<p>Ohhhh Northville High! Never been there, but my half sister lives right by there and it’s where I presume her kids are gonna go. Yeah I remember reading it was on like Newsweek’s list of top 100 public schools? I was referring to Novi High School before (the one I’ve been to).</p>
<p>“I’m not saying that the endowment per capita necessarily translates to dollar consumption on students but there is damn good correlation. northwestern’s endowment per cap (6.3B/16K students) = ~400K. umich endowment per cap ($6.6B/42K students) = ~160K. Difference, huge.”</p>
<p>bayvcroberts, as a public university, Michigan receives roughly $300 million in state appropriations annually. Using the 5% endowment rule, that’s equivallent to having a $6 billion endowment. Add that to Michigan’s $6.6 billion endowment, and you get $12.6 billion for 41,000 students. That’s over $300,000/student. When you consider economies of scale and other factors, Michigan’s access to financial resources is actually considerable.</p>
<p>liv4physicz, I would apply to both schools and see what happens. Northwestern, should they accept you, may give you a generous aid package. Then again, most Michigan residents with your credentials and financial background end up staying in Michigan. Your family income will likely be too high to receive significant (if any aid) and given your excellent stats, Michigan will probably end up giving you some merit money. The bottom line will result in Michigan being significantly cheaper (over 6 figures over 4 year) than Northwestern. But like I said, one never knows with private schools as they can be surprisingly generous with aid.</p>
<p>you’re right, the gap probably closes but you and i would both agree that it’s a bit more complex than that. without knowing how the funds are consumed (given that the gov’t can direct to some extent how the funds can be used and i’m almost sure that some of those funds are locked up in the endowment itself) we can only speculate. one thing is sure, privates are more or less free to appropriate funds as they choose.</p>
<p>THE FACT OF THE MATTER is that the student-faculty ratio is far lower at NU. it is well known that career services is top notch (anecdotal but well documented). also, this follows through to academic pursuits where NU (with a fraction and equally professionally driven students) outproduces UMich in fulbright’s (23 to 4) and marshall’s/rhodes (where umich almost disappears). this is the sort of data that tells me where the resources are going…</p>
<p>look, i have nothing against both schools. both great. not affiliated with either (stanford). i support publics when the data shows me otherwise (i voted for cal engineering over dartmouth).</p>
<p>Good advice, Alexandre. Do you think my dad being retired and me having a twin (who also needs to fund her college tuition) will carry much weight?</p>
<p>" i support publics when the data shows me otherwise (i voted for cal engineering over dartmouth)."</p>
<p>Would you support Michigan engineering over Dartmouth as well?</p>
<p>“…this follows through to academic pursuits as NU (with a fraction and equally professionally driven students) outproduces UMich in fulbright’s (20 to 4)”</p>
<p>Care to explain these results?</p>
<p><a href=“US Fulbright Program - Home Page”>US Fulbright Program - Home Page;
<p>Unless I am misunderstanding your premise, Michigan year in and year out is a leader in the prodcution of Fulbright Scholars. I agree that the school does not produce many Rhodes/Marshall Scholars. That would substantiate some of your claim as to usage of resources. Still you seem to be making many blanket statements with little evidence to support your claims, the exact thing you accuse me of doing.</p>
<p>bayvcroberts, you make a lot of assumptions wituout checking the facts.</p>
<p>1) “THE FACT OF THE MATTER is that the student-faculty ratio is far lower at NU.”</p>
<p>How do each university report student to faculty ratios? Michigan includes graduate students while Northwestern does not. That alone makes a difference in the outcome. If Michigan calculates student to faculty ratio the same way NU does, Michigan’s ratio would be 12:1. </p>
<p>“NU (with a fraction and equally professionally driven students) outproduces UMich in fulbright’s (20 to 4) and marshall’s/rhodes where umich almost disappears. this is the sort of data that tells me where the resources are going…”</p>
<p>I am not sure where you got your figures. Personally, I don’t think production of Fullbright Scholars or Rhodes Scholars is an indication of academic quality, but Michigan has produced more Fullbright and Rhodes scholars than Northwestern. Since 1993, Michigan has produced roughly 350 Fullbright scholars compared to Northwestern’s 200.</p>
