<p>This thread is competing with "Duke vs Berkeley" one for the "longest active" one. Both are very similar.</p>
<p>TourGuide, you hit the nail right on the head. lol.
We try to hire people who are smarter than us but less good looking. That way, they will do all the hard work, and we wll get the credit.</p>
<p><a href="http://despair.com/spin.html%5B/url%5D">http://despair.com/spin.html</a></p>
<p>Here's a guy who managed to overcome a Michigan education and do ok for himself.</p>
<p>
[quote]
...It's great to see hoedown back on this site. She is idealistic, unrealistic, and ascribes value to concepts that should be merely descriptive (e.g., "diversity").
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Just saw this. I'd laugh it off as per usual, but the context was so curious, I think it deserves a serious response.</p>
<p>I have access to data and information that many posters have to guess at. I try to participate in threads where having some real information (i.e. results from work that has been done in the field) can shed some light on the topic. </p>
<p>For example, in this one, where I know what studies of admitted students show--that Northwestern is U-M's top competitor outside of Michigan for for resident admits. Most posters with whom I've interacted regularly understand that if information is embargoed or for internal use only, I cannot give specific numbers (i.e. the exact number of cross-admits U-M has with Northwestern) but I will provide what I can if I think it will be helpful. Sometimes it has to be general, but it is factual.</p>
<p>You may never agree with some of the personal attitudes I hold, and that's fine; you can mock those if that's the kind of message board participation you enjoy. However, I have to speak up here to say I feel your jibes, at least at this juncture, are off-mark. I think you do my postings a disservice to suggest I primarily provide unrealistic or descriptive information. Let's hope I manage to earn a little more credibility with other readers. </p>
<p>Sorry for the topic hijack--I just found the teasing a little odd in this context.</p>
<p>hoedown,
Can you or any others provide a link to the data for Michigan for the class that entered in Fall, 2006? The most recent data that seems to be available is the CDS for the prior year (2005-2006).</p>
<p>Hoedown, I think almost all of the people on your side of the ideological fence are idealistic, unrealistic, and ascribe value to things that should be merely descriptive. You're just the most reasonable, logical, and articulate of your group I've come across here.</p>
<p>I think you have to come to terms with the concept that the whole liberal mindset is focused on what you WISH was the case, rather than what IS the case. Your eagerness to be optimistic and see the best in people clouds your vision. You stand up for terrorists, child molesters, and traitors because you have faith that a kind word and a nurturing environment will change their behavior. You railed against people being institutionalized against their will so now every retail establishment and public library in the country has a problem with the homeless. You have faith that people on the public dole are dying to get off of it. Diplomacy and economic sanctions will take down tyrants. Make love not war. Animals are territorial and usually violent, yet it's somehow natural for humans to thrive on peace. You see distinct gender roles among every species on earth, yet humans are immune to such differences. If women flock to nursing and elementary school teaching, it's Rush Limbaugh's fault.</p>
<p>Tourguide, it appears you may have me mixed up with another poster. These aren't topics I've discussed, nor positions I hold or espouse. </p>
<p>hawkette, try this:</p>
<p>The admissions office also has information on the admitted class, under their "fast facts" page. Hope this helps.</p>
<p>Yeah, right...</p>
<p>Thanks hoedown for providing the "enrolled" stats for Michigan. So now we have the following:</p>
<p>Mid-50% Range (2006)
Michigan: 1210-1440 SAT 27-31 ACT
Northwestern: 1320-1500 29-33 ACT</p>
<p>No more "admitted" stats for one school vs "enrolled" stats for another. :)</p>
<p>Hoedown, if you don't fall in lockstep with your A2 brethren and sistren, I apologize.</p>
<p>It's practically against the law to live in MI and not blindly worship U of M ... but somehow, I manage. My friend has advanced degrees in chemistry; she teaches at a college. She says U of M is NOT a good place for undergrad chem. --- fine for grad, though. Alternatives to pricey NU are Purdue & just about any LAC with a chem program. Truth is, you will need a masters to actually get a job. THAT's where you can worry about the name recognition!</p>
<p>Is that so Kelsmom? I am pretty sure that Michigan is a "state divided". There are many parts of Michigan that think the Maize and Blue should be mixed and turned into Green if you know what I mean! </p>
<p>And I am not sure I agree with your friend. Although I never took Chemistry at Michigan (thank God), I was told by many that Michigan's Chemistry department is actually quite focused on undergrads.</p>
<p>Michigan in a heartbeat for in state tuition.</p>
<p>Oh yes, there are wide swaths of Michigan where people don't care for U-M much. </p>
<p>There is at least one professor in organic chemistry at U-M who is really invested in undergrad education--he's won numerous awards for it (including the Golden Apple award, which is decided by students, and Professor of the Year for the state of MI). He is very engaged in ideas about improving teaching and learning and publishes on this. I know that has had some positive effect on the department. Of course I cannot speak to how influential his work is among his peers here, but his work and the degree to which he credits the Chem department for supporting his efforts make me wonder how up to-date that off-campus professor's assessment was.</p>
<p>
[quote]
It's practically against the law to live in MI and not blindly worship U of M
[/quote]
Well, maybe where you happen to live in Michigan. You couldn't fill a room with just Michigan alums and have that so-called blind worship apply to even that crowd. What a bogus generalization.</p>
<p>Hey Sam Lee,</p>
<p>you also know that Northwestern, along with most of the top privates, take the highest scores in multiple sittings, while Michigan takes the highest in one sitting?</p>
<p>Bet that makes up a large portion of the discrepency</p>
<p>Well, there's no proof that taking multiple sittings would increase the average SAT substantially. It's very easy to fall into the trap to think it would make a substantial difference by thinking of certain extreme cases. Most students improve in both sections upon retake (if they do retake). I encourge you to think of a hypothetical pool of 100 students or more and run a spreadsheet or do a survey of students in your high school, run the average and see what you get. The result may surprise you. </p>
<p>While Michigan may consider the highest sitting during the admission process, I am not convinced that what they show in their brochure/website aren't from the highest in multiple sittings. If you look at their website, they posted SAT range (for the admitted, not enrolled) for verbal and math separately.</p>
<p>Actually, the difference in ACT, which doesn't have this issue, serves as a check and it's more or less consistent with the difference in SAT.</p>
<p>{...hoedown makes note to go dispatch more Michigan brainwashing koolaid to GoBlueAlumMom's neighborhood water supply....}</p>
<p>^^LOL...Good one!:D</p>