<p>^^Apparently being a URM still helps a lot. I certainly don't have a problem with that, just saying it how it is.</p>
<p>Don't give up hope. I have a 36 act and at least a 3.7 uw GPA, applied on 10/31, and still haven't heard back yet. OOS though.</p>
<p>when is a good time to call the admissions office/how late is it open until?</p>
<p>I didnt find her essays amazing, but then again Im a bit of a critic. But her ECs were pretty good. She is president of every club she is in ( not exaggerating) And ALOT of volunteer hours, its like shes addicted to it. She doesnt even have alot of APs now Im thinking about it, there must have been something the adcoms liked about her. IDK but Im happy for her even though she doesnt know if she wants to stay instate any more..... I know Im not Im getting out of Ann Arbor as soon as August comes around lol 17 years is enough for me.</p>
<p>The university doesn't look at race at all anymore as a determining factor for admissions.</p>
<p>UM now has a system that looks at socioeconomic attributes of an applicant i.e. school, income, geographic location etc. which could explain why the aforementioned person was accepted.</p>
<p>Well I dont know how it all works but my mom is an alum so works with the board pretty closely and she says that even though AA is gone remaining diverse is really important to the University.... My cousin is from an Upper Middle class family and lives in a pretty nice side of town, Im really not sure but I dont think that her economic status came in to play here... But im REALLY not sure.</p>
<p>I hate to say it, (cause obviously we're all interested in this fine institution or we wouldn't be here) But I hadn't realized that the standards were so different in state vs out-of-state. If the majority of students are in state...and they get accepted with lower stats (in this case considerably lower stats, and it doesn't seem uncommon) Is U of M's reputation all smoke and mirrors??? Do the OOS kids just "up the stats" so to speak? Do they depend on the 4.0's from California to round out their US News numbers, and although thay accept plenty of kids with 3.6-3.7s (or below) most of those spots go to in state kids??? I think I'm having an epiphany here</p>
<p>Salem1: To play devil's advocate abit here, there is probably not much statistical difference in GPA's from 3.5 to 3.7-3.8 in that one midterm or final exam grade could yield someone a B+ vs. and A- (and given that UMich GPA's don't give a bump for anything above a flat B)...That being said, there is always a situation in a state school where in-state students are admitted at a different standard than out-of-state....that's not to say that it is always the oos student who suffers (think SUNY Binghamton), but generally the OOS student has to have better grades to be admitted vs. the instate......Not necessarily an "epiphany" but a fairly well known fact......What is less well-known is the actual difference in the stats in the end.....at UMich, how high does the OOS student have to "jump" compared to the in-state? That remains to be seen for this admission cycle.....So far, from what we have seen on CC, "very high"...........</p>
<p>Guys, I think we're all just getting worried, as we're waiting pretty impatiently at this point. Michigan is a great school, but it's not ivey equivalent, and it has to accept kids OOS with 3.6s and 3.7s and even 3.5s. Yeah, in state-ers are going to have an easier way in, but such is the case with all state schools. Michigan is a HUGE school and i'm sure that they're not nearly done filling out the class of 2012, and i'm sure that means there will be plenty more acceptances even for students with slightly lower gpas. I know people from my school (a school that is no where near underrepresented or under privileged) who got in last year and years prior to that with 3.6s.</p>
<p>Ivys look at much more than GPA, while for UMich GPA has a much heavier weight... (for ivys a person with a 3.6 unweighted at a competitive school with hardest classes + great EC's is probably a more competitive applicant than 3.9/4.0 GPA's )</p>
<p>I didn't mean to raise this controversy but even though I know people who have gotten in with lower stats from instate that says nothing about the applicants at whole. Im sorry to cause such doubt about the school, but regardless of admissions it still is an Excellent University with a very nice community. I still know PLENTY of people who got denied with a range of scores and Stats. I believe that the application is a package deal even though some factors weigh alot heavier than others SOMTIMES there can be a little balancing (just my opinion)</p>
