<p>Simply that there are WAY more similarities than differences between the two, so you have to base a decision on the fine points of difference. (Except for Michigan in-staters who should decide based on the $$$.) </p>
<p>For me, the fine points would favor Cornell because of the beauty of the campus, the chance to take courses in the ILR school, and (yeah, I admit it) the Ivy prestige. But it's a virtual toss-up and I could definitely see someone else opting for UM due to factors that they individually think are important (and not just football quality!).</p>
<p>I'm in Michigan and I have been considering both Cornell and Michigan for Engineering and Business. From what I'm hearing, Michigan is the better choice, especially because of the price. So, I shouldn't waste the $70 or whatever it is to apply to Cornell?</p>
<p>For me, Cornell would be cheaper. I'm in-state and I applied to one of the endowed colleges, which I believe is some $10,000 less than the privately owned schools. And obviously I live closer so I wouldn't have to fly back and forth to school. I got into Mich already and applied to Cornell ED.</p>
<p>While they do have many similarites, as Roscoe said concerning quality, reputation, ect., isn't it true that Cornell is more academically rigorous and cutthroat competitive? That reason alone makes me prefer Michigan a little, because I kind of want to have a social life.</p>
<p>I've lived in the suburbs my entire life. Michigan has no scenery unless you live on a lake or hill or whatever. For me, it was pretty much 25 miles of flat concrete and strip malls from my town to Detroit.</p>
<p>Cornell and Upstate New York amazed me. The gorges, hills, rivers, farms, etc. I'm into outdoor activities and such. The food is much better than at UM, I wouldn't be surrounded by the same kids I went to high school with, etc.</p>
<p>And I probably think that Cornell would leave you with better career prospects. Yes, Michigan is very good, but in my opinion, Cornell's Ivy prestige, the fact that they are more selective, etc. Yes, there are a ton of intelligent people at Michigan, but nearly every single person I can think of that is here from my high school would not have been accepted to Cornell.</p>
<p>But like I said, if you are getting in-state tuition, save your money. Spend it on grad school, a house, not having student loans, etc. Saving up $100,000 to pay back loans for college will take a hell of a long time.</p>
<p>Roscoe and dsmo, In both your cases, your fascination with nature is a very valid reason for chosing Cornell. Like I always say, for those who love slightly secluded, beautiful and untouched areas, Cornell/Ithaca is hard to beat. </p>
<p>However, you either underestimate Michigan's selectivity/prestige or overestimate Cornell's. Both schools have practically identical student bodies (same percent graduating in the top 10% of their high school class, same mean unweighed HS GPA and now, almost identical mid 50% SAT range). And in terms of prestige and career/graduate school prospects, all the surveys and statistics point to those two schools being almost identical.</p>
<p>Dramacouch, Cornell is not as cutthroat as people say it is. If you really like Cornell and it is cheaper, go for it. </p>
<p>Ungst, Cornell and Michigan are practically identical in Engineering. In Business, Michigan is better, but in terms of career prospects, they are about equal.</p>
<p>I don't consider class rank percentage to be valid because UM and Cornell draw different bodies of students. UM is obviously going to draw many more public school kids, many who will be from the state of Michigan. I think that we have a weak education program other than in wealthier areas of the state. Cornell will obviously draw more private school kids / New Yorkers who have attended far more competitive high schools. (The same can be argued for the GPA part).</p>
<p>How about the mid 50% SAT scores? Michigan's was 1260-1480 last year, compared to 1290-1490 at Cornell. I'd say they are pretty identical wouldn't you? </p>
<p>And dsmo, even if what you say is accurate (but I don't think it is), that Michigan takes more students from public high schools than Cornell, that does not mean the students are weaker. A very significant percentage of those students come from Ann Arbor, Troy, Birmingham, Rochester, Gross Point, Southfield, Bloomfield Hills, Traverse City etc..., where the public high school systems are among the very best in the country. And I am sure that a chunk of the 35% of Michigan's students who come from out of state and from overseas probably attended private high schools. Overall, I doubt there is much of a gap between Michigan and Cornell where applicant pools are concerned. In fact, it is pretty evident those two schools attract a very similar applicant pool.</p>
