<p>You must interpret the passage in context. Alexandre was commenting about the campus atmostphere. It's not the same as saying Chicago and Columbia are "academically superior" than Michigan.</p>
<p>Alexandre used the term "the only schools" ... that excludes all the other schools including HYPSM. Surely you wouldn't conclude that Alexandre believes that Chicago and Columbia are "academically superior" than HYPSM now, would you?</p>
<p>Ironically, I find myself agreeing with chriscap on many issues despite being a Michigan student. I think we are ranked around where we need to be with the current USNWR system. Perhaps, UVA is worse than us by a small margin, but 2-3 spots in the rankings doesn't say much so I could care less.</p>
<p>Alexandre, do you really believe that somehow Michigan's environment is more academically stimulating than Berkley's? This is almost an outlandish statement. There are numerous campuses around the United States that has very similar environment to Michigan. Yes, we have rare school spirit and a party scene uncommon to many top academic institutions, but we are not the unique and outstanding academic environ that you claim. Berkley's campus is unique and unparalleled on the planet. The amount of free-minded political activism, mixed with the dynamic international amalgamation, is much more common than Michigan.</p>
<p>I'm not sure if you have, but have you visited Berkley? They were one of the school's I was planning to attend in place of Michigan and I can honestly say with confidence that the major aspect that stood out for Cal that Michigan lacked was the academically stimulating environment. A single week at Berkley was able to confirm this assertion.</p>
<p>Tell me, what part about Michigan's campus is so unique and noteworthy that many people in and outside of the institution can praise as even equal to Berkley's renowned campus atmosphere?</p>
<p>bahamuscale, I have visited Cal many times. MANY times. I have spent a total 3-4 months on Cal's campus. On top of that, I recruited Cal students for several years. I am very familiar with Cal. It was a school I considered for my undergraduate studies. Cal is indeed amazing. Where did I ever say that Michigan's academic environment was "more" stimulating" than Cal's? I said that only two universities that I visited (and I have visited most of the nation's top 50 universities) had more intense academic atmospheres. That does not mean that Michigan is the third most intense academic school. Caltech and MIT are probably THE most intense. Johns Hopkins and GT are very intense too. Cal is extremely intense. But so is Michigan. </p>
<p>"Tell me, what part about Michigan's campus is so unique and noteworthy that many people in and outside of the institution can praise as even equal to Berkley's renowned campus atmosphere?"</p>
<p>I really don't understand how a campus' uniqueness can impact the learnign experience, but I can say without flinching that Michigan's Law Quad is pretty unique.</p>
<p>Berkeley and Michigan are simply different. Though I am not yet a college student and have only visited the U of M once, I do have a brother who is currently a junior at Cal, and have been a die-hard Bears fan since I was little. That being said, I've been to Cal numerous times. Sat in on classes with my brother, been to Cal vs USC football games (similar to UM-OSU in rivalry status), slept in a friend's dorm room, etc. Personally, I think Cal's environment is more outright intense, though "stimulation" is an arguable term. UM and Berkeley use different things to stimulate their students. Cal is probably more of a "wow" university, so the prestige of a Cal degree, coupled with blunt history such as Mario Savio and the FSM, drives many students. Plus, there is always that #1 ranking to live up to. Michigan is probably more laid-back, though that should not be mistaken for less serious. Students know internally how much the degree is worth, even if many people only associate Michigan with football. Students are driven to work hard for each other, their alumni, etc., all under the "Go Blue" mantra. It is more subtle, yet nonetheless very present. Berkeley's history and traditions are among the most unique in the world for any university, public or private, but the fact that it is different from the U of M should not lower either institution's academic standing.</p>
<p>"I just don't understand why you guys are so uptight about being ranked 25, that's it. Considering the thousands of universities in the US, Michigan is undeniably a first tier school, and that is something to be proud of."</p>
<p>I am sure you would have no trouble accepting a claim that JHU is merely ranked #25 right? Ranking Michigan at #25 is not bad, but it is not accurate either. Any university should be thankful to be ranked #25, but that does not mean that it should be ranked thus.</p>
