Vandy vs Umich?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Michigan
61

<p>Allcapella, since you’ve returned to the conversation that seems to have wandered a bit, and since you were originally posting for a friend, can you tell us the following information so we can actually respond to your question, which is of course accordingly unique to each individual situation:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>Is the student in state for Michigan or OOS?</p></li>
<li><p>Does the student have financial need as a school would define it (eg. have they run an Expected Family Contribution/or do they have the resources to accommodate a full-pay scenario.</p></li>
<li><p>What specific area of study does your friend intend to pursue.</p></li>
<li><p>Is Greek life of particular interest to your friend, or are they perhaps the type that is wholly disinterested in Greek life?</p></li>
</ol>

<p>My son attends UMich. A close friend of his attends Vandy. I also have an associate who studied UG at UMich and grad school at Vandy. Perhaps I could poll these folks to get you some salient basis for comparison ;)</p>

62

<p>“I don’t think it’s fair to associate every private school with the dishonesty of SAT/ACT disclosure that has occurred at a handful of privates. Yes, some schools do conveniently report stats that are most advantageous to them, and I don’t think there is anything wrong with looking at score ranges with a dose of skepticism, but they shouldn’t be completely discredited.”</p>

<p>While it is idealistic of you to think so, the admissions game has become an obsession to private universities. Emory, CMC and GWU are not exceptions. </p>

<p>“Even if Vandy does spruce up their SAT/ACT reports a bit (and I have no reason to believe they do), their scores are still quite a bit higher than Michigans.”</p>

<p>That’s what it looked like with Emory too. Now that they have fessed up, Emory’s super-score mid 50% range is the same as Michigan’s non-super-scored mid 50% range. </p>

<p>Not that it matters since Michigan does not weigh SAT/ACT scores heavily in its admissions decision, while Vanderbilt obviously does. </p>

<p>“Also according to Vanderbilt and according to Michigans own reported Class of 2016 profile, more studens were in the top 10% of HS class at Vandy than at Michigan.”</p>

<p>Like I said, I did not make up the data, I got it their Common Data Sets:</p>

<p>Class of 2016
Vanderbilt, 90% top 10%(average unweighed GPA 3.75)
Michigan, not reported (average unweighed GPA 3.80)</p>

<p>Class of 2015
Vanderbilt, 89% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.72)
Michigan, not reported (average unweighed GPA 3.79)</p>

<p>Class of 2014
Vanderbilt, 85% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.71)
Michigan, 92% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.76)</p>

<p>Class of 2013
Vanderbilt, 86% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.71)
Michigan, 92% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.75)</p>

<p>Class of 2012
Vanderbilt, 84% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.72)
Michigan, 92% top 10% (average unweighed GPA 3.75)</p>

<p>“Assuming cost is equal, I also don’t think more cross admits would choose Michigan over Vandy by any means, certainly for undergraduate.”</p>

<p>Again, I have no concrete evidence of it one way or the other. My observations are purely from College Confidential. Most Michigan vs Vanderbilt threads in the past have chosen Michigan. </p>

<p>“Right or wrong, selectivity does mean something to students. When a student gets into a school that admits 11-12% vs 38%, I think it’s tough for a student do chose the significantly less selective school without hesitation, even if the two schools are of a similar caliber. Justified or not, it is worth something, especially to impressionable high school students.”</p>

<p>I don’t think many students choose based on percentage admitted. It obviously plays a role in the case of some students, but I think the majority of students will choose the university that better suits them.</p>

63

<p>Alex, what does it mean to be a moderator here? How does one get chosen? Are you (and other moderators) serving here on behalf of universities or CC? </p>

<p>I think you made a mistake deleting that post, and ever since then you seem even more entrenched. You can’t make SATs mean nothing. You can’t back up a suggestion that all privates are corrupt. You don’t allow some data, but you do allow totally unscientific impressions that kids on CC choose Mich over Vandy. And, and I think this is your biggest recent error, you state very emphatically that Vandy and WUSTL have not risen in prominence over the past 5-10 years. Regarding the latter, I suspect you are the only person in the country who holds that view (which is entirely separate from the direct comparison of those schools with Mich).</p>

64

<p>“You can’t make SATs mean nothing.”</p>

<p>The SAT does not mean nothing. I never said that. But different universities assign different weight to it, and report the data differently. What I said was that comparing the student body art one university to that of another by looking at the SAT is flawed. </p>

<p>Take Brown and Cornell as a prime examples of a universities that, like Michigan, do not place too much weight on SAT / ACT.</p>

<p>MID 50% SAT
Michigan, 1260-1460
Brown, 1340-1520
Cornell, 1310-1520
Vanderbilt, 1400-1560</p>

