<p>To post 135</p>
<p>Again that is a article from August 2003</p>
<p>I see Penn competitive with the top 3 universities ( in August 2003 I knowed not).</p>
<p>Reading article dates can be extremely important when doing research, etc…'</p>
<p>I don’t understand post 143 ( well I actually do, besides the fact of it’s needed reason).
I clearly wouldn’t go by a 2003 gallup poll ( even adding to the original date how unaccurate the poll could have been)</p>
<p>^^^So can the use of proper English when expressing one’s opinions.</p>
<p>“Let me tell you about my background a little bit Alexandre. I actually just graduated from college and will be working full-time at a major consulting firm(think B/B/M). I also interned at a bulge bracket IB firm in the summer of my junior year.”</p>
<p>That’s fine ring<em>of</em>fire, and I genuinely wish you well. I am sure you will have a promising career. Try to respect alums from lesser universities, you will be amazed at how many of your colleagues will come from 2nd and 3rd rate universities. I personally worked a total of three years at two well-regarded IBanks and have been a consultant at one of the more well respected Consulting firms. At all three firms, I have been involved in campus recruiting. </p>
<p>“Furthermore, I have lived or traveled to 15 countries around the world including in Europe, Asia, Australia and North America.”</p>
<p>What’s the relevance? I have lived over 1 year in 7 countries (Lebanon, Bahrain, UAE, US, England, France and Germany) on 3 continents and I have travelled to over 20 other countries (Austria, Belgium, Canada, Columbia, Czech Republic, Egypt, England, Holland, Hungary, Italy, Jordan, Kuwait, Maldives, Mexico, Morocco, Oman, Poland, Saudi Arabia, Serbia, Spain, Tunisia, Turkey) on 5 continents. </p>
<p>“I RECENTLY went through the college admissions process(only 4 years back) and I have lived in Detroit, MI for the past 10 years.”</p>
<p>Again, I don’t see the relevance. I help students go through the admissions process annually and lived in Michigan for 7 years. </p>
<p>“In addition, I have several relatives and countless of friends who have graduated from UMich and I have been a diehard Michigan Football fan for as long as you have.”</p>
<p>You obviously do not honor and respect your relatives and friends who attended Michigan. Your lack of respect for Michigan would seem to indicate that you think they had an inferior education and are inferior intelects. And if you were truly a die-hard Michigan football fan, you would not celebrate when Michigan loses as you often did last season. Your words ring hollow.</p>
<p>"Even given all that, I don’t pretend to be objective or omniscient like you do regarding the matter of colleges or universities. The truth is everyone is entitled to have their own opinion and in a matter like this, there is no hard and fast “reality”.</p>
<p>Really ring<em>of</em>fire? It is refreshing to hear that coming from you. I recall your claiming that Duke was significantly better than Chicago and Cornell. I personally count Illinois, Texas and Wisconsin among Michigan’s peers. </p>
<p>“i disagree to an extent, but I was just using Harvard as an example. HYP in general have students that are in a whole another league than the next group of private and public schools. They are filled with international math, science. musical and art competition winners. In addition, they have students who are international activists, future politicians, famous debaters, etc. The true aptitude of these students can’t be measured by narrow statistics like GPA and LSAT alone.”</p>
<p>That’s exactly what I have been arguing for the last four years. You are the one who claims that quality of an entire student body can be measured statistically. I am the one who bvelieves that measuring quality of an entire student body is impossible. </p>
<p>“Whether Harvard has the best faculty or not is much more arguable than the student body question. Harvard has, WITHOUT A SINGLE DOUBT IN MY MIND, the strongest student body in the world. Even if only by a little bit…”</p>
<p>I guess we will have to disagree. </p>
<p>“The top universities derive their reputation as PLACES OF LEARNING from their STUDENT BODY. It isn’t fair to use the accolades of some top researchers to boost the reputation of the university they work at in the eyes of graduate adcoms. What they do in the laboratory is irrelevant to the undergraduate student experience.”</p>
<p>Do me a favor ring<em>of</em>fire, read this paragraph 10 years from now!</p>
<p>“Just because people are highly educated, that does not mean they know much about colleges and universities. It truly is a hobby and if I hadn’t wandered on to CC or met so many ambitious individuals in my lifetime, I wouldn’t be able to separate Dartmouth from Penn.”</p>
<p>I am not sure I follow your point here.</p>
<p>“USNWR disagrees with you anyway. Those are the people WHOSE JOB it is to measure the reputations of American universities at the undergraduate and graduate level. It is a specialization after all and just because a Nobel Laureate is renowned in the field of Economics, that doesn not mean that he/she is adequately qualified to judge the reputation of colleges and universities.”</p>
<p>Actually ring<em>of</em>fire, the USNWR people defer the reputational ranking of undergraduate institutions to members of academe. That is how the USNWR comes up with the Peer Assessment score. No other part of the USNWR measures reputation or academic quality. </p>
