University of Michigan Deferral Thread EA 2019

Did anyone’s Financial Planning Calculator on WA access change to say its unavailable until Feb 16th? Is this a sign of an acceptance potentially?

@Alexandre‌ Do you know what the acceptance rate is for international students this year, and what it was last year ?

Entering students, check back after February 16. Continuing students may check after May 18.?? @carlsandburgsr‌

SS124081, it is hard to tell because Michigan does not publish those stats, but I would estimate that the acceptance rate for international applicants is roughly 10%.

Yeah that’s what mine says @JK0919

@carlsandburgsr‌ I do not know if it means something positive (wish it is though)… Anyone who has an idea?

@jchan9423 your numbers are about right. Here is a link to a 2012 article (http://www.annarbor.com/news/university-of-michigan-sees-increase-in-out-of-state-students/) that says that the instate yield was 66-67% and OOS yield was 21-23%.
@Alexandre, no Ivy League university has a yield in 20s.

Thanks @Qwerty098. I compiled the data for UMich, UC-Berkeley and UCLA based on publicly available numbers and Michigan has yields closer to UCLA than to Ivy’s. Ivy’s (except HYP) are boosted by ED, so I think UC is a fairer comparison. The interesting thing I found is the mismatch between instate & OOS apps percentage for these two…if UC’s had common-app, their OOS numbers will go up a lot. Also, a lower selectivity for UMich in-state rubs off some of the shine in an otherwise fantastic school.

Michigan (Assumptions: Instate Apps=10K; Instate yield: 70%; Instate UG: 60%):
Total In-state OOS+Int
Apps 49776 10000 39776
Admitted 16047 5576 10471
AcceptanceRate 32% 56% 26%
Enrolled 6505 3903 2602
Yield 41% 70% 25%
Residency 100 60% 40%

UC Source: http://www.ucop.edu/news/factsheets/fall2014adm.html)

Berkeley

Total In-state OOS International
Apps 73711 44564 15800 13407
Admitted 12795 8391 3071 1333
AcceptanceRate 17% 19% 19% 10%
Enrolled 5909 4147 1017 745
Yield 46% 49% 33% 56%
Residency 100% 70% 17% 13%

UCLA

Total In-state OOS International
Apps 86521 55949 15625 14947
Admitted 15760 9128 4095 2537
AcceptanceRate 18% 16% 26% 17%
Enrolled 5997 4192 981 824
Yield 38% 46% 24% 32%
Residency 100% 70% 16% 14%

“if UC’s had common-app, their OOS numbers will go up a lot”

The UC’s already have a common application for instate students. Considering there are close to 40,000,000 Californians, that’s a lot of apps!

“Also, a lower selectivity for UMich in-state rubs off some of the shine in an otherwise fantastic school.”

The vast majority of students in the state of Michigan know how difficult it is to get accepted into their flagship. They are typically encouraged not to apply if their qualifications are not up to snuff. Michigan is pretty self selecting for a public school.

Even it is a lot easier to get into UMich from in state, it is pretty hard when compared to other in-state flagship schools.

Qwerty, when did anyone claim that Michigan’s yield for OOS students was high? I assumed it was 25% in my calculations, which is roughly in the same ballpark as the link you provided above.

Then again, I am not sure why you would isolate OOS students from IS when comparing Michigan’s yield to that of another university, Ivy or not. Obviously, Michigan’s yield for OOS applicants will be lower than that of an Ivy League. For one, Michigan is not as popular as an Ivy League as far as high school students from many parts of the country are concerned. That is not surprising, nor is it something to be ashamed of. The only non-Ivy with the same type of popularity as an Ivy are MIT and Stanford, and more recently, Chicago. Schools like Duke, Georgetown, Michigan and Northwestern are very popular (as popular as the Ivy League is some quarters), but will usually lose out to most Ivy League schools, all things being equal.

Secondly, even if Michigan were as popular as an Ivy among high school students, Michigan varies from the Ivy League in two critical ways that further hinder its yield:

  1. Michigan does not have binding ED. Most elite private universities fill 40%-50% of their freshmen class with ED students. That will raise the yield by a significant amount.
  2. Michigan is not as good as private elites at meeting financial aid need of OOS students

But again, I do not see how comparing Michigan’s OOS yield that that of an Ivy League’s overall yield is relevant. Perhaps the overall yield, but even then, you would not be comparing apples to apples because of the two points listed above.

