<p>^ I am sure you got taught some critical skills at Mich.</p>
<p>The PA score does not in entirety suggest that Mich is considered a top 15 for undergrad. Ignore the fact that the population in academia is quite larger than 2000, and focus on the fact that these surveys are arbitrary and subjective. </p>
<p>In all honesty, assuming someone is not biased, one would easily see that the PA score is not something to be trusted.</p>
<p>ANyways Mich is 29 and Northwestern is 11th I think on USNWR- which I think I would prefer to go by.</p>
<p>Some people hate the US government due to its Capitalistic nature. They protest and attempt to make it more, say, socialistic for example. Is that a good way to spend your time?
Isn’t it better to ACCEPT the nature of the US government and adapt so you can come out in the top?</p>
<p>My point is that in reality, Duke is 9th nationally. Northwestern is 11. UMichigan is in the 30s. USNWR is THE most popular ranking used. It also makes the most sense.
Accept it. Duke is a top 10 university out of 4,000 universities in America. That’s a feat. It’s also a fact. There’s no use in protesting against rankings.
According to this, Harvard > UPenn (<em>gasp</em>) > Stanford > Duke=Dartmouth > Northwestern > … > UMichigan
However, Michigan is in the top 1% of universities. That’s a feat as well. Instead of twisting PAs and claiming some random claim based off arbitrary data, accept what is.</p>
<p>In reality with regards to employers and everyday conversation, people will only refer to THIS. No one will consider endowment, PA scores, or SAT averages. </p>
<p>Alexandre, there are plenty of people in the world smarter than you. I’m 100% sure people like them are also responsible for the creation of the USNWR rankings. I trust their judgement more than yours.</p>
Northwestern and Michigan are peers. In such cases, there is no such thing as a “better” school – only a school better for you. As for which one that is, we haven’t the faintest idea; that’s something you’ll have to decide for yourself.</p>
<p>I agree with most of what people have said thus far. Apply to both and compare finances if and when you are lucky enough to get in. Northwestern HPME would probably be worth the extra money should you be admitted, but it is exceptionally competitive.</p>
<p>
Oh, stop baiting them. Saying stuff like that on CC is like throwing chum into a shark tank. (In other words, they attack fiercely, quickly, and in great numbers.)</p>
<p>Be glad that you are a Michigan resident and you have the opportunity to attend U-M for a fraction of cost of schools like Northwestern and Duke. My friends from other parts of the country think I’d be foolish not to send my daughter to college at U-M. Some are sending their kids there at OOS tuition.</p>
<p>If you interested in attending a college for prestige, the only ones I would consider truly more prestigious than U-M are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford and MIT. I few liberal arts colleges may also fit in this list. The difference in prestige between the other mentioned and U-M is not significant. The arguments are usually based on alumni pride and people making grandiose statements based on trivial differences in subjective rankings. You will see a lot of this on cc when it comes to U-M - much of it comes from the supporters of non-Ivy elite private schools who like to diss Michigan because it is public and has IS tuition that is substantially less than the dough their parents had to shell out for them.</p>
<p>I think you should base your decision on where you would rather be for four years and whether your family can afford to send you there. Your family’s EFC will be helped by having two students in college at the same time. Your father’s retirement means that he won’t have a salary to contribute to the EFC and the age of your parents factors in the formula as the formula assumes older people need to keep more of their savings for retirement. With family income of $170,000.00, I assume your family has accumulated investments and your financial need will be considered low. With your stats, I do not think you will qualify for substantial merit aid from either U-M or NU and most merit aid from other schools will not lower your cost below the IS tuition at U-M.</p>
<p>If you were interested in theater or journalism, I would think there would be a benefit to attending NU even though Michigan has produced its share of award winning journalists and has one of the top student run papers in the country. For engineering, I would think that Michigan has a clear advantage over NU; for pre-med I would have trouble distinguishing between the two and I would think it would be a good idea to save money for medical school. If you are interested in the study of physics as your name suggests, Michigan has a top physics department and relatively few physics majors - this could be a good opportunity.</p>
<p>Michigan’s biggest advantage is that it offers top programs in virtually every field so that if you change you mind as to a field of study you will find a quality program in that area.</p>
<p>I would suggest that you visit both campuses if you have not done so already. This may give you a feel of where you fit. I would suggest going beyond the tour and info session. Attend classes and stay overnight with a friend if you can.</p>
<p>As for getting in, Michigan is really into looking at the unweighted GPA. A 3.9 student with a 28 ACT is a stronger candidate than a 3.7 student with a 32 ACT. I would work hard to keep your grades from slipping. As you go below 3.7, your chances for admission diminish rapidly. I don’t know how NU evaluates candidates.</p>
I think the majority of your post is very fair and balanced, but I do take issue with this one. It seems to be the snobby public equivalent of the “you probably couldn’t/didn’t get in here” claim popular with supporters of private schools.</p>
<p>50% or more of the students at a top private university are usually on financial aid, many of them requiring very substantial aid. As just one datapoint, I attended a private school but paid less and got more attention than I would’ve at my own excellent in-state flagship. Most of the top privates guarantee to meet the full need of every admitted domestic student – with the exception of UNC and UVA, most publics do not have enough money to say the same.</p>
<p>
