<p>KK, we have gone through all this several times. Furthermore, since I am merely suggesting that Michigan and Northwestern are peers whereas you are the one who is suggesting that Northwestern is appreciably superior to Michigan, I would say that the burden on proof lies with you. However, I will humor you. As Sam Lee and I both agree, the best way to determine quality of undergraduate education is to see how well undergrads place into top graduate programs and exclusive firms. </p>
<p>The data shows that both schools are pretty even in terms of percentages. </p>
<p>1) According to a recent WSJ feeder school report, both schools had practically identical ratings, with close to 3% of Michigan undergrads placing into top 5 MBA, Medical and Law schools compared to close to 4% of Northwestern undergrads. As such, Northwestern ranks 14th in the nation among research universities compared to Michigan’s 18th spot. </p>
<p>I also recall seeing a similar link for IBanks and Michigan was the second most frequently recruited undergraduate institution after Wharton.</p>
<p>3) We both know the peer assessment score. Like it or hate, trust it or not, it is still the main indicator of what the academic world at large things of the various universities. Michigan typically has a PAS of 4.5-4.6 and Northwestern has a PAS of 4.4. In short, they are pretty much identical in the eyes of academe.</p>
<p>GoBlue81 wrote:
"research does not equal … faculty quality </p>
<p>Have you discuss that with your professors?"</p>
<p>Aye, GoBlue81, I imagine that you’re not a professor!</p>
<p>Furtermore, you cite rankings that (you suppose) penalize Northwestern for not having programs such as pharmacy, vet medicine… In other words, more grad progs at Wisc. so Wisc. must be “better.” </p>
<p>You know, Jakarta has more people than Paris–by you’re logic, Jakarta’s a “better” city than Paris, right?</p>
<p>“As such, Northwestern ranks 14th in the nation among research universities compared to Michigan’s 18th spot.” </p>
<p>This is indeed one way to frame the argument. The other is to say that Northwester is just flat out higher on the list than Michigan at 21 and 30 respectively. </p>
<p>Indeed the two places are recruited equally for the elite consulting firms, and if business and Ibanking were the only fields in higher education, then I would agree with you; they are equal at getting recruiters on campus.</p>
<p>As for the peer assessment, the most subjective piece of your argument, Michigan is indeed the “victor”. What does this say about your assertion that: </p>
<p>“Both get the same respect from graduate school admissions committees and exclusive companies’ recruiters.”</p>
<p>It says very little if you ask me. That is, unless you can prove that graduate school admissions committees and exclusive companies’ recruiters’ are the ones giving out peer assessment scores. </p>
<p>It should also be noted that the presence of consultant recruiters on campus does not mean that schools are sending the same number or percentages of students to the firms. Michigan’s graduating class is nearly 3 times larger than Northwestern’s. Thus, Michigan would have to send 3 times as many people to the firms than Northwestern does in order for them to be equal. If a person wants to get into one of the “top” graduate (law, med, and business) schools as named by the WSJ, then Northwestern is ranked HIGHER than Michigan. I’m not claiming that Northwestern is in a different league than Michigan, but I am claiming that it wins in pretty much every comparably objective category.</p>
<p>I think what Alexandre meant was 1 percentage point difference provides nothing conclusive when other unknowns are taken into account. I’d agree with him on that.</p>
<p>Sam, You’re right above NU not offering those programs. I just listed the rankings off a table I had on hand. Should have checked first before I post. </p>
<p>However, Wisconsin still out-ranked NU 14 to 5 among the grad programs on my list. And the fact that Wisconsin does offer more and broader programs should be a plus for the school … as it offers more opportunities for collaborative research.</p>
<p>Look, the point of my post was just that Wisconsin has more higher ranking graduate programs. And the facts support that statement.</p>
<p>
Nop… more HIGHER RANKED grad progs at Wisc. so Wisc. indeed has better graduate programs.</p>
<p>KK, my point, as Sam pointed out, is that there isn’t enough of a difference in the numbers to differentiate between Michigan and Northwestern. Georgetown is #15 on the list and Caltech is #29. Does that mean Georgetown is better than NU and NU and Georgetown are better than Caltech or Michigan? I don’t think so. There are other factors to look at. My point is, Michigan and NU are equally regarded. There is ample evidence of that. Beyond that, individual success will rest entirely in the hands of the individual.</p>
<p>Btw, ranking Michigan State as 6, 7th or even 8th in political science in the Big Ten is ludicrous. I’ve seen MSU rank as high as 6th, overall, in PoliSci and even the joke USNews ranking currently has MSU at 22nd, overall (w/ various programs within ranked higher). So it doesn’t follow that 5 or 6 public universities, albeit good public Us, esp from one conference, would rank ahead of MSU. Also, I don’t think the late Sam LeFrak would choose MSU has the host school for his personally endowed, nationally-recognized “LeFrak Forum” on democracy (over his alma mater, U of Md) if MSU was rated as low as you guys have the school… Again, I look at these rankings as popularity contests vaguely rooted in reality.</p>
<p>There are some really good programs at Michigan State that are not widely known. For example, its hospitality management, supply chain management and packaging engineering programs are ranked among the top in the country.</p>
<p>That’s true, GoBlue, but your thinking – positive though it is – reflects MSU’s image problem. Yeah, people will acknowledge MSU’s strength in “off-beat” programs like you mention (although Cornell takes a great deal of pride in it’s Hotel school), but when it comes to MSU’s strength in more traditional, liberal arts & science programs like Political Science, Music (where the Julliard Quartet was in residence for over a decade), creative writing (the famed Clarion creative writing workshop, 2 national lit journals and, more recently, the emergence of a very strong film program), physics/astrophysics, journalism/communications, pre-med and international relations (Lyman Briggs & James Madison residential colleges, respectively), econ and so on… people tend to be silent – actually, they just don’t know. </p>
<p>… and GoBlue you didn’t even mention MSU’s dominance in education.</p>
<p>… oops, I just learned the venerable Clarion SciFi Writer’s workshop, one of the best, is leaving MSU next year for UCSD due to state budget cuts… That that a national program of that caliber remained in flowered within MSU’s English Dept for 30+ years should say something about the quality of MSU English. If it were Iowa, people would be nodding their heads, but MSU???</p>
<p>t1388, my ranking of Engineering and Computer Science was basically a ranking of the Big 10’s colleges of Egineering, not only their computer science programs. I did not do rankings of departments.</p>
<ol>
<li>Northwestern</li>
<li>Michigan</li>
<li>Wisconsin</li>
<li>Illinois</li>
<li>Penn State </li>
<li>Indiana</li>
<li>Ohio State</li>
<li>Iowa</li>
<li>Minnesota</li>
<li>Michigan State</li>
<li>Purdue (don’t get me wrong… awsome enginering but what else? MSU is a better round school imo)</li>
</ol>
<p>Does anyone have Big ten (eleven ???) poli sci rankings ?</p>
<p>Haha, I love how like all of you on the first page put MSU last. (That’s the only page I looked at, I’m sure much more of you put it last, too.)
That’s so incredibly wrong.
MSU is getting very hard to get into. Indiana and Purdue are easier to get into than MSU.</p>
<p>Admissions is only one part of the equation. Some schools have more slots than others and that impacts admissions. It has only a marginal impact on quality after the dolts get weeded out first year.</p>