<p>
</li>
</ol>
<p>if you combine these 2 factors, all you need to do if you are financially stable is fill in your details and press a couple of additional buttons and you have finished applying to 2 top tier universities.</p>
<p>“If a student is looking for a smart, top notch student body I’d go with Vandy.”</p>
<p>Reddog, you are basing your observation on what exactly? Percent accepted and SAT/ACT ranges reported by the university? If Vanderbilt students are indeed smarter than Michigan students, it certainly isn’t translating into graduate school placement. Below are how Vanderbilt and Michigan compare to each other at elite graduate programs (I only have statistics on 6 different programs, but others are free to chip in!):</p>
<p>YALE LAW SCHOOL (currently enrolled)
Michigan 12
Vanderbilt 4</p>
<p><a href=“Welcome | Office of the University Printer”>Welcome | Office of the University Printer; (page 159)</p>
<p>CHICAGO LAW SCHOOL (currently enrolled)
Michigan 11
Vanderbilt 2</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/Announcements%202012-13%20FINAL.pdf[/url]”>http://www.law.uchicago.edu/files/file/Announcements%202012-13%20FINAL.pdf</a> (page 176)</p>
<p>MICHIGAN LAW SCHOOL (currently enrolled)
Michigan 150 (not a typo)
Vanderbilt 4 (not a typo)</p>
<p>[faq-charts[/url</a>]</p>
<p>JOHS HOPKINS MEDICAL SCHOOL (currently enrolled)
Michigan 12
Vanderbilt 5</p>
<p><a href=“http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/sebin/u/p/SOMCatalog0910.pdf[/url]”>http://www.hopkinsmedicine.org/sebin/u/p/SOMCatalog0910.pdf](<a href=“Admissions | University of Michigan Law School”>Admissions | University of Michigan Law School)</a> (page 460)</p>
<p>WUSTL MEDICAL SCHOOL (since 1995)
Michigan 48
Vanderbilt 26</p>
<p><a href=“http://medadmissions.wustl.edu/HowtoApply/selectionprocess/Pages/WhoChoosesWU.aspx[/url]”>http://medadmissions.wustl.edu/HowtoApply/selectionprocess/Pages/WhoChoosesWU.aspx</a></p>
<p>MICHIGAN MEDICAL SCHOOL (currently enrolled)
Michigan 201 (not a typo)
Vanderbilt fewer than 10 (not a typo) </p>
<p>[University</a> of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day](<a href=“http://www.med.umich.edu/medschool/admissions/apply/profiles.html]University”>http://www.med.umich.edu/medschool/admissions/apply/profiles.html)
[University</a> of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day](<a href=“http://www.med.umich.edu/medschool/admissions/apply/profiles/profiles_2011.html]University”>University of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day)
[University</a> of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day](<a href=“http://www.med.umich.edu/medschool/admissions/apply/profiles/profiles_2010.html]University”>University of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day)
[University</a> of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day](<a href=“http://www.med.umich.edu/medschool/admissions/apply/profiles/profiles_2009.html]University”>University of Michigan Medical School :: Admissions :: Interview Day)</p>
<p>TOTAL
Michigan 434 (83 not including Michigan graduate programs)
Vanderbilt 50 (37 not including Michigan graduate programs)</p>
<p>The gap between the number of Michigan students who enroll into top 10 Law and Medical school is too large to justify, even when you consider that Michigan has three times more Law and Medical school applicants. I realize that Michigan graduate programs really give Michigan undergrads a huge leg up (something to consider when weighing the benefits of going to Michigan for one’s undergraduate studies), but even at the other elite graduate programs listed above, Michigan matches Vanderbilt nicely. If you include Michigan’s top 10 Law and Medical schools, then the difference is so significant that the two universities are no longer in the same league altogether. Either way, if Vanderbilt students were truly “smarter” than Michigan students, they would be better represented at top graduate programs. I guess Michigan’s “dumb” students manage to perform as well as Vanderbilt’s “smart” students (when NOT including Michigan’s elite graduate programs) where it really matters; graduate school placement.</p>
<p>Alexandre, this semi-jousting is fun and a good way to pass the time for those of us with nothing to do while we await these decisions.</p>
<p>How many Michigan grads are in the Vanderbilt School of Medicine?</p>
<p>Isn’t prestige in large part based on rankings? Aren’t schools preoccupied with rankings because of a desire to influence perceptions of prestige? Don’t you post on rankings specifically to demonstrate that UMich is just as good or better than some other school(s)?</p>
<p>I would prefer Michigan over Vandy, but more for style/vibe/social reasons. That said, those numbers posted for Vandy, especially the 1470-1590 for middle 50%, are impressive.</p>
<p>You can’t include Michigan grad school because obviously it’s going to have significantly more Umich undergrads. Grad schools always have a disproportionately large amount of its own undergrads matriculating. </p>
<p>Taking that into consideration and taking the fact that Vandy has less than 1/4 the undergrads Umich does, the placement is much more leveled.</p>
<p>Also, I don’t think graduate placement is even an appropriate metric to determine undergraduate strength. There’s so many factors that go into grad school acceptance, it’s never attributed solely to intelligence. Also who’s to say it’s not easier to get a good GPA at UMich than it is at Vandy, or vice versa? </p>
<p>There’s really no getting around that Vandy has an incredibly excellent incoming freshmen class, with scores rivaling those at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. </p>
<p>I’m not saying Umich isn’t full of excellent student. In fact, I think it is. I’m just saying overall the student body strength at Vandy is stronger than that of Umich.
