<p>ANY IDEAS? COE, LSA, ENG? What do you guys think?</p>
<p>i vote for LSA. Ross ans CoE are both nationally renowned where as liberal arts, eh, its just liberal arts. Who really cares?</p>
<p>Kinesiology probably.</p>
<p>COE? ENG? whats ENG??</p>
<p>engineering 10char</p>
<p>and kevennni, I meant what undergraduate college.</p>
<p>Kinesiology is easier IF you happen to be a scholorship athlete for one of the major sports. These athletes, in most cases, do not have the credentials to get in through the front door and generally get in Kinesiology (or LSA) with lesser GPA’s and ACT’s. If you are NOT an athlete in this catagory, the admission requirements for Kinesiology are the same as LSA.</p>
<p>@undertaker, it’s no less of an undergraduate college than COE or LSA…</p>
<p>@snackyx: In 2008, only 60 slots were reserved for athletes in kinesiology. All of the rest were regular admittances. Yet, “he acknowledged the College of Literature, Science, and the Arts generally considers a GPA of 2.7 or 2.8 to be the floor. It’s in the 2.3-to-2.5 range for kinesiology, he said. The average high school GPA for an incoming Michigan freshman last fall was 3.8.”</p>
<p>“There are some kids who probably aren’t Michigan students,” Wolfe said. “And we get 'em (in kinesiology).”</p>
<p>[Kinesiology</a> reserves slots for University of Michigan athletes | MLive.com](<a href=“http://www.mlive.com/wolverines/academics/stories/index.ssf/2008/03/kinesiology_reserves_slots_for.html]Kinesiology”>Kinesiology reserves slots for University of Michigan athletes - mlive.com)</p>
<p>I haven’t found any stats but if you find them, feel free to post them.</p>
<p>If you are really as undecided as to not even know what college to apply to, just apply to LSA.</p>
<p>However the College of Engineering despite its admission stats (interquartile ranges) is no harder to “get into”, however than may be more reflective of the student body applying to it rather than how applications are evaluated.</p>
<p>Also note that admission standards aren’t completely consistent, and with the common app plus possible efforts to reduce growth to the student body if a notable admission’s rate change is to occur it would be this year. So, none of us really know.</p>
<p>kevin: I’m not sure if you misunderstood what I wrote or just chose to ignore it: the “floor” in Kinesiology is lower because the reduced GPA’s of admitted athletics are averaged in. My point is if you are applying to Kinesiology, and you are NOT coming in as an athlete, the requirements for admittance are the same as LSA. The numbers skewer lower for Kines because of the athletes who are admitted.</p>
<p>From the article your referenced (which I was already familiar with):</p>
<p>compared to admissions standards for nonathletes in kinesiology, “there are a number of student-athletes who are admitted way below, significantly way below.” </p>
<p>The Sports Management program offered through Kines was revamped a few years ago to address theis very issue, and the changes have effectively filtered out the athletics from moving into Phase II of this program because of the more stringent course load and required GPA (you must reapply for Level II Sports Management)–as per the cited article, most of the athletes transfer from Kinesiology into LSA after two years to finish with a BGS degree.</p>
<p>Engineering and Business are the very hard to get into, although I think Business is even tougher to get into (and I’m an Engineering student). So many people apply to Ross.</p>
<p>LSA is easy, everyone gets in.</p>
<p>I agree, but surely you read that there was ONLY 60 slots reserved for athletes. Granted I don’t know how many are enrolled in Kinesiology, I would still say there are a lot more than 60 that contribute to the average. The average is so low not only because they accept athletes, but because they accept lower caliber students, IMO. I agree that the GPA is lower because of the athletes, but if there’s only 60 out of many more, the lower GPA shouldn’t be attributed to them, but the entire program.</p>
<p>There are 850 people in the school of Kinesiology, which includes grad students and undergrads. So when 60 spots are reserved (I’d assume this would be total athletes, not per year) then it obviously would have an impact. However kinesiology’s acceptance rate is not lower than any other schools. So unless an interquartile range is found for several statistics of admitted kinesiology students (which is still likely to be lower than what holds true for non-athletes due to the influence of the athlete spots) then we can’t really say.</p>
<p>As for engineering vs LSA, It really depends on what sort of person you are. The lower quarter of engineering admits are probably people who have more of a bias towards doing well on the math/science than reading/english. So, someone who is (math=33,science=33,reading=24,writing=24,composite=29) is probably no less of a contender in admissions than a person who is (math=28,science=28,reading=29,writing=29,composite=29). Of course I’m not certain this would hold completely true but there is going to be a stronger correlation of math/science skills to admission than there is general composite to admission rate. However I know several people here with scores more like the former, so it definitely is a possibility. Having such a variation at the lower end of LSA applicants though probably would make your chances harder than it would in the CoE.</p>
<p>Though can anyone who has transferred from lsa->CoE or CoE->lsa comment about the role of pre-reqs before or after?</p>