Depends on one’s point of view, I suppose. Only 50% of Michigan applicants are admitted to medical school; although a Northwestern cross-admit would likely do better than the average Michigan pre-med, there is no reason to suppose that should necessarily be the case. A guaranteed acceptance to a top medical school is nothing to sneer at these days.</p>
<p>“Only 50% of Michigan applicants are admitted to medical school”</p>
<p>Percentages are not as important as actual numbers in cases like this. Michigan does not discourage anyone from applying to medical school, whether they are qualified or not. I can guarantee you that if an applicant from The University of Michigan has a high enough GPA, along with strong MCAT scores of course, he/she will be admitted to medical school at the same rate as a graduate of Northwestern. There are just so many more students at Michigan that naturally the acceptance rate will be lower.</p>
According to your source, Columbia is superior to both Stanford and Caltech. That is not a fact. So disregard your source, because Columbia, whilst it’s a great school, is not superior to either Stanford or Caltech. Only fools think that it is. :D</p>
<p>“Depends on one’s point of view, I suppose. Only 50% of Michigan applicants are admitted to medical school; although a Northwestern cross-admit would likely do better than the average Michigan pre-med, there is no reason to suppose that should necessarily be the case.”</p>
<p>Warberlsrule, Medical schools don’t really care where their applicants complete their undergraduate studies. All they care about is GPA, MCATs, ECs (including internships and research) and of courses, essays and interviews. I do not think a medical school would pick an applicant over another simply because of the university they attended, especially if both universities are considered among the best.</p>
<p>“A guaranteed acceptance to a top medical school is nothing to sneer at these days.”</p>
<p>No university can claim to guarantee admission into a top medical school. Still, Michigan does well in this department. 50 Michigan students enroll into Michigan Medical (#6 medical school in the nation) each year. Another 50 or so enroll into other top 20 medical schools. Those figures are very impressive. The reason why only 50% of University of Michigan premeds are placed into medical schools is because a significant percentage of University of Michigan applicants have sub 3.2 GPAs (20%) and/or sub 25 MCATs (15%). Such students typically have virtually no chance of getting into medical school. The acceptance rate into medical school for University of Michigan applicants with 3.6+ GPAs and 30+ MACTs is roughly 90%.</p>
<p>In terms of overall undergraduate quality, Northwestern at 11 is better than Michigan at 29.</p>
<p>In undergraduate perceived prestige, Northwestern at 4.6 is more prestigious than Michigan at 4.4</p>
<p>In graduate/academic field, Michigan at PA of 4.4 is more prestigious than Northwestern at 4.3</p>
<p>In terms of wealth, UMichigan is wealthier than Northwestern if we’re comparing endowments. But this shouldn’t matter at all…</p>
<p>In short, Northwestern is a better option overall. But, if financial problems are very high, then Michigan is a obviously a better option. You should get a good education in both institutions. </p>
Alex, you do realize Northwestern HPME is a direct admissions medical program into NU Med right? The valedictorian of my high school two years ago took Northwestern HPME over a full ride to UChicago, Shipman Scholars at Michigan, Duke, Harvard, Princeton and MIT. Being guaranteed admission into med school, especially a well-reputed one like Northwestern, at the age of 18 is like having the burden of the entire world lifted off one’s shoulder. It’s almost a complete no-brainer.</p>
<p>
This is not true when you consider per capita. Northwestern is wealthier in this regard and definitely has more resources for its undergrads than Michigan.</p>
<p>MrPrince, the PA is not a measure of graduate school quality, it is a measure of undergraduate quality as seen by university presidents and deans. </p>
<p>At any rate, of all the difference in your post above are tiny. There is no difference between #11 and #29 when comparing dozens of globally elite universities. Yes, #3 is better than #53. Heck, #5 may be slightly better than #25. But the difference between #11 and #29 is non-existant, especially whne you consider that the data used for such measures has not been adequately or fairly sterilized. </p>
<p>4.6 is not necessarily better than 4.4, nor is 4.4 necessarily better than 4.3. Having an endowment of $6.6 billion is not significantly more than having an endowment of $6 billion. In short, one cannot separate universities within of such equal quality. </p>
<p>And MrPrince, the USNWR ranking is not entirely accurate. I realize you seem to agree that Columbia is better than Stanford. But do you care to explain how you concluded that Columbia is superior to Stanford? Is it merely because the USNWR says so? If that is the case, then you must also agree that Columbia is superior to MIT. Or Penn equal to Stanford and superior to MIT. Or that WUSTL superior to Brown and Cornell. How do you explain all of those? Or do you just blindly accept the lies that the USNWR feeds the public to sell its only money-making edition?</p>
<p>^I refuse to consider your comments. I despise you as much as I hate rjkofnovi. Perhaps when you’re as efficient and reasonable as Alexandre, I might acknowledge you.</p>
You’re right. I meant to say academic prestige, which is different from perceived prestige as I believe is represented by Counselor rankings. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>YOU are correct. I will openly agree with you only when people start to believe Harvard (1) isn’t too different from WUSTL (12). </p>
<p>
I am saying Columbia is better. Since it is better, it is superior. Although I probably seem to have chosen the wrong word for it. Superior has a bad connotation to it.</p>
<p>
Yes, I do believe it. Its what UNSWR says. I find it a lot easier to believe UNSWR than making subjective judgments and imposing it on others.
Also, college rankings barely makes 1% of my life, so it doesn’t bother me to think UPenn is better than MIT (Note: I’m not using “superior” anymore). </p>
<p>USNWR is doing a pretty good job with its ranking criteria, and it makes money. I think its a win-win.</p>