Few would disagree with that much. </p>
<p>These little debates are always entertaining but they are pretty pointless, in my opinion. We can all find facts and stats to support college “A” over college “B”, and vice versa. Even if the colleges are of two completely different calibers (in this case they aren’t) you can still find numbers from various independent sources where the lesser college bests the other in certain respects. I think the OPs asking these questions would be better served with simple pros and cons of each, and not so much of the “This college is better than that college” bravado, especially when the colleges are highly comparable overall.</p>
<p>“How many Michigan grads are in the Vanderbilt School of Medicine?”</p>
<p>I do not know. I think all universities should post such data. A more pertinent question is how many Vanderbilt grads are in Vanderbilt Medical School! ;)</p>
<p>“Isn’t prestige in large part based on rankings?”</p>
<p>It depends on one’s point of view. To me, academic rankings are the primary driver of prestige. The more highly rated programs and/or departments, the more prestigious the university. However, some believe that prestige is directly associated with exclusivity. That the harder it is to get into a university, the more prestigious it is. There are other factors that determine prestige, such as the prominence of a university’s alumni, or the strength of its athletic traditions and programs. </p>
<p>“Aren’t schools preoccupied with rankings because of a desire to influence perceptions of prestige?”</p>
<p>That is especially true of private universities as they depend on rankings. Public universities are not as dependent on rankings. This explains why private universities manipulate their data so drastically. </p>
<p>“Don’t you post on rankings specifically to demonstrate that UMich is just as good or better than some other school(s)?”</p>
<p>Never in other forums and on my own initiative. I will post rankings on this forum for the benefit of other Michigan alums and students, not in an attempt to lessen the value of other universities, but to celebrate Michigan’s accomplishments with fellow Michigan faithful. I will not post similar rankings on other forums unless Michigan is being denigrated, in which case, I will defend the University. But I will defend any other university that is being unfairly trashed. That is one of my duties as moderator. </p>
<p>“I would prefer Michigan over Vandy, but more for style/vibe/social reasons.”</p>
<p>So would most cross admits. Vanderbilt is excellent, but Michigan is generally considered better. </p>
<p>“That said, those numbers posted for Vandy, especially the 1470-1590 for middle 50%, are impressive.”</p>
<p>They would be impressive if they were accurate, based in single sitting, included all SAT takers, and most of all, for students enrolling at Vanderbilt, not merely students admitted. But I find them suspiciously high. Harvard’s mid 50% is 1400-1590. I doubt Vanderbilt has a higher mid 50% than Harvard. I have a feeling that Vanderbilt doctored those figures to make itself look better. Like I said, public universities often manipulate data to make themselves look better. Omitting thousands of graduate students from their student to faculty ratios is my favorite! But they resort to other creative measures. Say at a private university, 75% of the students take the SAT and 65% take the ACT, it is not uncommon for private universities take the highest ACT and SAT scores that add up to 100% of the student body and omit the rest.</p>
<p>I think no one has any basis to know what most cross admits would prefer.
