If you got into UMich, NYU-Stern, and Indiana (Kelley) ....

College Search & Selection
41

<p>There isn't much of a difference between undergraduate Business and graduate Business. At the undergraduate level, nobody will rank Stern among the top 3 overall. It barely makes it in the top 5. That is not to say Stern isn't amazing in Finance. It is #2 in Finance at the undergraduate level. And like I said before, given its proximity to Wall Street, it makes perfect sense that it should be #2 in Finance. Even then, Michigan sends 30% of its grads to Wall Street each year, mainly to JP Morgan, CS First Boston, Goldman Sachs, Morgan Stanley, Lehman Brothers and UBS. But the OP has not specified what he wants to do. As a Business school as a whole (not merely finance and Wall Street), Ross is considered better than Stern...both at the graduate and undergraduate levels. In Wall Street, I would say that the two are equally respected...but Stern's presence in Wall Street definitely makes Stern a more popular option.</p>

<p>As far as selectivity, you are right, it is impossible to say which school is more selective...that is why I say they are about equally selective. It is you who claims that Stern is more selective than Ross when you yourself admits that comparing Stern's admissions process to Ross' is like comparing apples to oranges.</p>

42

<p>Alexandre,</p>

<p>Those stats you cited for NYU are either inaccurate or outdated.</p>

<p>The fact of the matter is the current NYU freshman class has a middle 50% SAT range of 1300-1450 (Stern's current average is a 1412). Even the 2 year old Princeton Review website puts NYU's average at 1352 NOT 1310 as you claim (the current frosh has an average of 1370 something, and this years ED admits averaged 1410 overall, 1440 for Stern-I know this from NYU alumni mailings/updates).</p>

<p>As far top 10% in hs class goes, the figure for NYU is 71%..not that I even think top 10% should count for anything. For example, I went to a top ranked boarding school, my high school didn't even rank, but I know the even people ranked in the middle of my class were more competitive for admission at an elite college than a student in the top 10% at an average public school. I would venture NYU has a much greater population from top private schools than UMich, probably more public magnet schools as well, in fact over half the NYU frosh come from high schools that don't even rank. </p>

<p>Sources:
<a href="http://www.princetonreview.com/college/research/profiles/schoolsays.asp?category=1&listing=1022976&LTID=1&intbucketid=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.princetonreview.com/college/research/profiles/schoolsays.asp?category=1&listing=1022976&LTID=1&intbucketid=&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p><a href="http://admissions.nyu.edu/before/%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://admissions.nyu.edu/before/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Compare this to UMich which has an SAT avg. of about 1300. As far as ACT's go, UMich's range is 26-30 (from UMich's website), while NYU's ACT average is 29 (much closer to UMich's 75th percentile than 25th percentile...its on the Pton Review site). </p>

<p>NYU's acceptance rate is 28%, versus a 53% rate for UMich. Given the disparity in overall selectivity for the freshman class, its not so crazy to assume Stern is more selective than Ross.</p>

43

<p>There you go again, JW. Trying to claim that there is a difference between a an average of 28 and 29 on the ACT. Stern is not more selective than Ross and NYU is not more selective than Michigan. It is certainly as selective, but not more. And like I said, the mean SAT score for Michigan students is about 1310 (2003). But those who make it into Ross are better than the average. I would say that the mean SAT score for students admitted into Ross is certainly over 1400. </p>

<p>But selectivity means little. It is something you continuously bring up, but let us face it, Harvard is more selective than Stanford, but nobody in his/her right mind would say that Harvard is better than Stanford in Engineering. In Business, undergraduate or otherwise, Michigan is considered better than Stern. Period.</p>

44

<p>Al,</p>

<p>Its great how you cite inaccurate info. and then back track with the implication, "its no big deal, selectivity means little". Your Harvard/Stanford analogy is irrelevant, Stanford is an engineering powerhouse, but here both NYU and UMich are top ranked undergrad business programs. You're also completely mistaken or not forthcoming if you say there is no difference between the undergrad and grad b-schools. A b-school is not like some history dept. where you'll have undergrads and grads in the same dept, grad students teaching undergrad recitations, etc. An undergrad at Stern or Ross is not going to be taking classes with the MBA students, will for the most part have different profs., many different facilities, and different job ops (companies have separate recruiting schedules for grad and undergrad)...this is the entire reason they have different rankings of grad and undergrad (similar to engineering schools). This is why when businessweek ranks b-schools, they will specify its for MBA programs, not to be confused with the undergrad. Heck, by your logic, since Princeton doesn't have many top ranked grad. programs, its undergrad is not that good....obviously this is not the case. </p>

