Here’s another one.
Going to Caltech, waitlisted at UMich.
And another one.
Ok we got the idea…
It’s Sad really… stop dragging them over the coals to prove a meaningless point…
Yes, it’s very sad really. Immensely qualified applicants being deferred/waitlisted at UMich, but still having Cal and Cal Tech acceptances in their pockets. The Cal, UCLA and UMich threads are all filled with high stat students being deferred, waitlisted or rejected. Also, a counterpoint to the following:
@sbdad12 wrote:
The yield protection, if there is such a thing, is pathetic really. Doesn’t prove UMich has higher standard whatsoever. And It’s really sad to use a few data points on CC to prove “look umich has high stats student.” But If we go down this path, we should look at the stats of committed students, not even the accepted students, of the entire schools (UCLA vs UCB vs. UMich, etc…). Frankly I don’t care.
Regarding the tuition, I have no complaints about the high OOS fee. UMich should have no obligation to OOS students. It’s unreasonable to expect UMich to give merit aid, you can hope for some, but I don’t understand the anger of not receiving one.
If anything, my “complaint” (I don’t care really, just an observation) would be that UMich does not cater enough to instate students. Don’t you ever wonder why so few instate students applied to their flagship college? Is it because of the high cost (for poor students) or too competitive? Could be both. It’s competitive bc UMich is not required to have mandate on the number of instate vs OOS. If UMich had to follow the same rule as the UCs (80/20), then I bet the high stats that you are bragging so much about would drastically drop. UMich gets to have state funds plus the majority of OOS tuitions, they have their cake and eat it too. Good for them to be able to get away with it. But the real victims are Michigan tax payers.
Michigan receives very little state funds in comparison to other schools/states. Yes, they run like a private school. They run like a good business. In Illinois they were taking almost 25 percent kids from full pay Asians at UIUC since if they didn’t they would fold. Only engineering there is self sufficient. Schools are doing what they need to do to survive.
Sadly there isn’t enough high Stat kids from Michigan area. The amount of seniors have dropped in Michigan. It has always been competitive to get in. This is a known fact for the locals. But they have other great choices like Michigan State. Wayne State, Grand Valley, Eastern Michigan, Western Michigan etc. They each attract a different segment of the Stat pile with different goals. Michigan should not have to take lessor Stat kids. There are plenty of schools in Michigan that they would be more appropriate for.
Plus Michigan is a very tough school. It wouldn’t be fair for them to take lessor Stat kids. They wouldn’t survive there. Not being trivial. Just a fact.
that’s why I said the stats would drop drastically if they followed the same rule as the UCs. I don’t know it’s chicken or the egg thing. Once can surely make it “tough” to get kids from other states. As far as not able to “survive”, I doubt that they couldn’t.
Anything is possible about surviving their academics but the high Stat kids are having a hard time at Michigan. Again, it’s a very difficult school. In engineering the GPA drops almost a full grade point from high school. Don’t want to get into another major debate but people that live in Michigan are pretty tuned in to which school is best for their kids. I know many families that only apply to Michigan, Michigan State and either Wayne State and/or Grand Valley. This way they know their kids are going somewhere and that it’s affordable.
“My daughter’s high school college admissions counselor is a reader on the UCLA admissions committee. She knows what they look for, and also Berkeley, but she is realistic in telling us that her chances aren’t great (less than 20%). It’s great to have her on our side for applying to the UCs.”
I am sure that being on the UCLA admissions committee makes her an expert on Michigan admissions…and completely impartial when it comes to comparing Michigan to the UCs. But you know the counselor, so feel free to trust her if she tells you that your daughter has no chance of getting into UCLA but a good chance of getting into Michigan! 
“My D will apply ED to Michigan and Wisconsin.”
EA, not ED.
“But I don’t share your optimism that she has a good chance at Duke or Hopkins.”
I did not say she has a good chance of getting into Duke or JHU. Nobody has a good chance of getting into those schools, UCs and Michigan included.
At any rate, I as not going to debate the intricacies of admissions as those are impossible to settle. But it is hard to deny that Michigan’s peer rating, facilities, resources, faculty and number of graduates who go on to top graduate schools, join/startup/lead exclusive companies and win major awards (Nobel/Fields, Fulbright, Rhodes, Truman, Marshall, Churchill, etc…) make it an elite university.
“ If UMich had to follow the same rule as the UCs (80/20), then I bet the high stats that you are bragging so much about would drastically drop.”
Would it have to do with the fact that California has more people in it than 4-5 states that surround Michigan? Or that it has a huge population on high achieving Asians? Or that the it’s very easy to apply to all the UC’s with a simple check next to the school on the same common application? Etc, etc, etc.
Or it has to do with the fact that the Michigan students didn’t apply to UMich to begin with because they thought they wouldn’t get in due to too many high stats OOS students.
Don’t tell me that Michigan is so small that it can’t come up with 6000 freshman a year who are smart enough to go to UMich. It’s insulting to Michigan residents to imply that.
I agree that universities have to do what it takes to survive, I would also add that they also do what they can get away with. Somehow, the UCs, with state underfunded, and much less endowment have managed to stay in business for so many years with little OOS tuitions, and still attracted so many brilliant students all over the world and within the US. Yes the students suffer in other areas due to the lack of resources, but the things we know for sure that CA students benefit greatly from the limit on OOS quota, and everyone graduated from there with excellent education and opportunity.