Many would chose Vandy, many would chose Umich. But none of us actually know what “most” do.</p>
<p>I also disagree that “Vandy is excellent but Umich is generally considered as better.” </p>
<p>Again there is not a general consensus that one is better than the other. Some may say one, some may say the other, but there is by no means a clear cut winner that is regarded as better overal, taking everything into consideration. </p>
<p>These threads are pretty tiring. No one’s mind ever changes. It’s just about a dozen posters tirelessly pasting various stats from a ton of different subjective and independent sources, trying to prove why school A is marginally better than school B. Then there are the posters that get so much as a sniff of someone insinuating that their school is even slightly inferior, and they will post for pages until they’ve got the last word in. </p>
<p>The honest truth is Umich and Vandy are quite different socially/environmentally and probably appeal to two very different types of students. It’s not “better” or “worse,” its a matter of preference. </p>
<p>Yes Vandy does have incredibly high score averages, and yes vandy is extremely selective, but that doesn’t mean it is better.
And yes, Umichigan is impressively diverse and well rounded academically and also boasts some fields of excellence, but that doesn’t mean its better.</p>
<p>Overal the national perception is that the two are comparable and few people would even entertain such a trivial quarrel in trying to declare one as slightly better.</p>
<p>“You can’t include Michigan grad school because obviously it’s going to have significantly more Umich undergrads. Grad schools always have a disproportionately large amount of its own undergrads matriculating.”</p>
<p>Are you kidding?! LOL! reddog, you MUST take those students into account. Michigan’ Law school cannibalizes on other law schools. Michigan students who are admitted into Michigan Law will almost always choose it unless they are admitted into Harvard, Yale or Stanford law schools. Michigan Medical school is always ranked between #6 and #10 in the nation. Again, most medical school bound Michigan students will choose Michigan over any medical school save only Harvard and perhaps JHU. </p>
<p>“Taking that into consideration and taking the fact that Vandy has less than 1/4 the undergrads Umich does, the placement is much more leveled.”</p>
<p>It is not levelled entirely. The edge still goes to Michigan. You have to include Michigan Law school. But to be fair, one should also include Vanderbilt Medical school as it is a peer of Michigan Medical school. Removing Michigan Medical from the equation, you still have a 233 to 41 advantage in favor of Michigan. That’s a 5:1 advantage. Also, you are assuming that Michigan has 4 times as many medical and law school applicants as Vanderbilt. That is highly unlikely. Only 25% of Michigan students apply to law and medical school. At virtually all private elites, that number is closer to 35%-40%. That’s because Michigan attracts a more diverse group of students in terms of academic and professional interest. Many students at Michigan go on to become Engineers, nurses, musicians, architects etc…I would be surprised if Vanderbilt had fewer than 1/3 of Michigan’s law and medical school applicants. Michigan publishes its numbers, I am not sure if Vanderbilt does. Each year, 1,300-1,400 Michigan students apply to Medical and Law school. You are free to check, but I am fairly certain that at least 500 Vanderbilt students and alums apply to law and medical schools annually. </p>
<p>Besides, even if you did not include Michigan Law in your calculation, which would be unfair, and the percentage of Michigan and Vanderbilt students enrolling in top graduate schools were the same, it would only prove that Michigan’s student body is as accomplished as Vanderbilt’s. </p>
<p>“There’s really no getting around that Vandy has an incredibly excellent incoming freshmen class, with scores rivaling those at Harvard, Yale, and Princeton.”</p>
<p>It does not only rival those at HYP, it actually beats them…if they are the scores of students who enrolled, not just admitted. I would like to see those figures come out of a common data set. Even then, as we have seen with Emory, they could be doctored. </p>
<p>“Also, I don’t think graduate placement is even an appropriate metric to determine undergraduate strength.”</p>
<p>It is a better metric than SAT ranges. </p>
<p>“There’s so many factors that go into grad school acceptance, it’s never attributed solely to intelligence. Also who’s to say it’s not easier to get a good GPA at UMich than it is at Vandy, or vice versa?”</p>
<p>Michigan is not known for grade inflation. For many years, it was in fact known for grade deflation. In recent years, it has become more reasonable. I doubt Vanderbilt’s grading philosophy is standing in the way of students. Besides, GPA alone won’t do. The LSAT and MCAT are also important. </p>
<p>“I’m not saying Umich isn’t full of excellent student. In fact, I think it is. I’m just saying overall the student body strength at Vandy is stronger than that of Umich.
