<p>Show some patience … in about three weeks, you will be able to switch to Part Deux of this conversation. After idly speculating about the rankings of the schools, you’ll be able to describe how wrong the rankings are – as in prior years! And, more than probably by using the wronf metrics, data from another year, or simply ignoring the data altogether – as in prior years.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alexandre, while I believe that you have shown both resilience and persistence in your efforts to represent Michigan in the best light possible, I believe that some of your younger peers at Michigan have displayed an attitude that is clearly aggressive, even when Michigan was not the center of attenton but another public school. </p>
<p>This goes back to the varying perception of members about who the aggressor is and who the “defender” of the right is. Obviously, I have been on record that I clearly believe that the relentless *and moronic) pompom waving is the clear cause of the disputes, you know whom I consider the culprits. It is pretty clear, from the various and repetitive exchanges between the “dookies”, the Cal fanboys, and to a lesser extent a few Michigan posters, to recognize the factions. </p>
<p>The are no innocents here!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well, Alexandre, news is getting better for you and your teams. The German team is doing extremely well in the WC U20 Women and France just grabbed the title from Spain in the U19 European Cup. </p>
<p>For France, there seems to be light at the end of the tunnel. The next generation is clearly quite a bit of promise, and a much better attitude and heart. The only question will be if France can be as succesful as Spain to graduate the younger talent and incorporate into the A-team. I, for one, hope so and that we won’t be subject to much more of the type of football of the current WC.</p>
<p>Okay, does something seem off? I can’t believe no one caught this. This “chocolatecream” person talks completely insensible. </p>
<p>And he’s a new member and this absurd post on Duke being more renown than Stanford is his first. I can’t help but think someone like rjkofnovi created the account to purposefully spite everyone else.</p>
<p>Why don’t people think in these forums? And whoever chocolatecream is…just sad the lengths you take to put down such a great institution as Duke. Alexandre, as the supermoderator, I expected better of you.</p>
<p>Secondly,
</p>
<p>That is incorrect. This may have been true a few decades ago, but this is 2010. Times have changes and so has Duke. Duke is widely regarded, but Stanford is more so. Plenty of rich children (especially China) all over the world (Not to mention the famous President from Chile) have attended Duke.</p>
<p>EDIT: Oh, but I can see you’re just another ■■■■■ against Duke with this completely unsupported statement.
</p>
<p>xiggi, Michigan students and alums seldom bash other universities. How often have you seen a Michigan faithful claim that Michigan is surperior to a peer institution? On the other hand, how often have we seen postersclaim that Michigan is inferior to its private peers and express geniune disgust when their institution is compared to it? </p>
<p>I agree that Michigan students and alums defend their school/alma matter aggressively, but I do not believe that they attack universities aggressively or without provocation.</p>
<p>TheSaiyans666, although you and three or four other Duke alums represent Duke very nobly, many Duke alums have acted disgacefully. I would honestly be ashamed of them. As such, I had no reason to doubt chocolatecream’s identity. This said, now that you mention it I agree that as a first time poster, the content of his post and countenance of his speech are suspicious.</p>
<p>@Alexandre: Thank you. I appreciate your praise.
As for Michigan posters “seldom bashing other universities”, please check rjkofnovi’s past posts.</p>
<p>TheSaiyans, rjkofnovi is certainly very proud and enthusiastic in his defense of Michigan (at times more than I can appreciate). But I have not seen him bash peer universities or claim that Michigan is superior to its peers. His youth and passion for the school does get the best of him at times, but almost always in defense of his school.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yeah, Duke fits in right ABOVE Michigan when ranked in alphabetical order.
Seriously dude, what the hell is your problem? Why do you keep picking out my posts and try to bash them up? I’ve haven’t bashed your precious UMichigan any time here! If I had the “JohnAdams12” attitude, I could easily pick out your absurd past posts and bash your UMich and compare it to my MIT.
But I don’t. So acknowledge that. </p>
<p>Your argument on PA scores are ever so boring and dumb. Through my search around these boards through your posts I’ve found this article to show why ** PA scores are completely ridiculous **
[Adams</a> sees UGA among 5 best | Uganews | OnlineAthens.com](<a href=“http://onlineathens.com/stories/070209/uga_458010816.shtml]Adams”>http://onlineathens.com/stories/070209/uga_458010816.shtml)</p>
<p>Read this before you argue back.
EDIT: Read this before you ■■■■■ back.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nobody should not be hiding behind games of semantics, or relying on questionable and self0serving lists of … peers! </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>All but five or six schools? Really? And, fwiw, that IS exactly the type of crass cheerleading and pompom waving that is so immensely annoying AND the cause for many negative reactions, including from many people who are not great fans of Duke.</p>
<p>^xiggi is just too awesome. Btw, I like highlighting the “JK” part of “rJKofnovi.”
I like to think he’s usually JK-ing around these forums. Makes sense, then no one has to take him seriously. 
