I may just be a parent, but I am pretty amazed by this discussion. I believe that it is true that one can obtain a world class education at either U of M, Dartmouth or other elite schools for that matter. Five or ten years after graduation, neither U of M nor Dartmouth grads will feel that they have been limited by the quality of their education. On the other hand, the non-academic factors can be significant to the quality of your life for four years (small enrollment vs. large, public vs. private, east cost vs. midwest, etc.). If a student is making a decision between these two schools, it should be on “fit” or cost. My daughter was fortunate enough to be admitted to U of M last year. She decided to attend Notre Dame because she felt more comfortable at a smaller, private catholic school. That is not a right or wrong decision that can be quantified by minor differences in national rankings. Many of her friends are at U of M and love it, while she loves ND. As long as the schools in question provide the major(s) that interest the student, “fit” is in my opinion more important when making a decision between elite universities.
Just to add a couple comments on the private k-12 topic: many people send their kids to private schools not because their goal is Ivy League or bust, but for any other number of reasons. They live in an urban area where the public schools are under tremendous strain; they want the collegiality of a private school; they want to impress people, etc. . . My sister has her three kids in private school in Richmond and it is interesting to see where the graduates of the schools attend. The largest number attend UVA, William and Mary and Virginia Tech. Yes, state schools! Great state schools, but state schools nonetheless. There are a handful that go to top-20 privates but there are also a handful that go to lower level colleges. So clearly chasing college prestige is not the only point. I would not necessarily make that choice to spend that much on a k-12 education, but there are many reasons to do so. Clearly these families also do not see that sending their kids to state schools is a waste.
@Todd87 You do realize that your perception of the qualities of these schools is simply your opinion, right? You seem to be insisting that your opinion on the relative ranking of these schools is right. And that what you would expect out of a private k-12 school is universally shared. As noted, many would disagree. Interestingly, all of your posts seem to be focused on rankings, which suggests that you are mostly concerned about prestige over anything else. And you seem reluctant to let the facts get in the way of your opinion.
Oh, and p.s., it’s “but YOU’RE not,” not “but your not.”
@Todd87 I really would recommend that you work on your grammar and syntax. It’s a bit funny reading your opinions of some of the leading universities in the country, only to discover that you don’t know the difference between single and plural verbs. I also don’t understand what you hope to gain by arguing with other people’s PERCEPTIONS of universities. It comes across as rather juvenile.
@Todd 87 As the brother of an Exeter grad I can say that you attend these schools for the education they provide, not to attend HYP. Everyone I’ve met from Exeter says that they do not push Ivy League universities, and indeed they make it clear to Exeter students that they will face very severe competition as each university will only take a certain number of our students. As a point of fact, the number of Exeter students going to HYP is much, much smaller than in year’s past, for a variety of reasons.
As for Harvard Westlake, I’m a bit surprised you haven’t heard of it as you comment so freely about schools. It is one of the best private schools in the country.
@Todd87 “Dartmouth as a minimum”? You talk nonsense. How do you come up with your rankings? And everyone who has attended new student orientation at Exeter, Andover etc., will know that they tell you not to count on your child getting into an Ivy League university. Most don’t, as a matter of fact. Loads of my brothers friends were deferred and waitlisted. Pennsylvania, Columbia and Chicago were notorious for wait listing and then rejecting students.
@umsigmadom I don’t know what “snooty boarding school” you are referring to, but that’s not the way it is. Students do not spend their time bashing Michigan or Berkeley. Few students use the term “HYP”. You also must remember that the famous boarding schools also offer excellent financial aid and many students get it. Not all are trust fund babies. I’m willing to bet that no one on the board bashing “public” universities is from one of the “elite” boarding schools.
Todd, anybody who thinks that Brown, Chicago, Columbia, Cornell, Dartmouth, Duke, JHU, Northwestern or Penn possess any advantage over Michigan isn’t very knowledgeable. Furthermore, schools like Emory, Georgetown, Notre Dame, Rice, Vanderbilt, WUSTL etc…are also just as good, at least at the undergraduate level.
