Michigan v. Notre Dame HELP PLEASE!!!!

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
81

<p>For an unbiased look at elite grad school placement
(I don't think any of you will be happy about it):</p>

<p><a href="http://www.wsjclassroom.com/college/feederschools.htm%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.wsjclassroom.com/college/feederschools.htm&lt;/a>
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=20239&page=4%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=20239&page=4&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>1)Harvard</p>

<p>6)Duke</p>

<p>7)Dartmouth</p>

<p>30)UMICH</p>

<p>35)Notre Dame</p>

<p>It seems as if people are equating undergrad with Grad schools.
Peer assesment scores track closely with Grad school reputations and less so with undergrad reputations. To the degree that grad school programs interact with undergrad, the undergrad is to an unknown degree enhanced.</p>

<p>UMICH: awesome Grad school!
Umich undergrad is another issue.</p>

<p>The trick is to get into the grad school. If you are Ivy undergrad, your chances are substaintially better than otherwise. This is Umich pronouncing its own judgement on undergrad programs.</p>

<p>My hope is UMich Med.</p>

<p>I was accepted to UMich honors, and as I understand it, acceptance is completely based on scores, </p>

<p>SAT + gradpoint, no?</p>

<p>MGOBLUE!</p>

<p>By the way, Ann Arbor is probably the most awesome college town in the world! It's amazing!</p>

82

<p>FountainSiren, being 30th is amazing. Thanks for providing the link. I was actually looking for that link to support my argument that Michigan is very successful at placing students in top graduate programs. Imagine if they also had Michigan Medical and Michigan MBA included in the study. Michigan would be among the top 15. And they do not even include schools of Enginering. But even then, there isn't much of a difference between #20 and #40. I would not look at the actual rank, but rather, at the % of students who are going to the top 15 graduate schools in question. I see very little different between 4% and 2%. </p>

<p>BTW, Harvard's number's are artificially bolstered because they have huge MBA, Medical and Law programs, all three of those programs were used in the study and like most graduate programs, Harvard favors its own.</p>

83

<p>Don't forget, which the article even mentions, that Michigan only does so well because they admitted over five dozen of their own students to their own law school...</p>

84

<p>Torn, all schools with a graduate program in that list have an advantage. It is not fair to single out Michigan. </p>

<p>Penn has Wharton and its Medical school included in the study...and those two programs accept about 100 Penn undergrads annually. Harvard's Law, Medical and Business programs are all part of the study, and they accept 200 Harvard undergrads. Northwestern's Business school is in the study and they take 50+ of their own undergrads annually. The list goes on. Harvard's advantage is compunded by the fact that all three of its professional schools are included in the survey.</p>

85

<p>I agree with both of you.</p>

<p>What's really amazing about this survey is how the LAC's really kick it!</p>

86

<p>Alexandre said:
BTW, Harvard's number's are artificially bolstered because they have huge MBA, Medical and Law programs, all three of those programs were used in the study and like most graduate programs, Harvard favors its own.</p>

<p>Torn said:
Don't forget, which the article even mentions, that Michigan only does so well because they admitted over five dozen of their own students to their own law school...</p>

<p>Alexandre said:
*Torn, all schools with a graduate program in that list have an advantage. It is not fair to single out Michigan. *</p>

<p>But it's fair to single out Harvard? I sense a contradiction :>.</p>

87

<p>Hah, you're out of my league with a 728 word count reply, so I'll just highlight a few finer areas.</p>

<p>I think the main problem is that you fail to realize how great an institution Michigan acutally is.</p>

<p>Not only is that untrue, but that is aside from our argument that UM is totally a superior school than ND.</p>

<p>I do not see how it favors large state universities when 16 of his top 20 are private.</p>

<p>It's just simple logic. His rankings boost state university positions. Perhaps if he didn't, 20/20 would be private. Maybe not. Either way, the fact is he inflates the state universities' rankings. He may have a good argument, but that's not what I'm addressing here, nor do I wish to.</p>