<p>[US.FULBRIGHTONLINE.ORG</a> || Program Resources - U.S. Fellows Directory](<a href=“http://us.fulbrightonline.org/program_students_us_list.html?sc]US.FULBRIGHTONLINE.ORG”>http://us.fulbrightonline.org/program_students_us_list.html?sc)=133</p>
<p>[US.FULBRIGHTONLINE.ORG</a> || Program Resources - U.S. Fellows Directory](<a href=“http://us.fulbrightonline.org/program_students_us_list.html?sc]US.FULBRIGHTONLINE.ORG”>http://us.fulbrightonline.org/program_students_us_list.html?sc)=1190</p>
<p>Historically, neither Michigan nor NU has been known for their production of Rhodes scholars, but Michigan has produced 25 compared to NU’s 15. </p>
<p><a href=“Office of the American Secretary | The Rhodes Scholarships”>http://www.rhodesscholar.org/assets/PDF/2010/Institutions_for_Website_6_29_10.pdf</a></p>
<p>Northwestern has produced more Marshall scholars with 18 to Michigan’s 16. </p>
<p>Both do well in the production of Fullbright scholars but neither is a champ where Rhodes and Marshall scholars are concerned.</p>
<p>It does appear that bayvcroberts is underestimating the quality of The University of Michigan. A not too uncommon occurance on these boards.</p>
<p>retraction, that website was for a dep’t. sorry. both are top10 in fulbright production over the past decade (pretty similar just browsing last couple of years). in the past decade, NU has definitely outperformed umich in marshall’s/rhodes (more relevant data set). </p>
<p>okay, not as bad as it looks. but with 4x the undergrad students fighting for the same accolades etc. as at a smaller institution, you see where i’m going.</p>
<p>Michigan has three times the number of undergrads that Northwestern has, not four times, and although Northwestern has out performed Michigan on a per capita basis, I think it is fair to say that the difference is not glaring, particularly when you consider the fact that Michigan is admittedly less selective.</p>
<p>DOCTORAL/RESEARCH INSTITUTIONS
RECEIVING FULBRIGHT
AWARDS FOR 2010-2011</p>
<p>NAME GRANTS APPLICATIONS
University of Michigan-Ann Arbor 40 144
Northwestern University 20 111</p>
<p>Yes I do see where you’re going bayvcroberts. You just can’t give Michigan credit for it’s achievements. Do you notice the ratios of grants/applications listed above? Using your quote, “Do I really need to do the math for you?”</p>
<p>it’s actually 23 (3 rescinded). NU had a higher absolute number and yield in 2009 (data check). look, i admitted i was wrong about the fulbright. more than you would ever do so rjlk, you can get your ass out of my face. i’m not going to throw out petty recent data about rhodes and marshall’s but you would find some way to argue about the numbers with your awesome subjectivity. </p>
<p>alexandre, your point is taken. i think selectivity aside, the reason why NU can beat Mich on a per capita basis is because those students are being afforded more opportunities. if 24K undergrads at Mich had the same sort of opportunities/resources as NU students, you would have 144*3 number of fulbright applications. anyway, this is what i think…</p>
<p>Fulbrights are not really a proxy for undergraduate education anyway. They are given at all degree levels.</p>
<p>“NU had a higher absolute number and yield in 2009 (data check). look, i admitted i was wrong about the fulbright. more than you would ever do so rjlk, you can get your ass out of my face.” </p>
<p>I am not the one offering my opinion as if it were fact. You have proven time and time again in this thread when confronted with accurate information, you are the one who presents a caveat to try to make up for your mistake. </p>
<p>“i’m not going to throw out petty recent data about rhodes and marshall’s but you would find some way to argue about the numbers with your awesome subjectivity.”</p>
<p>This is my statement from an earlier post in this thread pertaining to your remarks above:</p>
<p>“I agree that the school (Michigan) does not produce many Rhodes/Marshall Scholars. That would substantiate some of your claim as to usage of resources.”</p>
<p>See, I did agree with some of what you said. I never made a false statement as you did regarding Fulbrights.</p>
<p>Am I pretty much guaranteed admittance with my stats to UofM? And are my chances at NU good? I have a 3.7 unweighted GPA (4.3 weighted), 32 ACT, and good ECs with a few specific areas of concentration</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Nope. Not one bit. Try again later.</p>
<p>You should get into Michigan with those scores, especially since you’re instate. NU is no guarantee.</p>
<p>I see. Would you say Early Action at Michigan helps?</p>
<p>It doesn’t appear to be that way so far this year, but I certainly would apply as early as possible in any case.</p>