From your post above (#64), you have made several incorrect statements:
- Dartmouth is not necessarily the weakest Ivy League. There is no such thing as "the weakest Ivy". Harvard, Princeton and Yale are generally considered the stronger Ivies, but there is no weakest. Some would argue that Brown is the weakest, others would say that Cornell is, while others seem to believe that Dartmouth or Penn are. In truth, all of those universities are equally special in their own way. Please try not to judge universities as you would a car or a buffet selection. Universities are extremely complex entities. There is no formula or methodology that can accurately capture a university's overall excellence.
- Admission rates: Like Michigan, most of its private peers had acceptance rates that hovered in the 35%-45% range only 10-20 years ago. It isn't until the last decade or two that their acceptance rates dropped below 25%. The common denominator is the Common Application. Chicago, Cornell, Duke, JHU, Northwestern and Penn all had acceptance rates in the 35%-50% range until they joined the CA. Once they joined, their acceptance rates plummeted to 10-15% in a matter of 10 years or so. Michigan is headed in the same direction too. Michigan's admit rate before it joined the common app 6 years ago was 50%. This year, it is likely to drop below 25%. In the next 10 years or so, Michigan's admit rate will also be in the 10%-15% range. And Michigan, like Dartmouth, also has one of the best applicant pools. Michigan residents will not bother applying unless they have very strong credentials, and most OOS applicants tend to be stellar because Michigan isn't exactly located in a popular area. For the most part, it is academically inclined OOS and international students who apply to Michigan. As you can see, acceptance rate is not what separates those universities, including Michigan, from most other universities, since most of those universities had admit rates well over 30% until recently, yet their reputation was always extremely strong in academic and corporate circles, just like Michigan. It is their history, academic strength and reputation, resources, faculties, tradition in curriculum innovation, alumni influence and affluence etc... that does.
- You mentioned that Michigan is "not that old of a school as Dartmouth". That is true, technically speaking,...yet meaningless if taken out of context. Michigan was founded in 1817, 48 years after Dartmouth (which was founded in 1769). But Berkeley (1865), Chicago (1890), Cornell (1865), Duke (1838), JHU (1875) and Northwestern (1851), along with MIT (1860) and Stanford (1891), are all younger than Michigan. But it does not matter. Most universities were tiny and insignificant until the 20th century anyway. In 1900, most educated people would never heard of Brown or Dartmouth, but most of them probably knew of Michigan, as it was arguably one of the top 5 universities in the US at the time. Just to put things in perspective, Cornell was co-founded by a Michigan professor (Andrew Dickson White). Cornell's first two presidents were recruited from Michigan (Andrew Dickson White and Charles Kendall Adams, who was also a Michigan alumnus). Two of the last five MIT presidents (Jerome Weisner and Charles Vest) were Michigan alumni. Michigan has a rich history of academic and curriculum innovation. It does not matter when a university was founded. If you believe a university's history is an important factor, Michigan should be right up there with the best of them.
There aren’t many respected members of academe that would differentiate between Michigan and the other universities I mentioned above. This is clearly demonstrated by the the US News Peer Assessment Score, which is based on a survey of university presidents, undergraduate deans of admissions and provosts.
- Harvard University (4.9/5.0)
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology (4.9/5.0)
- Stanford University (4.9/5.0)
- Princeton University (4.8/5.0)
- Yale University (4.8/5.0)
- University of California-Berkeley (4.7/5.0)
- California Institute of Technology (4.6/5.0)
- Columbia University (4.6/5.0)
- Johns Hopkins University (4.6/5.0)
- Cornell University (4.5/5.0)
- University of Chicago (4.5/5.0)
- Brown University (4.4/5.0)
- Duke University (4.4/5.0)
- University of Michigan-Ann Arbor (4.4/5.0)
- University of Pennsylvania (4.4/5.0)
- Northwestern University (4.3/5.0)
- Carnegie Mellon University (4.2/5.0)
- Dartmouth College (4.2/5.0)
- Georgia Institute of Technology (4.2/5.0)
- University of California-Los Angeles (4.2/5.0)
- University of North Carolina-Chapel Hill (4.1/5.0)
- University of Wisconsin-Madison (4.1/5.0)
- Vanderbilt University (4.1/5.0)
- Emory University (4.0/5.0)
- Georgetown University (4.0/5.0)
- Washington University-St Louis (4.0/5.0)
Gerhard Casper, Yale educated scholar who was dean of the University of Chicago Law School in the 1980s and president of Stanford University in the 1990s wrote a letter to the US News, criticizing their methodology and ranking. He built his argument around Cal and Michigan’s rankings, stating that they are both arguably among “the top half dozen” universities in the US, yet they are ranked out of the top 20 according the US News.
