<p>I believe UM thought that since it was now on the common app. that its yield rate would be substantially lower. Although it was lower, I think the school was still surprised at how many accepted.</p>
<p>A few things of note for future applicants:</p>
<p>1) while GPA is considered Very important, standardized test scores are only considered “important”. This is confirmed when observing the ranges of both stats and from results of those deferred in recent years</p>
<p>2) Umich does not consider class rank at all as is evidenced by no information at all in the CDS; confirms earlier suspicions of this over the years…</p>
<p>3) the key stat not revealed which would be extremely helpful would be the # of students deferred who are ultimately waitlisted (and therefore have a very slim chance of being accepted: 42/14,000)…too much to ask for I guess…</p>
<p>Net, net…still penalizes kids with high ranks but huge grade deflation in their schools, especially out of state…With very little regard for high standardized test scores…</p>
<p>Only 24% with GPA’s 3.5-3.74…in many schools, that is top 5-10% of the class while in others it could be 50%…hmmmmmm</p>
<p>^^ Perhaps because so many schools have discontinued reporting rank. </p>
<p>Very interesting… as expected the increase in applicants ticked the standardized scores up every so slightly since they didn’t budge off their acceptance number. If they can get the yield characteristics down they’ll be good to go for a few more years without making many adjustments so I totally agree with you Alexandre.</p>
<p>I don’t think how they admit penalizes kids. There is something suspect about kids with high standardized test scores and low GPA or vice-versa. Is it the high school, is it the kid. They know the Michigan high schools and can understand why an inbalance might occur, but probably don’t “know” the out of state high schools as well. They get in, but it’s generally because of the holistic aspects of the application.</p>
<p>It’s rule of thumb in Michigan high schools that 3.7 - 3.8 unweighted and an ACT of 27-28 is the threshold to apply to Michigan and 3.5 with an ACT of 25 as a threshold for Michigan State. I don’t know whether you can reach/match/safety because admissions are holistic, but think of it as a reasonable threshold. It’s been that way for 5 years or so at least.</p>
<p>^^momofthreeboys: by imbalance, I’m not referring to low GPA’s and high SAt/ACt…I’m referring to 3.6-3.7 with top 5-10% ranks with all honors and Ap’s OOS consistently deferred, waitlisted and ultimately not admitted…it’s all over these boards…</p>
<p>IMO ,which doesn’t count for much, if a school ranks kids and has a bit of grade deflation, those ranks cannot be ignored as they are…that’s where UMich shortchanges of they don’t assess the HS’s rigor…</p>
<p>We know kids in other parts of this state (NJ) that are literally down in the 30% , with lower SAt/ACT who have been admitted because their schools have huge grade inflation…</p>
<p>There are those who will say, well, you haven’t seen their essays…With that much of a discrepancy, honestly, I don’t really care what their essays look like…demographic profiles are very, very similar…</p>
<p>But then again…just my opinion…</p>
<p>By the time I get to help these kids with admissions, it’s usually too late to change their course selections to bump up their UW GPA’s (I.e. drop down in levels to get higher grades)…</p>
<p>Surprising to see that some people are saying that Michigan admissions are holistic. On the other hand if they were truly numbers driven, I probably would not have gotten in (3.5 GPA, 2150 SAT, OOS).</p>
<p>hard to believe Michigan would not account for H.S.s that have clear grade deflation by incorporating class rank into the decision, and its closely allied cousin, class rigor. Yet that seems to be happening.</p>
<p>At our H.S. w/tough grading standards and the best students taking 6-9 APS and the rest honors, a 3.6 UW GPA clearly places them in the Top 10% of the class. Dropping 2-3 APS, or taking just a couple easier classes that would yield grades of 96-99 could pop the UW GPA to 3.7-3.8 very easily, but might result in dipping slightly below the Top 10% class rank(which accounts for class rigor and APs by giving a little extra weight to those courses’ grades). So one can easily game the system for a higher GPA while sacrificing only a couple AP courses and apparently make the cut off some schools have, i.e., schools that weight GPA heavily in the acceptance decision. Not accounting for course rigor and grade deflation would amount to accepting higher UW GPA kids into the university, but actually “dumbing down” the university status itself by excluding students that have accepted the challenge of taking the hardest courses and risking the UW GPA rather than gaming the system.</p>
<p>Bottom line, if you truly want a holistic review, you probably need to apply to colleges that look first at class rigor and course composition (number of APs,honors, college equivalent or college credit courses and class rank) . That is going to be most of your elite LACs, that have small populations and plenty of time for in-depth application review. I bet some of the applications at Michigan were only barely glanced at during the EA process.</p>