<p>"Trying to claim that there is a difference between a an average of 28 and 29 on the ACT."</p>

<p>A 29 is greater than a 28, there is by definition a difference. End of discussion, my point regarding ACT selectivity is proven. </p>

<p>"It is certainly as selective, but not more. And like I said, the mean SAT score for Michigan students is about 1310 (2003)."</p>

<p>So I guess a ED avg. of 1410 this year, 1370 for current frosh, or even an outdated 1352 for NYU is the same as a 1310 for UMich....yeah right, thats just a looney statement. I suppose you also think an overall acceptance rate for UMich which is almost double NYU's is nothing either. </p>

<p>"But those who make it into Ross are better than the average. I would say that the mean SAT score for students admitted into Ross is certainly over 1400."</p>

<p>I love how you try to shift the focus here from overall selectivity (clearly NYU is more selective than UMich) to focus on just Ross. Well Stern also has a higher SAT avg. than NYU in general...in fact Stern's average is a 1412, which again is greater than 1400. Speaking of this claim of yours that Ross's average is a 1400....do you have any type of proof to back this up or do you just base this on the fact that people in Ross had high college gpa's that allowed them to get in?</p>

45

<p>The information I cited was from the last USNWR, which stated that the mid 50% SAT scores at NYU were 1200-1400. I did not "spin" or do anything of the sort. Your attempt to use % accepted as a measure of student quality is "spinning". College of the Ozarks has an acceptance rate of 15%. Its student body is not nearly as talented as the student body at Chicago, which accepts over 40% of its applicants. </p>

<p>I have never shifted anything. NYU is not more selective than Michigan. As for for an ACT score of 29 being greater than a score of 28, the difference is negligeable. Nothing has been "proven" here. Michigan is as selective as NYU and Ross is as selective as Stern. And my position on selectivity has never changed. Go back to postings of mine that are months old and I always discuss the uselessness of selectivity ratings. Schools like Chicago and Johns Hopkins are less selective than schools like Washington University and Emory...it does not make them weaker.</p>

<p>And no, the Harvard vs Stanford analogy is perfectly legitimate. Harvard has a respected, top 25 Engineering program, but Stanford is one of the top 3 or 4 Engineering schools in the nation. And yet, Harvard is more selective than Stanford. Furthermore, Engineering undergrads do not take classes with Engineering grads. As for your claim that undergraduate Business students arenot taught by the same faculty and do not use the same facilities and do not interview at the same time...those are all wrong. At most programs, be it Wharton, Michigan or Haas (maybe not Stern), professors that teach MBA students usually teach undergrads. Most recruiters interview both undergrads and MBAs on the same trip (for different level positions obviously). And generally, undergrads and MBAs share the same building.</p>

<p>You are the one who always initated arguement mind you. From the begining, you are the one who said that NYU was better than Michigan, that Stern was better than Ross and that NYU/Stern are more selective than Michigan/Ross. At the end of the day, Michigan/Ross are more prestigious and more highly regarded than NYU/Stern and in terms of selectivity, they are about the same.</p>

46

<p>"The information I cited was from the last USNWR, which stated that the mid 50% SAT scores at NYU were 1200-1400." </p>

<p>Well I have several sources, including Princeton Review, and NYU's official sources telling me differently. Also, Us News doesn't have average GPA...so where were you getting those? Your SAT cite was inaccurate. NYU overall has both a higher SAT average and a lower acceptance rate than UMich overall...this is directly from the websites of the 2 schools themselves, not some inaccurate US News ranking which ranks Penn above Stanford and MIT, and may even use info that is years old. Also you have provided no info on Ross SAT scores, I doubt such info even exists. FYI, one point on the ACT means a lot more than one point on the SAT, and in admissions to top schools, especially at numbers orientated state schools like UMich, it can make all the difference, so I would not call it "negligible". </p>