<p>“Your post reeks of arrogance and entitlement. The 99% of Americans you belittle keep this economy afloat and their opinion matter just as much as the social elite. Many of the graduate school adcoms and employers you refer to fall into this huge percentage anyway.”</p>
<p>Again, I tend to respect all universities. You are theone who claims that Duke is superior to Cal, Chicago, Cornell and Michigan. </p>
<p>“Also, most Michigan grads will be entering fields where they will be interacting with regular Americans and regular Americans will make hiring decisions. They will not hold UMich in the same high regard.”</p>
<p>Really? So what did the first part of the gallup poll measure exactly?</p>
<p>[Harvard</a> Number One University in Eyes of Public](<a href=“Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public”>Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public)</p>
<p>It measures the general public opinion. It would seem that the general public thinks as highly of Michigan as it does of most universities Harvard, Yale, Stanford and MIT.</p>
<p>"This is graduate school prestige, but I am talking about undergraduate prestige. "</p>
<p>No ring<em>of</em>fire, the gallup poll asked people to rate colleges and universities overall, not specifically for undergraduate or graduate studies.</p>
<p>“I fully accept that Michigan is a top 5 graduate institution. However, with regards to undergraduates, it is a fringe top 25 school at best.”</p>
<p>Not according to the average American, who seems to rate Michigan among the top 10 colleges and universities in the US and certainly not according to the educated population, which rates Michigan among the top 5 colleges and universities in the nation.</p>
<p>I fully accept the fact that Michigan is an overall better school than Duke at the graduate level. It also a peer of Duke at the undergraduate level. According to USNWR, PA scores of Michigan and Duke are the same. Actually, Michigan’s PA dropped down to Duke’s level this past year.</p>
<p>“^^^So can the use of proper English when expressing one’s opinions.”</p>
<p>A thousand times amen.</p>
<p>
The strength of the overall academic departments is the only area in which Michigan and Duke are comparable. Duke blows Michigan out of the water in every other USNWR category.</p>
<p>Do you believe that Harvard is a peer to Michigan? If you want to claim that all the top 100 schools are “peers”, then more power to you. Duke is stronger at the undergraduate level than Michigan though.</p>
<p>In my field (Sociology, Social Policy, etc.), Harvard and Michigan are peers. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Do you honestly think Texas A&M, Ohio State, Penn State, Minnesota, Tennessee, Michigan State, Purdue, and Iowa are all superior to Columbia, Dartmouth, Cal Tech, and Georgetown? I don’t. But the “average” American apparently does according to that Gallup poll. What the “average” American thinks means nothing.</p>
<p>Having said that, this is a stupid argument. Michigan is clearly one of the finest academic institutions in the country. As a state-supported school with a large enrollment, however, it is also less selective than pretty much all the Ivies and other highly rated private schools. This is just a function of its purpose. Thus, its students on paper are not as great as the Ivies and other highly rated institutions when based on SAT, GPA, etc. It doesn’t make it a “worse” school, though. The students are still among the finest in the nation, just not as impressive. You can get just as good of an education from Michigan as you can from many of the Ivies, and certain fields at Michigan are even more well-regarded than Ivies. BUT, I’d still say the *average *student at an Ivy league school is slightly more accomplished than Michigan. I don’t know how anybody without bias could dispute that. That isn’t to say that Michigan students are subpar; the top of Michigan’s class in particular is composed of very smart, motivated, hardworking individuals who will accomplish great things in life - certainly equal to Ivy league grads…</p>
<p>“However, with regards to undergraduates, it is a fringe top 25 school at best.”</p>
<p>This tells me all I need to know about where you developed your perceptions of national universities. Fifteen years ago when Michigan was ranked in the top 15 (or 10?) by USNWR, I’m sure your opinion would have differed.</p>
<p>In the end, does this really really matter? UMich is a great school, so are the Ivies. There are motivated, intelligent, hard-working students in both institutions, as there are also lazy students who could care less about learning in both as well. </p>
<p>I dunno, it’s always made me wonder when people fight over “prestige” or whether one college is better than the other. Does it really matter in the end?</p>
<p>Sorry, that was my little side thoughts. Continue with your bantering.</p>
<p>“it’s always made me wonder when people fight over “prestige” or whether one college is better than the other. Does it really matter in the end?”</p>
<p>yes. If you were paying top dollars for a consulting project done by McK for the first time, and you know nothing about any consultants there. Would you rather get a bunch of Harvard grads, or a bunch of Michigan grads on the team assigned to you?</p>
<p>Michigan grads. They would be more down to earth and just as qualified. You know why? Because they got hired in the first place!</p>
<p>in that situation, id like to have a bunch of mckinsey consultants my team. i’d trust mckinsey to pick good people, and based on their choices of target schools, they obviously think michigan supplies good people.</p>