Few would disagree with that much.”</p>
<p>I disagree. I have seen no real tangible evidence of this. I do not believe the SAT/ACT is a viable indicator of intelligence because universities report the data very differently. There are very few universities that have clearly stronger student bodies and Vanderbilt is not one of them.</p>
<p>Alexandre,
I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then. I think Vandy does have a consistently stronger student body than mich, and i do think high school achievement is the most valid metric of quantifying the strength of the undergraduate community. </p>
<p>And Mikejohnson, I agree.</p>
<p>Alex, so I’m not sure I followed your response, which seemed contradictory…so debating prestige is pointless, but rankings not pointless, but in your view prestige is based on rankings? Lost me at hello.</p>
<p>And I didn’t say I’d choose Michigan because it’s better. I said because of vibe/social factors. I think saying Michigan is “better” than Vandy is a very tough sell, especially at the undergrad level.</p>
<p>Alex, you don’t think the lower 30% at Michigan is a lower quality student than the lower 30% at Vandy?</p>
<p>“I think no one has any basis to know what most cross admits would prefer.
Many would chose Vandy, many would chose Umich. But none of us actually know what “most” do.”</p>
<p>True. I have no evidence of this. Most people on CC who have had to choose have chosen Michigan, but that is not scientific. </p>
<p>"I also disagree that “Vandy is excellent but Umich is generally considered as better. Again there is not a general consensus that one is better than the other. Some may say one, some may say the other, but there is by no means a clear cut winner that is regarded as better overal, taking everything into consideration.”</p>
<p>We’ll have to disagree here. Michigan is a better university. There is such a thing as better. Djokovic is better than Murray. Yes, Murray can beat Djokovic on any given day, but Djokovic is the better overall player. Michigan is better than Vanderbilt. Virtually every single department at Michigan is better. Michigan has also more resources, a larger endowment, and equally large endowment per capita. In every measurable way, Michigan is as good as or better than Vanderbilt. </p>
<p>“These threads are pretty tiring. No one’s mind ever changes. It’s just about a dozen posters tirelessly pasting various stats from a ton of different subjective and independent sources, trying to prove why school A is marginally better than school B. Then there are the posters that get so much as a sniff of someone insinuating that their school is even slightly inferior, and they will post for pages until they’ve got the last word in.”</p>
<p>I agree here. People do not change their minds. I did, but most people do not. I used to think that LACs and schools like Brown, Dartmouth, Georgetown, etc… were plain bad. I now see them as excellent universities. It took time for me to see the light, but it happened.</p>
<p>“The honest truth is Umich and Vandy are quite different socially/environmentally and probably appeal to two very different types of students. It’s not “better” or “worse,” its a matter of preference.”</p>
<p>We can agree here. Just because one university is better than another does not mean it is better for you. We each have our preference. I got into Cal and Michigan. I think Cal is better than Michigan, but I still chose to go to Michigan.</p>
<p>“Overal the national perception is that the two are comparable and few people would even entertain such a trivial quarrel in trying to declare one as slightly better.”</p>
<p>Outside of the USNWR worshipping crowd, Michigan has a stronger national reputation. Vanderbilt is highly regarded to be sure, but Michigan is further reaching.</p>
<p>finalchild, I do not know what to think when it comes to Vanderbilt or other private universities when it comes to their student statistics. They have been lying and manipulating data for so long that it is hard to estimate. But to answer your question, I have no reason to believe that the bottom 30% of Michigan’s student body is weaker than Vanderbilt’s bottom 30%.</p>
<p>“I guess we’ll have to agree to disagree then. I think Vandy does have a consistently stronger student body than mich, and i do think high school achievement is the most valid metric of quantifying the strength of the undergraduate community.”</p>
<p>Huh? You lost me here. You are suggesting that the SAT is the same as “high school achievement”. Are you kidding? The two are completely unrelated. People study for the SAT on their own, outside of high school. I agree that high school achievement is the most valid metric, and that means GPA, class rank and high school curriculum. While it is not possible to compare the high school curricula that students at Michigan and Vanderbilt followed, it is possible to compare GPA and class rank. Michigan and Vanderbilt are identical there. Average graduating cumulative unweighed high school GPA was 3.75 at Vanderbilt and 3.79 at Michigan. 90% of students at both Michigan and Vanderbilt graduated among the top 10% of their high school class. That’s high school achievement, and that is what Michigan’s admissions office values above all else as it tries to determined academic potential. The SAT is an external exam that has little to do with high school classroom performance. The wealthy will always do better because they can afford taking hundreds of hours of test prep and take the test several times. Clearly, Vanderbilt targets students with high schools while Michigan does not. I have no way of proving Vanderbilt’s admissions philosophy, but Michigan’s stance on standardized tests is well known. Michigan openly admitted that they would prefer an applicant with a 4.0 GPA and a 1300 on the SAT than an applicant with a 3.8 GPA and a 1600 on the SAT. Back when Michigan used a formula in admissions, it allocated 80 points to GPA and 12 points to the SAT. Statistically, a student with a 4.0 GPA and a 1290 on the SAT would beat admitted over a student with a 3.8 GPA and a perfect 1600 on the SAT.</p>