<p>dsmo, I am not trying to be difficult. I attended Cornell and Michigan and I am proud of both universities. I have analyzed both schools very closely and I am always amazed at how much those two schools have in common. That includes student bodies, reputation and professional and graduate school prospects.</p>
<p>Well, I just found out I was deferred from Cornell. I'm happy because Michigan was beginning to slide ahead of Cornell as my top choice, and now it's not a binding agreement. But I have a new dilemma - should I bother to wait for Cornell's final decision in the spring, and I most likely won't be accepted anyway, or should I just go with Michigan and send in my deposit right away? And even if I did end up getting into Cornell, I'd really have to think about whether I'd want to attend... it's such a hard decision!</p>
<p>Give it some serious thought. The earlier you pay your deposit, the better your chances of getting the dorm you want and the earlier your orientation/class registration. So obviously, if you have established that Michigan is definitely your first choice, go for it. But you must be certain.</p>
<p>although i think michigan is awesome, i would probably pick cornell over it if i had the chance. </p>
<p>just because it's 'ivy league', a bit more prestigious, and private.</p>
<p>i hate having to spend so much more money here at umich compared to in-staters for the same education and experience. </p>
<p>i wish umich went private, got more competitive, made the incoming freshmen classes a lot smaller, and our rankings rose above uchicago and close to duke. that would make my day.</p>
<p>Forgiven, picking a school over another just because you don't have to pay more than other students to attend it makes no sense. The residents of any state in the US have paid taxes toward the public educational institutions within their state borders and as such, have been paying part of their tution years before joining and in many cases, years after graduating. It just so happens that Michigan is one of a handful of states that is blessed with a world-class state university. I hope you never compare yourself to others or you will always be chasing ghosts. </p>
<p>Cornell is neither more prestigious, nor are its students more accomplished. Yes, it is harder to get into Cornell because it is half the size of Michigan. However, in terms of quality, both student bodies are stellar. The statistics don't lie and it is pretty obvious that those two schools have identical reputations and students. Of course, any time you can add the title "Ivy League" to your alma matter, it is cool, but it does not mean that schools like Cal, Chicago, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Michigan and Northwestern are any less prestigious ir recognized.</p>
<p>Unfortunately, given the USNWR's current formula, Michigan is not likely to break into the top 20, let alone the top 10, anytime soon.</p>
<p>"
Cornell is neither more prestigious, nor are its students more accomplished. Yes, it is harder to get into Cornell because it is half the size of Michigan. However, in terms of quality, both student bodies are stellar. The statistics don't lie and it is pretty obvious that those two schools have identical reputations and students. Of course, any time you can add the title "Ivy League" to your alma matter, it is cool, but it does not mean that schools like Cal, Chicago, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Michigan and Northwestern are any less prestigious ir recognized."</p>
<p>the instaters that michigan "are required" to admit are averagely lesser than that of regular cornell students</p>
<p>Absolutely, which is why historically, Cornell's mean SAT score has been roughly 50 points higher than Michigan. I say historically because last year, Michigan's Freshman class' mean SAT score was only 20 points lower than Cornell. But whether the mean is 50 points lower or 20 points lower, the gap simply isn't noteworthy.</p>
<p>Alexandre, a trip to princetonreview.com shows the 25-75 SAT for Cornell is 1290-1480, while UM is 1220-1420. While I can tell the data is still from last year, it presents a more significant gap.</p>
<p>But like I said. I have about 30 kids from my high school class here with me at Michigan. Maybe one of them could have gotten into Cornell.</p>
<p>dsmo, those numbers are old. Like I said, historically, Cornell's mean SAT score was roughly 50 points higher than Michigan's, give or take 10 points. But the current numbers are almost identical. 1260-1480 at Michigan vs 1280-1490 at Cornell. But like I said, even a 50-60 point gap doesn't make one school better than another. A 200 point difference obviously does, but 50 points is insignificant, especially when you consider the fact that state schools like Michigan report SAT scores differently. </p>
<p>You may know the 30 students from your school who went to Michigan, but did you take the time to know the remaining 5,500 students in your class?</p>