The Student Profile is now up!
http://admissions.umich.edu/apply/freshmen-applicants/student-profile
Acceptance Rate: 26% (A lot lower for OOS, I’m assuming)
Mid 50% ACT Range: 30-34
Mid 50% SAT Range: 2040-2280
Average GPA: 3.85
Yield looks to be about 46%.
Wow! Yield is up quite a bit. So once again, it looks like an over enrollment.
The final enrollment would be around 6000. That would be the lowest number in the last several years.
@billcsho. Do you expect their to be a loss of about 200 with “summer melt”? Would that be typical?
@maya54 Yes. It lost around 200 students between May1 and Sept last year.
Eh, the acceptance rate has fallen significantly since my cousin’s class of 2001 (50% to 26%), but the profile isn’t too much more impressive. Back then it was 3.70 GPA and 28-32 ACT, for a class of 6500. Factor in grade inflation and common app now, plus affirmation action, larger class size, and much lower financial aid (no full COA michigan grant) back then and there hasn’t been the impact you’d expect. Then again, with state budget cuts and the great recession, things could’ve been a lot worse by now.
I think for a substantial improvement (like ivy quality), UM would have to privatize and cut 1/4 of the class and/or give full COA to out of staters
That stat only increased by a couple points in ACT and 0.15 in GPA, but it is very significant. Note the percentile difference for 32 and 34. There are several times less students getting 34 than 32. On the other hand, the much lower admission rate is mainly due to the bloom in applicant pool. This is most obvious in the year UMich joined CommonApp.
how is guaranteed transfer involved in this? do you guys know how many people got a guaranteed transfer option?
I got the GT option. In the waitlist thread, it seems like a lot of people were offered GT but that just might be because the people on this site may be a lot of the the highly interested, qualified applicants (just a thought). I personally find it hard to believe that too many were offered GT because those emails were sent out long after the May 1 deposit deadline. So umich would have known by that time what thier yield rate was. I doubt that they would be expecting tons of people to transfer out of umich given thier yield rate.
The number of students transferring in has little to do with the number transferring out. The return student rate at UMich is very high. Basically, there are other factors limiting the freshmen class size like dorm space and financial aids. They do have some room to admit some sophomore transfer student even without any student transferring out.
Accepting a lot of guaranteed transfers is also a technique for massaging a school’s entering class stats–the stats of the students transferring in aren’t counted toward the entering class medians. Cornell has been doing this for a long time, and many law schools do it to get an edge in the fiercely competitive US News law school rankings. Some public flagships have built-in mechanisms for doing this on a large scale. UC Berkeley and UCLA, for example, accept huge numbers of transfers from California community colleges; none of their stats figure into those universities’ reported median SATs and HS GPAs.
@bclintonk, as I pointed out in another thread, USC (which also has a GT program, offered to all legacy applicants) is the poster child for this.
19K undergrads but just a little over 3K in each entering fall freshmen class. Supplemented by a little over 1.5K transfers annually to graduate a little over 4.5K every year. They take in less freshmen than Cornell with 14K undergrads.
NEU plays this game too.
Demand for UMich is now high enough that they probably could institute a UC or USC type system as well.
billcsho is right. In 2014, 22,519 students scored 34 or higher on the ACT nationally, while 67,632 scored 32 or higher. Moving the 75th percentile from 32 to 34 is hugely significant; it signals a class that is much stronger (well, at least better standardized test-takers) at the top end.
Similarly at the 25th percentile, where 140,797 scored 30 or higher, while 246,979 scored 28 or higher. A 28 ACT Composite isn’t shabby–it represents the top 10% of test-takers nationally. But a 30 represents the top 5%, a 32 the top 2%, and a 34 the top 1%. Bottom line, Michigan now has an entering class in which 75% of the class scored in the top 5% and 25% scored in the top 1% of ACT-takers nationally.
Those ACT medians are right in the ballpark with schools like Yale (31-35), Princeton (31-35), Penn (31-34), Brown (30-34), Cornell (30-34), and Dartmouth (30-34)–especially impressive when you consider that Michigan’s entering class is many times the size of those schools.
I don’t understand the math … in the case of Michigan. Michigan just went through great lengths to minimize freshman intake, and I’d presume they would have to do the same next year. After over-enrolling for the past few years, I’d think Michigan would want to bring down the undergraduate population, not up.
I’d bet that most of the GTs are in-state with comparable stats. After all, Michigan is a public university with in-state responsibilities, and it’s getting so many highly qualified applicants that it can’t take many who would normally be admitted.
*I suspect it’s the same for UCB and UCLA (and to a lesser extent, Cornell) for taking so many CC transfers.
I believe the over enrollment problem was more freshman based. With guaranteed housing there simply wasn’t room for all. Also with certain prerequisites for freshman classes were too full. Michigan has I think some more room for upperclassmen.
Yes, the over enrollment is only a problem for freshmen. The transfer students were not affected last year even it had a record freshmen enrollment last year and over-enrollment in consecutive years.
Yep, as I noted elsewhere, at giant unis like UMich, you often have many more upper-level classes than intro ones, so accomodating transfers isn’t as much of a problem.
I’m not so sure about that. Yes, of course, Michigan is a public university with in-state responsibilities, but I’m not sure serving in-state students is their only priority, or even their top priority. A close friend of mine teaches at a public law school (not Michigan) and he says they (and most other leading law schools) use guaranteed transfers to generate tuition revenue without diluting reported admitted student stats. If Michigan were to pursue the same strategy at the undergrad level, they’d want to skew the GTs toward OOS students who bring in more tuition revenue. And just as guaranteed housing and the capacity of big 100-level courses constrain the size of the entering undergraduate class but not upperclass transfers, so, too, in law schools, it’s the capacity of mandatory first-year classes that constrains entering class size, but that problem goes away after the first year because there are so many more upper-level classes.
But I don’t know. It would be interesting to hear from some GTs whether they’re in-state or OOS.
^ It does not matter. When they report the OOS student population or percentage, they are not just counting freshmen. So 42% of OOS students are from all undergraduates.