<p>So, while it is clear that Vanderbilt values the SAT a great deal, it does not mean that students at Vanderbilt are better than students at Michigan. In all other ways (graduating high school GPA, class ranking, graduate school placement etc…), Michigan and Vanderbilt students seem evenly matched.</p>
<p>Alex, very comprehensive in hitting all of the points, except you missed #29.</p>
<p>Just curious, since the top LACs generally won’t be deep enough to rank as highly on a departmental basis – which by the way is just one way to rate academic strength…i.e. by department to department – do you also think Michigan is “better” than Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, etc.</p>
<p>“Alex, so I’m not sure I followed your response, which seemed contradictory…so debating prestige is pointless, but rankings not pointless, but in your view prestige is based on rankings? Lost me at hello.”</p>
<p>Department rankings, although not perfect, are grounded in more tangible factors. Prestige is almost entirely subjective. </p>
<p>“And I didn’t say I’d choose Michigan because it’s better. I said because of vibe/social factors. I think saying Michigan is “better” than Vandy is a very tough sell, especially at the undergrad level.”</p>
<p>In my personal opinion, there is no such thing as undergraduate vs graduate level. I only believe in overall institutional quality. Some universities may have excellent graduate programs, but if they lack the resources, not only with they be weaker at the undergraduate level, but also as an institution overall. Where you and I can agree is that in most disciplines, one can get as good an undergraduate education at Vanderbilt as in Michigan. From that point of view, you are absolutely correct. But that does not mean Vanderbilt is as good as Michigan overall. And in some undergraduate programs and fields, Michigan is better than Vanderbilt. Engineering and Mathematics are two such examples where Michigan will provide a better undergraduate education than Vanderbilt. But in the vast majority of fields, undergrads at Vanderbilt will receive as good an education as those at Michigan.</p>
<p>^^^gonna have to give you a C+ on explanation of first part :)</p>
<p>“Just curious, since the top LACs generally won’t be deep enough to rank as highly on a departmental basis – which by the way is just one way to rate academic strength…i.e. by department to department – do you also think Michigan is “better” than Williams, Amherst, Swarthmore, etc.”</p>
<p>Finalchild, LACs cannot compete with the heavy hitters from a point of view of academic strength. That is why I did not give them the respect they deserve. But then I visited a friend at Williams, another at Oberlin and yet another at Kenyon and I completely changed my outlook on LACS…for the better. The classes I took at Michigan that had 50-100 students generally also contained between 50 and 100 students at private peers such as Cornell, Northwestern, Penn etc… Many private research elites claim that 65%-75% of their classes have fewer than 20 students, what they omit to say is that the majority of core classes in most majors (classes like Intermediate Micro and Macro Econ, Financial Economics, Econometrics, Game Theory, as well as other popular intermediate and advanced level classes in other popular majors etc…) will have well over 20 students. That is not the case at LACs. Those same classes at Williams, Oberlin and Kenyon will have 15-20 students enrolled in them…and the faculty is ENTIRELY at their disposal. I mean entirely. Faculty at major research universities will seldom interact with undergrads outside of the classroom and of their limited office hours. It is not that they do not care, but they are too busy with their research, advising and working with their 5-8 graduate students, writing and publishing papers, fund raising for their research etc… Professors at LACs are way less busy with these things and focus far more of their attention on undergrads. </p>
<p>So, while LACs may not have the same academic horsepower, they more than make up for it in other ways. </p>
<p>PS. I found it hilarious how my friends at Williams, Oberlin and Kenyon knew almost every person we walked across or into on their campuses. I mean like well over half! LOL! You have a degree of intimacy in a campus with 1,000-2,000 undergrads that you cannot possibly duplicate in a school with 5,000 or more students.</p>
<p>I prefer research universities for myself, but I can appreciate the benefits of a tiny LAC.</p>
<p>finalchild, my Michigan standards, a C+ is right around the mean. Not bad! ;)</p>
<p>You rebounded with an A- response on the LACs :). I have a kid at one of the ones you mentioned.</p>
<p>LACs are great…and not just AWS. There are many excellent LACs, such as Bowdoin, Carleton, Claremont McKenna, Davidson, Grinnell, Haverford, Kenyon, Middlebury, Oberlin, Pomona and Wesleyan to name just a few. They are grossly underrated.</p>