<p>Yeah, how about citing an [ACCREDITED</a> RANKING SOURCE](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp]ACCREDITED”>http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2009.jsp) instead? </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And since you agree with griffon, you’re also supporting his arguments. Common sense.</p>
<p>Destroyed what? You didn’t even refute my argument. You simply shot it down because you could not handle UVA being more renowned in recruiting, as the documents prove. And your definition of a so called “accredited ranking source” is invalid when Emory is ranked 100th and Michigan 20-something. No one has ever widely cited or endorsed this ranking source.</p>
<p>Wow, you’re sore. You never cited where in the “documents” you provided it said UVA was more renowned in recruiting. I didn’t refute your argument because you never had one in the first place; all you had was conjecture. Pathetic.
Do you understand the simple fact that you are simply a horrible debater and stupid person in general?
Also, [about</a> ARWU](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/aboutARWU.jsp]about”>http://www.arwu.org/aboutARWU.jsp).</p>
<p>The link appledude provided is even more ridiculous, having Harvard at #24.</p>
<p>I am in no way stating that every college ranking is perfect, but seriously, just judging on how many Nobel Prizes and Fields Medals, number of highly cited researchers selected by Thomson Scientific, number of articles published in journals of Nature and Science, number of articles indexed in Science Citation Index is a horrible way to rank. Obviously larger schools would have an advantage. I have NEVER seen Texas A&M (a school I am very fond of) ranked higher than either Rice or Notre Dame. I am just saying that placement in the rankings is not debatable, but actual number is very opinionated. Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Notre Dame, Rice, (hell, even University of Michigan) all deserve top rankings. But actually placing a number is impossible. Looking at different figures will lead to different rankings. THAT IS WHY EVERY RANKINGS IS DIFFERENT! And also why so many people argue when ‘their’ school isn’t number one… such as yourself. If their is ever a ranking system that hardly anyone scoffs at, then PLEASE, let me know (there isn’t)</p>
<p>Well, now you’ve changed your argument. I agree with you. My point was simply that griffon is incorrect in calling the University of Michigan an “academically inferior” institution. Barboza just came in here because he got mad from the rhetorical dishing I gave him in a thread over at the UVA forum and should be arguing with me [over</a> there](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-virginia/917385-help-uva-mcintere-vs-berkeley-haas-vs-michigan-ross.html]over”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-virginia/917385-help-uva-mcintere-vs-berkeley-haas-vs-michigan-ross.html) instead of on this thread.</p>
<p>The reason I post in the forums of other universities is not to ■■■■■, but to point out inaccurate information, especially when it pertains to U of M. It’s very underrated here. The main reason why US News ranks it so low in the first place is because of its acceptance rate (43%). If you take a closer look at the undergraduate/graduate US News rankings, you’ll see that Michigan is actually ranked top 10 in the majority of programs, and top 5 in a few of them (such as psychology).</p>
<p>And that’s the main reason? You speak it like you know how heavily each criterion is weighted. While we’re at it, I guess Michigan does not have as stringent requirements as UVA to get admitted, though both schools are public. Plus, there’s no point arguing with you anymore, in spite of the evidence in the documents: you’re always going to be bitter about not getting into UVA/ND, but that’s okay because both schools are still better than UMich.</p>
<p>There’s no evidence in the documents. Simple as that. I asked you to reference it and you failed to do so, again proving your stupidity. This thread doesn’t even involve you, go back to the UVA forum… [sore</a> loser](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-virginia/917385-help-uva-mcintere-vs-berkeley-haas-vs-michigan-ross.html]sore”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-virginia/917385-help-uva-mcintere-vs-berkeley-haas-vs-michigan-ross.html). I’m arguing with griffon, not you.</p>
<p>Wow, someone’s immature and needless to say, bitter.</p>
<p>And someone doesn’t know how to debate effectively.</p>
<p>So back to the topic is Notre Dame a good school in terms of socio-ethnic diversity!</p>
<p>Here…let me quell this argument and [hopefully] quiet Recharge down a bit.</p>
<p>I went to the venerable University of Michigan, along with my girlfriend (at the time), and best friend. We all went there because we all got REJECTED from the University of Notre Dame. This is a very common theme…as I’ve NEVER heard of anyone getting into Notre Dame but getting rejected from UMich (unless they waited until March to apply). [As a sidenote…I transferred to ND sophomore year after getting a 4.0 at U of M freshman year. However, I only ended ND with a 3.4/4.0 :)]</p>
