<p>Prior to the 2003 affirmative action lawsuit there was a quantitative formula for UM admissions. Applicants would receive points based on criteria essentially identical to the “Rating Sheet” cited above. Each category had a defined set of points or range of points available. Students had to amass a base set of points in order to qualify for admissions (somewhere around 100 I think). </p>
<p>The biggest categories for points were GPA and standardized test scores. The higher your GPA/Test scores the more points you received. In-State got a points boost; students form under-represented counties in Michigan got an even greater number of points. The same was true for legacy candidates (though as I recall it was a small number, 5-7 points) and recruited athletes (I think it was as high as 20 points). URM candidates also got 20 additional points and those points essentially became the basis of the affirmative action lawsuit.</p>
<p>There used to be a link at the Michigan Daily that showed the criteria and all the points associated with each, but that’s been gone for a few years now. So, while the new admissions policy may be more “holistic”, the Rating Sheet certainly implies that the only thing that’s changed about the process is the actually assigning of a numeric rating to applications.</p>
<p>What has understandably frustrated many of the applicants is precisely UM’s “holistic” approach because in addition to, or frankly in place of, academic merit, the school apparently assesses applicants’ socio-economic status in order to determine if they should be considered “advantaged”. While I respect the transparency of UM’s admissions process, I have to admit that I found it offensive to be asked what my family’s annual income was. No other school did that. There have been many OOS students accepted who are, if one is to be completely frank, incredibly mediocre. So it is no surprise that the high achieving students left hanging are questioning the process. </p>
<p>But the biggest turn-off to UM is the number of UM people who obviously have a huge chip on their shoulder about the fact that they don’t go to an “Ivey”. The repeated references to “the Ivies”, as if all those schools have homogenous student bodies which just happen to be in different cities and states, reflects an ignorance about those schools. The student body at Columbia is not the same as the student body at Penn which is not the same as the student body at Brown. And to compare the student body at UM to any of those is absurd. I was interested in UM because the Ross Business School is highly respected but who would want to spend 4 years at a school listening to people whine about “well, I could have gone to ***”.</p>
<p>^It sounds like from your only other post on cc that you/your mom is pretty unhappy with the methodology of admissions as a whole (or at least top uni’s as you posted on the stanford boards.)</p>
<p>" I don’t blame you for feeling bitter. I’m a parent going through my third and last college admissions cycle with my youngest. I’m sick to death of this process; it has turned me into a cynic. You’re either the wrong ethnicity, live in the wrong part of the country - god forbid you live in the midwest - or just aren’t disadvantaged enough. "</p>
<p>Being unhappy with admissions is one thing, but bashing a uni just because you think it’s unfair that you didn’t get in or felt that the process wasn’t just in your eyes is pretty ridiculous.</p>
<p>Despite how my posts may sound, my kids have been truly blessed in the opportunities they have been given. My kids have been fortunate in the number of wonderful schools they have been accepted into and gone to. But I feel for the kids who don’t truly understand what goes into the process; it is making them feel bad about themselves. The admissions process should make some sense, and of all the schools I’ve been involved with, Michigan’s just doesn’t make sense to me. I’m not bashing the school at all; I wouldn’t have suggested that my son consider it if there wasn’t something attractive about it. But the Michigan posts are permeated with a inferiority complex. If you look at what is being posted on “the Ivey” leage boards, you don’t see people obsessed with how they compare with Michigan. That attitude worries me.</p>
<p>I’m happy to hear that you suggested Michigan to your son in his search for the right college, and I can see how you could have interpreted some of the posts here as displaying an Ivy-inferiority complex – something that’s easy to do when viewing them out of context. However, most of the posts, such as Alexandre’s post about the relative and impressive strengths of Michigan when compared to the ivies, are in response to some of the misinformed posters who try to downplay the university as a lesser institution, when, in reality, it is these posters that have the construed perception. </p>
<p>The fact is, I’ve never, in all my years of living in the state of Michigan, heard a student say that they wish they were going to xyz-school instead of Michigan – as they shouldn’t. All of the Michigan students that I know chose the university because it is Michigan, not because it is a university that they constantly view relativistically to its peers in the east coast. There’s nothing wrong with noting that your school may be ranked around or slightly higher than other schools that many young posters may view as “better” because they simply do not have a reference to what is “good” other than a single list found in a particular magazine.</p>
<p>marcher, the income question is completely optional. Besides, where it matters, most universities will find out a family’s income and socio-economic status and will factor it into the final decision. The common application asks for the applicant’s parents’ and siblings’ level of education, alma matter and profession. Even one’s address and the high school they attend will reveal much of their socio-economic background. A university does not have to ask about income levels to know if an applicant comes from a wealthy, middle income or lower income family. </p>
<p>“But the biggest turn-off to UM is the number of UM people who obviously have a huge chip on their shoulder about the fact that they don’t go to an “Ivey”.”</p>
<p>Wow…I am speechless. And you say Michigan’s income question is “offensive”? Talk about generalizations. Any response to this statement would likewise be an exercise in generalization.</p>
<p>While I agree with you with respect to many of your critiques of UM’s admissions process, I find it funny that, in the same paragraph, you scold people on this message board for assuming the student bodies at Ivy League schools are homogenous and then go on to generalize the entire UM undergraduate population based on a few posts by a handful of members on an internet forum. Despite the fact that you neglected to take into account the many Michigan posters who have not yet posted in this thread (i.e. I am willing to bet that the people with the “inferiority complex” constitute a small percentage of the total posters here), you showed quite a bit of hypocrisy, which I find interesting.</p>