http://web.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/president/speeches/961206gcfallow.html
Dr. Casper’s opinion is widespread in academe. To you, schools like Cal, Georgia Tech, Michigan, UCLA, UNC, UVa and Wisconsin-Madison may merely be “public universities”, but where it really matters, they are very prestigious. When the AAU was founded back in 1900, Harvard, Princeton, Stanford and Yale were among the founding members, as you might well expect, but so were Cal, Michigan and Wisconsin.
Michigan alumni also tend to be very successful. They are among the most well represented in all industries, from ITech to Investment Banking, and from Management Consulting to Aerospace. They do well with awards. 7 Michigan undergraduate alums have gone on to win the Nobel Prize and Fields Medal. That’s as many as Brown, Duke, Northwestern, Princeton and Stanford combined. In recent years (the last 20 years or so), Michigan has produced more Fulbright scholars than any other university in the nation. Michigan also holds its own in important awards such as the Rhodes, Marshall and Truman scholarships with the likes of Columbia, Cornell, Northwestern and Penn. Finally, Michigan, has a large number of Fortune 500 CEOs and billionaires.
http://www.businessinsider.com/silicon-valley-hiring-most-popular-universities-2015-7
Finally, Michigan is also extremely wealthy. Its endowment is tied for 6th place nationally along with Northwestern and Penn. Even on a per/student basis, assuming you factor in economies of school and state funding, Michigan’s financial position is similar to Brown, Chicago, Columbia, Cornell and Penn.
So a word of advice, try not to voice that opinion in public. Here on CC, you may get away with it, naturally, since the vast majority of posters are 15-22 year old high school/college students who are equally unknowledgeable. But in the real world, people will not share your opinion. It is perfectly fine to harbor such petty and superficial opinions mind you, but avoid airing them in public.
“My daughter was fortunate enough to be admitted to U of M last year. She decided to attend Notre Dame because she felt more comfortable at a smaller, private catholic school. That is not a right or wrong decision that can be quantified by minor differences in national rankings. Many of her friends are at U of M and love it, while she loves ND. As long as the schools in question provide the major(s) that interest the student, “fit” is in my opinion more important when making a decision between elite universities.”
tz2s6v, I could not have said it better. At that level, one should choose a university based on fit, not petty and insignificant differences.
“…everyone who has attended new student orientation at Exeter, Andover etc., will know that they tell you not to count on your child getting into an Ivy League university. Most don’t, as a matter of fact. Loads of my brothers friends were deferred and waitlisted. Pennsylvania, Columbia and Chicago were notorious for wait listing and then rejecting students.”
That is correct excanuck99. Only 25% of Andover or Exeter graduates end up at Ivy League schools (50% if you include peer institutions, including Michigan), but many end up at schools that are far from elite.
“I was just saying the mission of prep schools is to get you into ivy or Stanford/MIT/Duke/UChicago/Northwestern.”
Todd87, as I demonstrated in post #70 above, half the Ivies, Chicago, Duke and Northwestern are no better than Michigan, so you are contradicting yourself.
“Let’s be honest with ourselves who are we kidding. That’s the whole point. While they may/may not express it directly, its pretty much implied. The parents know it, the teachers know it, the students know it. You pay 160k and they are supposed to deliver a product. I was speaking regarding the issue from a customer standpoint and from an investment standpoint.”
I am not sure that is entirely true. The parents I have known that have sent their children to elite private boarding schools just wanted their kids to receive the best possible high school education. I am sure that they felt it also improved their chances of getting into a good university, but considering the talent of the student body at a school like Exeter or Andover, the fact that only one quarter end up at Ivy League schools and only another 25% at other elite universities (including Michigan), means that 50% of the students must resign themselves to attending universities that are not elite.