<p>Bottom line, UMich is a good PUBLIC school and, as such, has access to an immense amount of resources. It’s falling in rankings, though, so I would try to ■■■■■ around Cal, UCLA, UNC, and UVa’s boards first because you have more of an argument to prove to them…seeing as though they’ve almost all basically eclipsed you. UMich people have an incredible heir about them–mostly attributed to the high concentration of east coast kids. They are a proud group and that is commendable…but trying to compete with Notre Dame doesn’t work very well. </p>
<p>UMich boasts “the largest living alumni base in the world”…to me that devalues a degree. Even with that stat, the Notre Dame alumni network (probably a fraction of UMich’s) is still regarded as the best in the country.</p>
<p>Rebuttal, Recharge? Son?</p>
<p>First of all, your post is an anecdote, meaning it pertains to you alone. There’s no doubt that ND is a much more selective institution, and I’m not surprised that you’ve talked to no students who got rejected from Michigan there.</p>
<p>My point is not that Michigan is a better school. That’s purely subjective. My point is that Michigan is academically superior to Notre Dame - as judged by professional academics in universities around the nation who chose to participate in US News’s Peer Assessment. It’s also a better feeder school than Notre Dame.
<a href=“http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf[/url]”>http://www.wsjclassroomedition.com/pdfs/wsj_college_092503.pdf</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The only public school that is definitively superior to Michigan is Cal. This I will admit. However, if you talk to UCBChemEGrad, he’ll personally tell you that he believes Michigan is better than UCLA and several reasons why. Michigan is ranked lower than UVA and UCLA because of its extremely high admittance rate, not because it’s an inferior school. Michigan’s better than both of those two in the vast majority of academic departments; if you don’t believe me, I’ll post some links. FYI, UNC isn’t a valid college to reference in this argument.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>To each his own.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This statement is frankly ridiculous and causes your credibility to drop. Schools like Harvard and Dartmouth OBVIOUSLY have the best alumni networks in the country. If you still disagree, then prove your statement.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yep, that’ll boost your cred - stereotyping east coast kids. Also, it’s AIR, not HEIR. Look it up.</p>
<p>One last thing, and this is my opinion completely:
It was a pretty stupid decision to transfer from U of M with a 4.0 to ND. If you had continued your excellence there, you would’ve been in better shape. I don’t understand why you’re proud of ending ND with a 3.4–this just proves either that the professors grade more harshly (which does NOT correspond to academic superiority) or you were just lazy.</p>
<p>Well, to be brutally honest there is no sense in arguing with you. You have it set in stone that University of Michigan (a fine college) is sooo much better than everyone says it is. (And since you quote so much I thought I would throw one in, and trust me: I am waiting for the quote from this post) “The reason I post in the forums of other universities is not to ■■■■■, but to point out inaccurate information, especially when it pertains to U of M. It’s very underrated here.” By doing so you give “U of M” a horrible, no, a ridiculous reputation. I don’t think that by “pointing out people’s mistakes” in a WHOLE OTHER COLLEGE FORUM that you can really make that much of a difference. I don’t want to rant as you do, but I want to make it clear that we really don’t care how “underrated” your school is. By being so aggressive at pointing at how “dumb” Notre Dame students are, we must ask the question: Why be so aggressive unless what we say is true? You should care less what other people think about your “superior” school. Again, I hate ranting on forums but seriously, go to Michigan State’s or another “inferior” college ( I bet Harvard would get a kick out of your little jokes) and point out how amazing you are. (please point out my grammatical errors also because I TOTALLY care how stupid I am)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Absolutely not. You’re putting words in my mouth, a straw man logical fallacy. The typical Notre Dame student is smarter than the typical Michigan student. I’m not arguing this at all. I’m arguing that Michigan is not an “academically inferior” institution and it would be ridiculous for me to argue anything that is obviously untrue. US News takes into account the quality of undergraduate teaching as well, which Notre Dame is better than Michigan at. Why else do you think students at Mendoza LOVE it enough to have it come out #1 on Businessweek’s Student Survey rank? However, you’re entirely missing the crux of my argument.</p>
<p>Quality of undergraduate teaching =/= academic strength.