<p>"The main things I am criticizing are the inherent drawbacks of being in a school of 30,000 undergrads."</p>
<p>The size of a school has nothing to do with its ability to effectively educate its students. Columbia, Cornell, Harvard and Penn all have over 20,000 students. Cal has 35,000 students. Michigan has 40,000. All of those schools are HUGE. That does not mean they do not educated their students as well as schools that have fewer than 10,000 students.</p>
<p>"That said, however, I do feel that the admissions process at the top privates is more holistic and therefore more selective than that of Michigan, where a certain GPA and SAT/ACT almost ensure admission to the school."</p>
<p>If a school could only enroll 50 students or 100 students, a highly personalized and holisitc admissions process would be of great help. But a school that enrolls more than 1,000 (let alone 6,000) freshmen each year does not need to worry about being holisitc. Each year, such a school will enroll students of every type. As long as they have ability, that's all that matters.</p>
<p>"Furthermore, I don't understand why you compared the University of Michigan to Johns Hopkins. Personal attack? If all I cared about was rankings, I would've gone to the University of Chicago, where I was also accepted. I chose to go to Hopkins because I wanted a small student body, one-on-one attention and a school that boasted the best national programs in International Relations and Public Health Studies. I am also a very devoted pre-med and know that Hopkins offers opportunities and support for me to pursue a Medical Degree. Had I wanted to be an engineer (anything other than BME or ChemBE), I would've chosen Michigan, regardless of its 25 ranking."</p>
<p>Go back to reading this post and let me know who attacked whom. Where have I attacked? Did I say Michigan is better than JHU? Hell, as long as I can remember, I have been defending JHU on CC.</p>
<p>"So since I brought up the University of Chicago and I now have to reply to your personal atacks, lets talk about how it ranks. Consider for a moment that the University of Chicago tends to have lower stats than many of the top private universities, i.e. it admits many students with lower GPA/SAT who prove themselves promising in other qualitative ways. Yet you yourself admitted that the UChicago is academically superior to the University of Michigan. This is because of the admissions process, and this admissions process is similar to that of Hopkins. In fact, you might like to know that the University of Chicago founded its academic system on that of Johns Hopkins. You might also like to know that the three schools most well-known for their abnormally difficult and demanding cirriculums, and their grade deflation, are the University of Chicago, Cornell, and Johns Hopkins. Interesting you find one of those superior to U of M, but 2 of them inferior. Michigan does not and cannot look at applicants in a highly holistic manner, because of the sheer volume of applicants they have. They look at GPA, they look at ACT, and 90% of the admissions process is over."</p>
<p>First of all, as I said above, I never attacked you. It is you who attacked Michigan. And I never said that Chicago is better than Michigan, although I certainly think Chicago is amazing. I said Chicago's campus has a more academically intense feel to it. And what does Chicago's system being modeled after JHU's system have to do with anything? Stanford's system was modeled after Cornell's and Cornell's was modeled after Michigan's. Does that mean Michigan is equal to Stanford? Of course not. Stanford is one of the 5 universities I will fully admit is better than Michigan. As far as I am concerned, Chicago = Cornell = Johns Hopkins = Michigan. </p>
<p>"Anyway, the fact is that Hopkins ranks on average at about 15. We are arguing that Michigan should/shouldn't be in the top 10-15. So if you were trying to prove that Hopkins has little edge over Michigan, then logically you have shown that Michigan does not deserve to be ranked in the top 15."</p>
<p>I was not trying to argue that Hopkins has a "little edge" over Michigan. I think Michigan and Johns Hopkins are pretty even. Michigan has its advantages over JHU and vice versa. Overall, they are both amazing schools.</p>
<p>"Either way, however, this is pointless for me to argue. In all of your threads, Alexandre, I have never seen you admit to a weakness of the University of Michigan."</p>
<p>You obviously have not read many of my posts. I have frequently criticized Michigan and I have no problems admitting Michigan has its drawbacks. But overall, it is a good university with fewer flaws than most other universities.</p>
