<p>
[quote]
Plus, check out Forbe's brand new study of "Colleges That Will Get You Rich"...I'll paraphrase...the list is as follows : Dartmouth, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, MIT, Harvard, Penn, NOTRE DAME.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know if earning the most money qualifies you as academically superior.</p>
<p>ACT Average -
Notre Dame - 32.5
Michigan - 29</p>
<p>SAT Average -
Notre Dame - 1405
Michigan - 1320</p>
<p>If you're towards the bottom of the distribution, you wouldn't get into Notre Dame, anyways, but Michigan still offers you access to world class faculty and resources. If you're towards the top of the distribution, then you'll have a much larger volume of people at or above your intellectual level at Michigan than at Notre Dame.</p>
<p>I agree that U of M offers great resources and faculty (although I had mostly GSI's when I was there...not really worth it when you can't understand a gosh darn thing they are saying ha). U of M will have a large volume of people who are incredibly smart. I know tons of 35's on the ACT who went there because it is an in-state bargain and it has great programs. However, I don't know of one "dumb" person at ND. Even the athletes could [mostly] get into U of M straight up (in-state, less competitive). I agree that U of M, by virtue of its size, has a lot of smart kids...but most all the students at ND are incredibly bright (hence it's reputation for unattractive girls and lack of party scene).</p>
<p>I thought Dame meant hot chick</p>
<p>What's amazing about Michigan is how it maintains its superior academics with its relatively high admittance rate. Honestly, if you're a top top top student truly looking for a superior academic education, would you pick Notre Dame above Michigan? List your reasons and I'll negate them. And don't just pick and choose a couple rankings and quotes from a couple sources. In fact, tell me exactly why you think UCLA, UNC, and UVA are academically superior to Michigan beyond selectivity. How does selectivity effect what you're learning? More so, wouldn't you think that Michigan has a bigger out-of-state and international appeal than UNC and UVA? I had breakfast this morning with a guy who lives in the town that UVA is in and he said that it really lacks the intellectual diversity and international appeal that Ann Arbor has. When it comes to the top students, I think they base their decisions more on the college's academics than the college's selectivity rate.</p>
<p>I'm almost embarrassed to say "I go to the University of Michigan" when I'm abroad (I'm studying abroad in Taiwan right now) because people in the know automatically think, "Oh wow, you go to a top 15 in the world university." Just the other day, I met a guy who stuttered, "Oh...you mean...you go to that...you know...very good university...in Ann Arbor?" That's not my usual method of picking up guys (oh dear, that sounds way too...feminist...for me), but whatever works (just kidding) =P.</p>
<p>
[quote]
All public schools have similar quotas for accepting in-state students, so that is a moot point.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Since this is utterly false, one wonders about your other assertions. I'd check your sources of information--someone or something is giving you bad info.</p>
<p>Such a disappointment.. Has there been any statements made by the University in response to this drop in ranking?</p>
<p>Now universities require statements to respond to US News rankings? What is this world coming to...?</p>
<p>
[quote]
Even the athletes could [mostly] get into U of M straight up (in-state, less competitive).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You can't be implying that Notre Dame doesn't have football recruiting... Or maybe they don't anymore, seeing how good they were at football last year.</p>
<p>One more thing - I don't think you should judge a university's academic strengths by seeing how high their incoming students' ACT scores are. They come to learn, not to teach.</p>
<p>Yes, U of M is heralded as a top university, world-wide. Playing devil's advocate here, but I am having trouble reconciling that with the fact that it has slid in MORE than just the US News rankings (at the expense of other public schools rising up) and, overall, I wouldn't say that U of M carries as much weight as it used to (that is complete opinion, though, from speaking with other people...no need to tear that statement apart)</p>
<p>But more importantly, in that aforementioned Forbe's (nonpartisan) brand-new study of "Top Colleges For Getting Rich", I forgot to mention that U of M is ranked #17 on the PUBLIC school ranking (not even including the private/Ivies). These numbers don't lie. This is about as great a study as one could find because it shows what graduates do 10-20 years into the work force. I would say that U of M has great job placement after graduation...but I feel it's more important to assess what they do after a few years of work (when a U of M pedigree is less important than overall hard work and performance). Cal and Virginia are the top spots, as UCLA, Illinois, and Texas are all there ahead of U of M as well.</p>
<p>
[quote]
But more importantly, in that aforementioned Forbe's (nonpartisan) brand-new study of "Top Colleges For Getting Rich", I forgot to mention that U of M is ranked #17 on the PUBLIC school ranking (not even including the private/Ivies).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think this is actually a testament to Michigan's academic superiority. It just means that more of the top Michigan graduates move on to some form of graduate school because their education allows them to do so, because I'm pretty sure this Forbes study refers to bachelors degree holders, as their "most lucrative majors" study does.</p>
<p>In regard to the inquiry about the University's response....</p>
<p>The University will respond to media questions as asked, but it's hardly inclined to put out a big press release when USNews results come out. That's true every year, not just a year like this one. Like many of the top institutions (research as well as LACs), it doesn't proactively publicize the UG rankings.</p>
<p>I'm sorry but that doesn't make much sense...I think you are contradicting yourself. Operating under your assumption, the top U of M grads who go to great graduate schools would have salaries (10-20 years down the road) that would reflect this top notch graduate school education. For example, I am pretty sure that Forbe's would consider--in it's study--a U of M accounting undergraduate who does his/her Masters of Accounting at Texas (#1 in the country) to be a U of M grad. Hence, his/her salary would be included in the U of M stats (which is the only logical explanation)</p>
<p>I believe what he meant was that the study eliminates all those with advanced degrees. Payscale was based on those people who still held only a bachelor's degree. It's an unusual way to look at graduates, for any school whose graduates have high educational ambitions.</p>
<p>cbpeanut, I'm loving your ND recruit post.</p>
<p>Sux2BU, colleges are supposed to teach people to be the leaders and the best, and that doesn't always mean being rich.</p>
<p>Hey now...we're both having some tough times right now. Our recruiting the last few years has been pretty nasty, though. And, by the way, ND doesn't have "General Studies" or a Communications major. Hence, "U of M Football Players Need Not Apply"...jk ;)</p>
<p>We'll see, come September 13th!!!</p>
<p>"Sux2BU, colleges are supposed to teach people to be the leaders and the best, and that doesn't always mean being rich."</p>
<p>I actually was waiting for that. The two are more than correlated, though...you have to admit that. As a counterpoint, you shouldn't be bringing that up to a catholic university person...we have at least 10% of our graduates every year going on to do service in the form of Peace Corp., ACE, Teach for America, etc...so I don't think U of M is anywhere near that.</p>
<p>troll, UM is among the leaders in Peace Corps and Teach for America numbers practically every year. UM perhaps had the most influence in the founding of Peace Corps than any other school. (read JFK's speech)</p>
<p>Sux2BU, the Forbes study was very superficial. Can you tell me how many alums were surveyed from each school? From what geographic locations? Werecost ofliving adjustments made? Did they specify the types of jobs surveyed? Do you honestly think Notre Dame and Chicago alums are wealthier than Michigan and Northwestern alums?</p>
<p>And GSIs do not teach at Michigan, so I doubt you ever attended. 98% of classes at Michigan are taught by professors. 25% of classes have discussion goups and labs that are led by GSIs, but they do not teach or grade, they just lead discussions and labs.</p>