<p>I'm assuming uMich is oging to be a bit more selective this year in light of what has happened the past two years with admissions numbers. Hoedown or anyone else with significant insight, can we expect an increase in the SAT or ACT ranges for the class of 2010? Are the applicants generally stronger? Are the acceptees stronger?</p>
<p>Judging from some of the kids I know who applied early and were admitted, no.</p>
<p>Will the stats for the class of '10 rise. Isn't that a bit like asking if George Bush will appoint Al Gore to the Supreme Court........</p>
<p>No KB, I didn't draw that parallel. I really think those fumes in the halls of the RC are gettin' to ya bro. Go clear your head with a basketball game or something ;-)</p>
<p>
[quote]
George Bush will appoint Al Gore to the Supreme Court........
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thats the most funniest thing I've heard all year.</p>
<p>Hard to say. I suspect SATs/ACTs will edge up a bit. It's too early to say for sure.</p>
<p>i think SAT averages will rise, gpa will stay the same. acceptance rate will rise even more. something that bothers me about michigan is that the admissions people don't care about these things, year after year, as cornell/northwestern/wustl(michigan's old peers) get more and more selective, Michigan has essentially remained the same in selectivity.</p>
<p>
[quote]
is that the admissions people don't care about these things
[/quote]
</p>
<p>This is a (perhaps understandable) misunderstanding. Admissions people are doing the work, so it's easy to ascribe this to them. However, at Michigan it's not up to the admissions people. The size of the class is determined at a higher level. Freshman targets are set by Deans and the Provost with input from other important sources. Admissions needed to meet those targets are worked out using some yield predictions.</p>
<p>Acceptance rate is also hugely driven by app volume. The admissions people are the ones working hardest to increase apps from qualified applicants, so in fact their work in this area drives down acceptance rates! The big dip in apps seen a few years ago was quite out of their hands, I'm not going to rehash that for the 80th time here.</p>
<p>Anyway, I've seen considerable evidence that the admissions folks care a lot about this. </p>
<p>I will grant that there are competing tensions, however--admissions professionals want to be selective, but they (more than any other person involved in enrollment management decisions) also really feel for these kids--they see their apps, meet them at fairs, hear all the great things about them. Director Spencer gets teased all the time about how he loves every applicant. But it is not up to him, or his staff, to move the acceptance rate in a particular direction.</p>
<p>if they really cared, they would have spent more time/money on recruiting, especially on out of state students. WUSTL is famous for this tactic. I didn't get a single letter from Michigan when i was a hs junior after taking the PSAT, i've gotten letters from Cornell, NYU, Columbia, WUSTL, and other top notch schools. These things are what the admissions office should do. Even the brochure I requested from Michigan was not up to date and very uninformative. These kind of effort requires very little financially, but pays huge dividends when applications roll in.</p>
<p>I got a PSAT good enough for NMSF, and didnt get anything from Michigan. A black friend of mine who had a lower, though still very good score, got a cd and brochure from Michigan. I don't know if it was thru the PSAT, but somehow he got some recruiting material.</p>
<p>WUSTL, as a private institution with no mission of enrolling state residents, is naturally going to have a different approach.</p>
<p>I guess this isn't big campus news, but OUA has been looking hard at a new CSM program to enable it to do more of the kinds of things you are describing. From what I have seen, the costs are not as minimal as you describe. They're also doing some more things with ACT test takers, as I understand it.</p>
<p>However, I think they are less interested in just increasing app volume, and more interested in taking good care of the prospects and applicants they already have.</p>
<p>Some enrollment management specialists would argue that it is more economical and effective to work on yield rather than to just try to up app volume so you can say "no" to hundreds more people. If you're going to send extra mail, why not send it to the students who have exhibited strong interest already (by applying) instead of to a big groups targeted via some Student Search mailing? Why not try to increase the yield of your best applicants? That will drive down acceptance rate, too, because you'll dip lower into your pool if more of your high-ability apps enroll.</p>
<p>It's a different way of achieving the same ends, I guess.</p>
<p>If the state gets wind that UM is doing mass mailings to OOS kids just to generate more apps it would be very embarrassing to a school that is somewhat strapped for cash--or at least that's what they want the state to believe. Publics have some constraints privates don't have.</p>
<p>why is that embarrasing? There is only a gentleman's agreement between the University and the state legislature to keep the Out of state student level at 30%, since the recent budget cuts have reduced funding from the state, i think it sends a signal to the state that the University is looking to seek revenue in other ways, such as by accepting more OOS, thus generating more money via tuition.</p>
<p>You have lots to learn about politics. One, logic is not all that important. What makes good headlines is. Universities rarely win fights with their state politicians. They hold all the cards and 90% of the people in Michigan really don't care that much how UM is funded as long as the football team wins.</p>
<p>barrons, once again you delight me with your succinct way of putting things across. Also, your keen grasp of issues.</p>
<p>I'll expand on your post a bit....the state can make life difficult for a university--in ways that have nothing to do with the amount of funding. The last thing U-M needs is a bunch of hacked-off legislators adding nuisance reporting requirements and hassling the University about issues. Yes, U-M is largely autonomous but we still answer to the folks in Lansing for some things. Look what happened to EMU when they had the brouhaha over the Presidents house. Boom, a new boilerplate item (which all 15 of us had to do) asking for reports on presidential housing and residence halls. EMU also got screwed over when it came to some extra capital outlay funds. That was just one year. EMU may be feeling pain for awhile--they're having to dedicate time and effort (maybe money) to polishing their image and making nice.</p>