</p>
<p>Xiggi, I hope you are right about French soccer. Even the current squad has excellent talent. Players like Evra, Sagna, Diarra (both of them), Gourcuff, Malouda, Nasri, Ribery, Benzama, Ben Afra etc…are all very talented. France always had good talent, but getting the right coach has been a challenge of late. Let us see how Laurent Blanc manages the talent. He definitely has a depth of talent to work with, and I think he has the right blend of leadership and experience to lead the squad. But first, he must do away with the troublemakers and primadonas. Evra has to go.</p>
<p>Alexandre…what are the admission stats for the michigan class of 2014? michigan’s reported sat and act scores add up to over 100%. I think it is 116%. Michigan needs to get with the program and drop the lower 16% of scores like some other top schools do. I think Stanford even did this last year. I think this was the first time I have seen Stanford do this. Easy way to raise the scores.</p>
<p>So Xiggi…now that UC Berkeley is going to have a wealthier student body, and the SAT scores and in several years the grad rates will rise…I expect you to gush about UC Berkeley. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dstark, cosnidering how adept you are at researching arcane items to support your many discussions in the Political Forum, may I suggest you do some research on the details of the Common Data Set and fnd out how the reports work. You really should not rely on hearsay or on the opinions of others, and that includes me! </p>
<p>By the way, in its latest CDS, Stanford reported figures that did NOT add to 100 percent:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Questions for you are:</p>
<ol>
<li>How is that possible?</li>
<li>Do you think Stanford is obfuscating scores the school does not like?</li>
<li>Can schools report more than 100 percent, and why? Less than 100 percent?</li>
<li>What do you think the reported 5 percent of ACT scores tells us about applications from states were the ACT is mandatory?</li>
</ol>
<p>dstark, Michigan does not publish admissions stats until after classes start. For now, I know that Michigan admitted 50% of the applicants, but I am not sure about SAT/ACT averages, class rank etc…This said, public universities like Cal and Michigan cannot publish superscored SAT ranges and averages, nor can they conveniently drop the lowest 20% of the ACT scores of students who took both the SAT and the ACT. I am not sure by how much such devices would enhance standardized test score ranges and averages, if at all, but until reporting standards are properly audited and standardized, we shall never know for sure.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dstark, I am afraid that I have failed miserably in conveying to you the nature of my true feelings about Cal, and this despite my best efforts over the years.</p>
<p>Fwiw, and contrary to most who participate in these “debates,” because I could not care less about where Cal ranks, or how prestigious it is in the Bay Area, or in Manila, or among Tibetan goat herders, I can see it as it is, and with a LOT more objectivity than the “interested” parties.</p>
<p>As I have written in the past, I have never understood why Cal supporters (and to a much lesser extent Michigan fans) cannot be satisfied with the undisputable recognition of being one of the best research universities in the world, one of the most prestigious options for graduate students, and all of this while maintaining its stated objective to address the needs of a state constituency through direct or transfer undergraduate admissions, and to offer a very competitive education to some of the best students from its own state.</p>
<p>If superscoring makes such a difference, why not compare the ACT scores? </p>
<p>From <a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1065319485-post365.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/1065319485-post365.html</a></p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Wrong, indeed!</p>
<p>Despite being repeated ad nauseam by “interested” parties, the superscore differences are not necessarily as important or relevant as they would like them to be. In addition, there is no evidence that a school that does not superscore for admission purposes does NOT elect to report the superscores. Schools tend to use the data that make them look better! </p>
<p>Anyway, since there seems to be a doubt about the SAT and the superscores, why not look at the ACT data to eliminate the “superscore” crutch:</p>
<p>MIT: Compo 32-35 Math 33-35 English 31-35
DUKE: Compo 30-34 Math 29-35 English 31-35
MICHIGAN: Compo 27-31 Math 27-32 English 27-33
PRINCETON: Compo 31-35 Math 31-35 English 32-35</p>
<p>Funny how that did not work out as expected! The differences are even more profound when comparing the non-superscored ACT. Michigan’s 75th percentile on the composite ACT does not reach Princeton and MIT 25th percentile.</p>
<p>xiggi, because many private universities drop the lowest ACT scores of students who take both the SAT and the ACT. We are talking about a large chunk of ACT scores here. Public universities do not do so.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Alexandre, with all due respect, what evidence do you have that private universities do engage in such practices? What evidence do you have that public universities do NOT report the superscores? The word of admisssions’ officers? </p>
<p>By the way, if you were to analyze the ACT and SAT scores of Michigan and compare them to a number of higher ranked schools, you might have to review your often stated position on the superscoring effect. From my vantage point, it seems that the SAT scores remain in the same range, and the same differences appear on both the “superscored SAT” or the non-superscored ACT composite score. </p>
<p>This would mean that that the superscoring “bonus” is either a myth, or that Michigan reports superscored SAT results.</p>
<p>xiggi, the evidence is clear. Most private university CDS show that only 100% of students submit the ACT AND/OR the SAT. For that to be correct, it would mean that not a single applicant submitted both. That is impossible. There is always a 20% or so overlap of students who take and report both the SAT and the ACT. Always. That is not open for debate. It is a fact that is universally acknowledged. We all know that. And yet, many private universities spirit away those 20%. Where did they go? How do you explain the disapearance of such a large portion of standardized test scores?</p>
<p>As for the SAT “bonus”, it certainly exists and Michigan does not report superscored results. </p>
<p>This said, I would never both comparing Michigan’s student body to that of HYPM or Caltech, not did I ever claim that reporting SAT/ACT scores properly and fairly would completely bridge the gap between public elites and private elites. I only said that the gap is not as great as many would think and that such a gap does not weaken public elites academically.</p>
<p>Yield rate is now important? One example I can think of that hurting is the UC schools. To apply to several UC schools, it just takes one application. Most kids in California apply to a whole bunch of UC schools because it’s so easy to do so, hurting many yield rates. This isn’t really a great reflection on their quality. Also, the UC schools (I’m pretty sure) do not have “early decision”, which probably hurts the yield rate.</p>