutgers University caliber, Harvard wouldn’t be Harvard.</p>

<p>I’d say that Michigan’s graduate programs are very elite, and they attract high quality students. But, at undergraduate level, and hence overall, Michigan’s selectivity lags behind. Fair or not, many view Michigan as safety school and it is generally viewed as not as desirable as Ivies.</p>

94

<p>We are comparing Columbia($45,290) to Michigan in-state($12,590) here. The question of the OP is whether Columbia is worth the extra $130K. The question you need to ask is how long will the OP be able to save to pay back the $130K after he graduates from Columbia with a Human Rights degree.</p>

<p>p.s. In case you are wondering, the OP has already stated that Michigan would be less than 1/3 of the cost of Columbia.</p>

95

<p>“However, like I said before, at graduate level, Michigan is much stronger than its undergrad program.”</p>

<p>A 4.5 PA score at USNWR clearly indicates you are wrong. You are now just talking out of your ***. For example, Michigan engineering is elite at both levels. The B school is rated higher at the undergraduate level than at the grad one. In the meantime LazyKid answer this question; Why does Columbia NOT REPORT the admissions data on General Studies and Nursing school students?</p>

96

<p>“However, at undergraduate level, the difference between Columbia and Michigan is very pronounced, with regards to selectivity, quality of student body, and rankings.”</p>

<p>I totally agree. I am shocked how relatively weak Columbia is in overall engineering rankings.</p>

97

<p>I chose Ross instead of Columbia as oos.
I know many students in Michigan who turn down Columbia as oos.
Columbia is good school compare to Rutgers but not impressive at all compare to Michigan.
Ross class environment is far outstanding than Columbia student quality, education program and Technology.
Have you ever take any class at Ross ? I had class in Columbia. My Columbia class experience was very disappointed. And what is Columbia neighbor? Dirty dangerous and stink. Too many drug,rape, theft.
Oh one more thing, Columbia is way too diverse to me. Again I agree Columbia is better than Rutgers.
Michigan>Columbia>Rutgers</p>

98

<p>Uh, I totally turned down Columbia too</p>

<p>if you count not applying becuase I realized I needed SAT2 Test scores as turning them down that is…</p>

99

<p>

</p>

<p>OP stated that the differences in cost would be around 30-40k. Ivies hand out large fin aid packages, and virtually most attend with generous financial aid.</p>

<p>I attended an Ivy for undergrad and all my tuition was covered by aid. I only had to pay for room and board, and not a cent for my tuition. It was cheaper to attend my UG than to attend state flagship back home. Michigan was out of state for me, and they didn’t give me much money at all. </p>

<p>If one is in-state at Michigan and strikes out at Ivies, Duke, Northwestern, or Stanford, then Michigan is a phenomenal option with an affordable price tag. However, I wouldn’t recommend attending Michigan to anyone who is out of state, since it is very expensive and it doesn’t hand out much financial aid like elite private universities. Michigan is a good school, but it is not good enough to justify paying 40k a year tuition for out of state students.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Look at the rankings. I concede that U Michigan is close enough to Columbia at graduate school level. Look at rankings for MBA or law. In law, Michigan is ranked #9 and Columbia is ranked #4. At least, that is close enough.</p>

<p>At undergrad, Michigan is ranked #28, and Columbia is ranked #4. That is not close at all.</p>

<p>Like I said, Michigan’s grad programs are very elite; Michigan law and MBA attract top applicants, they are very selective, and placement records into elite jobs are superb. At undergrad level, the difference between any Ivies and Michigan is pretty steep, in terms of rankings, student body, or quality. </p>

<p>Michigan is similar to other schools such as NYU. NYU is ranked top 35 at undergrad level like Michigan, but it is not ‘same’ in quality compared to Ivies at undergrad level. At graduate school level, NYU is uber-elite. NYU law, MBA, and medicine are top notch and they all attract some of the most qualified applicants/students, with very impressive placement records into elite jobs.</p>

<p>I maintain that the most important factors in college education is both the learning experience and post-grad job placements. It is an advantage to attend a more selective institution, being exposed to stronger and smarter peers, and being challenged by your peers in and out of classrooms. I am not saying that U of Michigan’s student body is bad, but it is clearly no Ivy league-caliber at undergrad level. (at grad school level, that may be a different story)</p>

100

<p>According to the most recent Times Higher Education Rankings, Columbia is #12 in the world and UM is #18 in the world. In the US rankings, Columbia is #9 and Michigan is #13.</p>

<p>[Top</a> 400 - The Times Higher Education World University Rankings 2011-2012](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/top-400.html]Top”>World University Rankings 2011-12 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>

<p>[Top</a> Universities in North America 2011-2012](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2011-2012/north-america.html]Top”>World University Rankings 2011-12 | Times Higher Education (THE))</p>

<p>How interesting</p>

<p>:)</p>