<p>MID 50% ACT
Michigan, 28-32
Brown, 29-33
Cornell, 30-33
Vanderbilt 32-34</p>

<p>As you can see, there is a small but noticeable gap between Vanderbilt and Brown/Cornell. Do you honestly believe that the student body at Vanderbilt is brighter and more accomplished than the student body at Brown or Cornell? Or do you simply think that Vanderbilt places more weight and importance on standardized tests…or perhaps reports data differently?</p>

<p>“You can’t back up a suggestion that all privates are corrupt. You don’t allow some data, but you do allow totally unscientific impressions that kids on CC choose Mich over Vandy.”</p>

<p>If I have not allowed data, it is because it is unsubstantiated. </p>

<p>“And, and I think this is your biggest recent error, you state very emphatically that Vandy and WUSTL have not risen in prominence over the past 5-10 years. Regarding the latter, I suspect you are the only person in the country who holds that view (which is entirely separate from the direct comparison of those schools with Mich).”</p>

<p>Actually, I have no personal opinion on the matter. I was merely referring to the Peer Assessment rating of Vanderbilt and WUSTL. In both cases, the Peer Assessment rating remained constant since the 1990s (both at 4.0/5.0 or 4.1/5.0). So at least in the eyes of academe (university presidents and deans of undergraduate colleges), Vanderbilt and WUSTL have not risen in prominence. I also do not think that those two universities have become household names. They were relatively unknown (relative to other elite universities) in the 1990s, and they remain so today. Like I said, among high school students, who depend largely on the USNWR, those two universities have risen in prominence significantly, but in most other quarters, I do not think much has changed, at least not in the eyes of the experts.</p>

65

<p>No one has mentioned Vanderbilt’s 4 year graduation rate of 87% vs UM’s 4 year graduation rate of 73%. It takes UM students 6 years to reach an 87% graduation rate. For an out of state student that’s $110,000+.<br>
Anyone who thinks all universities aren’t “gaming the USNWR” to keep their ranking high must be living in fantasyland. There must be 100 ways to game the system and universities know them all.</p>

66

<p>I think I’ll answer this way. While I wouldn’t argue that Vandy (or WUSTL) are “better” than Brown or Cornell, I think a kid getting admitted to Vandy and Cornell or Brown and WUSTL look at that choice differently than they would have 5 years ago, 10 years ago, and certainly 20 years ago. Aside from head-to-head comparisons, and however you slice the numbers, schools like Vandy, WUSTL and Rice have very strong student bodies. Is this the USNWR effect. Perhaps. But how did they get ranked that high in USNWR? Even if deeply flawed, there must he something there. And I don’t think you are exactly saying this, but it’s not like USNWR should be put entirely to the side, and it’s not like USNWR is the only media outlet or guide that rates these schools very, very highly.</p>

<p>I think we do run into the category problem. It’s easier when we separate Ivies, elite public universities, elite mid-size non-Ivies, elite LACs. I see Vandy and WUSTL as very much very belonging to the same family along with Duke, Rice, Emory, CMU, etc.</p>

67

<p>opie12, Michigan’s current 6 year graduation rate is 90% (compared to 92% at Vanderbilt). Also, while your 73% 4-year graduation figure seems accurate, you need to keep in mind that the majority of OOS students graduate within 4 years, precisely because of the high cost of attendance. Also, several Michigan programs require more than 4 years to graduate, particularly double majors and Engineering. The reason why students take longer than 4 years to graduate is either personal or curricular. It is seldom because students cannot register for required classes.</p>

68

<p>“Aside from head-to-head comparisons, and however you slice the numbers, schools like Vandy, WUSTL and Rice have very strong student bodies.”</p>

<p>I never questioned that. I am questioning the notion that those universities have much stronger student bodies than Michigan. I have not seen much evidence of this. </p>

<p>“Is this the USNWR effect. Perhaps. But how did they get ranked that high in USNWR? Even if deeply flawed, there must he something there.”</p>

<p>Finalchild, I personally think the USNWR is very flawed because the data used is not at all consistant. You would see huge swings if all data input into the USNWR equation were audited for accuracy and consistency. </p>

<p>“And I don’t think you are exactly saying this, but it’s not like USNWR should be put entirely to the side, and it’s not like USNWR is the only media outlet or guide that rates these schools very, very highly.”</p>

<p>I have not seen many rankings that I really respect finalchild. I find the Peer Assessment rating relatively reliable, only if it were carefully audited and transparent. </p>

<p>“I think we do run into the category problem. It’s easier when we separate Ivies, elite public universities, elite mid-size non-Ivies, elite LACs.”</p>

<p>I agree with this. Well, LACs are ranked separately anyway. But I think separating private universities from public really makes sense since private universities usually report data one way and public universities another.</p>

