<p>^^^^^^So what? Go to the “much better schools” and be done with Michigan.</p>
<p>Anyone that is defending Michigan here, please be sure to actually read the comments before replying. I don’t think these people are questioning the decisions made… They are questioning the process and the late decisions. The argument that they have been doing this for a long time and people shouldn’t complain is so flawed that there is no point to counter it. Also, the argument that the University will suffer greatly budget wise by speeding up the process is also ridiculous.</p>
<p>We aren’t saying we will be given admission into the “much better schools,” but we are saying that there are many schools out there considered better academically with smaller class sizes and more applicants that get the decisions back much earlier. </p>
<p>Also, there is a huge difference between being waitlisted on April 16th and being waitlisted on April 1st. If people don’t file complaints and show concern, Michigan will not have any pressure to improve their admissions process. That will hurt the University as well as the applicants, so it’s definitely something it should take seriously. Don’t think I’m attacking the University, because I’m not.</p>
<p>Happened to see this thread and it looks like things haven’t changed from when my double legacy S went thru the '06 admissions cycle. Deferred in OCTOBER and waited almost 6 months until mid-April to hear back from the U. Thankfully, he had long moved on at that point, but H and I weren’t amused. Also agree with the above poster that most applicants need those critical 4 weeks in April to get their ducks in a row in order to make an informed decision by May 1st. Said it then and I’ll say it again, the U needs to dump rolling and go to a full EA/RD system.</p>
<p>“^^^^^^So what? Go to the “much better schools” and be done with Michigan.”</p>
<p>Seriously.</p>
<p>I am not saying that I have been admitted to these school! What I am saying is that if academically better schools with more applicants can release their results on time then why can’t UMich?</p>
<p>still havent heard and i was deferred in december. they tell me its still under review when i call. what does this mean its really wrong to do this</p>
<p>Yes don’t complain about anything. That way any problems will disappear magically. Come on let’s be realistic… a better admissions process will help the University just as much as the students.</p>
<p>“Anyone that is defending Michigan here, please be sure to actually read the comments before replying. I don’t think these people are questioning the decisions made… They are questioning the process and the late decisions.”
QFT</p>
<p>I am not personally bothered too much by my decision. Not only had I gotten in to schools which were a much better fit academically, financially and/or socially but I had already entirely ruled out Michigan by the time they released their decisions. I am more bothered by the principle of the matter, that most of those who applied early and received a deferral were simply waitlisted without further consideration, as well as the way U-M releases rejections and, most of all, the lack of time between decisions and the 5/1 deadline. Though I lucked out and had already narrowed down my choices to two schools which were not U-M, many were waiting on U-M to make their decision.</p>
<p>Back to the actual complaint, however: do you think e-mail the Office of the President would be just as effective as a written letter or is an e-mail likely to get ignored?</p>
<p>When it comes to OOS, Michigan wants to have it both ways. They want to fill positions early to ensure they meet their yield, but want people to continue to apply up to the very end. It is clear that the admissions chances descrease significantly for later filed applications. They should either set a hard deadline for OOS applicants of November 1, and then take the next three months to honestly compare the entire applicant pool, or make it clear that, as an OOS, if you miss the Nov 1 deadline, admission becomes a crapshoot.</p>
<p>^Was that not clear before? No they don’t officially say it but everyone who’s been associated with Michigan will tell you that…</p>
<p>Maybe there’s just not enough people who know the college in other states. I can tell you everyone here knows applying early significantly increases your chances.</p>
<p>Actually, Qwert, they do officially say it ongoingly via their information sessions, adcoms, etc.
Whether GCs HEAR it and pass it along to students or students themselves take the initiative to find out from adcoms is another matter.</p>
<p>But what I am really wanting to respond to is the idea that somehow the lack of timeliness on the part of U of M is cruel or ignorant as opposed to a merciful if frustrating process designed to optimize an applicant’s chance at admission.</p>
<p>If you were deferred in December and had a choice, would you rather be rejected outright (and have a later applicant take the place if a spot opens) or accepted later in the event that the first offers were declined and ergo, there was room to admit you because indeed, you were deemed to be qualified? Those waitlisted and deferred are generally QUALIFIED for acceptance.</p>
<p>As an applicant to Michigan, if you’re sincere and not just wasting the admission department’s time or looking for another notch on your admission bedpost, and if you’ve researched your intended college choices, it seems you would want to maximize your chance of admission even if it meant proceeding with contingency plans. If you were not sincere in your application to Michigan and would predicate a decision on a two-week differential in decision dates, then in a way you’ve self-selected, haven’t you?</p>
<p>Just a thought.