<p>Unlike UMich, JHU and U of C, have small applicant pools that are very self selected (hence the high acceptance rates for schools of that caliber), so again, you've made a faulty analogy. </p>

<p>"Most recruiters interview both undergrads and MBAs on the same trip (for different level positions obviously)."</p>

<p>They generally do not...check recruiting schedules of i-banks...there is an analyst schedule and an associate one, it does not, for the most part correalate. And yes, some facilities (eg library, lecture hall, probably used by many others in the university as well), and faculty might be shared, but you miss the point, Stern and Ross students are NOT going to be taking finance, marketing, or whatever, with any MBA student....thats just not how b-school works, its not going to be the same subject matter, it will likely not even be the same prof. (your point of there being some common profs. is well taken, but its still not the same class) Furthermore, at most b-schools, there is almost always a separate dean for the undergrad program and the MBA school...this to me indicates, they really are separate entities within a school...not some amalgamation as you claim. </p>

<p>As far as highly regarded, more prestigious, what are you citing besides the extremely accurate USNWR (sarcasm)? My original statement was only on selectivity (again, my statement came out of higher SAT score and lower acceptance rate for NYU), and I responded to your original assertion of UMich being better overall and in business, which it clearly isn't.</p>

47

<p>It is not just the USNWR. Kaplan/Newsweek provides the same information. Mean SAT score for NYU is 1310. The Princeton Review is the one that is inacurate. But NYU's own cite posted the newest data, and that, I was not aware of. But even the difference of 2 or 3 points on the ACT and of 60 or 100 points on the SAT is not significant. In this case, NYU's ACT scores are, on average 1 point higher and SAT scores are, on average, 30 points higher. That does not make NYU more selective. For one thing, Michigan places lower importance on the SAT/ACT and more importance on GPA, course selection and dificulty, APs and class rank. </p>

<p>I agree that the USNWR overall ranking is a joke. I always say as much. But their stats are accurate...even if they are one year old and its Peer assessment score is generally quite accurate.</p>

<p>And you say that I started this debate? Hardly. Go back to your first post on this thread...before I ever posted, and read what you wrote. Actually, I will paste it for your convenience:</p>

<p>"NYU....you'll get the best job opps. there by far."</p>

<p>I had not even posted on this thread at that point. I corrected you by saying that Michigan would give a student equal opportunties and instead of admitting it, you kept insisting that NYU was better.</p>

<p>And you were the one who also continuously claims that NYU is more selective than Michigan. I never said Michigan was more selective than NYU. Personally, I believe that at that level, it is imposssible to really determine which school is more selective. Neither is as selective as Harvard or Yale, but both are pretty selective. As for Ross, it is impossible to tell how selective it is, but I can tell you, a 3.6 GPA (mean for Ross acceptees) at Michigan is extremely difficult to maintain. Only the top 10% of Michigan students maitain GPAs of 3.6. Do you know how good the top 10% of Michigan students are? Let me put it this way, the top 10% of Michigan's student body have SAT scores over 1500.</p>

<p>I also never claimed that undergraduate programs and graduate programs were an amalgamation...or identical. I said they are related and schools with top undergraduate programs in Business are usually schools that have top MBA programs. It is not surprising that #1 is Wharton at the undergraduate level, or that MIT, Michigan and Haas are always ranked #2-#4. At the MBA level, Wharton is usually ranked among the top 2 or 3 (along with Harvard an Kellogg that do not have undergraduate programs) and Michigan and MI are usually ranked between #4 and #8. And yes, MBA programs and undergraduate business programs usually share many of the same resources, recruiters and faculty.</p>

<p>As for reputation and academic excellence, the rankings speak for themselves. Not just the USNWR mind you. I am talking about Barrons, Fiske, Gourman, NRC etc... Michigan is generally ranked significantly higher than NYU is every single field of study...save Art, the Languages, Film and Theater. If you can name me one field in which NYU is ranked higher than Michigan, let me know.</p>

48

<p>To show the correlation between the USNWR undergraduate rankings and MBA rankings in general, I am going to provide below a ranking of the top MBA programs.</p>

