Is Michigan weak in any way?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
261

<p>Alexandre -- </p>

<p>Scores of 25/26 -- Those that I know are not URM. Most are legacy with a sprinkling of athletes. They do exist. 25 or less, that's a lot of people, close to 1500. (Info from the CDS for 2003-2005 shows the 25 -75% to be 26-31). </p>

<p>Referring to your reference on top feeder schools -- it rates MI 30. Morehouse is rated 29. Does that mean Morehouse is a better school than MI? Comparing MI to some of the other schools you mentioned -- UM (2.73), Chicago (6.22). Penn (5.49) and Northwestern (3.69). This means Chicago has 2.3 as many ‘scholars’, Penn 2.01 and NW 1.4 times more. Statistically I would say these are big discrepancies. </p>

<p>What is gifted? Maybe we should also be looking at PhD’s and not just law, MBA, and med school admittance. (I think I read somewhere that in MI, Kalamazoo College has the highest % of students receiving PhD’s not MI). </p>

<p>Schools like Chicago and Northwestern send a higher % of students to PhD programs than MI. It's possible because of this their numbers on the feeder school chart are reduced. Do you have counts that combine all graduate programs? (I bet the discrepancies would increase, possibly dramatically).</p>

<p>Alexandre, your quote -- </p>

<p>I can only think of 5 research universities that are better than Michigan at the undergraduate level. After those five, there are roughly 10-15 universities of equal caliber, and Michigan is one of them. I do not include LACs because they are totally different.</p>

<p>Your rankings defy those of most educators and for that matter the granddaddy of all rankings USNWR. MI RARELY IS LISTED IN THE TOP 20 NATIONAL UNiVERSITES. You can’t exclude LAC’s when calling MI one of the top '15’ schools in the country. That’s like saying I am the top golfer at a division 1 school when there are 4 people at division 2 schools that post better scores. By most standards that would make me #5. Unless I qualified my statement by saying #1 in division 1. </p>

<p>DStark</p>

<p>Yes I know what you mean. But I disagree. I think because the entering student is more cerebral at Penn, with more experiences, Penn is a more intellectual and sophisticated community. </p>

<p>Also I have been told, but do not know for sure, that MI looks at composite ACT's while schools like Penn look very closely at the individual scores. Your sub scores must fall within an acceptable range just like the composite score. This ensures a specific academic level is always maintained.</p>

<p>LOL -- I can top your friends. I have a cousin in engineering at UM now and an Uncle (in-law) and cousin who graduated from Penn. </p>

<p>My cousin at UM had a 3.9 GPA from a decent public MI high school. A few honors classes (2) and 3 AP's. ACT 28 or 29. He played football and wrestled. Never held a leadership role. Only other activity -- NHS.</p>

<p>My cousin who went to Penn graduated from a top private HS in NJ. He was a NMS, took all honors and AP's with a 3.9 GPA. He had SAT's over 1500. AP scholar. Captain of the lacrosse and forensic teams. Played in the jazz and concert bands. Hundreds of volunteer hours. Plus membership in all those misc clubs like NHS. He told me that although he was probably in the top 10- 15 in his HS, he was the norm at Penn, at the most one notch above the norm. </p>

<p>As you said there is a big difference in the caliber of the student being admitted. Why wouldn't it permeate through the entire educational process?</p>

<p>Using Alexandre’s top feeder school theory – UM rates 30 at 2.73% and Penn rates 16 at 5.49% -- twice as many admits. Do you really think they are equal? </p>

<p>Another thing to think about -- as my uncle has often said. He would not get into Penn today. The IVY's use to be all male and probably were going co-ed just about the time you were entering college. There were no women to compete with. It was a lot easier to get in those schools 30-35 years ago. Also they were expensive, there wasn't always aid so if you had money it increased your chances to be admitted. Possibly we should not compare people in your age group with the kids there today. Maybe MI and Penn were more on par back then, certainly Brown was. Much has changed.</p>

<p>GOBLUE81</p>

<p>Your statement -- I am claiming that this may have an impact on Michigan's ACT range. And it is a direct result of Michigan putting more emphasis on GPA/curriculum than test scores. That's all the point I was making on my previous post. It's all quantitative - GPA/curriculum vs. test scores.</p>

<p>That may be true. But what’s to say that this does not occur at other schools. Even if a school puts more emphasis on test scores and you test in the upper range – using your reasoning there would be no need to retest either. Wouldn’t this affect the scores the other schools report also? I think we are splitting hairs.</p>

