<p>
Acceptance rate is the measure of a university’s quality? Well, then USC is better than NYU, right? Or maybe acceptance rate does not measure the quality of a university.</p>
<p>
Take out a huge chunk of Michigan and it is harder than NYU… Just as reasonable. I mean really, LSP is just as much a part of NYU as Stern.</p>
<p>It’s simply a reflection of the way the USNWR rankings were when CC opened these forums. They don’t want to change it for fear of angering forum users. Personally, I think it’s poor form, if you use a particular set of metrics once as a basis for dividing schools, you ought to update that division as the metric changes.</p>
<p>Boozer you’re so ignorant. [Office</a> of Undergraduate Admissions: About Michigan](<a href=“http://www.admissions.umich.edu/about/]Office”>Explore & Visit | University of Michigan Office of Undergraduate Admissions) </p>
<p>Average High School GPA: 3.8
Middle 50th Percentile of the Admitted Class:
ACT Composite of 28-32
ACT English of 28-34
ACT Math of 28-34
ACT Science 26-32
ACT Combined English/Writing of 27-31
SAT Total of 1960-2200
SAT Critical Reading 620-730
SAT Math 670-770
SAT Writing 640-740</p>
<p>This year, they accepted about 40% (class of '15)</p>
<p>Scores are so much higher than NYU’s</p>
<p>@BillyMc
You are right. Acceptance rates does not measure a university’s quality. I was simply refuting the point that someone made that said Michigan is harder to get into…
The thing is Michigan doesn’t really have a LSP system so you really can’t compare.</p>
<p>@undertaker
Those stats don’t really tell much. Is it a 3.8 weighted or unweighted? And those scores aren’t “so much higher”. Look at the range of the scores…It’s really broad.
Both NYU and Michigan are basically on the same level of “prestige”. The way you put it, Michigan seems to be on-par with the Ivies, which is blatantly false.
But whatever man, you rock on with that attitude that you’re right and everybody else is wrong. I wonder who truly is the ignorant one :).</p>
<p>Fyi: I’m not being biased. I applied and got into both schools. My school’s Naviance data can also illustrate that NYU and Mich have similar stats…</p>
<p>
And NYU doesn’t have state obligations.</p>
<p>lol how am I ignorant? bozer stated what michigan’s sat scores “are” and I proved him to be false… btw, i’m not bias either since I got into both.</p>
<p>Both NYU and Michigan are basically on the same level of “prestige”</p>
<p>It’s up for interpretation, but by looking at PhD rankings I (personally) believe that Michigan is more prestigious</p>
<p>Again… are people really so concerned? After I (hopefully) get accepted, this forum will be a thing of the past. This reminds me of “Who has a bigger p***s?” lol</p>
<p>@undertaker</p>
<p>here’s the average stats for NYU freshmen
[Just</a> the Facts](<a href=“http://www.nyu.edu/admissions/undergraduate-admissions/is-nyu-right-for-you/faqs.html]Just”>http://www.nyu.edu/admissions/undergraduate-admissions/is-nyu-right-for-you/faqs.html)</p>
<p>Percent Offered Admission:
30%
Grade Average:
A-
SAT Critical Reading (middle 50%):
630-730
SAT Math (middle 50%):
650-750
SAT Writing (middle 50%):
660-750
SAT Total (middle 50%):
1940-2230
ACT with Writing (middle 50%) : 29-31</p>
<p>NYU and UMich both show pretty much identical numbers but the important factor here is that NYU actually has 10% lower acceptance rate than that of Michigan. I really don’t know where you got the idea that Michigan’s scores are on the higher end of the spectrum but just about every data I see on the web proves the contrary and shows that NYU usually had higher SAT score range (or at least similar) and much lower admission rate compared to Michigan’s.</p>
<p>So please, stop embarrassing yourself and embrace the inconvenient facts.</p>
<p>Isn’t CC Top Universities just CC “universities the most CC members are interested in?” Like… pretty sure NYU fares just as well as Emory in liberal arts and business. Schools like Tufts aren’t listed there either, probably because of lack of activity on those boards.</p>
<p>Boozer, you don’t seem to understand that acceptance rates mean nothing. For instance, Case Western has a higher acceptance rate than SUNY Stony Brook. What is the better school though? Case obviously… Better applicants apply to University of Michigan.</p>
<p>And also, NYU’s SATs and ACTs are VERY misleading due to the fact that students who do not do well on them don’t send them. They will send 3 subject tests or 3 ap tests. Obviously this makes the 50% percent inflated…</p>
<p>I would imagine a much larger proportion of Michigan’s applicants submit ACTs, making their SATs less descriptive of the overall student population. I may be mistaken, this can be verified.</p>
<p>Also IIRC Michigan takes only all the scores in a single sitting, no mixing & matching. </p>
<p>IIRC NYU wants you to submit all tests, then mixes and matches them to credit you with the best possible result. If that’s what they report externally also, it is likely somewhat puffed up from the way Michigan reports.</p>
<p>Acceptance rates means everything, especially when the applicant pool is pretty much the same. Also, in my experience, better applicants apply to NYU. Don’t forget that UMASS is a public funded institution which has an obligation to accept certain portions of students from the local region and this kinda puts public schools at a disadvantage in terms of selectivity compared to the private schools of similar caliber (that’s why Berkeley can never be Harvard even though it certainly has a potential to be). And if one school has better application pool than the other in terms of scores, that fact should also be reflected in the mean score of the accepted students, which in this case it clearly wasn’t, so your logic fails to hold up in every aspect. </p>