<p>"Also, having lived in 3 different countries myself, I can tell you that the majority of private schools are more well-known than U of M, UCB, UCLA, UVA, etc."</p>
<p>Your experience is obviously very limited. I have lived in England, France, Germany and all over the Middle East. First of all, most people in those countries have never heard of any US university with the exception of maybe Harvard. Secondly, those who have heard of US universities have heard more of Berkeley than most other US universities, private or public. Michigan is also very highly regarded among the educated elites in Europe. I am an alum of Cornell and Michigan and I am very involved in events for both schools and I'd say both schools are equally highly regarded internationally. Johns Hopkins is also extremely highly regarded. Of course, HYPSM, Cal and Columbia are THE most highly regarded, but Michigan, along with the schools mentioned above are also very well regarded. Schools like Brown, Dartmouth, Emory, Rice, Vanderbilt, WUSTL and several other private elites are excellent but have very limited international recognition. So I am not sure what private schools you are refering to (other than HYPSM and Columbia).</p>
<p>"Am I subsequently saying that U of M isn't well know? Absolutely not. The difference between 10 and 25 in USNWR rankings is MINIMAL, and it's ridiculous to complain about."</p>
<p>According to your previous posts, you seemed to say that there was a clear difference between #15 and #25. Now you are saying there isn't a significant difference.</p>
<p>"Also, having lived in 3 different countries myself, I can tell you that the majority of private schools are more well-known than U of M, UCB, UCLA, UVA, etc."
^^^Majority. Ok, get a list of US private schools off the internet, and find 51% of them that you think are honestly more well known than Michigan, Berkeley, UCLA, and UVA. If you can do that, take the time to back up your claim, then maybe you will have something noteworthy. Just follow this link, that should get you started: <a href="http://dir.yahoo.com/Education/Higher_Education/Colleges_and_Universities/United_States/Private/%5B/url%5D">http://dir.yahoo.com/Education/Higher_Education/Colleges_and_Universities/United_States/Private/</a> </p>
<p>So you think someone in China is going to be more aware of Williams than Berkeley? Grinnell than UCLA? Vassar over Virginia? Davidson over Michigan? All those LACs are ranked in the top 11 nationally, so they are obviously prestigious private schools. Personally, I think most are more aware of Berkeley than JHU, Dartmouth, Penn, etc.</p>
<p>this thread is getting too serious.</p>
<p>anyway, i feel that michigan's campus environment is very UNconducive to studying. i've been to a lot of schools (as a student), and i probably did the worst gpa-wise at michigan, haha.</p>
<p>i don't know exactly what it was, but in my opinion, everything was too close together. for example, the ugli is basically next to all of the bars on south u. you definitely feel out of place if you're studying on a friday or saturday night. also, the whole football atmosphere does not help studying at all either -_-</p>
<p>Alexandre, I don't see any use in continuing to debate this with you. I do support and respect the University of Michigan, and you are aware of the personal reasons why I chose to attend a top private over Michigan. This doesn't mean that I am hostile towards the school, nor that I'm attacking it. I in fact have quite a few friends who go there.</p>
<p>To be honest, it was really only one of your first remarks that set me off.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Hopkins was my dream school for many years, a school that I devoted four years of my life to in order to be accepted. I know I could have been accepted to Michigan with less effort, and to hear you imply that I'm a fool for putting in that extra effort was insulting. Nonetheless, certain comments in your last post hint that perhaps I misinterpreted the above quote...</p>
<p>So, yes, it is a financial strain for me and my family to send me to Hopkins. However, we all believe that it is a worthwhile investment, and I know many others both in my community, in my high school, and on both sides of the Atlantic who would've made the same choice. Thus we'll have to agree to disagree: you don't see the benefits that I do in attending a top private university over U of M. Fair enough.</p>
<p>As an aside, I lived in the States, Germany, and Belgium. When I spoke of the reputation of American universities abroad, I was speaking from my experience with the educated international community, not the average lad you meet in a pizzeria.</p>
<p>"Alexandre, I don't see any use in continuing to debate this with you. I do support and respect the University of Michigan, and you are aware of the personal reasons why I chose to attend a top private over Michigan." </p>