<p>Aside from the fact that US presidents' scores are private information and not confirmed, US presidents aren't known for being brilliant thinkers. They are politicians. I don't mean to paint a bad picture here -- the thinking patterns of a politician are unique. Gates and Jobs both had 1600's, I believe, although unconfirmed. I won't even go into the SAT-IQ scary similarities.</p>

<p>But to say that a student body with 1400- verage on the SAT is going to be more successfull or are more capable than a student body with 1300+ average on the SAT is nonesensical.</p>

<p>Something to chew on: I believe a 1300 puts you in the top 10% range. I know a 28 on the ACT does. If you look at the percentage of students that score higher than that, they <em>drastically</em> grow less and less. I would agree with you if the SAT difference was 1000 and 1100, but it's a different ballgame when you're in the top 10%, where there are gaping differences. A 27.5 - 35 on the ACT comprises the top 10%, approximately. Every point above 27 actually means a lot. What I wouldn't give for an ACT score more than 2 points higher! A difference of over 2 points is common when you compare ivy leagues with the rest. I hope this makes sense to you -- if not I can elaborate. The following website gives some hard facts.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.act.org/news/data/04/pdf/t4.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.act.org/news/data/04/pdf/t4.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>And as a devout Catholic myself, I can tell you when you stick a bunch of us together...we do indeed form a blindfold and resist learning in most ways that aren't academic. That is why I declined Georgetown and didn't even bother with Notre Dame. Learning at the highest level with such a group is limited in several ways.</p>

<p>And I can tell you that after 12 years of going through a catholic school system, that's quite inaccurate, based on my experiences. If you want to argue this with examples and support, etc. then I'll be willing. I don't see religion as a blindfold. We're not living in the medieval ages anymore.</p>

<p>If you think Michigan is predominantly "liberal", think again.</p>

<p>I think you are largely mistaken here. Michigan not only is liberal, but an unproportionately large number of universities in the US are also liberal. I will list a couple websites that will give you poll statistics and also a clip about UM. UM is right up there with Berkeley.</p>

<p>This tells about the college scene in general:
<a href="http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3514.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.intellectualconservative.com/article3514.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>This explains some of UM's liberal past:
<a href="http://www.michiganreview.com/article.php?id=1242%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.michiganreview.com/article.php?id=1242&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>I thought it was known fact that UM was one of the most liberal campuses in the US. Perhaps I should start a new post and receive replies on that.</p>

88

<p>What's wrong with liberalism? I find it disgusting that the right has turned it into a dirty word. I equate the religious right with terrorists. Also, consider your sources. Michigan review and something called "intellectual conservative label anything not fascist right wing as "liberal." I actually ATTEND Michigan, and it while the institution is liberal as are the students, you will see that a fair amount of students are conservative. The college republicans are very active. I wouldn't trust any report that defines the political affiliation of a school.</p>

89

<p>Terminator, have one of your programs used in the survey (as is the case with 10 or so universities, is not such an advantage. But have two (like Yale, Stanford and Penn) gives a university a slight advantage. Having all thre of your programs in the survey (like Harvard) is an unfair advantage. Michigan has top 7 or 8 Law, Medical and Business schools. They can easily have had the three programs in the survey and that would have given Michigan an unfair advantage. I do believe that Michigan has a slight advantage because its law school is included in the survey. But let us face it, 60 students (the number of Michigan students admitted into its Law school annually) out of 6,000 graduating seniors isn't going to scew the stats all that much. In the case of Harvard, 200 of their 1,600 graduating seniors enrolled into either their Medical, Law or Business schools. If Michigan medical and Michigan Business were included in the study, Michigan would have added another 80 or so students to the pot! Again, not a huge difference when consdidering the size of Michigan, but still significant. As you can see, it does give a school an unfair advantage.</p>

90

<p>"But it's fair to single out Harvard? I sense a contradiction"</p>

<p>That's because Harvard is the only one with all three departments represented (and they are large departments), thus giving it an unfair advantage...not that Harvard needs it. Columbia and Chicage both have two departments represented in the survey; while Stanford and Northwestern have none.</p>

<p>In any case, this is only good for intellectual discussion...as someone pointed out that "it was only one year of data". If they are serious about this, they should at least do a five-year average, and survey a few more schools in each category.</p>