Cheers,
K</p>
<p>I agree 100% with the posters on this thread. I know of a friend (highly qualified) who had applied early October last year (within the Early Response deadline). He was happy to see his application status as ‘completed’ before the Early Response deadline. However, sometime in mid-November when he wanted to know the status of his application he had been told that his application was ‘lost’ and that he would need to resubmit the application. He resubmitted the application in early December, only to learn that his chances of admission had been greatly minimized because he was not eligible anymore for Early Response. He received no decision until April 10th. This was when his decision finally came; he was WAITLISTED (as if they did not have him wait enough). He ended up getting accepted to the school (LSA) near the end of May only days before graduation. He is attending the school but will always hold a bitter attitude against the admissions system.</p>
<p>kmccrindle, I feel that your statements were based on the assumption that everyone who applied to Michigan was 100 percent sure about going there (correct me if im wrong). I don’t think it’s insincere to apply to Michigan as a safety school or even if it’s not your first choice. The college decision is so tough, which is why it takes time (More than two weeks usually) to make it. When you receive decisions so late, you may not get a chance to participate in admitted student days or take that one last visit that makes all the difference. (personally the W&M admitted students’ day tipped my decision towards W&M over Michigan)</p>
<p>That’s just what I believe, but some may disagree and that’s okay. Michigan can continue this admissions process and still have excellent students, but I feel that if they properly recognize the problem they can fix it quickly and efficiently. It would be a win-win in my opinion.</p>
<p>I agree that applicants can be sincere and at the same time less than 100 percent certain of Michigan as a choice. I guess my sense, though, is that the REASON it is such a long process in the case of MI is that instead of having BINDING early decision, they have early response, for which the May 1 deadline holds LEGALLY. At the same time, they do not benefit from the ER in terms of knowing how many offers are actually accepted or what their yield might be. Meaning then that they are abysmally slow at slotting in the deferred or regular decision applicants. Perhaps the way to solve this is to make ER a form of “ED” insofaras an acceptance of the offer is required earlier. Eg. non-binding but decide by March, for example. The reason I suspect they don’t do this is because many qualified students who regard U of M as a “safety” also apply to the ivies and would be unlikely to apply ED to Mich when many ivies announce Apr. 1st. This is also likely why they do not have an early decision date for ER applicants…who’d want to commit if a dream school were still on the table and a likely letter in the offing? I think that by delaying as they do, the benefit to Michigan is that it optimizes the number of ivy prospectives it gains. Which indeed, does suck for RD or deferred. Considering all those factors, I just can’t wrap my head around what they could do differently…I don’t think its a staff shortage at all re: the wait. I think it is contingent on the yield restrictions (only 1/3 can be OOS yet 2x the number of apps are OOS) and the timeliness of student confirmation of acceptance of offers. But I could be out in left field.
Cheers,
K</p>
<p>although I agree with parts of your post, I still think that the process could be much faster. I don’t think Michigan has a higher percentage of “ivy prospects” than any of the other top public schools that have a similar applicant pool with a faster response time.</p>
<p>Without entering a protracted argument, for the sake of accuracy I believe I disagree (though I could be convinced otherwise). Two comparable public schools in terms of size, relative rank and reputation would be Berkley and UVA. The following is from 2007 quoted in a Michigan Daily article:</p>
<p>"Ninety-two percent of students in the University of California at Berkeley’s 2007 freshman class are from California and 68 percent of students in the University of Virginia’s freshman class are from Virginia.</p>
<p>So, Berkley is only placing about 8 percent OOS, while UVA is placing roughly the same number of OOS as Mich, give or take.</p>
<p>HOWEVER, UVA’s application deadline is January 2nd, and students are notified on April 1st. They also use the Common app, ostensibly quicker.
