<p>Chose UM (Ross PA) over Stern, NU, Cornell, CMU, WashU, Wisconsin. Alexandre -- how do NU and Cornell alter their numbers?</p>
<p>They don't alter their numbers. They report SATs differently. Most private universities play around with financials, class size stats and SATs in order to look better in the USNWR. For example, Columbia only reports acceptance rates and SAT averages for the colleges of Arts and Science and Engineering. They do no include admissions stats of the college of Nursing or into the college of General Studies. If they did, their numbers would not look nearly as good. Most private universities include medical and Law school faculties in their student:faculty ratio. Public universities may not do so because medical and law school faculties do not teach undergrads. Most private universities list SAT ranges and averages according to the highest score per section whereas most public universities report SAT scores in one sitting. All of those add up. They do not alter numbers, but they manipulate them.</p>
<p>I'm done arguing with you guys, you are convinced of your beliefs, and that is fine. However, the VAST majority of the world has a different view than you guys, but believe whatever you want.</p>
<p>the vast majority of the world = the uneducated layman, whose opinion of academia is worthless and based on a false notion of prestige.</p>
<p>haha, i guess everyone's defintions of "better" is different. It really just depends on how you use the resources given to you. A 4.0 at Michigan is just as impressive as a 4.0 at cornell or NU. You can get equally good jobs after graduation going to either Cornell, NU, or Michigan, so its better to go wherever you fit in better. I mean, isnt that all that really matters in the end?</p>
<p>DSC, care to expand on your comment. Where is the evidence that the majority of people (I assume you mean graduate school adcoms, top academics and corporate recruiters from major companies) have a different point of view. All you have done so far is make outlandish and sweeping comments. Where are the facts that suggest that recruiters, adcoms and academe think more highly of Cornell or Northwestern than of Michigan.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UM is also at an advantage in that list as their 4 strongest programs IMO are Med, business, law, and engineering, which correlates heavily to MBA, MD, and Law programs.
[/quote]
It shows that you don't know too much about Michigan. None of these 4 programs are in the top 5; engineering at #6 being the highest.</p>
<p>Michigan does have many top 5 programs, for example:</p>
<h1>3 in political science</h1>
<h1>2 in psychology</h1>
<h1>3 in sociology</h1>
<h1>5 in earth science</h1>
<h1>4 in pharmacy</h1>
<h1>5 in public health</h1>
<h1>3 in nursing</h1>
<h1>1 in health administration</h1>
<h1>1 in social work</h1>
<h1>4 in music, etc.</h1>
<p>Btw, I don't see your point. How would Michigan having strong programs in business, medicine, law and engineering help its WSJ feeder scores?</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you are in business and not going to grad, I could see it...
[/quote]
DSC,
My previous post(#42) was in response to your statement implying Cornell having better grad school placement than Michigan. You can talk about quality of education or environment which are personal preferences. Comparing grad school placement, however, must be based on concrete facts.</p>
<p>If you are talking about graduate school in the broad sense, you haven't answer any of my questions. Does Cornell have more grads placed in the top graduate programs in say, psychology, political science, East Asian studies, or engineering, etc? I doubt it. You haven't shown me any solid data to support your argument. The fact that Michigan has top 10-15 programs in almost all disciplines should give Michigan an edge here.</p>
<p>I must assume then that you were only referring to grad placement in MBA, medicine and law ... as you only cited the WSJ feeder poll. It's true that Michigan has its law program included in the poll (can we help it if none of Cornell's MBA/medicine/law programs are ranked in the top 10?). But whatever advantage Michigan gained from that is more than outweighed by the heavy East Coast bias of the schools surveyed. The WSJ feeder poll would give a more complete picture had they polled all of the top 10 schools of each program. But then you would expect Michigan to have an "unfair" advantage as it would have two, or may be even three programs included in the poll.</p>
<p>Goblue, although not ranked among the top 5 currently by the USNWR, Michigan Engineering, MBA and Law have all been ranked in the top 5 by the USNWR at one point in the time. Furthermore, according to the current BW ranking, Ross MBA is ranked #5, as it has been historically...and many would agree that BW is just as reliable and accurate a ranking as the USNWR. Michigan Law is generaly considered one of the top 6 or 7 and many rank it in the top 5. Michigan Engineering is ranked anywhere between #5 and #10 depending on the year. </p>
<p>But I agree that those aren't necessarily Michigan's strongest departments. You mentioned many of Michigan's top 3 programs. Anthropology, Classics and Dentistry are also widely considered to be among the top 3 or 4 departments in the nation.</p>
<p>Very good point about the WSJ survey's heavy East Coast bias. The advantage that Ivy League and East Coast elite LACs (like Williams, Amherst, Middlebury) and privates (like Georgetown or Duke) receive from the selection of top graduate programs more than amply outweighing whatever advantage Michigan gains from having its Law school included in the survey. Schools like Cal, Caltech, Chicago, Michigan, Northwestern and Stanford all suffer from this.</p>