<p>Btw, did anyone notice that this has nothing to do with graduate programs. Law, medicine and MBA are all professional degrees!</p>

91

<p>Terminator, I went to Catholic schools for 12 years too. I attended 4 different Catholic schools, including Georgetown Prep in the DC area. I studied the bible in Latin. But it is a fact that I learned very little from my Catholic classmates. I made valuable friendships with them and I learned a lot in terms of academics, but it was with non-Catholic that I learned the most because we continuously debated openly and learned to see different points of view. I can now tell you that I would never send my kids to a Catholic school unless the majority of its students were non-Catholic. The reason we do not live in the "Middle Ages" is precisely because we did away with allowing Religion to interfere with public life. Let Religion creep back into the world, and you will see a gradual return to the darker times. In short, Religion should be confined to places of worship and to the individual's personal chambers. </p>

<p>Secondly, Michigan is not liberal...except to members of the KKK or the neo-Nazi party. Like all good universities, Michigan is tolerant and diverse and it encourages all forms of expression and thought, but it is not liberal. And a university that does not encourage and embrace the principles of free thinking and expression cannot consider itself worthy of being good. All good universities are tolerant and open. So no, Michigan is not one of hte most liberal campuses in the US. It is about as "liberal" as 100% of the nation's top 15-20 universities.</p>

<p>By the way, I am not liberal (I support the death penalty, never did any drugs, I never drink alcohol and am personally very opposed to abortion although I believe in the individual's right to chose) and I personally knew very few truly liberal people at Michigan. The vast majority of people at the University are in the political and social center, with probably a few more leaning to the left than to the right. Very few extremes exist at Michigan. </p>

<p>I will stand by my belief that SAT/ACT scores mean very little. I got a 1540 on my SAT (in 1992, when the mean at Harvard was 1350 and fewer than 15 people in the entire World scored a perfect 1600) and I can tell you, I am not special. I just prepared for the test. Like I said, there is very little, if any, difference between a student body that averages 1310 on the SAT and a student body that averages 1380 on the SAT. I find class rank and GPA to be far more telling. There is obviously a big difference between a 27.5 and 35 on the ACT, but not so much of a difference between 28 and 32. If there was, Michigan undergrads would not be as successful as Notre Dame grads...and yet, there are.</p>

<p>At the end of the day, non of this changes my initial statement that Michigan, as a university, is superior to Notre Dame. It is not necessarily a better place to learn (that cannot be measured and depends on the individual and their fit with the university and its environment), but it is superior.</p>

92

<p>Alex I totall agree with you, but you are portraying liberalism as a bad thing, when actually it is a beautiful thing. Is Michigan 100% politically left? No. Is it liberal? Yes. Political alliances and beliefs are only a small facet of liberalism. Liberalism is more about progressivism, change, and the power to advance society. The right wing fascist political commentators and politicians (bush administration, sean hannity, anne coulter, etc) keep insisting that liberal means weak and communist, and unfortunately the majority of the democratic party responds to this. Kerry never labelled himself as a liberal, and Howard Dean, my favorite said after he lost that because of the politics, a candidate could not label himself or herself as a liberal and still win, and were he elected, he would make liberalism acceptable again. I personally am a fiscally conservative liberal. I support gay marriage, right to choose, basically all social programming that are brilliant president has cut, but at the same time I believe in fiscal responsibility, which was once a cornerstone of the republican party, but is now being espoused by democrats. Anyway, the religious right are as bad if not worse than terrorists</p>

93

<p>^^^Pinko commie ;)</p>

94

<p>I believe these rankings are skewed against the large public universities because a smaller percent of their undergraduates seek admission to the "elite" programs in question. Rather than class size, the denominator should be the the number of undergraduates applying to these particular graduate programs, resulting in a true "yield".</p>

<p>Still, it is impressive that Michigan beats out supposed pre-professional private institutions such as Emory, Tufts, Wash U, etc.</p>