“It’s interesting how much of an anti-Michigan bias there appears to be. Todd87 uses the term “public school”'as if Michigan were the high school in “Lean on Me”, and not the #1 research institution in the world with a top 10 engineering school in almost all disciplines and a top 10 business school. It’s baffling. Many of the snooty boarding school types spend so much of their high school years bashing public school education, that it has created a blind spot, harmful to their worldview. Anyway to all of those accepted to the Leaders and Best, congratulations! No doubt some of you will create the next Google (or the 1st something else) or be the next one to donate $500,000,000 to the school. Michigan has its disadvantages (e.g. larger size) but it can more than hold its own against the perceived juggernauts. Now, hows that for a “public school”?”
Good observation umsigmadom. I will preface my response on this matter by saying that the prejudice against Michigan is primarily a phenomenon among high school students and people who rely on faulty data in an attempt to compare universities. As I demonstrated in post #70m this prejudice will not exist in academe or in corporate America, where Michigan’s reputation remains, as it has been for over a century, extremely strong.
That being said, the bias against Michigan on CC is to be expected since the majority of the posters on CC are students and concerned and overprotective parents who find comfort in the claim that private universities look out for their children more than public universities. They erroneously assume all public universities are the same, and that faculties at private research universities care more about undergraduate students, and dedicate more time to them, than public universities. That is obviously not the case. Undergraduate students at smaller private research universities may benefit from smaller classes at the intro levels (they will still be very large either way), and in the handful of very popular majors, may even benefit from slightly smaller classes at the intermediate and advanced level classes, but by and large, the quality of instruction and education will not be materially better. Professors are research universities simply do not have much time for undergrads. They are too busy raising funds for their research, conducting their research and publishing their research. Managing their PhD students (which includes overseeing their RA/TA performance, advising them on their research and thesis etc…) is another very time consuming task. The notion that private research universities are more undergraduate focused, and better value for money, is nothing more than an fantasy. If one really wants the undivided attention of the faculty, LACs are the only way to go.
There are other, more sinister, reasons for the systematic denigration of the University. Some are threatened by Michigan because of its all-around excellence and size, while others were probably rejected or feel otherwise slighted. You probably also have a fair share of MSU, OSU and Notre Dame alums and children of alums on CC who disrespect Michigan for obvious reasons.
@Todd87 In response to your comment that we should be honest and admit that parents send their kids to Exeter, Andover, Deerfield etc., to get them into Ivies, I’d say this was true 20 or 30 years ago but isn’t any longer. And there might be some terribly uninformed parents who still think that, but they will be disabused of such notions the minute their children arrive. The reality is that it can be HARDER to get into an Ivy, or an equivalent LAC, if you are from Exeter or Andover compared with an “ordinary” private school. From my own personal experience and that of my peers, the Ivies don’t fall over themselves trying to enrol lots of Exeter students. That’s not the image they want. Just this year not one of our ED candidates to Barnard, Columbia or Princeton was accepted. Not one. The number accepted each year has been steadily declining.
As for you not having heard of Harvard Westlake, I don’t know the relevance of that remark. It is exceptionally well known to universities and admissions officials, and they get more kids into HYP than Exeter.
Again, speaking from personal experience, Michigan, UVA and Berkeley are amongst the top choices of my peers. And I personally know many who haven’t got in. I only wish it was guaranteed that if you came from Exeter or Andover you could walk into one of these universities. Not anymore.
So, OP, back to your main decision, as a current Umich student here’s some clarification:
Active research = Michigan
Big college sports = Michigan
Premed = Dartmouth
Pre Law = either (although going to Umich would give you a heads up in admissions for grad school at UMich)
Business = Either
More intimate connections with profs = Dartmouth
Greek life = Dartmouth (higher percentage of participants)
Regarding private vs public HS, the data speak for themselves. Top private universities admit only about 50 percent of their students from public HS. Given that only 10 percent of HS students in the country go to private HS, the advantage is huge (almost 9 to 1). It is much more than the advantage of being a legacy (rumoured to be 3 to 1), being a minority, athlete, or major donor. I have witnessed this in my own neighbourhood and family. Kids who go to top private and public universities have different placements even when the public student kid has more APs, ECs, and better SATs. It comes down to how private schools advocate and present their students, hours on the phone with admission counsellors, etc. Also, private school kids have a track record of paying a lot for school. The only exception I have witnessed over the years is MIT. Seems that they really do look at the kid and are not influenced much by which school they came from (again, just from personal experiences).