<p>I go to a catholic school, does anyone know whether or not my religion classes will be counted as part of UM GPA? Also i presume art of the film and music appreciation don't count?</p>
<p>that's a good question salem, something i've wondered myself. I'm going to use an analogy here, and I realize I've used Berkeley and UCLA as examples a lot, but it's what I'm familiar with, and they should be the same level academically as Michigan. The avg. admitted student at Berkeley has a 2070 SAT score, and a 3.9 uw GPA. UCLA boasts a 3.9 and 2006 avg. Now, there are students admitted above and below those avgs. of course, but for the most part, students really do have great stats. It is very rare to see someone sub-1800 SAT/27 ACT get admitted. I mean there are the athletes and low-income students, but even then, admissions standards are no gimme. There is a difference between IS and OOS applicants, but its more like "I have a 2100 IS, and this person has a 2300 OOS." I'm a bit perplexed as to why Michigan has such a huge gap in students. Why (or more HOW) do they admit both the 24/3.6 and the 33/4.0, and still maintain their ranking as one of the best universities on the planet? I'm not complaining, maybe Michigan should be given even more credit for fostering an environment where both types can succeed. But it just seems odd that there is such an enormous difference. You are basically accepting the very avg. student, along with the National Merit Finalist and throwing them into the same chem class. Weird.</p>
<p>epiphany to me...my school has that "work space" program that tracks the last 5 years of applicants to a specific school, averaging their GPA and test scores (very cool). In my school, the average U of M acceptee (and there are like 85 who have been tracked) has an average GPA of 3.78 (UW) and ACT of 31. MANY have been rejected with less and some with more. If the average in-state kid has a 3.5 and the average out of atate kid has a 3.8...I think that's considerable (a fact of life for state schools maybe) but in my minds eye I compare Michigan to the Holy Grail of Public Universities. But You're right, I guess it's still a public school, which means the out-of-state kids do have higher entrance standards, and as such
they elevate the prestige of the school. For a private school a median GPA or SAT is just that...(regardless of residency) Truth is, Michigan is fortunate to have so many qualified (over qualified?) out-of-state students knocking themselves out to get in... and the residents of Michigan (unlike those of us in New Jersey) are fortunate to have such a strong state school!!!! Go BLUE</p>
<p>The purpose of public universities isn't to exclude people of an education, especially people living in Michigan, whom the state obvious wants to keep if you anything about how the economy's going. Universities shouldn't be judged on the sat scores of the kids they admit; in fact, it seems more praiseworthy for a state university to focus not on rankings but providing a great education to the greatest number of people.</p>
<p>Yah but a "24" without many AP courses...ouch</p>
<p>is everyone positive that we haven't heard a decision yet (and we applied early) we're most likely getting deferred?</p>
<p>*if we haven't heard a decision (sorry typo)</p>
<p>I think part of it, and this is not a knock against Michigan residents AT ALL, is that the UC schools, for example, have the most populous state to choose from. They get 2x as many applicants (UCLA led the nation with 50,000+ last year), and can therefore accept 1/2 as many (UCB: 23%, UCLA: 24%). Therefore, that breeds competition, and you end up getting many Ivy-level applicants. Just a different type of admissions I guess. Nice that they can accommodate everyone though, though I am a bit mad they hold OOS applicants to a much higher standard and then turn around and charge them twice as much. But oh well, I love the U of M. Go Blue!</p>
<p>Absolutely not, still plenty of room left. But It looks like U of M liberally uses the "deferal". Which I think proves the point someone made above that applying early is great for the uber-students, but maybe doesn't benefit the "median" accepttee (for U of M OOS 3.7 or below). I don't know what percentage of deffered students they accept. All this is speculation...though you gotta admit these U of M applicants are damn insightful and savy. Where ever they end up they will be true assets thats for sure, very bright indeed. No doubt the class of 2013 will benefit from this obsessive brain storming...any stat people out there in need of an AP thesis????</p>