<p>The fact is that there is more to college quality than the students--like maybe the quality of the faculty and facilities. Here UM is clearly in the Top 10. That may be why most of the elite firms in the US head to UM for future employees.</p>
<p>Um and NU both stink in basketball.</p>
<p>"Take UVA and Duke for example. Many consider UVA the top public university - however, do you really think that certain employers aren't going to look at applicants from both schools differently (if only slightly)?"</p>
<p>If they had different GPA's, then yes. If not, $100 says it would come down to the interview. Your GPA and the school you went to 'gets you in' for the interviews, though neither UVA nor Duke will have trouble with that. The rest is up to you. Are you really going to call a 3.8 at Duke better than a 3.8 at UVA, or would you want to know more about the two people? This is where we interview to learn which one is better for the job that will be asked of them. </p>
<p>"if an employer had a choice btwn a newly-minted NU grad or a UoM grad based on nothing but knowledge of the make-up of the student body - which grad do you think is going to get the "benefit of the doubt"?"</p>
<p>right on the money. Wait a minute ... what the hell type of company would do this and why in god's name would anybody want to work for a company like this? It would go against everything that's taught to any HR Recruiting exec. For what it's worth, I go to the school that is considered the best for training HR Recruitment execs. Trust me, a situation like this will never happen.<br>
Alexandre, did you ever hear of this type of hiring technique?</p>
<p>"Michigan is not some mega elite, highly selective, hugely prestigious undergraduate institution (at least in comparison to the USNWR Top 20 national universities)"</p>
<p>am i missing something or isn't Michigan like #24 on your revered USNWR list, so do really think that #24 differs that much from the top 20th national university?</p>
<p>i don't think anyone's saying that u of m is comparable to schools like harvard, princeton, etc. but i think that as you go down the list it becomes highly subjective and distinctions between which school is "better" overall become less clear. yes, for example, northwestern is higher-up on the list than michigan, but for a lot departments michigan has higher rankings, so it depends on what you're looking for. </p>
<p>anyway, when i first posted this topic i didn't mean to start a war between which school has higher rankings. i was looking for a more holistic personal response especially in regard to whether northwestern was worth the extra money for an in-state Michigan resident and i pretty much got my answer.</p>
<p>No Gomes, I haven't heard of such a hiring technique. But what do we know? We are mere alums of the country's #1 ILR school! In all fairness, I have only been involved in high-level recruitment at Eaton, Ford, Goldman Sachs and Lehman Brothers and have assited Amgen, Cisco and McKinsey on select recruitment strategy projects, so my experience is very limited and probably worthless. Maybe some top companies do hire fresh college grads and throw $50,000+ at them going primarily on the "benefit of the doubt"!</p>
<p>"Maybe some top companies do hire fresh college grads and throw $50,000+ at them going primarily on the "benefit of the doubt"!"</p>
<p>Too bad I hope for these types of companies whenever I log onto my internship search portal. I'll try to re-word my search terms. </p>
<p>I have received candid calls from a few companies in the middle of class, though. I never applied to these companies, not sure how they got my number, but dang it, I still had to do interviews.</p>
<p>
[quote]
And as for a direct comparison with Northwestern, the U of M is quite large and, based on the objective data provided in the Common Data Set of each school, the average student quality is definitively below that of Northwestern.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>For the record, SAT averages at top publics went up substantially over years prior, closing much of the gap.</p>
<p>Northwestern: 1320-1500
Michigan: 1260-1480</p>
<p>This is with over double the number of undergraduates too (It is, after all, a large public research U) </p>
<p>Perhaps publics decided to take the best scores in all the sittings like privates do?</p>
<p>
[QUOTE]
Again, Michigan is a very good state school and it's probably even great in selected departments.