<p>All ---</p>

<p>I think we keep forgetting the thread. Does Michigan have any weaknesses? Are we really qualified to say Chicago is better is than UM or Penn is less intellectual? I laugh at some of the things we write. Between family and friends, we know people who have gone to most of the Ivy’s and the 7 sister schools, Chicago, NW, MIT, Bard, Bucknell. Lehigh, Georgetown, the little Ivy’s, MI , UC Berkley, etc, etc. One of the smartest is my mom’s cousin who graduated from St. Bonaventure and then St John’s law school. (He got a scholarship undergrad and worked through law school). One of the most successful is his wife -- went to Seton Hall both undergrad and law school (at night). She fell into a niche in the legal system and is considered an authority in her field. Long term it’s the individual not the school.</p>

262

<p>Mnozzi, like I said earlier, Michigan is not a good fit for you. You are looking for a different setting. That does not mean that because Michigan isn't right for you that it is inferior to a university that is. I do think that several of your points are severely flawed:</p>

<p>1) Morehouse is a university that is made up of URMs. At Michigan, like at most of the other universities that make up the top 50 schools in the Feeder ranking, only a small portion of the student body are URMs. I don't think I need to explain further here. And remember, East Coast school will enjoy a slightly higher ranking in the Wall Street Journal Feeder ratio because 75% of the gradsuate programs examined are East Coast schools...most of those being Ivy League graduate programs.</p>

<p>2) LACs and research universities are very different. One cannot compare them to each other. In some ways, top research universities destroy LACs and in other ways, research universities don't even come close to the top LACs.</p>

<p>3) You say that "Your rankings defy those of most educators and for that matter the granddaddy of all rankings USNWR. MI RARELY IS LISTED IN THE TOP 20 NATIONAL UNiVERSITES." You couldn't be more wrong Mnozzi. Most of the rankings you refer to, ESPECIALLY the "grandaddy of them all" aren't ones made by "educators". They are those made by highly prejudiced and not-so-educated organizations, purely driven by profit. </p>

<p>There are several educators who rank universities, and most of them rank Michigan among the top 15 undergraduate institutions in the nation, uncluding the USNWR. That's right Mnozzi, Educators have their say in the USNWR, in the Peer Assessment Score, where Michigan has been ranked between #7 and #12 for the last 20 years. Edward Fiske is another educator who ranks Michigan among the very best, making it one of just 20 or so research universities that gets the ***** academic ranking. Gerhard Casper (a Yale educated scholar, ex-dean of the Chicago Law School and president of Stanford University from 1990-2000) never ranked universities, but he had that to say:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/president/speeches/961206gcfallow.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.stanford.edu/dept/pres-provost/president/speeches/961206gcfallow.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Notice what he uses as his "Prima Facie" (first or primary evidence...axhibit A as it were)? "I am extremely skeptical that the quality of a university - any more than the quality of a magazine - can be measured statistically. However, even if it can, the producers of the U.S. News rankings remain far from discovering the method. Let me offer as prima facie evidence two great public universities: the University of Michigan-Ann Arbor and the University of California-Berkeley. These clearly are among the very best universities in America - one could make a strong argument for either in the top half-dozen. Yet, in the last three years, the U.S. News formula has assigned them ranks that lead many readers to infer that they are second rate: Michigan 21-24-24, and Berkeley 23-26-27."</p>

<p>Jack Gourman (even though I concede that his rankings are majorly flawed) is yet another educator that ranks Michigan among the top 15 in the nation. Clearly, "educators" think a great deal more of Michigan than you do.</p>

<p>Mnozzi, you and I aren't as far apart as you think. I agree that Michigan should be slightly smaller and a little harsher when it comes to admissions. But that does not mean the university is weaker. The university provides all the resources, challenges and opportunities necessary to excel, including one of the top 5 faculties in the country, access to some of the most advanced facilities (labs, classrooms, alumni association and libraries) on Earth and the full attention of the country's top graduate schools and most exclusive employers. Attending Penn or Brown over Michigan will not open more doors or provide one with a sounder or more respected education.</p>

263

<p>Alexandre -- </p>

<p>I don't have time to write more now, but that article's 11 years old. A lot of schools have come on strong since then -- Notre Dame, MIT, WUSL, Rice. Contributions by major benefactors in the last 15-20 years have changed the face of education and colleges. Maybe with Ross' contribution, Ross business may surpass Wharton someday -- but it's not there yet.</p>

<p>I never said UM is inferior. I have always said it is a great school. You asked does it have weaknesses, which is a subjective question. I am just giving you my opinion with supporting arguments. </p>

<p>You are taking this personally. This is becoming a duel. Because this is a subjective question for every positive quote you can find I can probably find a negative supporting argument.</p>

264

<p>Alexandre, do you know how the school of public policy ranks nationally?</p>

265

<p>Michigan's Ford School of Public Policy is ranked among the top 10 nationally. It was ranked #8 the last time the USNWR ranked Public Policy programs back in 2004.</p>

266

<p>Beyond the rankings can anyone give more information about the public policy school or anyone comment about the new BA in Public Policy offered at Michigan or the MPP? How do the degrees offered at UMich match up with other schools? Thanks for any info!</p>

