<p>I’m not going to get into a shouting match with you here. If you read my entire post, you’ll find my initial claim substantiated, so I’m not going to get baited into an argument just because you equate me to a 10 year old. If ever there were an ad hominem attack between us it would be your claim that Michigan’s top students are “Maybe more competitive, less well-rounded, and more grades-focused, but certainly not any better.” My post doesn’t have such derision, belittlement, and stereotyping as that statement produces. When I claim UNC to have a relatively unremarkable student body outside of the Morehead Cain grouping, it is through your equation of Rhodes Scholars to accomplishment/quality, which is inherently flawed anyway. It is also rather strongly implied in the quoted statement that the top of UNC’s student body is better, at least in character, which I do disagree with. I mainly took offense to that statement, so if I misconstrued it than I apologize.</p>
<p>Also, the top of Michigan’s class, if that’s what one considers the LSA Honors program (I don’t, but for the purpose of this argument it will do), has the following stats for its enrolling class of ~500:</p>
<p>Median SAT Range: 1380-1490
Median ACT Range: 32-34
Median unweighted GPA Range: 3.8-4.0 </p>
<p>If UNC has statistics proving that its top 500 students enrolling in the liberal arts program have similar stats than I’ll be interested to see them. I’m sorry if this comes off as caustic, since I surely don’t mean it as such; it just seems the facts back Michigan as having a better (number-wise) top of the class than UNC.</p>
<p>I never understood people’s need to associate themselves with great student bodies. On CC, it is an obsession. Nobody of substance in the real world cares how strong the students at your school are. People are judged on their own merits only. Nobody will assume that a person is capable or brilliant just because they attended a particular university. Many students assume that just because they attend an elite university, they are somehow entitled to respect. That is particularly true of some of the smaller private universities, particularly the Ivy League. But in truth, nobody will assume that a person is capable based on their alma matter. There are several reasons for this:</p>
<p>1) Even at Harvard, there are a significant number of duds. That’s right, Harvard students, like any other students, must prove themselves</p>
<p>2) EQ is more important than IQ. In a recent survey conducted on corporate leaders, 70% of employee success has been associated with emotional intelligence.</p>
<p>Bottom line, a person’s potential and ability is not measured based on the quality of the student body at her/his alama matter. Instead, it is based on her/his own GPA, interviewing skills, proven track record and performance.</p>
<p>It so happens that Michigan and UNC have similar student bodies in terms of academic ability, so this debate is moot. </p>
<p>Universities, on the other hand, can be measured by the quality of their faculty, the availlability of resources, the strength of their programs and departments, quality of facilities etc… In this domain, Michigan is stronger than UNC, albeit not by much.</p>
<p>Overall, we are talking about two of the top five public universities in the US.</p>
<p>Alexandre, I completely agree. That’s why I had constant parentheses to show that I was merely arguing with stats, not my beliefs. I have a friend a MSU going to Duke law school and one at Michigan going to Cooley, so I know it would be foolish to think that the undergrad school attended entitles a student to anything. In all honesty, it’s usually the kids below median at a given school who have the misplaced sense of entitlement anyway…</p>
<p>I apologize if it seemed I was belittling Michigan’s upper students. I tried to make it clear I was saying the two were on par. I never said UNC’s was better except in terms of pure # of Rhodes Scholars and Rhodes Scholars per capita. </p>
<p>Hmmm, I’m not sure how to find statistics for the top 500 students in the class? The honors program does not publish statistics as far as I know. I’m also not sure that the Honors program constitutes the very top of the class, numbers-wise, as selection is hugely dependent on essays. </p>
<p>I suspect the perceived differences in their reputations are pretty regional, and trivial at best. I’ve always lived in the South, and have never really considered Michigan more than a really good state school. That is also how I saw Carolina – a really good state school – even though now that I live in North Carolina its reputation is much stronger. I’m sure if I lived in Michigan I would think less highly of UNC just because I had been less exposed to it. Still, there’s nothing wrong with a reputation as a really good state school, at least not in my eyes, or I’d be somewhere far different. Both schools attract top students that could have attended Harvard, Yale, Princeton, etc. Michigan’s engineering especially probably gets a large number of these. I think Carolina is hurt by its lack of engineering program; that’s a big pool of smart people that we can’t draw from. </p>
<p>Again, I’m sorry if it seemed I was belittling Michigan’s student body.</p>
<p>Ah, no harm no foul. As Alexandre said, it really comes down to the students and what they do at whichever college they attend, and the great thing about both UM and UNC is that they both provide every opportunity and resource an undergrad could possibly need to be successful.</p>
<p>Nationally Michigan’s prestige trumps UNC. There I said it.</p>
<p>OldWell, Michigan and UNC both enjoy national reputations, although I am not surprised that Michigan does not have a great reputation in the South. This said, Michigan’s reputation in NYC, Silicon Valley, DC, Chicago etc… is extremely strong. UNC also has a strong reputation all over the East Coast and in the South.</p>
<p>UNC doesn’t have that great of a rep. in the midwest either…</p>
<p>^^ I have to admit most Midwesterners only know UNC through athletics (namely, basketball).</p>
<p>Good lord, isn’t it rather self-evident that Michigan has a better reputation in the midwest and UNC in the south? And you just don’t hear all that much about the other in the other’s home territory.</p>
<p>OK i have a question in regards to UMich and UNC Chapel Hill…
Im going into Kinesiology for both schools and im leaning toward UNC’s program because it seems like UNC has better sciences than UMich. Though everything else at UMich is better and much better alum status … What do you guys think ??</p>
<p>Why do you think UNC is stronger in the sciences?</p>
<p>Well … i guess i did talk to the director of UNC’s entire athletic department haha. I figured he would say that i guess, but there very close in rankings right ? UNC and UMich (Kinesiology)</p>
<p>“Well … i guess i did talk to the director of UNC’s entire athletic department haha.”</p>
<p>Michigan is better in the natural sciences, social sciences, humanities, fine arts, business, medicine, law, etc. etc…</p>
<p>Thats exactly what i had figured, theres no way i would even hint that to him, obviously, but ok never mind just wanted to make sure !
Thank you !!</p>
University of Michigan offers a variety of courses which are all ranked in either top 10 or top 15
I heard unc is better than umich for premed
There is no such thing as “better for premed”. Michigan is definitely harder than UNC in the sciences. If a student struggles with mathematics, physics and chemistry, Michigan would be hell for a premed. The university does not compromise or cut corners in those subjects and only “naturals” in them will do well. But for premeds who are naturally inclined toward the sciences, Michigan is actually a good place to go for college. The opportunities for research and internships are second to none, the advising is good and placement into medical school is very good.
UNC acceptance rate to med school is 90% compared to umich which is 56% UNC is on many lists for best premed schools while umich is not