“Also, a lower selectivity for UMich in-state rubs off some of the shine in an otherwise fantastic school.”

I agree, but that perception is changing very quickly. In the last 2-3 years, Michigan’s selectivity has increased significantly, and students are taking note. While it was once unusual for applicants who were admitted by elite private universities to be rejected by Michigan, it is not very common, and become more common each year. Michigan is outpacing most other universities where selectivity is concerned. I do not think it will be considered less selective than most private peers by 2020. Chicago went through a similar transformation between 2004 and 2014.

I think rjk has a valid point here. UCLA’s in-state application pool is 6x that of Michigan’s, compared to a four-fold difference in state population. If Michigan receives comparable in-state application volumes, Michigan’s in-state selectively would be similar to that of UCLA.

Even with its lower acceptance rate, UCLA does not admit or attract a more accomplished student body than Michigan. In fact, the high school academic credentials of both freshmen classes last year were identical, at least where test scores are concerned (it is not possible to compare high school class standings and GPA since UCLA has a weighted system and Michigan does not).

Mid 50% SAT
Michigan 1280-1480
UCLA 1170-1440

Mid 50% ACT
Michigan 28-32
UCLA 25-32

When they are gonna release our stuffs???

Sorry to perpetuate hijacking this thread…interesting discussion, may need to be moved elsewhere.

“They are typically encouraged not to apply if their qualifications are not up to snuff. Michigan is pretty self selecting for a public school.”

" I think rjk has a valid point here. UCLA’s in-state application pool is 6x that of Michigan’s, compared to a four-fold difference in state population"

I am not sure I buy the first argument above, but the second argument makes more sense. Population of CA is ~4x of Michigan and UCLA receives 5.5x and Berkeley receives 4.5x the number of apps. I think this may be due the fact that UCs use a common application (not Common App) and a student with a lower ranked match school such as UC-merced can easily check a box (and pay the fee) to apply to Berkeley/UCLA. Michigan has supplemental essays and many in-state students for whom it is a reach may not apply.

The disparity in OOS applicants (~30K for Berkeley & UCLA) vs ~40K for Michigan may be due to the fact UCs have a separate app and an earlier deadline (Nov 30) vs Michigan which has a generous non-restrictive EA and a later deadline (Feb 1 for RD) and uses the Common App.

“Even with its lower acceptance rate, UCLA does not admit or attract a more accomplished student body than Michigan”

That sort of emphasizes my point about Michigan instate residents being more self selected. Of course I have no way to prove my assertations, but I can guarantee that the vast majority of instate students who apply to Michigan are qualified to get in.

“Michigan has supplemental essays and many in-state students for whom it is a reach may not apply.”

It takes quite a bit of effort these days to apply, and those that don’t have the chops are more than likely not going to bother spending so much time and effort on writing essays.

" Population of CA is ~4x of Michigan and UCLA receives 5.5x and Berkeley receives 4.5x the number of apps"

California also has a very significant Asian population that would cause these percentages to trend up as compared to Michigan.

Hi. I’m a longtime reader of CC but this is my first time posting. I have two questions. In past years, where all of the students that found out in late January accepted, or was it a mixed bad? Also, did we ever determine what was a good letter and what was a bad letter? My letter reads:
Thank you for your application to the University of Michigan College of Literature, Science, and the Arts for Fall 2015. We are pleased that you have applied and are impressed with your achievements. However, our high application volume, coupled with the very strong credentials of our applicants in recent years, has contributed to an increasingly competitive admissions process. As a result, we are writing to inform you that your application is currently being deferred for further review.

While this is not the answer that you were hoping to hear, your application remains under consideration. All final admissions decisions of admit, deny, or waitlist will be made no later than early April, 2015.

Strong fall semester or trimester grades may improve your status in the deferred pool of applicants. Therefore, please ask your high school counselor to forward them when they become available. Beyond that, we are confident that the information you have given us is more than sufficient for a final decision. The most successful candidates send us only what we require. Please refer to the website https://umich.custhelp.com/app/answers/detail/a_id/2080 for FAQ’s about the admission process and what to do next.

We hope your interest in Michigan continues. You have our best wishes for an enjoyable and successful end of your senior year.

Sincerely,

Erica L. Sanders

Interim Director