OOS Students and the Public State Universities

College Search & Selection
161

<p>Alex & GoBlue,
I'm not ignoring the other areas. We'll get to them in due time. </p>

<p>Re Alex's statement about U Michigan having an accomplished student body, I have never claimed that it does not. My longstanding statement has been that there are a lot of accomplished student bodies around the USA and that, when considered in a national context, U Michigan's student body is not at the elite level, ie not one of the Top 25-30 student bodies at national universities. I think that the data and most objective observers would agree with this statement. </p>

<p>Having said that, I think that U Michigan's student body is accomplished with credentials on par with several other terrific colleges (eg, UCLA, Georgia Tech, Boston College, NYU, Tulane, etc). I consider that high praise as these colleges also attract many very good students and produce many very good graduates.</p>

162

<p>
[quote]
U Michigan's student body is not at the elite level, ie not one of the Top 25-30 student bodies at national universities.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Uh-oh. Dems fightin' words! :D</p>

163

<p>"U Michigan's student body is not at the elite level, ie not one of the Top 25-30...I think that the data and most objective observers would agree with this statement."</p>

<p>hawkette,
How is this so? Please give me an "objective" analysis to arrive at the conclusion from the data you posted.</p>

164

<p>
[quote]
Having said that, I think that U Michigan's student body is accomplished with credentials on par with several other terrific colleges (eg, UCLA, Georgia Tech, Boston College, NYU, Tulane, etc).

[/quote]

While that may be true according to SAT stats, Michigan offers many more top-flight academic offerings than those other terrific colleges. This elevates Michigan - in my college ranking perception - into the Top 15-20. ;)</p>

<p>You see, Hawkette, Michigan's public service message is true..."there truly is a Michigan difference". Go Blue! (and Bears!)</p>

165

<p>Nefer,
In support of my statement that the U Michigan student body is not elite, ie, not in the Top 25-30 national universities, I offer the following objective data points. </p>

<p>SAT CR: U Michigan 37th out of 51 national universities; 7th out of 17 publics</p>

<p>SAT Math: U Michigan 30th out of 51 universities; tied with UCLA for 4th out of 17 publics</p>

<p>ACT: U Michigan 25th out of 41 national universities; 2nd out of 13 publics</p>

<p>Top 10% students: U Michigan 16th out of 51 national universities; 7th out of 17 publics</p>

<p>Acceptance Rate: U Michigan 40th out of 51 national universities; 8th out of 17 publics </p>

<p>If you have other criteria that you think are appropriate to use in comparing the strength of the student bodies of the USNWR Top 50 national universities, then please post it.</p>

166

<p>Ammount of students with math SAT scores above 700 (or ACT equivalent).</p>

<p>Top 7.</p>

<p>Amount of students with verbal SAT scores above 700 (or ACT equivalent) </p>

<p>Top 7.</p>

<p>Amount of students with ACT scores above 30...</p>

<p>Top 7.</p>

<p>Amount of Students that have performed at Sydney Opera House or Carnegie Hall or equiavlent..</p>

<p>Top 7</p>

<p>Amount of students in the top 10% of their hs class</p>

<p>Top 15</p>

167

<p>Hawkette, you do not take several things into consideration.</p>

<p>1) Michigan does not superscore the SAT, which explains why the average ACT ranking at Michigan is relatively higher than the average SAT ranking, albeit marginally so.</p>

<p>2) Standardized test scores are de-emphasized at Michigan. That fact is well publicized within the state of Michigan (where 65% of undergraduate students come from).</p>

<p>3) The correlation between acceptance rate and student body strength is not always positive, so I am not sure why you even mention acceptance rate in your attempt to prove your point.</p>

<p>4) At how many of the schools that you rank ahead of Michigan are 20% of the undergraduate student body not part of the college of Arts and Science, Business or Engineering?</p>

<p>If you compare apples to apples (LSA, Engineering and Ross) and adjust for superscoring in the case of the SAT, I am pretty sure Michigan would rank in or around the top 20 purely from a standardized test point of view, to say nothing of more telling academic indicators, such as class rank and GPA. Not that it matters since like Michigan, I do not place too much weight on standardized tests. I have seen too many below average intellects master the SAT and I have known way too many exceptional intellects who completely flopped. Standardized tests measure familiarity with the test, not intelligence. One does not have to be smart to ace the SAT and highly intelligent people do not necessarily ace the test. Of that, I am entirely certain. </p>