<p>you might even have some students at very selective prep schools that get 3.4UW GPAs and rank close to or even in the Top 10% of their class, score over 2250 on their SATs and get deferred. Conversely at some of the easier public schools you may have a graduating class w/10 Valedictorians all w/4.0 UW GPAs, and an entire second tier of kids (maybe 20% or more ) getting 3.7 or above UW GPAs that are getting admitted even though their SAT scores maybe only 1950-2000. I know all the qualifiers about ECs, essays, a lukewarm LOR, clear expression interest in the school and likelihood of enrolling vs. using it as a “safety”, but c’mon fair is fair. Class rank and course rigor should be a paramount and overriding consideration. You really do not want to penalize someone for challenging himself and taking the toughest schedule possible.</p>
<p>pleaseadvise, that is precisely what Michigan does. It looks at all the facts, including the overall quality of the school and the strength of its curriculum, grade deflation, ECs etc… I know students with 3.3 GPAs at a school in Dubai who habitually get into Michigan. Then again, 3.3 students from that school also usuall get into Brown and Cornell. Michigan knows which schools are compatitive and which are not and makes decisions accordingly.</p>
<p>Brown also interviews nearly every applicant. Cornell interviews applicants in Hotel Admin and Architecture, and although no formal interview process exists for the rest of the schools, Cornell’s Alumni Ambassador Network of 9,000 individuals meets w/very many applicants to Cornell on an informal basis nationwide in one-on-one “information sessions”, that are indeed written up and submitted to the AdCom. So there is holistic and then there is really holistic I suppose.</p>
<p>BTW, that is not atypical, many private schools tend to interview prospective students, and many public universities do not. It’s not a knock on the publics who may be resource (money)constrained, personnel constrained, or overwhelmed by a huge number of applications. I think UCLA is up to close to 75,000. I’m sure all colleges would love to meet w/every applicant and that is not realistic. Still, if your particular applicant has something to offer in person and in-depth that may not translate well on paper, or who really shines in that type of environment—it probably isn’t going to hurt, and might well offer a more holistic presentation of oneself.</p>
<p>Alexandre: while umich may look at schools in Dubai with such scrutiny, I highly doubt based in my experience that they scrutinize OOS public high schools the same way…if they did, results above would be unheard of…alot of these top kids have been accepted ultimately to top 25 schools like Cornell, Vanderbilt and Wash U given those schools scrutiny of curriculum and rigor at the particular high schools in question…</p>
<p>It all depends on who the state rep is for your particular state as to whether that scrutiny occurs…</p>
<p>pleaseadvise, I was the chair of the CAAAN committee in the UAE. As such, I coordinated all Cornell interviews and conducted several myself. I can assure you that interviews were informal and were conducted alumni volunteers that had no impact on the admissions decision. For the record, Chicago, Duke, Northwestern, Rice and Stanford do not conduct interviews. Interviews mean nothing.</p>
<p>Rodney, Michigan admissions is not random. Like all elite universities, Michigan has its own admissions standards and preferences. Thousands of excellent students are rejected annually.</p>
<p>my son has an alumni interview w/U of Chicago later this month. They are indeed regarded as optional and whether it means anything is moot. But he does have an interview.</p>
<p>Wesleyan, UPenn, USC and many others do provide interviews. Brown, Penn, and Cornell contact students directly. I do not know of any school that actually requires an interview. They are variously listed as optional, may or may not be termed an interview, often disavowed as not part of the admissions process, but in some cases also referred to as highly encouraged (e.g. Wesleyan). Even in the cases where they are not termed interviews, notes are taken and referred to the Admission Committee. I’m not saying it makes a difference or it doesn’t. Maybe the schools are simply collecting information as to how the student community views them, what are the most FAQs or mis-perceptions about the school etc. in order to better help the school represent itself at-large. But I bet anecdotally you will find many applicants who were deferred or who applied RD that felt the interview was a swing factor in their admission. They may be right or wrong about its impact, but if it keeps the student working harder through first semester, focuses him or her on the continuing process of being involved post deferral, or actually refines their thinking about where they might attend or which college to cross of their list–it is beneficial IMO. My guess is that it does matter in some cases and has a subjective impact for a swing candidate even if it is not an objective criterion.</p>
<p>P.S. why collect an alumni interview if it has no impact? Why are CAAAN interviewers asked to submit a 250 word review of the session after meeting w/ the applicant, including any new information re: the applicant, perhaps his depth of knowledge about Cornell and its programs, the degree of passion for his intended course of study?</p>
<p>Alexandre: when did I ever post that UMIch admissions was random? All I am saying is that some students at grade deflated high schools are at a disadvantage because UMich does not consider them in the context of their high school (using class rank or otherwise)…</p>
<p>And I would venture a guess to say this is most prevalent in states where they get oodles of applicants…</p>