<p>lol on upper ivies and lower ivies. I wonder who invented those terminologies… lol</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A good guess would point in the direction of the members of the Wannabe Ivy League.</p>
<p>“I think the point is that at Michigan, you say “Whoaaaa! There are three kids on my floor that turned down upper Ivies!” whereas at upper Ivies, pretty much everyone probably turned down a school like Michigan or of Michigan’s caliber, and nobody really thinks it’s that big a deal.”</p>
<p>Well duh! No kidding! That’s not the point. The point is many top students, who could have gone just about anywhere, still chose to attend The University of Michigan. This is not uncommon. I’m sure it happens at ALL of the top publics. Not everyone wants to attend HYPSM or any of the ivies, or for that matter any private school. That does not mean that these students are any less intelligent and won’t get a top education to rival almost every other elite school. I am just sick and tired of hearing from those students on CC, who almost always invariably did not attend one of those five elite schools as an undergraduate, try to knock schools like Michigan or Cal as being something less than academically elite. Btw, the statement also included many schools that are not considered “upper ivies.”</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Again, the terms “many” and “not uncommon” are entirely in the eye of the beholder. What is many? One percent? Five percent? What is uncommon? Isn’t that the opposite of common? Should we assume that is IS common to meet UG students who were admitted to HYPS and turned it down? Common … as in happening frequently? </p>
<p>Really? </p>
<p>The number of students who were admitted at HYPS but selected Michigan (or fill the blank with another public university) CANNOT be statistically relevant.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Why do you pay any attention to such drivel? Could it be that you have been on a relentless campaign to demonstrate the exact opposite of what your “opponents” are saying? Is this not a chicken and egg story? Who started first? </p>
<p>Why can’t you just be happy with your choice to attend Michigan and drop the non-sense of trying so hard to make it bigger and better than it is … on a silly ranking system or on a prestige scale that matters to almost nobody outside this small circle of people who like to argue for fun? </p>
<p>Take a good look at your posting history! How does that compare to RML’s? Upper Ivies? Lower Ivies? Public Ivies? Don’t you the ridicule on debating such terms, and the ridicule of the constant cheerleading and pompom waving?</p>
<p>When someone inquires about your school, do you answer, “I attend Michigan, and you know, it is just as good as one of the Lower Ivies!” Perhaps, you should also add, “And you know, we even had a SCOTUS case about us!”</p>
<p>xiggi, one percent of 30,000 UG students is 300…perhaps not “common” in the broader population, but still significant enough to be fairly easily found.</p>
<p>Also, the post didn’t claim just HYPS…it also mentioned: Cornell, Chicago and Georgetown.</p>
<p>“Why can’t you just be happy with your choice to attend Michigan and drop the non-sense of trying so hard to make it bigger and better than it is …”</p>
<p>Bigger and better than it is? I have never stated that Michigan is better than HYPSM or Caltech for that matter. I have always stated that it is a peer of every other school in this country, including all of the so called lesser ivies and other private schools whose cheerleaders constantly try to convince others on this board that their school should be rated better than Michigan and Berkeley. Michigan is indeed better or equal overall academically than all but five or six schools in this country. If you think that’s cheerleading and pompom waving sobeit.</p>
<p>
…“on a silly ranking system” very little care about.</p>
<p>I’ve learned when reading xiggi…you have to remove the “…” 's. It’ll get you less riled up. ;)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Including more schools of relative similarity does not change much to my post about the definition of “many” and “not uncommon.” If you want to switch uncommon for rare, be my guest. By the way, I think you know that “to be faily easily found” is quite different from being statistically significant. Remember your Fisher’s test! :)</p>
<p>^ Yes, 300 students is about the class size of CMC…where is that again? :D</p>
<p>
Ha! Sorta…had to look it up.