267

<p>I think the BA program was a good move. It's a public policy degree but in a liberal arts context, so you cover many different areas of social science in it without too much specialization. That's why it's still a BA degree.</p>

<p>It is a new program, but I think it will be a very solid. You get in after your sophomore year after some prerequisites. They're only taking about 50 kids, so it's going to be selective.</p>

268

<p>


</p>

<p>Which five are you referring to, and what are the primary factors that make one university better than another?</p>

269

<p>I just came back from an information session on the new BA program in public policy. It offers a lot of stuff that I'd be interested in specifically, like more opportunities to do things directly applied to analyzing policies, but it also seemed a bit limiting because it's new. There isn't a lot of selection to fulfill major requirements and it doesn't seem like they want to implement a program that allows you to double major in public policy and something in LS&A.</p>

270

<p>Weasel, the 5 I was referring to at Harvard, MIT, Princeton, Stanford and Yale. Those 5 universities have great reputations, larger endowments and more talented students. No other university in the country beats Michigan on all three fronts. Michigan's reputation, as evidenced by the Peer Assessment score, is on par with most other top 15 universities. Michigan's endowment is practically tied with Columbia at #6 or #7 in the nation. And in terms of student bodies, Michigan's may not be as talented as some of its peers, but it is not far behind. But when it comes to the five universities I mentioned above, they truly are in a league of their own.</p>

271

<p>Yes, I agree with HYPSM and would have chosen those 5, perhaps not necessarily in that order but maybe even so.</p>

272

<p>I would personally pick Michigan over Yale because I really hated New Haven. I think I would probably pick Michigan over Harvard because I have yet to meet a Harvard person I get along with, and I have met dozens of Harvard alums, so the sample size is significant. I typically don't get along with type-As! But I would definitely chose MIT, Princeton and Stanford over Michigan, even if I know my overall experience would not have been as good.</p>

273

<p>Buried in the text of the New York Times, 1/26/07, ("Colleges Regroup on Diversity Efforts"): </p>

<p>". . . the University of Michigan, where two-thirds of the applicants are from out of state."</p>

<p>If true, that means about 17,300 out-of-state (OOS) applications per year, and 8500 in-state.</p>

<p>UM's actual enrollment for the fall '06 freshmen class was 3428 MI students, 1971 OOS.</p>

<p>So if somebody would just break into the UM admissions office's top-secret vault and get the yield rates --broken down by in-state and OOS -- one could then better answer the proverbial question: "What are my odds on getting into Michigan if I live in Illinois? . . . "W. Bloomfield?" etc. </p>

<p>UM should open up the vault. Right now the admissions office is less than candid with the many out-of-state applicants who ponder, ineffectually, mushy UM admissions data that doesn't address their particular, highly competitive situations.</p>

274

<p>I've decided that the one weak thing about Michigan, at least in my case, is that EVERYONE in-state who has any intellectual strength goes there.</p>

<p>At least 10 people in my class (out of 65) will be there next year, and another 100 or so from the two public high schools in my city.</p>

<p>Despite the large OOS population, Michigan is in many ways the school for smart kids from metro Detroit. This isn't necessarily a bad thing, but going away and meeting just new people has its advantages.</p>

275

<p>Its campus supposedly feels very large and spread out. The weather is less than desireable too.</p>

276

<p>
[quote]
Michigan is in many ways the school for smart kids from metro Detroit

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Agreed completely. I'm not discounting how fantastic UMich is, because there's a very good chance I'll be going there. What I have a problem with is how it's marketed as the only school for the academically talented, at least within my (large, public, suburban) high school. </p>

<p>GC's don't encourage us to set our aims any higher or farther. As a general rule at my school, if you're smart enough to go to UMich, you go there. If you're smart enough to go to Harvard, you still go to UMich. I'm not saying that's wrong if you truly want to go to Michigan, I just think that we're encouraged to have tunnel-vision.</p>

277

<p>Adriannam: Part of that is 'cause is such a damn good school and I imagine significantly cheaper for someone in state. I am not familiar with UMich that much, but my strong impression is it generally offers as much as if not more than just about any university. I guess I think in terms of its quality overall and compare it my mind to the best elites, the Ivies,MIT,Stanford,Berkeley,CalTech, etc. that shine on the graduate as well as undergraduate.</p>

<p>I agree with you, though, that people are always better off mixing it up and getting away. Seize the opportunity to go East or West or South.</p>

278

<p>Well, at least East or West...</p>

279

<p>^BedHead, that's a bit of a stretch.</p>

280

<p>Hey Alexandre, could you read this thread I just posted and tell me what you think? I'm going into Aerospace and am torn between WPI and Michigan and can't decide. I'd really appreciate your input.</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=334009%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=334009&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>