<p>kk,
I work for a well-known tech company which hires many top graduates of Northwestern and Michigan, and I evaluate and interview job/intern applicants all the time. These two schools are so strong in my area (computer science, engineering) that it's rare an applicant from one school is favored over the other without giving both of them a fair consideration. The school name and GPA isn't everything. We try to gauge their intelligence, drive, interpersonal skills, communication skills, curiosity, creativity, etc, etc, etc, and those are the often the qualities that land you a job. That said, however, "better" schools do have a small advantage. In a strong applicant pool, Stanford, MIT, Cornell graduates stand a better chance. NW graduates seem to do better than Michigan relative to their school sizes. But the difference is not much. Between these two schools, your individual performance and character (and connections!) are more important than the school name. My daughter goes to UMich, BTW. So I may be biased. You be the judge. I personally would prefer NW over UMich because it's less crowded, less bureaucratic, has a stronger student body to interact with, but not because it would give you a leg up in career opportunities.</p>
<p>K&S, the average student at NU may be a better student, but more students at NU are given As and Bs than at Michigan. If I recall, the average GPA at NU is close to 3.5, compared to 3.1-3.2 at Michigan. Both schools have exceedingly demanding faculties that will not compromise on grading. Generally speaking, and this is of course not 100% accurate, but grading is pretty standard accross universities. Students with equal GPAs from top universities will be regarded as equals, all other things being equal.</p>
<p>KK, the 16 universities you mentioned above, along with a couple others (Brown, Johns Hopkins, Georgetown, Amherst, Williams, Swarthmore) are pretty even when it comes to employers. Sure Harvard and Yale have an edge over most other universities, but overall, the top 20 or 25 universities are highly regarded and will attract the vast majority of exclusive firms and will send a significant portion of their students into top graduate programs.</p>
<p>"We try to gauge their intelligence, drive, interpersonal skills, communication skills, curiosity, creativity, etc, etc, etc, and those are the often the qualities that land you a job."</p>
<p>Exactly...the name of the college might give a person an advantage in getting an interview (and in this case, Mich and NU would be equally likely to do so), but once the person is sitting in front of you answering questions, you're MUCH more concerned with how well he/she is going to get along with other workers, and if he/she will make customers/clients trust him/her. Once they are in front of you, the difference between Michigan and NU is about as important as if they part their hair on the right or left.</p>
<p>sorry, my computer farted out on me, this was my full answer from before:</p>
<p>" Ok then,</p>
<p>Michigan = Harvard= Yale= Rice= Stanford= Cornell= Penn= Princeton=Northwestern, Chicago= Duke= MIT= Caltech= Berkeley= Dartmouth= Columbia... etc...."</p>
<p>when it comes to getting a job, this sounds about right. I'm not saying the schools are just as prestigious as one another, you might have read it wrong. But, when it comes to evaluating candidates, a 3.8 applicant from Duke isn't going to be looked on as "better" than a 3.8 from Rice. </p>
<p>"“In the ultra rare case that two applicants are exactly equal, the college won't have any part in the decision.”</p>
<p>-Ridiculous… "</p>
<p>sounds ridiculous, but it's also true. Do you really believe that employers will spend thousands of dollars and days upon days interviewing people only to reach a deadlock and say "well, this guy went to NU and this guy went to Mich - lets base our decision on that, nevermind the interviews." Lets be real here. </p>
<p>" "You have to understand, the school you go to plays only a small detail in the whole application process.”</p>
<p>-This is clearly something that would vary from place to place, yet you speak so vehemently…… How is that so???"</p>
<p>I am speaking mostly in context of this thread. My answer would vary if it was Northwestern vs. a random 4th tier school that is trying it best to even stay accredited. But lets be honest, that is far from the case here. Why do I speak so vehemently? Because I have more knowledge on the topic than you do. But, what's a degree in the subject matter worth in a discussion like this? I even said that you need to have a high GPA from a solid school - I wasn't referring to BJU as 'solid'. Now, there are only a handful of places that only recruit at the elite colleges - these are the prestigious iBanks and consulting firms, though to be fair they'll both be on the NU and Mich campus. Here, it will matter if you went to an Ivy vs. a random state school, though the vast majority of students don't go into industries like Banking. Which student will get the job at a place like the Banks? Usually, it'll be the one with the best interview (assuming that GPA and stuff are up to par). Is this an unfair assumption? Possibly, but there's a nice Harvard Business School case study on Deloitte that tends to back this up. </p>
<p>"I guess, then, I would ask where firms are recruiting. Are firms recruiting elite schools with the same strength as those that are not as elite? That is, do firms recruit as actively from random state college branches as they do at say, Dartmouth? It would seem to me that the only way to give any credit to what you are asserting (beyond your own belief, of course) is to have this kind of question answered."