<p>Even if we could weed out all irrelevancies, we would still not have a pure product. Measuring the quality of an undergraduate student body statistically is impossible. There are too many variables to consider. So discounting Michigan's student body is a matter of personal opinion, not statistical accuracy. My opinion differs from yours Hawkette, and like me, you have offered nothing to prove your point. But unlike you, the main source you have been using to support your claims actually supports my conjecture that Michigan is in fact one of the 20 most selective universities in the US. </p>

<p>Also, as I have already mentioned several times, when it comes to financial (and other) resources, Michigan probably cracks the top 20 universities. Even if you look purely at endowment per student, Michigan is in the top 25 among research universities. But with the exception of UVa, all other schools with higher endowments per student are private. Michigan receives over $300 million annually in state funding, private universities have no equivallent income. And all universities with higher endowments per students are much smaller than Michigan, so itis safe to say that Michigan benefits from economies of scale. I think you would agree in this instance that Michigan is in fact among the top 20 universities in terms of resources.</p>

168

<p>Dstark,
Is that the best argument you can come back with? A calculation method that (eg, on CR) would rank Dartmouth 32nd, MIT 36th, Rice 43rd, and Caltech 50th? Good idea…NOT!</p>

<p>In fact, it’s a method that would rank U Michigan near the BOTTOM of every category for students below the 700/30 thresholds. </p>

<p>Try harder…maybe something really convincing like U Michigan students have better ECs on their applications…or maybe better recs from their teachers…or they write better essays than students applying to other schools… :D</p>

169

<p>Alex,
According to Collegeboard, a 29 ACT equates to a 1300 (range 1290-1320). U Michigan’s 50th percentile ACT score is 29 and the 50th percentile SAT score is about 1320. U Michigan’s 25/75 SAT average of 1320 is actually the stronger score for U Michigan. </p>

<p><a href="http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/act-sat-concordance-tables.pdf%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://professionals.collegeboard.com/profdownload/act-sat-concordance-tables.pdf&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Neither the SAT nor the ACT gets U Michigan in the top half of the colleges being compared. </p>

<p>If you think that superscoring is a factor in U Michigan low relative ranks, then just look at ACT scores. U Michigan ranks 25th out of 41 colleges compared and could easily be out of the Top 30 if all schools reported this data. Of those not reporting ACT scores, it is certain that Harvard, Yale, UCB, and Georgetown would rank ahead and maybe U Virginia, Wake Forest, Boston College, and Lehigh as well. </p>

<p>Oh, and I believe that the SAT numbers on U Michigan’s Common Data Set ARE superscored. (yes, I know that they are not for admissions purposes) If the SATs were significantly below ACTs, that might be support the claim that the CDS numbers are not superscored, but as we’ve just determined, the SAT and ACT levels are pretty even, if not favoring SAT a bit. </p>

<p>As for your comments about specific areas within U Michigan, I would concur that there are many strong students at Ross and Engineering and they probably make up a large portion of your strongest students. But there are still about 17,000+ other students at the school who are not part of these programs. </p>

<p>In summary, I have presented numerous facts to support my argument that U Michigan’s student body is properly placed in the Top 30-40 among national universities. Your response has been that either these facts don’t matter or that your personal experience trumps these facts and supports your allegation that U Michigan’s student body belongs higher, maybe much higher. I think you underrate the quality of the undergraduate student bodies at the schools that I would place alongside and ahead of U Michigan.</p>

170

<p>Hawkette, it's objective data.</p>

<p>I wouldn't want to go to Dartmouth, MIT, Caltech, or Rice.</p>

<p>There aren't enough strong students at these schools. I'm not kidding.</p>

<p>These schools aren't as strong as Michigan in as many areas either.</p>

<p>I prefer a different type of school than the ones you mentioned.</p>

<p>None of them have the energy of Michigan.</p>

<p>Percentages and averages are not always the answers.</p>

<p>"In fact, it’s a method that would rank U Michigan near the BOTTOM of every category for students below the 700/30 thresholds"</p>

<p>lol</p>

171

<p>Hawkette, SAT scores in the Michigan CDS are not superscored. Michigan only keeps one single SAT and ACT score for all its applicants. That would be the highest score in a single sitting. All other SAT/ACT scores are thrown out. So the SAT ranges reported in the CDS are not superscored since Michigan would have no record of those additional scores. </p>