<p>Top MBA programs (average between BusinessWeek and USNWR)</p>

<h1>1 Harvard *</h1>

<h1>1 Kellogg *</h1>

<h1>1 Wharton</h1>

<h1>4 Stanford *</h1>

<h1>5 Chicago *</h1>

<h1>6 MIT *</h1>

<h1>7 Columbia *</h1>

<h1>8 Michigan</h1>

<h1>9 Dartmouth *</h1>

<h1>10 Duke *</h1>

<h1>11 UVA</h1>

<h1>12 Cornell</h1>

<h1>13 Cal-Berkeley</h1>

<h1>14 UCLA *</h1>

<h1>15 NYU</h1>

<h1>16 Carnegie Mellon</h1>

<h1>17 UNC-Chapel Hill</h1>

<h1>18 Indiana-Bloomington</h1>

<h1>19 Texas-Austin</h1>

<h1>20 Purdue-West Lafayette</h1>

<p>(* no undergraduate program)</p>

<p>Undergraduate rankings according to the USNWR</p>

<h1>1 Wharton</h1>

<h1>2 Sloan</h1>

<h1>3 Cal</h1>

<h1>3 Michigan</h1>

<h1>5 Stern</h1>

<h1>6 Carnegie Mellon</h1>

<h1>6 UNC-Chapel Hill</h1>

<h1>6 Texas-Austin</h1>

<h1>9 USC</h1>

<h1>9 UVA</h1>

<p>As you can see, with the exception of a couple of instances, there is a clearl correlation between undergraduate and graduate rankings.</p>

49

<p>First off, thank God for automatic trading programs, so I can only occsionally look at the overseas markets and do this BS...:)</p>

<p>Al said,</p>

<p>"In this case, NYU's ACT scores are, on average 1 point higher and SAT scores are, on average, 30 points higher. That does not make NYU more selective."</p>

<p>30 points?..Its NYU-1352 vs. UMich-1310 (the 1352 on PR's site is not an error, I know from NYU's own website)..thats 42 points, not 30. Furthermore, NYU's ED admits had an SAT average over 1400 this year, compared to 1310, thats not insignificant. I have no idea about the other sites besides US News that you mentioned as they are not avaiable online. But I would say 42 points, even 30 is more significant than a .1 difference in gpa and most reasonable men would agree (you never mentioned where you got the gpa figures...its not US News). Even unweigthed gpa's vary according to high school grading standards, quality of school, choice of courses. Most intelligent people know that the SAT is a much more objective measure than HS gpa. Again, I would venture that NYU has a heavier representation of top private schools and magnet schools than UMich does (I know the attitudes of these students since I was at a top boarding school myself). The fact is that UMich has an acceptance rate almost twice as high as NYU's and UMich's applicant pool is not self selective like University of Chicago's. </p>

<p>"For one thing, Michigan places lower importance on the SAT/ACT and more importance on GPA, course selection and dificulty, APs and class rank."</p>

<p>Umm just about every college in the country claims this, but you have put forth no evidence that UMich de-empasizes SAT scores to any significant extent more than other similar schools, just because UMich's average SAT score is lower doesn't mean they place minimal importance on them. In fact, the way I see it, SAT scores are probably even more important at a numbers orientated state school like UMich than a private school like NYU (where many of the programs require auditions, interviews, submission of work, etc.). I would also think a private school would place more emphasis on EC's, essays, and reccs. </p>

<p>As far as my initial statement, I stand by it considering the OP had expressed an interest in NYU's MBA program and is from NY (is it too crazy to assume he also wants to work there?). What started this, was you saying UMich was better than NYU in business, and overall. </p>

<p>"Only the top 10% of Michigan students maitain GPAs of 3.6. Do you know how good the top 10% of Michigan students are? Let me put it this way, the top 10% of Michigan's student body have SAT scores over 1500."</p>

<p>Here you make a faulty assumption that there is some perfect or even strong correlation between SAT score and college gpa, when most studies have shown that the correlation is in fact not that strong. </p>

<p>As far as 10% of UMich's student body having SAT scores above 1500, I highly doubt that. According to UMich's own website, the middle 50% range is a 1230-1390. That means 25% of UMich's class has above a 1390. Thus by your logic, the number of UMich students with a 1390-1490 would almost be the same as the number with a 1500-1600...this is clearly not how a bell curve distribution works....its gets narrower as you get to the top. Until you show me a credible source that indeed shows 10% of UMich has OVER a 1500, I'm inclined to disbelieve.</p>