My point still stands; Michigan is academically superior to Notre Dame.</p>
<p>Michigan better overall academically than ND? lol. Give me a break. Michigan may have certain departments that are better, but overall there is no way a state public school that has to admit a certain percentage of Michigan kids is going to be academically superior to a private school like Notre Dame which is much more selective. Its simply a fact, the average student at ND is going to be more qualified and smarter than the average Michigan student. On top of that, ND emphasizes undergraduate teaching, and Michigan, being a huge land grant research university, emphasizes graduate school resources and stats. The average class size at ND is much smaller than at Michigan, where you are subjected to a lot of large lecture hall size classes. While Michigan is a very good school, and one of the best public schools in the country, ND is more selective, harder to get in, and has average test scores that exceed Michigan. By the way, I got into both schools, and chose----guess.</p>
<p>you guys -_- please stay on topic. i got accepted and would also like to know.
is ND good for bio/pre med? thanks.
and why are people saying it’s not a good school…? it’s ranked 19th!!!</p>
<p>Recharge, I think you need to more concretely provide your definition of “academic superiority,” which I think is where the heart of the discussion lies. I’ll concede that U of M is certainly a very underrated institution (Here you know I’m not biased, as it’s very rare that you’ll hear a Notre Dame student admit this.), especially when it comes to graduate school. That being said, based on what I have seen from both schools, I personally would regard Notre Dame as “academically superior,” i.e. Notre Dame is more selective (both in numbers as well as SAT scores/high school statistics/etc) for undergraduate purposes, graduate programs are too close to judge (but I would give a slight edge to ND), etc. I’ve seen the rankings you have posted, but they all seem either highly disputed or skewed by class size (For example, as good of a school as Ohio State University is, I can’t help but doubt the legitimacy of your ARWU because it places OSU a few spots above Brown University). I believe rankings like the US News and the Princeton Review are more widely used for a reason.</p>
<p>So, what do you mean by “academic superiority?”</p>
<p>You are both talking to people who haven’t posted on this thread since May 2010. You may want to start a new thread to get any specific questions answered about ND.</p>
<p>My niece graduated from ND & was accepted to all the podiatry schools she applied to with generous merit awards; she is currently attending her favorite! It was hard for her to adjust from HI to the midwest, ND & its culture but loved it by the time she left 4 years later & has no regrets.</p>
<p>Notre Dame has one of the highest medical (and related) school acceptance rates in the country. Peer assessment scores are a terrible way to evaluate Notre Dame because it 1)Lacks a major graduate-level research program on the scale of Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Michigan, etc. and 2)is a religious school. As a doctoral student at a major research institution, I can tell you that these factors are major no-no’s when it comes time for the peer assessment rating. However, from experience, I can tell you that Notre Dame prepares you better for whatever you want to do after graduation than virtually any other school. It starts with the small class sizes and the professors who care about their undergrads rather than just their research. Trust me. I’ve done work in the Ivy League and at Michigan—most professors think of undergrads as an inconvenience. There are exceptions to every rule, of course (my personal favorite being Prof. Brian Coppola at Michigan–what a guy). Nevertheless, on the whole, Notre Dame is just about the best place in the country to go for an undergraduate education.</p>