<p>^agree with asleeacn^</p>
<p>I thought the explanations presented were pretty clear. Here it is again: Many people believe that SAT's are not true indicators of intelligence or college success. It's a fact that SAT scores can be brought up significantly with good tutoring and a lot of money. How can a coachable test be an indicator of college success? In fact, the UC system realized this and threatened ETS to withdraw from using SAT scores. So while they do base their admissions somewhat on SATs, they consider taking students who thrive in their given environment(top 10%) with the hand dealt to them moreso. Also Alexandre, where did you get those statistics. I didn't check them all, but while looking at their websites I found that UCLA's average SAT was actually 1350 and Irvine's a 1270.</p>
<p>still acerockolla, the majority of students in the united states cannot afford a tutoring class, that's the truth. It's tough to pay 80 bucks an hour to get tutored. And yes true, a prep course can raise your grade TO A CERTAIN DEGREE. but a course isn't going to raise your grade from a 1000 to a 1300 on a consistant basis. The truth is, yes the SAT is flawed but colleges accept it for what it is. And like i've said before, i think it is weird that a school can have 94% top 10% students and have an average score of 1050. I don't think you will find another state school that is like this.</p>
<p>Ace--you are looking at admitted students--not enrolled. Enrolled is the std of comparison as many top admits go elsewhere.</p>
<p>"Ace--you are looking at admitted students--not enrolled. Enrolled is the std of comparison as many top admits go elsewhere"</p>
<p>That's a good point. Many people are citing SAT averages for UMAA (and UCLA) that are almost 100 points higher than the average student at those universities. Those are indeed "admitted averages".....the "enrolled averages" are quite a bit lower since the 1300+ SAT scores usually go to other schools, letting the the bulk of 1100-1300 scorers stay at the larger public schools.</p>
<p>Anyways, I think this flame-war has continued past the point that it should have. If someone has first hand experience with both UC-Irvine and UMAA, please post comparisons/contrasts.</p>
<p>Neighbors' kid goes to Irvine and loves it. Of course the weather is only better at San Diego State (which is further inland and has less fog). </p>
<p>Seems to be a collegial group of kids. Faculty seemed interested in undergrads. Great opportunities to do research if you are so inclined. Building ties to local businesses, i.e., Broadcom and Cisco.</p>
<p>No much greek system. Campus is in Irvine, a planned bedroom community, so its not for kids who prefer a city life. Thus, the downside of much of a college community experience, since nearby housing is expensive, and many kids gravitate to apartments in Newport Beach. However, the Admin is building more on-campus housing. One apartment complex that just opened for upper classmen, has a pool, tennis courts, cable and jacuzzi. The asian pop ~50%.</p>
<p>School is definitely an up and comer within the UC system. Should pass Davis in rankings in a few years. Current Chancellor search underway, whose main job will be to raise $$.</p>
<p>others can post on Ann Arbor......</p>
<p>"That's a good point. Many people are citing SAT averages for UMAA (and UCLA) that are almost 100 points higher than the average student at those universities. Those are indeed "admitted averages".....the "enrolled averages" are quite a bit lower since the 1300+ SAT scores usually go to other schools, letting the the bulk of 1100-1300 scorers stay at the larger public schools."</p>
<p>I believe the princeton review and college board stats are for enrolled students.</p>
<p>see, u don't make any sense, because i goto this school u call "UMAA" and the student quality is as good as any ivy. u further proved that u don't know anything about college admissions by suggesting that PR is a reliable source of information.</p>
<p>jeffl, who are u referring to? i hope you realize i was quoting golubb_u. I was merely suggesting that PR and collegeboard have the enrolled students stats, not admitted students stats. </p>
<p>(btw, i got into umich too)</p>
<p>oh BigRed25, my bad, sorry, i didn't see the quotation marks.</p>