50

<p>Alexandre said: </p>

<p>"As for reputation and academic excellence, the rankings speak for themselves. Not just the USNWR mind you. I am talking about Barrons, Fiske, Gourman, NRC etc... Michigan is generally ranked significantly higher than NYU is every single field of study...save Art, the Languages, Film and Theater. If you can name me one field in which NYU is ranked higher than Michigan, let me know."</p>

<p>Ummm...philosophy (that was my major at NYU...its considered to be the top depts. in the country by many), mathematics, economics, finance, int'l business, neural science...thats just what I can think of right now. And if you really want to start looking at the grad level, ever hear of NYU Law School??? (again I always thought we were talking undergrad). </p>

<p>Also, fyi, the rankings you cited showed that Cal is above UMich in undergrad, but below it in MBA programs...the same can be true of NYU if you believe that USNWR isn't the bible of all rankings....though no ranking is perfect, there are certainly better ones. </p>

<p>Rankings depend on whats being ranked and whose doing the ranking. Besides your cite of USNWR; Barrons & Fiske are not rankings, but merely guidebooks.</p>

<p>Both the Revealed Preferences rankings and the Consus Group rankings (in overall and selectivity) put NYU above UMich. These are both far more objective than US News.</p>

51

<p>"But even the difference of 2 or 3 points on the ACT and of 60 or 100 points on the SAT is not significant."</p>

<p>No offense, but I think you are 100% wrong on this, a 60-100 pt. SAT difference could easily make the difference between on whether one is getting an acceptance, esp. in today's environment where colleges are more competitive than ever, and students need every edge they can get, no matter how small. </p>

<p>The mean SAT difference between Yale and Penn is probably 60-100 pts, if even that....and I don't think anyone would argue those 2 are about the same in selectivity.</p>

52

<p>Cal is not ranked ahead of Michigan at the undergraduate level. It is tied with Michigan. </p>

<p>As for Philosophy, Math and Law, NYU and Michigan are pretty much ranked equally in those fields.</p>

<p>But in Engineering, Physics, Chemistry, Computer Science, Geology, Political Science, History, Psychology, English, Economics, Biology and Medicine, Michigan is generally more highly reguarded than NYU.</p>

<p>In short, in every field imaginable, save a couple, Michigan is either as good as NYU or better.</p>

<p>As far as Revealed Preferences, it is a ranking derived from High School students. It is meaningless. It ranks schools like Chicago, Cal and Michigan way lower than they should be because they aren't perceived to be as cool as other schools. </p>

<p>Listen, if you want to believe that NYU is better than Michigan, it is your rigth to do so. But to give students your advice and to try to pass it one as fact is not exactly fair to the students.</p>

53

<p>"As for Philosophy, Math and Law, NYU and Michigan are pretty much ranked equally in those fields."</p>

<p><a href="http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/2004/overall.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/2004/overall.htm&lt;/a>
NYU is tied with Pton for #1, UMich is 4.</p>

<p>What seems to be your fav., US News ranks NYU above UMich in both math and law. </p>

<p>Where you getting your econ. data from?</p>

<p>"As far as Revealed Preferences, it is a ranking derived from High School students. It is meaningless. It ranks schools like Chicago, Cal and Michigan way lower than they should be because they aren't perceived to be as cool as other schools."</p>

<p>Your comments indicate you know nothing about the revealed preferences ranking. The ranking is done by profs. from Harvard and Wharton (whom I'll bet you are smarter than the writers of US News), its published in a scholarly journal, its not a bunch of HS kids talking about which schools they think are "cool"....I assure you Harvard was not ranked #1 in revealed preferences because some 18 year old thought it was "cool" or "gnarly". The revealed preferences data is based on the matriculation of cross admits, ie. someone admitted to both NYU and UMich is more likely to choose NYU. The revealed preferences ranking is a market driven approach that places colleges in head to head competition with each other for the best students...it should defintiely be appreciated in a b-school thread of all places. The revealed prefrences ranking is one of the best rankings out there...it blows US News out of the water, its like a consumer report on colleges since it shows what the consumer (the top high school student) prefers. You don't like where your school is, attack the metodology, not the result. </p>