[/QUOTE]
</p>
<p>Michigan is over 25 in most, if not all, departments it has. That's a lot more than just "selected departments".</p>
<p>I am having a tough time finding a Common Data Set for the class that entered in Fall, 2006. The latest that I can find is for 2005-06 and the SAT score is 1220 at the 25% level, not 1280. Some colleges (UVA) are posting higher numbers on their admissions websites than what is actually on the CDS so I'd like to check the CDS numbers for U of M.</p>
<p>hawkette,
From Yahoo
UM
Test scores SAT verbal scores over 500 95%, SAT math scores over 500 97%, ACT scores over 18 100%, SAT verbal scores over 600 69%, SAT math scores over 600 84%, ACT scores over 24 91%, SAT verbal scores over 700 20%, SAT math scores over 700 40%, ACT scores over 30 35%
NU
Test scores SAT verbal scores over 500 100%, SAT math scores over 500 99%, ACT scores over 18 100%, SAT verbal scores over 600 92%, SAT math scores over 600 94%, ACT scores over 24 96%, SAT verbal scores over 700 53%, SAT math scores over 700 63%, ACT scores over 30 69%</p>
<p>GoBlueAlumMom,</p>
<p>The meet will start at 6pm. Are you already in Columbus?</p>
<p>sam,
can you provide a link?</p>
<p>Hey Sam--
It'll be chilly in Columbus, but steamy in the natatorium. I'm there if you are! When did your flight get in? I can hop in the car and make it down there in time for the first relay. ;)</p>
<p>dashms308 Regarding your earlier post (#103) about my "revered" USNWR rankings, you're talking to the wrong person. I think the rankings are very suspect because of the subjectivity of important factors (Peer Assessment) and the arbitrary weightings given to various criteria, particularly the 25% to Peer Assessment and the 20% to Graduate/Retention ranks. I believe that these weightings unfairly promote the Northeastern schools in general, and the Ivies in particular (see my earlier thread on this exact topic). The big public schools are also a beneficiary of their high Peer Assessment rankings. As for the figures that I quoted, they are all facts-I assign them no weight. I believe that those without an axe to grind will concur with the opinions that I have put forth on Michigan's selectivity, prestige, relative standing to the USNWR Top 20 in general and Northwestern in particular. I agree that # 24 for Michigan is pretty darn good and I also agree that Michigan is a pretty fine school. I just don't think that it is that elite or selective nor do I believe that Michigan's average student deserves the same standing as the average student at the Top 20 USNWR schools, including Northwestern. Can some of the Michigan students compete with the students at the top schools? Absolutely. Please don't distort my comments. But he numbers are what the numbers are. On average, Michigan students are a notch below their peers at Northwestern.</p>
<p>As for the comments made by some that Michigan is elite because so many top employers recruit there, I guess that depends on how you define top employers. Michigan is a big school with a lot of alumni in the Northeast and so probably has a decent profile with Wall Street and the consulting firms that are so often presented here as proof that a school has true recruiting bona fides. I don't know, but I suspect that the geographic advantage and stong alumni network give Michigan a high profile in the Northeast that is not sustained elsewhere. For example, do the top venture firms in the Silicon Valley recruit there? How about the top energy related firms located in the Southwest? Do the top healthcare firms located in Tennessee recruit there? Again, I'm not intending to put Michigan down, but there is so little balance in the comments on CC about Michigan's place in the world. It is a very good state school, but it is not the best thing since sliced bread as some CCers would have us believe.</p>
<p>Is something going on between Sam and G<em>B</em>A<em>M</em>? They can't merely be talking about some lousy swim meet can they? Tsk, tsk, tsk!!!</p>
<p>Among the large schools in the US it is among the best 2 or 3 in the US. That's not sliced bread. The President of Stanford called it one of the best universities in the US when criticizing the US News rankings. I'd trust his opinion over yours.</p>
<p>Hawkette, not none of us has said that Michigan is better than NU or that it is the "best thing since sliced bread" (I prefer baguettes myself, but I digress!). Most of us in this thread have said the two schools are roughly equal in terms of academic excellence. It is you who is saying that Michigan is inferior to Northwestern. I personally find your comments about the average Michigan student being "undeserving of the same standing" as a Northwestern student somewhat...well, I just hope you do not approach the people you meet in everyday life in such a way. I tend to make it a point to know the person before passing judgement on their "standing and rightful place".</p>
<p>Haha...Alexandre. Well, perhaps steamy wasn't the best choice of words...but, are you implying something, um, inappropriate? ;) Just seeing how loyal he is to his school. Although, I don't know...Sam made that dang swim meet sound like something not to be missed. Undoubtedly, as exciting as that event will be, Columbus is no place for a Wolverine. :eek:</p>
<p>barrons,</p>
<p>The letter is dated 1996. I will concede that he knows more than me about various schools, but his views were clearly not shared by everyone as USNWR ranked Michigan 24th that year, same as currently. </p>
<p>Your response addressed none of the facts presented and came across to this reader as condescending. Is this the way that Michigan people argue-try to put down or silence anyone who dare question mighty Michigan?</p>
<p>Last time I checked, Barrons was not a Wolverine. Not all who respect Michigan are connected to the university. </p>
<p>And Gerhard Capser's views are more likely to be shared by the majority of the academic world, as the Peer Assessment Score would suggest. The man was educated entirely at Yale, he was a prominent faculty member at Chicago, Columbia and Berkeley and he was Stanford's president for 10 years. No, he was never affiliated to Michigan in any way. The fact that the overall USNWR doesn't agree with him doesn't mean that the majority of academe doesn't.</p>
<p>alex,</p>
<p>I am not meaning to be disrespectful so please let me apologize if that is the way it came out. Perhaps it was a poor word choice. I only meant to point out the numbers on the USNWR survey relative to Northwestern and Michigan. Maybe we interpret them differently but I see a clear difference in the numbers. I don't conclude that the student bodies of Michigan and Northwestern are roughly the same. Certainly the top quarter of Michigan is strong, but the numbers (and my comments) talk about the whole school. I am sorry if you feel that pointing that out is impolite. I'm not making a qualitative statement about Michigan or Northwestern-I'm only saying that, based on the numbers, the average Northwestern student is stronger.</p>