p-value is less than ___ therefore we reject the null hypothesis and the data is insignificant…or something like that, I recall.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Here you go again! </p>
<p>As UCB pointed out, I tend to use an ellipsis for emphasis. Please reread the sentence as "Why can’t you just be happy with your choice to attend Michigan and drop the non-sense of trying so hard to make it bigger and better than it is on a silly ranking system or on a prestige scale that matters to almost nobody outside this small circle of people who like to argue for fun?</p>
<p>Again, I think that abandoning the “better than thou” arguments by placing yourself above such discussion will make you happier. Quiet confidence or healthy humility? Let the others decide.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So true, so true! That is why it would take a gargantuan effort to find a post on CC where I claimed CMC to be … bigger and better than … [fill the blanks]. Again, with emphasis through ellipsis. </p>
<p>When you’re small and unknown, it’s better not to reach for headlines. :)</p>
<p>rjkofnovi: Elite schools and non-elite schools can be peers. Do you understand? Even with HYPSM, schools like Dartmouth, Duke, Cornell, UCLA, Yale, University of Singapore, even Rice…they’re all peers.
For instance, the Exploring College Options Program: Stanford and Harvard travel with their peers (from the H and S adcoms’ own mouth, peers) Duke, UPenn, and Georgetown.
In reality, Harvard and Stanford don’t differentiate themselves among the elite five as this CC forum does. As you people here do. Believe it or not, HYPSM do conduct research with other “lower” schools.
During my biomedical studies at Duke, I recall being in a program with partnerships with Stanford and 3 other virtually non-existant state schools in the eyes of a CCer. </p>
<p>And for the record, you ** do ** seem very insecure with your school of choice. Remember the list I gave you?
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/2885267-post115.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/2885267-post115.html</a></p>
<p>I would say the top 15 universities (I would replace Rice with JHU) + Berkeley in this list are “brand name” universities mostly known and well respected throughout America. They are very desired. Berkeley is interesting in a sense that for undergrad, its bashed and very “TTT” as we would joke about in MIT (at least among my friends). Getting into undergrad Cal isn’t looked at as such a big deal either–its the truth.
HOWEVER, it has amazing grad programs, which it gets most of its prestige from. Hence, it’s looked up as the top public school in the nation. What ticks me off is that undergrads misread this and attempt to take the spotlight.
In America, private schools are generally “more desirable”, especially with the plundering government deficit. We also have the tendency to only look at the #1 public school and leave it at that. Hence UMich is always left in the shades. </p>
<p>When my high school’s valedictorian was headed for UMich, no one knew what that was. Everyone knew she turned down Pomona, which everyone thought she was crazy to do. She’s now a CEO of a rising start up company. I admire her.</p>
<p>
Are you willing to stand by that comment?</p>
<p>
So you sit around with your friends at MIT and bash Berkeley undergrad?</p>
<p>
What you fail to understand is that most students and adults alike don’t select universities or praise universities based on departmental rankings or academic strength alone. The resources that the universities offer the students as well as the strength of the student body that an individual will be surrounded by are often much bigger considerations when selecting an undergraduate school.</p>
<p>I’ve said it before and I’ll say it again, most of my classmates at Duke and my friends from other elite privates had only a rough idea of what we wanted to do after we graduated school and could certainly not pinpoint a specific major till well into our sophomore years of college. So, would it make sense to pick Berkeley over Duke if I wasn’t sure I wanted to be an Economics or Philosophy major just because UCB is more renowned at the graduate level in these subjects? In fact, most kids are going to choose schools like Dartmouth and Duke over UCB since they place much better on The Street and in other lucrative business positions, which is FAR more relevant to a student who intends on getting a job right out of school and not venture into the depths of academia.</p>