<p>“I see Vandy and WUSTL as very much very belonging to the same family along with Duke, Rice, Emory, CMU, etc.”</p>

<p>I would add Georgetown and Notre Dame to that group.</p>

69

<p>

Standardized tests become limiting factors when comparing the undergraduate student bodies at elite universities since they are not difficult enough of examinations to differentiate between schools such as Stanford, Duke, and Vanderbilt. Their student bodies may appear to be similar based on SAT/ACT scores but there is a major difference in the professional school and graduate school placement of Stanford, Duke, and Vanderbilt.</p>

<p>

Actaully, its the reverse based on graduate school placement-Brown/Cornell alums are far represented than Vanderbilt grads at the elite business schools (M7 minus Kellogg).</p>

<p>Based on Poets & Quants:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/business-school-mba/1224650-top-feeder-colleges-americas-elite-b-schools-2.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/business-school-mba/1224650-top-feeder-colleges-americas-elite-b-schools-2.html&lt;/a&gt; (data found in Post 20 and links found in the first page of the thread redirected from Poets & Quants)</p>

<p>Harvard 192
UPenn 183</p>

<p>Stanford 117
Yale 113</p>

<p>Princeton 101
Duke 95
Columbia 89
Berkeley 84
Dartmouth 80
Georgetown 79</p>

<p>Northwestern 67
Cornell 59
Indian Institute of Tech 58
Univ of Virginia 58
Brown 54
MIT 54
Michigan: 49
NYU 42
UCLA 41
Univ of Texas-Austin 40</p>

<p>West Point 29
USC 25
Boston 24
Williams 24
BYU 23
Univ of Illinois 22</p>

<p>Washington 17
Michigan 15
Carnegie Mellon 14
Notre Dame 13
National Univ. of Singapore 13
Univ of Chicago 12
Cambridge 12
Middlebury 11
LSE 11
Yonsei Univ 10
Seoul National Univ 10
Univ of Wisconsin 10
GIT 10
Vanderbilt 9
Oxford 9
Tufts 8
Univ of Western Ontario 8
McGill 7
Univ of Maryland 7
Fudan Univ. 6
Bowdoin 6
Johns Hopkins 6
Univ of Georgia 6
Wellesley 6
Amherst 6
Penn State 6
Purdue 6
Colby College 5
Shanghai Jiao Tong Univ. 5
Ohio State 5
Bates 4
New Economic School 4
Peking 4
UNC 4
Haverford 3
Rice 3
Univ. of New South Wales 3</p>

<p>Emory, Wash U, and Vanderbilt are nowhere close to Brown, Cornell, or Michigan in terms of MBA admissions. Is this because grads from the former schools don’t have access to the same level of elite jobs as those from the latter schools? I suspect so.</p>

70

<p>Goldenboy, I am not sure how accurate the extrapolation of the Poets and Quants data is. There was a recent survey conducted by Businessweek. Like Poets and Quants, it is also a relatively unscientific count of where graduate students at top 10 MBA programs completed their undergraduate studies. Out of almost 2,400 responses (approximately 25% of MBA students enrolled in those elite programs) from those top 10 MBA programs, below were the 10 most represented undergraduate institutions:</p>

<ol>
<li>University of Michigan 67 grads</li>
<li>University of Pennsylvania 64 grads</li>
<li>Harvard University 62 grads</li>
<li>Cornell University 61 grads</li>
<li>University of Virginia 54 grads</li>
<li>Duke University 52 grads</li>
<li>UC Berkeley 49 grads</li>
<li>Stanford University 46 grads</li>
<li>Princeton University 42 grads</li>
<li>Northwestern University 40 grads</li>
</ol>

<p>The above is not surprising considering the fact that all of those universities, save Princeton, have top 10 MBA programs (according to Businessweek), and therefore, will perform favorably in such a survey. Either way, schools like Emory, Vanderbilt and WUSTL will not do as well as schools like Cornell, Duke, Michigan and Northwestern. I agree that this is in part thanks to the professional placement of undergraduates coming out of those universities, which in turn, yields a higher rate of acceptances into top MBA programs.</p>

<p><a href=“Bloomberg - Are you a robot?”>Bloomberg - Are you a robot?;

71

<p>When comparing Vanderbilt, Duke, Northwestern, Notre Dame to the lower ivy’s I also will not use the word “better” but will say these universities do offer a more “holistic” college experience and they are more in touch with what 18 year old top students are looking for in their college years in 2013. I don’t think Cornell and Brown stopped caring about test scores or that VU, NU, DU, and ND all of the sudden started to care more about test scores.<br>
People don’t quit their job to work accross town unless there is a reason. You can blow off Vanderbilt’s test scores, quality of life scores, increasing selectivity, increasing applications and come up with reasons you don’t believe in them (bad methodology, sample size, they don’t like me, blah, blah, blah). Or you can say there must be a reason all trends are moving up. Something good must be going on in Nashville. There also must be a reason other universities are seeing the reverse trends. Go and look for it.</p>