I don’t doubt for a second that UMich is a great school, and elite one at that. But its peers do not have the same privileges that it does and yet still be competitive. One can only wonder what would happen if it’s being held to the same rule as everyone else.
Ps. Is the question of this thread a trick question? When someone raised a point, neither bad nor good, everyone feels the need to “defend” and make excuses for it rather than having an honest discussion about the pros and cons. I do wish UMich does more for the people of its state, gives more aid to students that need it (it’s so rich), be more diverse, do more outreach in minority/economically depressed areas. A lot of good that UMuch can do more of. If you don’t agree with it, then move on. We already established that UMich is a great educational system.
Thread title asks: Is Michigan weak in any way ?
We’ll find out on Saturday, October 26, 2019 & again on November 30, 2019.
Also, economics & chemistry are not strengths.
And I’ll be there on 10/26. But don’t forget 9/21 and 10/19.
Everyone seems to forget the success of the basketball program. Back-to-back Big10 titles in 2016-2017 and 2017-2018. And losing to one of the National championship participants (Texas Tech) this year in the Sweet 16. 
RJKofnovi, not sure why you say this, but:
a) I went to a Top 30 B School, so the school wasn’t the issue. My classmate is the CEO of AT&T. Lots of successful graduates. Remember I am comparing myself to other classmates on how quickly I got a job, not to grads from other B schools. My classmate who went to Duke undergrad also had an issue getting a job. Same for another from Tufts. Undergraduate school mattered little as to whether we were hired quickly or not.
b) My work experience after college wasn’t strong. This had more of an influence on securing employment post MBA than my undergraduate school. Same for getting rejected by Kellogg and Anderson MBA. I had good grades at Michigan and good GMATs, but work experience hurt me.
Work experience and major, in my opinion, have a bigger influence on what type of first job you get than the school you attended. Hence my point that it matters less where you go to school and more what you study and your experience. And then a couple of years after you graduate no one cares at all where you went to school but rather your work experience, skill set, connections in business, etc. I met a guy the other day in my tech job who was super smart and he went to the University of Phoenix. I would hire him any day over someone from a an “elite” school with fewer skills.
And yes, I wouldn’t get in to Michigan today with my previous scores. Nearly everyone I know says this, especially other parents out here in SoCal that went to Berkeley and UCLA. But compared to others at the time I was admitted, I was well prepared to get into a good school. It’s like comparing Babe Ruth to today’s hitters. There is a lot more power today than during the deadball era, but it is how you compare to your contemporaries that matters. At the time I matriculated, Michigan was ranked #8 in the country. There’s more competition today because of international students and kids apply to 15-20 schools instead of 5.
You are correct…EA instead of ED.
Not sure she is an expert at Michigan admissions, but she knows her stuff and a number of kids from our 3000 student high school apply to Michigan every year. It’s somewhat of a crapshoot as we all know why certain kids get admitted and others don’t. But if you have so many local kids applying to the top UCs and fewer applying to Michigan, you get the picture that the top UCs are more difficult to get in to from here than Michigan. It doesn’t mean the UCs are better schools, which it seems that many here are sensitive about. I would think that my kid has a 50/50 shot of getting in to Michigan, and a lesser chance at Berkeley, but who knows?
The limit on OOS students, which is recent, has done little so far in terms of lowering admissions standards. It’s still very difficult, instate or OOS to get into a UC. And this after they raised the number of total students admitted.
I was talking with our state assemblymember last night at an event. He said he was thinking of tackling again the difficulty of getting in to the UCs with further limitations on #s of OOS students. Tons of well qualified kids out here are getting rejected at the UCs (and everywhere for that matter), and if you want to send your kid to a good school, you might need to send them OOS, which is essentially a tax on you. I don’t know if his efforts will work though but if it works at UVA and UNC (instate easier than OOS), maybe it could work here for instaters.
“I went to a Top 30 B School, so the school wasn’t the issue…”
Actually, it seems it was.
The OOS acceptance rate at UMich is 19%. Are you comparing that rate to the in-state acceptance rates of Cal and UCLA? If so, then I agree. For a Californian, it’s harder to be admitted to Cal and UCLA than Mich, not sure about UCSD and UCI. From my recollection for the Class of 2022, UMich is lower than UCSB and UCD.
UMich is the 1st or 2nd largest OOS draw for our local public school of 2,400-2,500 students here in the SF Bay Area. It’s considered a highly desirable destination over the “top UC’s.” The local private school as well.
There’s almost no problem changing majors as often as you want, you can see your advisors almost anytime, professors respond quickly to correspondence, free and accessible resources like tutoring or internship prep and they have a winning football and b-ball teams. ??
Yes, I’m referring to in state UCs vs OOS Michigan.
Not sure what you mean by Michigan is lower than UCSB or UCD. Can you clarify?
I would say in CA at least the type of students applying and being admitted to Michigan are equal to those applying and being admitted to UCSB. My friend’s kid 6 years ago got waitlisted at Michigan and got into and attended Davis—loved it. Now I would say it’s slightly easier to get into Davis than Michigan but not by much. It’s also highly sought after.
Seems that with UCSB being difficult, Cal Poly SLO is the new UCSB. BTW, very impressed with UCSB. Their academics seem to be top notch and it was the best tour we went on, including Stanford and Berkeley. There are only 3K grad students so you’re not as likely to get a grad student assistant as often in discussion groups. (Ranked right behind Michigan at #5 for best public university) No football but they do have a beach on campus!