<p>Lastly, the new score policy you’re referring to was set in place this year and I’m pretty sure the stats I presented is from last year but since you seem to be extremely reluctant to check the facts for yourself, let me just lay out the data for practical purposes. Keep in mind that NYU and University of Michigan both had pretty much the same score policy all along, and NYU’s new score policy was only adopted starting this year.</p>
<p>2007 </p>
<p>NYU</p>
<p>[New</a> York University - Average SAT Scores](<a href=“http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_college.asp?College_ID=193900]New”>http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_college.asp?College_ID=193900)</p>
<p>SAT (25-75th Percentile)
Total: 1860-2140
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 28-31</p>
<p>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor</p>
<p>[University</a> of Michigan-Ann Arbor - Average SAT Scores](<a href=“http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_college.asp?College_ID=170976]University”>http://www.satscores.us/sat_scores_by_college.asp?College_ID=170976)</p>
<p>SAT (25-75th Percentile)
Total: 1830-2130
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 27-31</p>
<p>2010</p>
<p>NYU</p>
<p>[NYU</a> Admission Statistics 2010-2011 | College Admissions 100](<a href=“http://collegeadmissions100.com/nyu-admission-stats/]NYU”>http://collegeadmissions100.com/nyu-admission-stats/)</p>
<p>SAT (25-75th Percentile)
Total: 1860-2170
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 28-31</p>
<p>University of Michigan-Ann Arbor</p>
<p>[University</a> of Michigan Admission Statistics 2010-2011 | College Admissions 100](<a href=“http://collegeadmissions100.com/university-of-michigan-admission-stats/]University”>http://collegeadmissions100.com/university-of-michigan-admission-stats/)</p>
<p>SAT (25-75th Percentile)
Total: 1840-2150
ACT (25-75th Percentile)
Composite: 27-31</p>
<p>I can find more data but I assume you get the idea. NYU and Michigan always showed similar stats and if anything, NYU had a slight upperhand in terms of scores and admission rates.</p>
<p>In the end, it’s doesn’t matter how you would prefer to think, the facts are there, and your argument just doesn’t make any sense.</p>
<p>Undertaker… That’s a highly inaccurate statement…</p>
<p>“Those students who don’t do well on the SATs send in 3 SAT II or 3 AP tests, instead”</p>
<p>Last time I checked… It’s more difficult to do well on 3 SAT II subject tests or 3 AP tests (taken junior year), than it is to do well on the SAT. So… If they did better on one of the former tests, I’d assume it’s because they had a bad SAT experience and are actually more than capable and deserving of admission, assuming they get it. I’m sure someone could calculate the approximate SAT score of any individual given their SAT II scores. But I don’t think that’s needed.</p>
<p>Boozer… Your assumptions are quite wrong.
<p>As for the quality of UM versus NYU. You’re also mistaken.
They have similar scores for attending student, but here’s the difference:</p>
<p>NYU has 2.3 billion dollars. UM has 6 something. Their spending is much greater. They employ better faculty, have the resources for better facilities and more money to spend on research. If you look at ANY ranking system in the US, UM is simply better than NYU. Why? Because UM puts out massive amounts of research and it at the forefront of most fields. NYU simply doesn’t have the resources to do that.</p>
<p>Being good at Chemistry Spanish and US History (or others) means you’re going be good at writing reading and math? Oh please. First off bozer, all of the links you posted are inaccurate. I’m sorry, but you can only get official information from college websites and collegeboard (sometimes collegeboard is even wrong though). </p>
<p>Michigan
84% in top 10th of graduating class
97% in top quarter of graduating class
100% in top half of graduating class
63% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
27% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
6% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
3% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
1% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99</p>
<p>NYU
61% in top 10th of graduating class
92% in top quarter of graduating class
100% in top half of graduating class
33% had h.s. GPA of 3.75 and higher
39% had h.s. GPA between 3.5 and 3.74
16% had h.s. GPA between 3.25 and 3.49
11% had h.s. GPA between 3.0 and 3.24
1% had h.s. GPA between 2.5 and 2.99</p>
<p>NYU Clearly has a stronger applicant pool (LOLOLOLOLOLOLOL)</p>
<p>Chemistry… Let me see… Last time I checked; that involved more complex math than on the SAT I. Spanish would have to be your second language… So I would assume that if you can read and understand the grammatical structures of a foreign language (not your native language); if it is your native language then of course it’s not a good measure. However, the US History will require a reading/writing comprehension ability. SAT I’s are incredibly easy. AP’s are by far, much more time consuming and knowledge based.</p>
<p>NYU2013 / And there are plenty of people who choose NYU as a safety. In fact, I was one of them so I know what I’m talking about. Just assuming University of Michigan must have much more students who apply there as a safety and therefore concluding that has to be the explanation for the somewhat exorbitant admission rates of Michigan is totally unjustified.</p>
<p>I don’t want to get in to the issue of quality of education, research output and all that because that’s not the central concern. If you want to make a claim that Michigan is a better school because it’s a better research institution then that’s fine, I don’t really care. I’m only refuting the claim that Michigan is a better school because it’s simply harder to get into, which is clearly untrue and unfounded.</p>
<p>undertaker1664/ Higher GPA, Lower SAT/ACT, Higher admission rate. Still doesn’t prove your case. </p>
<p>Got anything else?</p>