72

<p>Opie I have no idea what you’re talking about. A huge number come in with credits and finish in 4-4.5 years. If someone’s taking 6 years they probably took a leave for health problems. Few programs take longer here than anywhere else. Also those who take an extra semester or two is by choice. They want an extra major (or even triple) or dual degree, of which there are many to select from.</p>

73

<p>Opie has a kid at Vandy.</p>

74

<p>With 60% of Michigan undergrads hailing from the state of Michigan and paying $12k in tution or less annually, it is not surprising that some choose to take their time to graduate. What’s not to like? Ann Arbor, fun college campus, football saturday etc…! :wink: </p>

<p>There are many reasons why Michigan has a lower 4-year graduation rate, none of which have to do with lack of resources. But in this regard, there is no question that Vanderbilt is superior to Michigan. The higher the 4-year graduation rate, the better it is. That’s one area that Vanderbilt excels at and that Michigan needs to work on. But Michigan is vastly improved in recent years. When I was at Michigan back in the mid 90s, Michigan’s 4 year graduate rate was barely over 60% and the 6 year graduation rate hovered around 80%. At least Michigan’s 6 year graduation rate is now up to scratch. But the University needs to address the 4 year graduate rate by restructuring curricular demands of several programs without compromising the quality of the programs. I do not think Michigan’s academic demands and multitude of academic programs will allow the school to reach a 4-year graduation rate much higher than 80%, but there is room for improvement to be sure.</p>

75

<p>I don’t get why people care about inane things like minor differences in admissions rates. College is an investment, and the employment statistics/grad school placement should really be all that matters (this is assuming the cost of attendance is roughly equal). </p>

<p>If you’re going into engineering or business, michigan is the better choice. Michigan has better law and med schools, but it’s really up to the individual student as far as admission goes so it doesn’t really matter which undergrad you go to. Same with grad schools, both of these schools have the resources, but it’s up to the individual to get the research/grades and have the passion. </p>

<p>Vanderbilt might give liberal arts students in the south who aren’t continuing their education some leg up, but I don’t really know what those jobs are.</p>

76

<p>Opie12,and Alex, re grad rates…at umich, 5800 of its undergrad students are in Engineering, which is normally a 9 semester sequence. I do believe that skews the four year grad rate a little, since that’s roughly a quarter of the undergrad population. Even when students bring a lot of APs etc., many of those only fulfill electives, not necessarily program or even distribution credits. When umich gives Coe scholarships, they last for 9 semesters, not 8, which tells me it’s pretty common to expect that segment of the population to take a little longer than the standard four years. ;)</p>

<p>In addition, there are another 900 approx students at the School of Music, many of whom dual degree, which takes an average of 9-10 semesters. So I personally wouldn’t take the four year grad rate as “meaning anything” in terms of quality of the school or its student body. The six-year grad rate is more meaningful in this sense.</p>

<p>And frankly, since I don’t think the 4-yr grad rate “means” anything except as it relates to a UG BA at LSA, I don’t really think Michigan needs to work on that metric when its an “artificial” signal of quality that is otherwise evident ;)</p>

77

<p>kmcmom, I am well aware that Michigan’s graduation rates over time are primarily a result of curricular demands of certain programs. In some instances, the relatively low cost of attendance for in-state students also causes complacency on part of the student. I have never heard of a scenario where a student did not graduate on time because of something that the university did. Still, I believe Michigan can revisit its curriculum in some instances (such as Engineering and Music) to facilitate graduation in 8 instead of 9 or 10 semesters. Of course, it should do so without compromising the quality of the program.</p>

<p>Either way, graduation rates is not an area of concern, but it is potentially an area of improvement.</p>

78

<p>^^^My sister-in-law graduated with a degree in nuclear engineering from Michigan. It took her an extra semester of school to do so. She is about the most intelligent and hardest working person I know. She was and is hardly complacent! Engineering is simply more demanding that most other majors. kmcmom13 is spot on with her comments.</p>

79

<p>I think for some schools grad rates are a very important metric to look at, but I’m not concerned about it at Michigan. U Roch also has a lower rate than I expected, where I’m also not concerned. Another big metric is retention where Mich does very well, especially for a school of that size.</p>

80

<p>I also have a HS Jr with UM on his list. Cost is an issue for my family and I want him to graduate in 4 years if possible.</p>