<p>answer this, then, bearcats: would you rather have a bunch of accenture guys with harvard degrees or a bunch of mckinsey guys with michigan degrees?</p>
<p>plus, harvard isn’t in the discussion. i don’t think anyone is arguing that michigan’s student body is on average equal harvard’s. h/y/p are in a league of their own in terms of AVERAGE student body quality among american institutions, even compared to other ivies, though there are definitely plenty of people at michigan who would fit right in if they were at harvard.</p>
<p>
I’d be real worried if McK or Accenture were to send me a team with no advanced degrees!</p>
<p>"“However, with regards to undergraduates, it is a fringe top 25 school at best.”</p>
<p>This tells me all I need to know about where you developed your perceptions of national universities. Fifteen years ago when Michigan was ranked in the top 15 (or 10?) by USNWR, I’m sure your opinion would have differed.“”</p>
<p>Michigan was ranked 23 fifteen years ago.</p>
<p>"
plus, harvard isn’t in the discussion. i don’t think anyone is arguing that michigan’s student body is on average equal harvard’s. h/y/p are in a league of their own in terms of AVERAGE student body quality among american institutions, even compared to other ivies, though there are definitely plenty of people at michigan who would fit right in if they were at harvard."</p>
<p>I was responding to the point someone made that prestige does not matter. It does. Sorry if you are living in your own little world.</p>
<p>“answer this, then, bearcats: would you rather have a bunch of accenture guys with harvard degrees or a bunch of mckinsey guys with michigan degrees?”</p>
<p>you are trying to divert my question to an irrelevant question. That was not the point.</p>
<p>We are talking about if prestige makes a difference, and it definitely does from a first impression/perception point of view ceteris paribus, while McK and Accenture are definitely not equal.</p>
<p>Hmm I wonder what is the reason some exclusive PEs ONLY hire at Harvard and Wharton out of undergrad… I wonder… is there anything reason other than prestige??</p>
<p>i can’t believe i’m actually dignifying bearcats’ post with a response. anyway:</p>
<p>
your claim is based on flawed assumptions though. namely:
- that michigan isn’t as “prestigious” as ivies like penn or cornell which I consider peers to michigan (exclucing wharton). grad schools and employers like our students just as much, a claim which you have been unable to refute.
and 2. that even if 1 was false, the difference is large enough to actually make a difference</p>
<p>
yes that was relevant. my counterclaim was that michigan students at mckinsey are just as qualified as harvard ones, or they wouldn’t have been hired. furthermore, the fact that mckinsey targets michigan indicated mckinsey believes that there are top notch students at michigan. no rational manager would make the decision you suggest, except perhaps a harvard alum who would prefer someone from his alma mater (though on the other side, the michigan alum would likely prefer the michigan guy). </p>
<p>i’m interning front office at a top finance firm right now (and posting this during a bit of downtime at the office - at 10pm. wooo finance) - none of my bosses treat the wharton kids any different than they treat me or have any higher expectations.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>name one. “actively recruiting” =/= “hiring.” i personally know people who have interviewed at, among others, blackstone pe and bain capital. the firms not may actively recruit here since the number of people interested in/qualified for those jobs at michigan is low compared to wharton (but on par w/ cornell, penn cas, etc imo), but if you are good, the michigan degree on the resume isn’t holding you back.</p>
<p>and again: when did this thread become about michigan vs. harvard? that argument was never made.</p>
<p>There seems to be some confusion developing on this thread. I suppose after 150 odd posts, losing sight of the original topic is understandable. Let us break it down:</p>
<p>WHAT THIS THREAD IS NOT ABOUT:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>This is not a Michigan vs Harvard thread. Nobody here claims that Michigan is equal to Harvard. </p></li>
<li><p>This is not a Michigan vs MIT, Princeton, Stanford or Yale thread. Again, nobody here claims that Michigan is equal to any of those universities.</p></li>
<li><p>This is not a Michigan’s-total-and-overall-student-body-is-identical-to-Ivy-League-student-bodies thread either. Again, nobody claimed that Michigan’s student body was exactly equal to the student body at say Brown, Cornell or Penn. </p></li>
</ol>
<p>Now that we have made this clear, below is WHAT THIS THREAD IS ABOUT:</p>
<ol>
<li>Academically and reputationally, Michigan is a peer institution to several Ivies, particularly Cornell and Penn. Most unbiased polls (such as the gallup polls and the Peer Assessment rating) indicate that as an undergraduate institution, Michigan is among the top 10 or top 15 universities in the USA.</li>
</ol>
<p>2) The top 50% of Michigan’s student body is as strong, accomplished and well-rounded as the student bodies at some Ivies (Brown, Cornell and Penn). As such, those Ivy league schools do have stronger student bodies overall, but the difference is negligible and does not impact the overall quality of education or the general undergraduate experience.</p>