<p>And the ACT cannot be converted into the SAT. The two are completely different tests. If we are comparing apples to apples, Michigan would probably crack the top 20 as far as test scores are concerned. </p>

<p>So no Hawkette, you have not presented facts that support your argument. In fact, your arguement is flawed. And I do not underrate the student bodies at other universities, I just don't think that one can draw conclusions simply by looking at standardized tests when it is clear that (1), they do not measure intellectual ability and (2) insitutions weigh and report standardized scores differently. </p>

<p>I agree with the USNWR when it comes to student selectivity. Michigan's student body is somewhere between #15 and #25 in terms of overall strength. When you add its top 10-15 financial rating and top 5-10 faculty rating, you get a pretty comprehensive picture. </p>

<p>And that says nothing of the amazing research opportunities open to undergrads, ridiculously busy on-campus recruitment by every single exclusive and elite industrial, financial, biotech, high tech and consulting firm (most of which list Michigan among their top 10 strategic campuses), awesome campus/college town environment, unbeatable athletic tradition, abundance of intellectual , political and artistic oferings and undying school spirit and loyal alumni support from one of the largest and most successul and influencial networks on earth, you get a university that is clearly among the top 15 in the nation. To put it bluntly, Michigan is one of the most well rounded universities in the US. The energy on and off campus is sick!</p>

<p>So, you can throw all those manipulated and meaningless statistics into the equation, it won't alter the fact that Michigan is in fact a top university, very much worth its steep sticker price. That is why each year, 2,000 talented students come from the remaining 49 states and 130 countries from around the world to attend Michigan at full cost, most of them chosing Michigan over other universities you seem to lable as superior.</p>

172

<p>Alexandre, Hawkette is a fictional character. ;)</p>

<p>Are you living in Dubai right now?</p>

<p>I am hearing horror stories about the economy in Dubai. What are you seeing there?</p>

173

<p>I am still living in Dubai. The Economy here is definitely hurting. As I have said in several posts before, Dubai had lost its way long before the crash. I am not surprised with what is happening though. It would take too long to explain, but suffice it tosay, they were in way over their head. WAY OVER! LOL! </p>

<p>Anyway, I work for a major US-based HR consulting firm and our business, although certainly impacted, seems to be ok for now. That's because most of our clients are in Abu Dhabi, Doha and Riyadh. Those cities are so energy rich that their economies are relatively intact. Our office has grown from 25 consultants in October of 2008 to close to 50 consultants today. We are still looking for entry level consultants. So if you know of fresh college graduates who are looking for a challenging Analyst position at a major HR Consulting firm, have them PM me. They'd have to be willing to relocate to Dubai of course. Oh, and we are now turning our attention to males. Our 5 last Analyst recruits have all been female!</p>

174

<p>Alexandre, I'm glad things are working out for you. </p>

<p>There aren't too many places in the world that escaped the debt bubble.</p>

<p>"Our 5 last Analyst recruits have all been female!"</p>

<p>:)</p>

175

<p>dstark,
It's a good thing you wouldn't want to go to Dartmouth, MIT, Caltech, or Rice. You probably would never get in. :)</p>

<p>Alex,
My argument is flawed?? LOL. In my world, facts are more substantial than opinions and emotions (insisting and stamping your feet is not convincing evidence) and bullying bluster. </p>

<p>I have focused my comments here on the strength of student body for U Michigan and other colleges in the USNWR Top 50. I have presented many facts that clearly reveal the breadth and depth of student quality at many schools and these facts are obviously just too painful for you to acknowledge. I am sorry for your pain, but that does not change the fact that there are 30-40 exceptional national universities with undergraduate student bodies superior to your alma mater. Hopefully someday you will come to appreciate this quality and give these other fine colleges and their students the respect that they deserve.</p>

176

<p>lol</p>

<p>Top 5 countries when comparing gdp per capita...</p>

<p>Brunei, Singapore, Qatar, Norway, and Luxembourg.</p>

<p>Yeah....</p>

<p>Those are countries with much better economies than the US. ;)</p>

177

<p>hawkette, not to nitpick... but some of your acceptance rate ranking was a little off.</p>