Are you implying that if a company doesn't recruit on one college campus that a student there will never get a job at that company? Maybe, though I'm not talking about this. But, it's probably fair to say that NU and Mich are roughly equal when it comes to recruitment by the big name companies. </p>
<p>"Are firms recruiting elite schools with the same strength as those that are not as elite?"
Most do. Again, only a few select industries only hire on ivy campuses.</p>
<p>"Because I have more knowledge on the topic than you do."</p>
<p>-You know it's funny..... You know nothing about me and yet you are some how able to discern that you have more "knowledge on the topic" than I do. Just how in the world did you gather this? For the record, I don't care what college you attend, my OPINION is just as valid as yours, seeing how you provide NO evidence for anything you are stating. But then again, your ILR degree won't matter much when you're up against that Michigan grad for the same job, now will it? :)</p>
<p>"You know it's funny..... You know nothing about me and yet you are some how able to discern that you have more "knowledge on the topic" than I do. Just how in the world did you gather this?"</p>
<p>I know you're not an ILR student. But, this doesn't matter. I don't care what you know, i'm here to tell people what I know. I study matter like this as my major and as a possible career choice. Not only that, both both of my parents are involved in recruitment for two separate Fortune 500 companies. I have talked to them many times about the topic since it is something that I'm interested in. Also, my mom teaches some random class called "organizational development" at a top-50 university that has something to do with how to hire people that fit well into a company. It's just a little tidbit of knowledge, and I was even responsible for picking out the case studies that are used in that class (which I took from a class at Cornell called HR260 - human resource management). </p>
<p>"For the record, I don't care what college you attend, my OPINION is just as valid as yours, seeing how you provide NO evidence for anything you are stating."</p>
<p>Say what you wish, and you're right in the fact that I can't prove everything I'm saying. In the court of law, it wouldn't be taken as pure evidence. However, I'm not saying these things to hurt you or anything, I'm saying them because it's what I've learned in my experience with the subject matter. I've been on these boards a long time and I probably will be as long as there is time to waste. It's not to my advantage to try and lie about something to prove a point or to prove you wrong. KK, I have nothing against you at all (we've had some lovely debates before), but what I'm trying to inform people about what I've learned through experience in the field that we're discussing now. There aren't many people on these boards with much information about the recruitment world, and I am making it an issue to say what I've learned about it through both college and through living with 2 people that are heavily involved in the recruitment process for 2 huge companies. There are many assumptions that are passed around these boards, and I try my best not to make any random assumptions. How do you want me to prove what I'm saying is true? Do you want my resume? I can try to dig up the Harvard cases I've studied, though I don't think you'll have access to them as they are copy written material. How about lecture notes? I can try to dig those up and post those here as well. Do you want the call numbers/authors/titles of the numerous HR books I have? </p>
<p>Now, to say you don't care what college I attend is to ignore a rather important fact. You will agree that somebody majoring in chemistry will know a bit more about DNA analysis than the average poster on these boards, right? And that a history major will probably know more about the Louisiana territory than random poster XXX, right? Why is this situation any different? I'm not trying to fake my knowledge about the issue, i'm trying to share what I've learned in my major that focuses heavily on the workplace and strategic hiring. </p>
<p>You don't have to believe what I say, that choice is up to you. I'll just tell you what I've learned and how I've learned it and I'll let you make your own decision if you want to believe it or not. </p>
<p>"But then again, your ILR degree won't matter much when you're up against that Michigan grad for the same job, now will it?"</p>
<p>that's correct. The only edge that would come would be if an employer wanted specifically an ILR grad or had some type of preference with the school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
..i'm only saying this b/c umich is extremely easy to get in if you r instate which in no way even puts you in the application league for nu.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Sorry to reply to this so late, but this statement struck me as wrong inasmuch as it implies that U-M resident admits tend to not be Northwestern material. Northwestern is generally U-M's top competitor for residents among non-Michigan institutions. Many Michigan residents who apply to U-M also apply there, and many get in and face the same choice the OP is asking about.</p>