Meanwhile, Michigan’s deadline is Feb. 1, and RD decisions rolling. </p>
<p>So, by my reasoning, Michigan’s performance considering the delicate balance of managing a high volume of OOS applicants and filling spots runs roughly for the same LENGTH of time as UVA.</p>
<p>I think many Ivy applicants do indeed apply to publics like Berkley, U Mich and UVA as a form of “safety” (whether that’s an appropriate term or not.)</p>
<p>Now, somewhere on this thread someone suggested moving the Feb. deadline up to Jan. like the ivies. Certainly, that might help. But it also might reduce the post-ivy-acceptance yield.</p>
<p>Cheers,
K</p>
<p>PS – One difference…UMich is processing about 29,105 Applications overall and UVA is processing 18,000 applications…so, 11,000 applications makes a big difference. I doubt many other schools process as many!</p>
<p>K, here are some updated stats on UVa admissions this year- their numbers also rose, though not as significantly as UMich. </p>
<p>**For UVA: </p>
<p>Total number of applications: 21,839
Total number of VA apps: 7,663
Total number of OOS apps: 13,764</p>
<p>Overall offers: 6,331 total offers (28.9%)
Total VA offers: 3,276 offers (42.7%)
Total OOS offers: 3,055 offers (22%)</p>
<p>Enrollment goal: 3,240 first-year students**</p>
<p>I think for some folks the frustration with Michigan comes from the lack of information or perhaps the conflicting information they’ve received. D’s good friend was greeted with enthusiasm at an audition then got the runaround for weeks from Admissions, only to be waitlisted. I know here in VA there is concern over the numbers admitted and what the yield will actually be at many state universities and where they’ll all live. Michigan may also be experiencing that crunch as well.</p>
<p>Wow, I got the 18,000 number directly from UVAs website so it was 08, same with UMich. If UVA has gone up by 3,000, I wonder what UMich’s numbers are for this year. They are right to be worried about overly high-yields (though not so much when it comes to OOS, at least, according to the FA posts on cc). Nonetheless, the late application deadline definitely factors in. Which does nothing to lessen the frustration.</p>
<p>While I agree there may be much to be frustrated about, I don’t think an audition-based example actually is typical of UM’s “conflicting communications”. (It actually seems to be the dead silence that is killing folks…wherein there is no conflict…just no timely communication. I wonder what would happen if they just started posting things like: EGADS You’re on WA again? Weren’t you here an hour ago? Well, we’re still swamped…we know you exist and are still wading though…please please please don’t hate us. After all, we might become your alma mater…:)</p>
<p>I’m assuming your D’s friend applied to the School of Music, Theatre and Dance. If she applied to music theatre, for example, they take about 22-26 kids and they can’t afford to over-enroll. In my son’s specific program, they take four. Same problem. At the SOM, the applicant would have first been academically pre-screened. This is a whole different kettle of fish, because the pre-screen stats are SIGNIFICANTLY lower than the actual SOM average or mean…but they don’t want to eliminate the odd outlier virtuoso. What was the audition date? For example, if March 6 (or even the Febs) only the highest evaluations were offered immed. admit and everyone else had to wait for the results of the last Mar 27 auditions. When it’s close, the selection committee then has to look at credentials again b/c it can influence the offer. If D’s friend was waitlisted, it could have been that her evaluation score was great but not “as great” OR that her academics, experience and profile weren’t quite as highly developed as someone with an equal audition evaluation. No matter how welcoming adjudicators or specific instructors are at auditions, (not just Michigan, this is true of all the conservatories) it remains a function of recruitment until all the auditions are complete and the committee gets ahold of the results. At some schools, teachers have even sent letters saying they want to instruct applicant, but the final adcoms reject. Nonetheless, I am sorry for your d’s pal and I hope she makes it off the list. Waitlist for SOM is still a phenomenal accomplishment.
Cheers,
K</p>
<p>Thanks for that information K- don’t want to give too many personal details re: the student but I don’t think academic qualifications were an issue. She has other equivalent or superior to UM acceptances so won’t be staying on the waitlist. I do think this is an unusual year for admissions and hopefully some of the kinks will be ironed out in the future.</p>
<p>I have to agree with those who are complaining, with a proviso! Michigan’s admission process is becoming UNACCEPTABLE! It is truly shameful for a university of Michigan’s status to have such an ineffective and off-putting admissions process. There are several problems as far as I am concerned:</p>
<p>1) Michigan’s February 1 deadline is ridiculous. Most universities that have over 25,000 applicants have December or January 1 deadlines. Michigan shoild move its deadline up to January 1.</p>
<p>2) Michigan’s admissions options are ridiculous. ER and rolling admissions just don’t work together. Michigan should stick to ER and have RD for the remaining students. </p>
<p>3) For some reason, Michigan is affraid of using the waitlist. It shouldn’t. Michigan should just assume a 45% yield, and based on that, accept enough students to fill its desired Freshman class size. Those acceptances should be sent out by Christmas day for ER applicants and on April 1 for all other applicants. Should more than 45% of admitted students chose to enroll, Michigan will have a slightly larger class than anticipated and can make up for it the next year. Of course, in such a case, non of the wait-listed students would be admitted. Should fewer than 45% of admitted students chose to enroll, Michigan can dip into the waitlist to fill the remaining seats. </p>
<p>It really is that easy!</p>
<p>Now for the proviso:</p>
<p>Applicants should understand that Michigan is very selective. It is obviously not as selective as the Ivy League, but it isn’t much less selective. This year, I have known of at least four students who have been admitted into the Ivies and schools such as Duke, NU and Rice and they have all been wait-listed by Michigan. Many rely on totally exaggerated admissions stories (of “mediocre” students somehow getting in) and assume that its relatively high acceptance rate (42%) somehow applies to them. It doesn’t. In the case of OOS applicants, unless students apply very early (application completed before November 1) AND are 3.9+ (unweighed GPA) students ranked in the top 5% of their class and have 2200+/33+ SAT/ACT results, Michigan is a reach. For in-state applicants, Michigan is a little less selective, but not by a large margin. Unless a resident applicant applies very early (again, application must be completed before November 1) AND has a 3.8+ GPA (unweighed) and a 2100+/32+ SAT/ACT, again, Michigan is a reach. One must expect this sort of selectivity of a top 20 university these days.</p>