<p>What you major in college is IRRELEVANT 95% of the time in deciding what opportunities you decide to pursue post-college. A lot of engineers at Duke go the premed route. A lot of Econ majors at Duke go to law school. A lot of science students end up working in Wall Street. Most students at HYPSM and Duke and places like that major in what they’re truly INTELLECTUALLY passionate about after several years of careful exploration of different subject areas, rather than at UMich or Berkeley where everyone comes in pre-business, pre-journalism, premed or whatever and then go work for business companies, magazines and hospitals.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Go back to Alexandre’s post # 332, which is about where this thread branched onto its current path. The number he and I agreed on was ~2000 per entering class, based on comparative SAT score ranges. That would be the upper third of an entering class of about 6K. That is a rough order of magnitude for the number of Michigan students who are at least competitive for the likes of Duke, Chicago, or the Ivies (“lower” Ivies, if you like). Even if you assume that half of this 2000 would have been filtered out of T10 admissions by ECs and essays, the remaining number is still comparable to the entire entering classes at some of the private schools.</p>
<p>Now think of 2 classes with 15 kids. In one, let’s say 5 kids are brilliant and the other 10 are merely kinda smart. In the other, 10 kids are brilliant and the other 5 are, well, quite smart. If both classes are taught by world-class professors and the material is the same, how big a quality difference do you think you’ll notice in the learning experience?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Dartmouth? perhaps. But Duke? hmnnn… I don’t know. Show me data.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The discussion and your agreement with Alexandre are quite different from mine --which about the commonality of ACCEPTED students and the definition of as simple term as “many.”</p>
<p>The fact that there might be 2,000 students at Michigan that could be competitive with the applicant pool at HYPS and similarly ranked schools does not address the acceptance rate at such schools. At best, this means that this pool is competitive with the APPLICANT pool at Harvard that accounts for … 30,000 students. </p>
<p>Since the admissions at H and at YPS are below 10%, there are no reasons to apply a filter of one “half” as you did. Nor can you apply the overall admission rate of Michigan to this pool. Simply stated, you cannot take 2,000 -let alone 6,000-- and decree that several thousand students ARE HYPS students; they are NOT. You can state that those 2,000 or 6,000 are not different from the pool of applicants at HYPS and others, and obviously not different from the … Michigan pool altogether. </p>
<p>However, that is where the similarity stops. When comparing pools of admitted students, your number drops down to a fraction of the number you and Alexandre agreed on, and should generously be estimated at no higher than very low three digit number.</p>
<p>Again, perhaps this means that there are “many” in absolute terms, but still VERY far from “not uncommon.”</p>
<p>Not to stir up anything, merely asking a question, but</p>
<p>
Wouldn’t all of those aside from Michigan be superscored? So obviously there’s going to be a difference between them, a significant one at that.</p>
<p>I’m just wondering, someone correct me if I’m wrong…</p>
<p>Al right, this is pathetic. I’m out of this dumb conversation. I will not go “oh gross” when someone picks UMich over Duke and Dartmouth. I’m perfectly happy with a student choosing Berkeley over Harvard. I don’t care!!</p>
<p>To UCBChem: Its called a joke, my friend. We joke about it. Norcal MITers joke about Berkeley and how rejected it to go to MIT. Nothing more. Just deal. My best friend turned down MIT to go to Berkeley, no biggie. He’s a genius programmer. Even he makes fun of the Cal undergrads.</p>
<p>To RML, the Berkeley obsessed ■■■■■: Check these links out. [Private Equity Firms & Universities: Whats the Relationship? | BankersBall. Where Investment Bankers Come to Party. Investment Banking Compensation & Salary](<a href=“Bankers Ball”>Bankers Ball)</p>
<p>[The</a> Education Of Fortune 100 CEO’s](<a href=“http://www.slideshare.net/sheilacurran/the-education-of-fortune-100-ce-os-sheet1]The”>http://www.slideshare.net/sheilacurran/the-education-of-fortune-100-ce-os-sheet1)</p>
<p>[2007</a> list of BB Summer Associate class by colleges | WallStreetOasis.com](<a href=“http://www.wallstreetoasis.com/forums/2007-list-of-bb-summer-associate-class-by-colleges]2007”>2007 list of BB Summer Associate class by colleges | Wall Street Oasis)</p>