<p>Revealed preferences ranking:
<a href="http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewPaper&id=1298%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://knowledge.wharton.upenn.edu/index.cfm?fa=viewPaper&id=1298&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>"Listen, if you want to believe that NYU is better than Michigan, it is your rigth to do so. But to give students your advice and to try to pass it one as fact is not exactly fair to the students."</p>

<p>I would think this really applies to you a whole lot more than me. I never even used the word "better" as applied to NYU/UMich or Stern/Ross, you did. I only said better jobs ops at NYU under the assumption the OP had NY ties and wanted to work there, now thats not too crazy. Yes, I understand "better" is a subjective term, and what's better for one may not be for another. I only compared selectivity, via SAT scores and acceptance rates....pretty objective and fair stuff. Based on this, I said NYU was more selective than UMich...which really is not an insane statement any way you slice it, and I stand by it. Its you who is going on about "peer assessment", "highly regarded", "better rep", etc...these are phrases that would indicate a subjective concept like "better".</p>

<p>Look both NYU and UMich are great schools overall, and have awesome b-schools (either of which is a stronger pick than Indiana) and I think we can agree to disagree.</p>

54

<p>The mid 50% SAT range at Michigan is actually 1200-1410. So 25% have SAT scores over 1410 and I would assume that roughly 10% have SAT scores over 1500. But that is an estimate. At any rate, being ranked in the top 10% at Michigan is extremely difficult.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.umich.edu/%7Eoapainfo/TABLES/FR_Prof.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.umich.edu/~oapainfo/TABLES/FR_Prof.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And those are 2003 stats. I read somehwere but do not have link that in 2004, the average rose slightly from 1310 to 1330. </p>

<p>As for your claim that NYU is more selective than Michigan, I still do not see it. NYU's mean SAT score of 1350 compared to Michigan's of 1310 does not prove anything. And you claim that NYU is more popular than Michigan among students from top private schools? How do you figure? Clearly if you attended an elite private school in the East Coast, chances are, NYU would probably be more popular than Midwestern schools. But if you were to look at elite schools from other areas of the country rather than schools that are located in the East Coast, Michigan would probably hold an advantage.</p>

<p>I agree that there isn't much of a difference between a 3.75 student and a 3.6 student...just as there isn't much of a difference between a student who scores of 1310/28 on the SAT/ACT and a 1350/29 on the SAT/ACT. I will stand by my original statement. Michigan/Ross are just as selective as NYU/Stern. I personally do not attach much value to the SAT anyway. It is a single test that can be cracked if a student takes the time and gets the help required. I personally got a 1540 on my SAT in 1991. At that time, fewer than 15 students around the world got a perfect 1600. It was at a time when a 1300 on the SAT actually meant something special. My sisters barely broke the 1100 on the SAT. I can assure you that my sister are better students than me.</p>

<p>At any rate, academic reputation and quality are not 100% related to selectivity. Obviously, it is one important criterion, but quality of faculty, curriculum, ties to industry, reputation in academe and industry etc... are all just as important. Schools like Michigan, Johns Hopkins and Chicago are not as selective as schools like Washington U. Georgetown and Rice...but they are at least as good...if not better.</p>

55

<p>Like I said, the Revealed preferences is a student derived ranking. I never students ranked the universities, I said that it was derived purely by high school students. It has nothing to do with academics. I know the ranking very well. I looked at it and analyzed it and pretty much realized that it is excrement.</p>

<p>According to the USNWR, Michigan is ranked higher than NYU in Mathematics and Economics. In Law, NYU is ranked higher than Michigan. I would say that in Law and Math, the difference is insignificant. Both are second to none. Michigan does, however, place far more students into top Law schools. In Economics, I would give a slight edge to Michigan.</p>

<p>It is strange that you should mention the Philosophical Gourmet. Here is a ranking of the top universities overall according to that source:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/2004/topresearch.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.philosophicalgourmet.com/2004/topresearch.htm&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>At any rate, we can most certainly agree that both NYU and Michigan are excellent universities. And we can disagree about which school is more selective, which one is better in Business and which one provides better placement opportunities.</p>