95

<p>I find it funny how Alexandre only accepts the category in USNWR that supports Michigan over ND. Why refuse to look at Alumni Giving Rate (ND #2) which shows how much students enjoyed their lives at a university. You insist on focusing (subjectively) on the academic side of both universities when (attempting) to argue the UM is "superior", and refuse to acknowledge the superior social life at ND.</p>

<p>Oh, and I suppose all ND people have to chant is "Scoreboard. Scoreboard."</p>

<p>ND- #18
UM- #22
(In the most referred to and regarded college ranking system)</p>

96

<p>nirvana:</p>

<p>What's wrong with liberalism?</p>

<p>I did not say there was something wrong with liberalism. I said that Michigan tilts to the liberal side quite a bit, in response to Alexandre's comment which follows:</p>

<p>Many Michigan students are conservative...and just as many are liberal.</p>

<p>I brought it up because I felt she was inaccurately portraying UM as completely balanced on the political scale, to promote her idea that UM is so extremely diverse. </p>

<p>I hope that clears it up a little bit for you.</p>

<p>PS: Thanks you nirvana for, as a student, claiming that UM is liberal. You are a current student, and I assume Alexandre is not, so I believe your claim holds more credibility.</p>

97

<p>project:</p>

<p>I find it funny how Alexandre only accepts the category in USNWR that supports Michigan over ND.</p>

<p>I would find it funny, however I never bought the magazine or found a copied one online. That is the reason I asked Alexandre to cite his/her sources -- I should have specified that I wanted to see the actual statistics, because I feel it unfair to manipulate sources that only one party has access to. However, I didn't mention that to Alexandre, but I wanted to express my concern over this.</p>

98

<p>GoBlue:</p>

<p>Alexandre should have directly said that Harvard was more deceiving than the other schools with 1, 2, or 0 top 15 graduate programs because it has 3. Because he/she did not point this out, his/her post came off as using a double standard. That, of course, wouldn't surprise me :>.</p>

<p>You are right that the statistics could be more accurate.</p>

99

<p>*In short, Religion should be confined to places of worship and to the individual's personal chambers. *</p>

<p>I hope that the people reading this recognize that your personal experiences have really brought about an extreme reaction here. For me, the entire point of religion is for there to be a moral guideline which one abides by during all times of one's life. I think many people can attest to that. This liberal statement (by what I consider "liberal") made by you supports my statement even more :>. To say that Catholics as a group are less worldly than others is extremely opinionated, kind of like the rankings you hold so dear to heart. </p>

<p>* with probably a few more leaning to the left than to the right.*</p>

<p>You said previously that there are an equal number of liberals and conservatives, but now you surrender some ground?</p>

<p>A difference of 100 points, not the 70 that you bring up, is actually significant in the top 10%. That's the difference that separates the very top universities from the rest. That's why few schools have ACT averages of over 30, while there are countless schools with ACT averages in the top 20's. That's why 10k people scored 33 on the ACT, while 10k scored either 34, 35, or 36. </p>

<p>*
I will stand by my belief that SAT/ACT scores mean very little* </p>

<p>Universities always use this as one of the top 3 most important measures of student qualifications. </p>

<p>You can support your statement that UM is superior to ND subjectively, but facts tell a different story. In the end, "superior" is an incorrect term to use. That term should only be used it it is clear and little opposing it. In this case, there is even enough evidence to justifiably claim that ND is superior to UM. Therefore, I don't think it's proper to use that term.</p>

100

<p>I disagree. I'd say the top 75% of Michigan students are almost exactly equal to ND's overall class.</p>

<p>The difference? Size...
Both are great Universities, but niether are Harvard/Yale quality. Ergo, niether are getting apps from every top student in the country. The top students in the midwest do, however, almost always apply to both, and when accepted to both the decisions are almost 50/50, but the fact remains that Michigan's class sizes are 4x as large as ND's. Therefore, the bottom of the class is a little less selective when it comes to average SATs ect. Nothing more, nothing less. </p>

<p>If you chopped off Michigan's top 25% averages (IE the total class size of ND), I have no doubt they would be higher than ND's total average.</p>

<p>I chose Mich over ND.</p>