@Abbylawi There is no disputing that private schools have certain advantages: more teachers, more personalised attention, more resources. But the same advantages accrues to those from higher income groups.
@Todd87, I get that you are just a kid, but as others have pointed out upthread, you are completely mistaken in your perception of elite prep schools.
Our son graduated from one of them last June (if you haven’t heard of Choate, it’s in the same league as the ones you have heard of). The mission of the school is similar to all of the other elite prep schools:
The college counseling office practically hits parents and students over the head with the message that if you’re expecting a particular college outcome, Choate probably isn’t for you. The purpose of the school is to prepare students to hit the ground running at WHICHEVER colleges they matriculate. Prep schools are about the quality of the high school education, not the college results.
As for Michigan, I can’t tell you how revered it is in prep school circles. At the Choate Fall college fair, our son said he couldn’t get near the Michigan table until the end of the evening and, even then, there was a line. And, when all was said and done last year, Michigan rejected more Choaties than it accepted. The Choate CC office considers Michigan a reach for any student. You may also be surprised to learn that the number of Exonians who matriculated to Michigan from the class of 2013 was in the double digits. No one is looking down their prep school nose at the Maize and Blue.
You’re also incorrect about the cost: it’s closer to $240K now. 
@Todd87 Exeter* and certainly Michigan is not exactly the most difficult to get accepted to compared to Ivys and some other universities. And your right, you do not need to go to a boarding school to get accepted to Michigan. You have to realize going to these boarding schools is not to get into certain colleges. Most students who go to Andover, Exeter, Choate, Deerfield, and St. Paul’s do not internally declare their high school experience as just a means of going to prestigious universities even though many do eventually do go onto these universities more so because they attract athletes, intellectuals, and the well-connected wealthy (and of course combinations of all of this and more). Correlation vs causation ( although that itself is a little too black and white). Public schools in my area usually send around 10 kids to UMich through EA (not sure about RD) out of around classes of 300. Some public technical magnet schools in my area send around their top 40 to Ivys and similarly competitive schools. More so than the school itself, certain schools in certain areas attract top students who would eventually go to these schools.
Furthermore, Dartmouth is not the weakest Ivy. It is hard to compare Ivys because schools like Cornell UNIVERSITY is research-oriented but Dartmouth COLLEGE is more focused in personal undergraduate education. Of course, Dartmouth is currently trying to expand its graduate and research programs. It’s not exactly fair to compare different schools that had different goals in mind.
Todd and XAtlas, your assumption that it is easier to get into Michigan than smaller private universities is outdated. For the last 2-3 years, Michigan has been roughly as selective as smaller private elites for OOS applicants. This class will have an OOS admit rate in the 15% range, with SAT/ACT ranges 1300-1500/30-34 or above. That’s identical to Brown, Cornell, Penn etc…Last time I checked, most students who apply to Michigan from Exeter and other good East Coast boarding schools are considered OOS applicants.
@Todd87, you admit you have no experience with boarding schools, so why do you insist that their purpose is to get their students into Ivies? You are incorrect. Several posters here who do have experience with these schools have tried to tell you that the purpose of prep schools is just what their name suggests, “prepping” students to be successful at whichever colleges they matriculate. Because their students ARE well-prepared, they go on to fine universities, and there are dozens and dozens and dozens of very fine universities that will serve these students well, Michigan being one of them.
I will say it again: The mission of the elite preps is to provide a stellar high school education, not guarantee any particular college result. You can continue to think otherwise if it amuses you, but you would be wrong.
We are very well satisfied with what our son got out of Choate, worth every penny. He did not choose an Ivy. Didn’t even apply. No interest.