56

<p>"Clearly if you attended an elite private school in the East Coast, chances are, NYU would probably be more popular than Midwestern schools. But if you were to look at elite schools from other areas of the country rather than schools that are located in the East Coast, Michigan would probably hold an advantage."</p>

<p>I would highly doubt that, especially since UMich has a greater in-state population (logical since its a state school). I would say NYU is much more geographically diverse than UMich, and appeals to broader sections of the country. </p>

<p>Example, the Webb School, probably the best private school in California and the west coast had 3 matriculants at NYU, and none at UMich for the class of 2004. In fact, NYU is among the top destinations of students from this this elite west coast high school. The Ivies, U of C, and other top schools are all represented. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.webb.org/academics/cg_matric04.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.webb.org/academics/cg_matric04.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>A word about northeastern boarding schools: They are hands down the best in the country and have people from all over the US and the world, not just the eastern seaboard of the US. I grew up mostly in CA (I almost went to Webb, though I didn't), but I attended boarding school on the east coast, the population there was from all over, it wasn't only local. The private schools on the east coast tend to by far be the most elite ones in the country. </p>

<p>"Revealed preferences is a student derived ranking. I never students ranked the universities, I said that it was derived purely by high school students. It has nothing to do with academics."</p>

<p>My couter to that is very simple, its what any businessman would say: The revealed preferences was based on the college choices of top high school students. These top students all have peferct access to information (ie existing rankings, general rep of the college), and being smart students, they know how to analayze this info, and based upon that analysis they made a college choice. Surely academics has something to do with the choices made by over 3 thousand of the most talented high school seniors in the United States.</p>

<p>BTW, all the rankings besides philsophy in philosopical gourmet are based on US News academic reputation surveys, where people doing the ranking don't know always know all there is to about the school they are ranking. You prefer opinion based stuff like "peer assessment" and "reputation", while I prefer hard facts like SAT scores and acceptance rates....that seems to be where we differ. </p>

<p>I'll take a market driven approach (ie Revealed Preferences) that is influenced by consumer choice and demand over a shoddy opinion based survey (ie us news peer assessment) anyday, thats the capitalist in me. Top high school students who are actually paying money for these colleges have much more at stake than some guy filliing out a form....thats US news peer assessment. These students in the revealed preferences ranking put there money where there mouth is, they think one school is better than another (they were accepted to both, so they have a choice), and they are willing to pay a lot of money to actually attend the school they think is better....in New York, thats called talking s*** and backing it up. -- Now, compare this to some old professor or dean who could care less about the result of some annoying form he filled out in which he rated his and other schools, he has none or very little incentive for anything in this peer assessment. Maybe its just something about me that appreciates talking the talk and walking the walk. </p>

<p>"At any rate, we can most certainly agree that both NYU and Michigan are excellent universities."</p>

<p>Well we've found some common ground....thats a good thing. On that note, I'm out...for a while.</p>

57

<p>By all accounts, from personal observations and what everyone says, Stern ug is far superior to Ross ug-rankind difference is due to the weakness is USNEWS methodology. Much higher SAT and GPA (sizable amount of Ross students have sub 1300 SAT)
-also FT has Stern #8 in world, and it's probably the most reputable source. Alexandre has shown a strong anti-Stern bias from day 1. It's funny</p>

58

<p>Alexandre where did u get all those freshman averages from? for michigan, that is.</p>

59

<p>u need about a 3.7 from lsa to get into the business school at michigan. i would think thats tougher than getting a 1400 on SAT(which is essentially 8th grade geometry and 9th grade reading comprehension)</p>

60

<p>Selectivity should not play a role in this discussion. Indiana is one of the easier schools to get in, and the business school is almost annually ranked around #10 in the country. It depends on faculty, recruiting, and their program, not necessarily the types of students that go there. The point in this whole discussion is that Michigan and Stern are both top quality schools and it comes down to the campus environment and size. I'm in the same position as the original poster, except my 3 schools are going to come down to Indiana, Michigan, and University of Virginia. I'd like to hear what people have to say about the UVA path, if i get accepted, and less about minutia about the selectivity of two great schools. (How much free time do you guys honestly have?)</p>