<p>"Many people are citing SAT averages for UMAA (and UCLA) that are almost 100 points higher than the average student at those universities. Those are indeed "admitted averages".....the "enrolled averages" are quite a bit lower since the 1300+ SAT scores usually go to other schools, letting the the bulk of 1100-1300 scorers stay at the larger public schools." - golubb</p>
<p>You've done it again! I must say you enjoy twisting the facts...</p>
<p>Let me say it again. The data posted on Michigan's website are indeed for "enrolled" freshman class (<a href="http://www.admissions.umich.edu/fastfacts.html%5B/url%5D):">www.admissions.umich.edu/fastfacts.html):</a></p>
<p>Mid-50% of the 2004-05 freshman class:
.. high school GPA of 3.6-3.9 (unweighted; 10th/11th grades)
.. 24.3% with 4.0
.. 48.2% with 3.90 or higher
.. SAT I total of 1230-1390</p>
<p>Let me go a step further. The following are extracted from the 2003-04 Common Data Set reported by UCI, Michigan, UCB and UCLA. The UCLA data are from 2004-05 (partial) as the 2003-04 report is not available.</p>
<p>It is clearly stated in the Common Data Set reports that "the information is for all ENROLLED, first-time, first-year (freshman) degree-seeking students".</p>
<p>For UCI (25% - 75%)
.. SAT Verbal .. 519 - 620
.. SAT Math .... 567 - 675</p>
<p>For Michigan (25% - 75%)
.. SAT Verbal .. 580 - 690
.. SAT Math .... 620 - 720</p>
<p>For UCB (25% - 75%)
.. SAT Verbal .. 570 -700
.. SAT Math .... 620 - 740</p>
<p>For UCLA (25% - 75%)
.. SAT Verbal .. 570 - 690
.. SAT Math .... 610 - 720</p>
<p>Thus UCI's mid-50% SAT at 1086-1295 is indeed more than 100 points lower than that of Michigan(1200-1410), UCB(1190-1440) and UCLA(1180-1410).</p>
<p>CASE CLOSED!</p>
<p>Michigan's, UCB's and UCLA's scores are practically identical...which is in line with what most people on this thread agree, that these three universities are in the same class. You can draw your own conclusion on UCI.</p>
<p>It is interesting to note that Michigan and UCLA have similar ACT composite scores too:</p>
<p>Michigan (71% submitted): 26-30
UCLA (28% submitted): 24-30</p>
<p>GoBlue, do not forget the mean ACT scores for UCB and UCI.</p>
<p>Data for ENROLLED students:</p>
<p>UMich: 71% report ACT. Mid 80% ACT range 26-30.
UCB: 28% report ACT. Mid 80% ACT range 24-30.
UCLA: 28% report ACT. Mid 80% ACT range 24-30
UCI: 27% report ACT. Mid 80% ACT range 22-28</p>
<p>All in all, mean SAT/ACT scores at UCB, UCLA, Michigan and UVA are pretty even...ranging from 1285 (UCLA) - 1330 (UVA) for the SATs and from 27 (UCLA and UCB) - 28 (Michigan). All four schools de-emphasize SATs and are more keen on GPAs and curriculum.</p>
<p>Alexandre - where did you get that info for berkeley's ACT range. it is missing whenever i look at it on princeton review and collegeboard.</p>
<p>Hey Stan. You can find a lot of the latest data in this site. </p>
<p><a href="http://nces.ed.gov/IPEDS/cool/index.asp%5B/url%5D">http://nces.ed.gov/IPEDS/cool/index.asp</a></p>
<p>Golubb_U,</p>
<p>I think a better question would be </p>
<p>Which is better:</p>
<p>UC-I vs U of M </p>
<p>answer: University of Maryland CP </p>
<p>(it's just a better school, IMHO), most students in the east have never even heard of UC Irving. Where in California is Irving anyhow, near LA or San Fran?</p>
<p>I have an uncle by that name, we call him Erv.</p>
<p>Maryland v UCIrving?</p>
<p>What's anyone else think?</p>
<p>It's Irvine, not Irving.</p>
<p>Let me ask a question...how many schools are there in the University of Michigan system other than Ann Arbor? I'm just curious.</p>
<p>U of M dearbor, it's a comuter school. That's the only one I beleive.</p>
<p>MSU is not part of U of M system.</p>
<p>(I know the name of the school, lol)</p>
<p>"It's Irvine, not Irving.</p>
<p>Let me ask a question...how many schools are there in the University of Michigan system other than Ann Arbor? I'm just curious"</p>
<p>University of Michigan is actually three schools : Ann-Arbor, Flint and Dearborn. I think Flint and Dearborn are third tier (maybe second, don't know) schools....but anyways, they're also considered "michigan students". </p>
<p>I guess if you average the SAT of all three schools at Michigan, then you're going to be disappointed. However, the stats at the top of the thread are for the best MIchigan school - UMAA. The best michigan school has an acceptance rate of 55% and SAT scores as debated above.</p>
<p>Sorry, forgot about Flint.</p>
<p>How about another comparison:</p>
<p>UCIrvink vs U of M Flint(stone)?</p>