<p>Dartmouth and Brown had a 13% acceptance rate, with Dartmouth's being maybe .1% lower. So you should switch their order and correct their numbers.</p>

178

<p>Look, I love Michigan, but Alexander you are severely overestimating the strength of the Michigan student body.</p>

<p>Even simply by it's nature as a public school that takes 65% of its students from the state where the education system and average test scores are not particularly exceptional (Its National Merit cut off last year was only 209, Illinois was at 213, California at 217, North Carolina at 215, and Virginia at 219) 65% of its applicant pool is drawn from a group that is not particularly strong. </p>

<p>Michigan's cross-admit-yield against at least HYPSM is single digits, tops. And I suspect that it does not exceed 20% against any top 10 or top 15 university. As such it loses nearly all of the most competitive students. </p>

<p>The University of Michigan only had 62 National Merit scholars in 2007, compared to 285 for Harvard, 47 for Cornell (with far less volume), and 84 for U of I (a comparable peer school).
<a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454412-national-merit-scholars-2007-schools-have-most.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/454412-national-merit-scholars-2007-schools-have-most.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Michigan's students may go on to be very successful. And I'm sure that by volume a student there could find as many bright students as they would be able to get to know at Harvard or Yale if they invested the effort. But on the who Michigan's undergraduate population is not any more bright or exceptional then its peer schools of UIUC, UNC, and UCLA. Michigan's rank would likely drop into the upper 30s if schools were ranked on sheer strength of student body. This is by nature of it being a large, public, big-ten state school.</p>

<p>It is great to love Michigan; it's an excellent school. But to defend its student body as top 20 material on the whole is delusional.</p>

179

<p>Tyler, Michigan does not give scholraships to National Merit finalists... UIUC does. Of Illinois' 84 NMSs, only 28 are non-sponsored. All of Michigan's 62 are non-sponsored. If memory serves, Michigan usually leads the nation in non-sponsored NMS attending publically funded universities. Michigan is usually in or around the top 10 in terms of non-sponsored NMSs attending any and all universities, private or public. </p>

<p>But NM scholars again do not tell the whole picture. Why does Cornell, which is roughly 55% the size of Michigan, only have 75% of Michigan's NMSs? If Michigan has 62 NMSs, all things being equal, Cornell, given its size, should have 34 NMSs. It has 47. That is hardly a strong case for Cornell having a stronger student body than Michigan. Those two universities have 14,000 and 26,000 undergraduate students respectively. As an alumnus of both universities, I would argue that those two universities have nearly identical student bodies. </p>

<p>And Michigan's student body is no better than Cal's, UCLA's, UNC's or UVa's. I never claimed it was. All of those schools have incredibly talented student bodies, all arguably among the 20-25 most accomplished among research universities. The USNWR selectivity ranking confirms that. </p>

<p>There are other rankings that seem to support my supposedly "emotional" and "delusional" point of view. The percentage of Michigan students who are awarded Fulbright scholraships is definitely among the top 20 research universities. The percentage of students who enroll into top graduate schools also ranks among the top 20 research universities. Those are tangible results that actually point to performance rather than standardized tests that are questionable in nature. </p>

<p>And the cross-admit estimates you have aren't entirely accurate. I agree that the cross admit battle between Michigan and HYPSM is likely in the single digits. So what? I am pretty sure most of the other top 20 universities would have single digit cross-admit rates vs HYPSM. But your claim that Michigan has a 20% cross-admit rate vs other top 15 universities is actually off. Again some top universities, it may be as low as 20%, but against most of the top 15 universities, it would be in the 50% range. </p>

<p>I stand by my point. There is no way to statistically measure the quality of a student body, but to claim that there are 30-40 universities with superior student bodies as Hawkette does is pathetic. 15-20 sounds about right. I firmly believe that in-class perforance is the best indicator of academic performance and ability, so the USNWR ranking of selectivity makes sense. It is one of the few things they got right.</p>

<p>"Hopefully someday you will come to appreciate this quality and give these other fine colleges and their students the respect that they deserve."</p>

<p>Hawkette, get over yourself. You are the one who lacks respect for Michigan (and a handful of other universities). I respect all universities and give them their due.</p>

180

<p>"Hopefully someday you will come to appreciate this quality and give these other fine colleges and their students the respect that they deserve."</p>

<p>Classic turnspeak hawkette. You've been exposed, now try to behave.</p>