<p>If you honestly are concerned, I can assure you that the people I know have much better things to do with their time than exhibit an inferiority complex towards the Ivy League.</p>
<p>Most everything can be dismissed on the grounds that its a generalization. But I will reiterate that there has been entirely too much time devoted to comparing Michigan to what are comparatively small, private, extremely selective schools. What every school needs and wants are students who want to be there. . . not students looking over their shoulder worrying how their school compares to another. As the “moderator” for this university, I’m just suggesting that you not get pulled into what is a useless exercise. It does nothing to actually enhance the reputation of the school.</p>
<p>UM was called a safety school. As a result, some posters went on the defensive. One way to do that is by making comparisons to other schools. In my opinion, this outcome should have been expected. Have you visited the campus? You’ve got a UMich student right here telling you that I’ve encountered that attitude very rarely outside this forum.</p>
<p>Thank you. I appreciate your input – very much. I’ve never been to the campus and that is one reason I began following what was going on on the Michigan boards. I wanted to get a feel for the school. Michigan became my personal choice for my son(although obviously where he goes is up to him!) but I became concerned with the impression I was getting.</p>
<p>marcher, if you pay close attention, you will notice that in most instances where a Michigan student or alum mentions other universities (Ivy or otherwise) in the comparative sense is usually taken in context. Either an applicant or potential applicant considering Michigan is asking for the comparison or some troller posts incorrect and offensive information about the University and how it compates to other universities. Even then, most Michigan students and alums try to remain civil and stick to facts. </p>
<p>Of course, you will have a healthy dose of pride and chest bumping, and along with that will come some trash talking. Wolverines and wild and proud and furry beasts after all. And you will have a fair share of students who wish they had been admitted into a school they feel is better or gone elsewhere for college. But such occurances are no more common at Michigan than at other major universities.</p>
<p>Maybe since I’m just a cynic but I’ve never bought into the “holistic” idea of admissions. To me, the very word sounds like a legal shield. By saying you use a (nebulously defined) holistic approach you can get around explaining pesky issues like affirmative action, quotas and the admission of the idiot son of the wealthy alum. </p>
<p>That said, besides being a cynic I’m also probably naive, I actually believe that you increase you chances of admission by having higher GPA and SAT/ACT stats. Beyond that you’re just adding gravy.</p>
<p>Holistic is what gets you a diverse student body. Love it or hate it. If it was a mission the university would simply say x number of in-state students first come first serve based on GPA and ACT, then fill the rest in first come first serve with OSS and internationals that can show they can afford. Never gonna happen. As it is now, they have to “guess” how many kids from California, NY, NJ, Mass. and other states are actually going to show up and pay the price after acceptances. They have to figure out how to admit Michigan kids from all areas of the state and not just the strong schools on the west coast of Michigan or the suburban Detroit magnet, private and stronger publics. They need to admit kids that have achieved despite less than ideal family circumstances from all over the world and so on and so on. If you want to blame anyone, blame the numbers of applications from kids who apply who know very little about the school and simply applied because of the name recognition and clog up and back up admissions.</p>
<p>and rolling admissions slow down that process further. They have to be concerned about balancing out the class as they continue to issue acceptance. For example, they can’t accept all physics major even though it may be the strongest of the pool.</p>
<p>Really? Don’t you have to write the short answer questions? One of the questions ask for the following:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>Please describe your interests sna aspirations in engineering. What experiences have influenced you? (College of Engineering)</p></li>
<li><p>What led you to choose the area(s) of academic interest that you have listed in your application to the University of Michigan? If you are undecided, what areas are you most interested in, and why? (LSA)</p></li>
</ul>
<p>Academic interest is only one factor. There are other factors like geographic locations, extracurricular activities, etc… or perhaps the marching band needs more trombone players next year… They need to balance the intake to build a diverse freshman class.</p>
<p>I think Michigan is better off doing away with rolling admission, and moving up the RD deadline to January 1. This will make their admission process more in line with their peers.</p>
<p>I don’t agree with you GoBlue. I’m guessing UofM has a pretty good handle on their yield from IS and Internationals…it’s the OSS kids that are harder to predict. Michigan might be better with an ED situation where they coud admit and know who is going to attend which would give non-Michigan kids who want to attend an ability to declare their intent in a “big” way. Those that are uncertain and can’t commit aren’t in any worse position than waiting for spring. If it’s your first choice you can move on if not accepted and if it’s not your first choice then you know what the schedule will be. It’s the uncertainly year after year if the long time between applying in October and hearing in April that makes some kids crazy. College acceptances aren’t brass rings to be grabbed and collected…there needs to be at least some modicum of “intent” to attend.</p>
But you don’t get to see the whole deck when you do rolling admission. You have to constantly adjust as you go along making admission decisions on a rolling basis.</p>
<p>
You don’t just get a Yes/No answer when you apply ED. Most of the ED applicants are deferred. For example, if Brown is your first choice and you apply ED to Brown in October. Let’s say you are not among the lucky 20% accepted; chances are you will be deferred if you are a strong candidate. Then when can you expect to get a decision from Brown … yeah, April 1. Would you complaint about the uncertainly of having to wait for your Brown decision from October to April?</p>
<p>
I would like to see Michigan go to an ED situation too. However, until Michigan has the financial resources to meet all needs for OOS, it cannot switch to ED.</p>