<p>Best Colleges Preview: Top 25 National Universities - US News and World Report</p>
<p>rankings probably suffered because of the 8% increase in acceptance rate =/</p>
<p>Lol. I grew up in North Carolina and I don’t understand why Wake Forest is highly regarded. All the best students went to Duke or UNC and most don’t even consider Wake Forest. In fact, I sometimes forget they even reside in NC.</p>
<p>They don’t get too much recognition for athletics, academics, not anything. What is so special about them? I hear they have a good business program, but thats it…</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure Michigan > UVA, Emory, Notre Dame, UCLA, Wake Forest, USC, and Vanderbilt (top 25 schools). I can’t believe Michigan doesn’t even make the list. </p>
<p>[Best</a> Colleges Preview: Top 25 National Universities - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/09/best-colleges-preview-top-25-national-universities.html]Best”>http://www.usnews.com/articles/education/best-colleges/2010/08/09/best-colleges-preview-top-25-national-universities.html)</p>
<p>Michigan is 27, Wake is 28. Michigan doesn’t crack the top 25 anymore.</p>
<p>
Michigan doesn’t know how to play the game … either that, or they don’t care. They don’t make use of the waitlist; they don’t have early decision, etc.</p>
<p>Michigan’s admission process is a mess ever since they adopted early response. Instead of setting a limit, they admitted way too many in the early round … thus leaving not enough room for more qualified applicants in the regular round.</p>
<p>This year may be worse. The adoption of the common application and early action will put more pressure on the admissions staffs. Let’s hope I’m wrong.</p>
<p>In the USNWR methodology, public universities get shafted compared to privates due to categories like faculty-student ratio, alumni giving, and student selectivity. Publics simply have a broader mission than privates irt admission policies. </p>
<p>UM’s relatively high admission rate, compared to Berkeley and UCLA is probably the only thing that puts it at #27 in the USNWR methodology. </p>
<p>Here’s another survey/assessment that puts more emphasis on a key mission that is stronger in public universities than in privates: research. Michigan is one of the top. </p>
<p><a href=“http://mup.asu.edu/research2009.pdf[/url]”>http://mup.asu.edu/research2009.pdf</a></p>
<p>See page 8. (These are groupings, not numerical rankings) Michigan is in the same group as Harvard, UPenn, Duke, which is slightly ahead of Berkeley and UCLA and well ahead of the UVa grouping.</p>
<p>Here’s an idea: how about using class rank as another measure instead of just straight GPA (which was unweighted before last year, but still being used as the most important factor) and giving a higher priority to standardized tests than they do now?</p>
<p>clutchengineer:
[Best</a> Undergraduate Engineering Programs - Best Colleges - Education - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-engineering]Best”>http://colleges.usnews.rankingsandreviews.com/best-colleges/spec-doct-engineering)</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Need a new category–“non research universities of middling size with some grad programs most of which are little known”<br>
There’re a number of schools in the National Us group that would fit that group better.</p>
<p>USNWR is a joke, anyways. Emory, Wake Forest, UCLA, and USC beating out U of M? Doubtful. Then again, Michigan is so widely regarded and has an endowment the size of a small country, so rankings probably aren’t the first thing on their mind. It’s no wonder more and more colleges every year choose not to participate.</p>
<p>A world without college rankings sounds nice.</p>
<p>Michigan will always be respected as an institutional powerhouse. No University has as much pride as Michigan.</p>