<p>Your reasons are indeed valid, which is why I wished you the best of luck. You made a decision that makes you happy and that is all that matters. </p>
<p>"This doesn't mean that I am hostile towards the school, nor that I'm attacking it. I in fact have quite a few friends who go there."</p>
<p>Your comments and tone toward Michigan in this thread have been derogatory and belittling. It sounded like you really look down on the school as an inferior to other top universities. </p>
<p>"To be honest, it was really only one of your first remarks that set me off.</p>
<p>Quote:
Originally Posted by Alexandre
Are you actually chosing to attend JHU at $45,000/year when you could be attending Michigan for $20,000/year? </p>
<p>Hopkins was my dream school for many years, a school that I devoted four years of my life to in order to be accepted. I know I could have been accepted to Michigan with less effort, and to hear you imply that I'm a fool for putting in that extra effort was insulting. Nonetheless, certain comments in your last post hint that perhaps I misinterpreted the above quote..."</p>
<p>I think you misinterpreted what I said. I was just saying that paying an extra $100,000 to attend Johns Hopkins (or any university for that matter) over a school like Michigan is a pretty big sacrifice. Whether it is worth it or not depends on personal circumstances.</p>
<p>"So, yes, it is a financial strain for me and my family to send me to Hopkins. However, we all believe that it is a worthwhile investment, and I know many others both in my community, in my high school, and on both sides of the Atlantic who would've made the same choice. Thus we'll have to agree to disagree: you don't see the benefits that I do in attending a top private university over U of M. Fair enough."</p>
<p>I am sure many would have made your choice. It is a fine choice. I also think just as many would have taken Michigan over JHU. Either way, you cannot lose. They are both awesome in their own right. It really boils down to fit.</p>
<p>"As an aside, I lived in the States, Germany, and Belgium. When I spoke of the reputation of American universities abroad, I was speaking from my experience with the educated international community, not the average lad you meet in a pizzeria."</p>
<p>I was alluding to the educated elites too Chris. Like I said, most people in Western Europe and the Middle East don't know anything about US universities save perhaps Harvard. In educated circles, Johns Hopkins has an incredible reputation in Western Europe and the Middle East...but so does Michigan.</p>
<p>Alex et al,</p>
<p>I know you all defend/boast about michigan because you go there, but I think its enough already with the "michigan is a top 10/15/whatever number floats your boat these day" school posts. Michigan may very well be the best school in the universe, but according to USNews's methodoly it isn't. In fact, the thing I find most comedic about it is that the only reason michigan is even ranked 25 in USNews is because of its very good PA score, which even you, Alexandre, said wasn't important unless you were a student who was going to graduate school--and most students don't. Without PA, I'm sure Michigan would drop to the mid 30s. And a school, which many of you like to compare michigan to, UVa (which is consistently ranked higher than michigan anyway), and constantly say "well michigan is better than UVa" tends to stay at its ranking, or move slightly up in "PA free" recalculation of the rankings. Just my 2 cents...</p>
<p>Now, do I think UVa is better than Michigan? Of course not, but I'm also not someone who is going to make stupid comment like bahamutscale and say "Perhaps, UVA is worse than us by a small margin."</p>
<p>regarding an earlier post that held Michigan and Cornell are equally highly regarded on an international level: are you serious?</p>
<p>Cornell blows Michigan out on the international level, with way more internationals knowing that Cornell is the more prestigious of the two. That is, of course, if they've ever heard of Michigan!</p>
<p>mrsopresident, I speak purely from personal experience. International rankings seem to support my personal experience.</p>
<p>mrsopresident: I decided to test your theory. I emailed 5 of my friends who live in different countries (Ireland, Japan, Nigeria, Britain, and Russia), quite a diverse pool, and asked them which one they felt was more highly regarded: Michigan or Cornell. You may be surprised when I tell you that 3 chose UM over Cornell, 1 said they were equal, and 1 put Cornell over Michigan. Also, all 5 of those people are educated, successful adults, and 2 are university professors in their country.</p>