<p>“Now, to say you don't care what college I attend is to ignore a rather important fact. You will agree that somebody majoring in chemistry will know a bit more about DNA analysis than the average poster on these boards, right? And that a history major will probably know more about the Louisiana territory than random poster XXX, right?”</p>
<p>That is not my point. My point is: you don’t know what I know or have studied, yet you proceed to tell me that you’re more knowledgeable on the subject than I am. That statement is not only quite a bold one for you to make, but it seems to be based on nothing more than your belief that your knowledge on the issue somehow transcends mine. I find it ironic that you can tell me that you know more about this (or anything for that matter) than I do without actually being privy to what it is I may know. </p>
<p>Moreover, I say that what you study doesn’t matter half as much as you seem to believe it does, because, most of what is being said in this forum is based on….. <em>gasp</em> opinion! All the human resources and labor training in the world doesn’t make your <em>opinion</em> more valid than anyone else’s. </p>
<p>Many come here and give their <em>opinion</em> that a Michigan graduate has the same chance of getting a job against grads of more elite schools. I, however, think such a blanket assertion is ridiculous, but, this is just my <em>opinion</em> on the subject. I don’t for one second believe that in say, the Philadelphia area, a Michigan grad will be viewed nearly as favorably as a Penn grad; this simply goes against everything that I have experienced and witnessed. I, however, think that the case for most schools in this situation, not just Michigan. I also think people here tend to underestimate the role location tends to play in these kinds of issues. I’d be willing to bet that a Rice graduate has a better chance at landing a job in Houston that one from many other elite schools. Why? The power of location….</p>
<p>“The only edge that would come would be if an employer wanted specifically an ILR grad or had some type of preference with the school.”</p>
<p>-So, it’s on a case bye case basis like I said? Clearly what you said here goes to say that there are times wherein employers DO prefer an applicant from one (seemingly equal) school over another (for whatever reason). That’s quite the departure from the ‘this never happens’ type of argument you previously made. </p>
<p>Also, people get on and talk about peer assessment this and that, but seem to want to ignore the fact that not only is PA pretty much the most subjective part of the US News ranking, but we don’t even know who responded or what was said. That seems like a pretty absurd basis for any argument to me…. But, yet again, this is just my <em>opinion</em>. Why in the world should I care what random respondents said on the evaluations- because US News tells me to? No thanks; I can make decisions for myself. Also, all you supporters of PA should know this: </p>
<p>“The U.S. News ranking formula gives greatest weight to the opinions of those in a position to judge a school's undergraduate academic excellence. The peer assessment survey allows the top academics we consult—presidents, provosts, and deans of admissions—to account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching. Each individual is asked to rate peer schools' academic programs on a scale from 1 (marginal) to 5 (distinguished). Those who don't know enough about a school to evaluate it fairly are asked to mark "don't know." Synovate, an opinion-research firm based near Chicago, collected the data; of the 4,089 people who were sent questionnaires, 58 percent responded.”</p>
<p>-I could go on for days about why this seems absurd to me….. Not only did fewer than 60% of those sent surveys actually respond, but US News surveyed people it <em>believes</em> are best equipped to determine the relative merits of other schools….. What about being provost at Harvard gives a person the ability to “account for intangibles such as faculty dedication to teaching” at a place like the University of Miami (or any school for that matter)? And even if the Harvard provost did answer “don’t know” for Miami and other schools like it, then shouldn’t that lead one to question the system? Wouldn’t the ‘peers’ of the various schools only be what the respondents believed they are? That is, if the president of the University of Miami considered her school to be a peer to Harvard wouldn’t she be the sole judge of that when grading the merits of the school? I’m sorry if I seem skeptical, but I don’t for one second buy the argument that university officials are experts on every other college in the country, let alone believe that they know enough to answer those kinds of obscure survey questions with any kind of accuracy.</p>
<p>"you don’t know what I know or have studied, yet you proceed to tell me that you’re more knowledgeable on the subject than I am."</p>
<p>you're not studying what I am, what I study is the topic of discussion. Share what you do study, just so I know for future reference. </p>
<p>"I find it ironic that you can tell me that you know more about this (or anything for that matter) than I do without actually being privy to what it is I may know."</p>
<p>I would love it if you told me then. I've told you where I get my information from, now tell me yours. </p>
<p>"Moreover, I say that what you study doesn’t matter half as much as you seem to believe it does, because, most of what is being said in this forum is based on….. <em>gasp</em> opinion! All the human resources and labor training in the world doesn’t make your <em>opinion</em> more valid than anyone else’s."</p>
<p>I never said people have to believe me, they can make their own decision. I'll just say what I believe and how I have developed that opinion (aka credibility). Nobody has to believe me, not you, not anybody else. I'll tell you what I know and where I got it from (i did that). If you think I'm wrong, tell me why you think that and where you get your information from. I'll be glad to discuss it. </p>
<p>"Many come here and give their <em>opinion</em> that a Michigan graduate has the same chance of getting a job against grads of more elite schools. I, however, think such a blanket assertion is ridiculous"</p>
<p>you would think that. But, again, it's your "opinion" that even you admit most don't share on this thread. </p>
<p>"So, it’s on a case bye case basis like I said? Clearly what you said here goes to say that there are times wherein employers DO prefer an applicant from one (seemingly equal) school over another (for whatever reason). That’s quite the departure from the ‘this never happens’ type of argument you previously made."</p>
<p>When I was talking about school, I wasn't talking about Cornell, but rather the ILR school. You're mixing things up. Lets keep apples with apples here, ok? I said I should be on equal ground with a Mich graduate UNLESS the employer has a preference to students in the particular major that is called ILR. In a case like this, there is no ILR major at most schools. If an employer wanted somebody from that specific major, then yes they would have to put a preference to the ILR school at Cornell ... but that's not what I was talking about. I am referring to general position where any major will do or a widely available major (like econ) will do. </p>
<p>There is of course the rare 'preference' a particular person may have to one school over the other, though this usually doesn't happen and interviews are usually done by more than one person thus negating most errors like this. Then again, I guess a Yalie going against 3 interviewers all from Harvard has his work set out for him. </p>
<p>"I also think people here tend to underestimate the role location tends to play in these kinds of issues. I’d be willing to bet that a Rice graduate has a better chance at landing a job in Houston that one from many other elite schools. Why? The power of location…."</p>
<p>we're talking about getting a job in general, not landing a job in 1 particular city in the south. If we were, I'd argue otherwise, but we are not. NU may have better connections to Chicago, but an issue like that was never brought up.</p>
<p>“you're not studying what I am, what I study is the topic of discussion.”</p>
<p>There you go with your random assumptions again. For all you know I could be studying industrial engineering and management sciences and concentrating in Industrial Behavioral Sciences. That would seem pretty relevant to me…. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>"we're talking about getting a job in general, not landing a job in 1 particular city in the south."</p>
<p>-I don't know how it is you think that "in general" doesn't include the specifics... How can you say what will happen "in general" if it clearly won't happen in many different specific situations?</p>
<p>"There you go with your random assumptions again"</p>
<p>now, last time I checked, NU didn't have ILR or OD or HR - am I wrong?</p>
<p>kk, I asked you to say what major you are and to say where you get the information for your 'opinions'. Even though they are your "opinions", I do place emphasis on credibility and I would like to know your credibility now. Your turn...</p>
<p>"now, last time I checked, NU didn't have ILR or OD or HR - am I wrong?"</p>
<p>NU does have an HR program. The program may be a graduate program, but it does exist....</p>
<p>As for my major, there's no need for me to say that. My point is not about what YOU know, but about what you think I DON'T know. You have no way of knowing what I have or haven't studied, and thus shouldn't tell me when you know 'more' about anything than I do.</p>
<p>"As for my major, there's no need for me to say that."</p>
<p>this is an important fact, though. Does it have something to do with the topic we are discussing. If not, where do you get your information? I think that you don't know as much as I do about the topic, but you keep dancing around proving that you do. I now know that you havn't studied HR as an undergrad, so why should I believe that you know more than me?</p>
<p>I don't care if you disagree with me and what I said about the recruitment process, in fact I'd prefer to be corrected if I'm wrong. But, you first have to prove that you know what you're talking about before I change my "opinion". I'd rather be proved wrong than misinform people here on these boards.</p>
<p>Alexandre -
[quote]
K&S, the average student at NU may be a better student, but more students at NU are given As and Bs than at Michigan. If I recall, the average GPA at NU is close to 3.5, compared to 3.1-3.2 at Michigan. Both schools have exceedingly demanding faculties that will not compromise on grading. Generally speaking, and this is of course not 100% accurate, but grading is pretty standard accross universities. Students with equal GPAs from top universities will be regarded as equals, all other things being equal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>OK - this analysis is getting WAY too specific (grade inflation, etc.).</p>
<p>Let's make this REALLY SIMPLE.</p>
<p>Btwn the 2 schools - where does one have a higher chance of picking a student who had a score higher than a 1400 on his/her SATs (old test) or a 30 on his/her ACT?</p>
<p>Due to UoM 's mandate as a state school (not to mention it's large size) - there are thousands of students attending UoM who wouldn't be competitive with NU's student body (just as there are those who are) - this concept is pretty simple.</p>
<p>"I now know that you havn't studied HR as an undergrad"</p>
<p>-No you don't.</p>
<p>"But, you first have to prove that you know what you're talking about before I change my "opinion"."</p>
<p>I have to prove nothing to you. All I am saying is that just because you've studied something doesn't make your opinion any more valid or credible. If the only people who got to discuss history were history majors or have political opinions were political science majors, the world would be just that much crappier....This topic is not as straightforward as elementary mathematics, there are no right or wrong answers here, no matter how much you think you know about the topic, you are no more 'right' than one who hasn't studied HR.</p>
<p>For those who are continuing to have difficulty with this concept - take a look at the make-up of the student body of another excellent B10 school - UoW.</p>
<p>UoW
Average high school GPA 3.66
Test scores SAT verbal scores over 500 90%, SAT math scores over 500 98%, ACT scores over 18 99%, SAT verbal scores over 600 60%, SAT math scores over 600 79%, ACT scores over 24 91%, SAT verbal scores over 700 16%, SAT math scores over 700 29%, ACT scores over 30 27% </p>
<p>UoM
Average high school GPA 3.75
Test scores SAT verbal scores over 500 96%, SAT math scores over 500 98%, ACT scores over 18 100%, SAT verbal scores over 600 70%, SAT math scores over 600 86%, ACT scores over 24 94%, SAT verbal scores over 700 21%, SAT math scores over 700 43%, ACT scores over 30 38% </p>
<p>As we can see - the make-up of UoW's student body is more similar to that of UoM's than UoM's student body is that to NU's.</p>
<p>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>"Sorry to reply to this so late, but this statement struck me as wrong inasmuch as it implies that U-M resident admits tend to not be Northwestern material. Northwestern is generally U-M's top competitor for residents among non-Michigan institutions. Many Michigan residents who apply to U-M also apply there, and many get in and face the same choice the OP is asking about."</p>
<p>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"). But she writes really well, and uses punctuation like Beyonce uses her hinder.</p>
<p>"As we can see - the make-up of UoW's student body is more similar to that of UoM's than UoM's student body is that to NU's."</p>
<p>-I'm sure great point will be ignored by the Michigan boosters. </p>
<p>But hey, let's keep it going...</p>
<p>UoW=Michigan = Harvard= Yale= Rice= Stanford= Cornell= Penn= Princeton=Northwestern, Chicago= Duke= MIT= Caltech= Berkeley= Dartmouth= Columbia.......</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"). But she writes really well, and uses punctuation like Beyonce uses her hinder.
[/quote]
LOL...after reading this, couldn't help but think of what the famous Scooby-Doo would say..."Rut-Row!"</p>
<p>""I now know that you havn't studied HR as an undergrad"</p>
<p>-No you don't."</p>
<p>you said it's a grad program. Aren't you an undergrad?</p>
<p>"I have to prove nothing to you."
Then I take it you have no idea what HR recruitment involves. If you do, I would just like to know where you found out so that I may learn something more than just your inability to prove a point. </p>
<p>"All I am saying is that just because you've studied something doesn't make your opinion any more valid or credible"
The thing is, it's not really my opinion. Is something that was taught through a professional text book or through a HBS case study just an opinion? I'm not making up theories as I go along, I'm mostly just regurgitating information that I have learned from my classes. Are these opinions? I think it's a very fine line that you're trying to thread. I won't delve into whether or not they're teaching opinions to me, but lets say they are - it's not my opinion but the opinion of every credible source I know that says Mich and NU will be looked upon quite equally initially and it's the interview that will really make the difference as to who does and who doesn't get the job. This isn't an assumption that I just made up, nor is it really my opinion - it's what I've been taught.</p>