<p>My daughter is looking at a career in medicine. I’m well familiar with Michigan since I have another daughter there now. We are in state. Her stats through junior year include a 3.91 GPA from a Birmingham district HS and a 34 ACT. Question is whether there is an advantage in applying to Cornell over Michigan if medical school is the ultimate objective. This is not a financial decision since I could pay for either, but if the schools are close the savings would be nice. I know by comparison that about 95% of Princeton grads applying to med school get in on the first try. Any stats like that to compare Michigan versus Cornell?</p>
<p>“Question is whether there is an advantage in applying to Cornell over Michigan if medical school is the ultimate objective. This is not a financial decision since I could pay for either, but if the schools are close the savings would be nice. I know by comparison that about 95% of Princeton grads applying to med school get in on the first try.”</p>
<p>Several thoughts: 1) going to Michigan would mean the opportunity to make contact directly with professors and there is also a quantifiable “hook” from UM undergraduate to the medical school; I’m not familiar with the framework at Cornell but is there a possible proximity issue (Cornell campus upstate, some (all?) elements of Cornell medical in New York?) in that it may be harder to establish, while an undergraduate, research relationships with medical school faculty? I simply don’t know but it might be worth researching; 2) from memory, however defective, I remember something like 60% of UM applicants being accepted; this is far lower than Princeton, but percentage is a bit deceptive in that the Michigan cohort is probably much larger and probably places more people in aggregate; 3) I would guess that Michigan is roughly a wash with Cornell as to teaching undergraduate sciences; 4) Michigan has poured a lot of concrete and invested over $1,000,000,000 in life science research over the last 10 years; not sure where Cornell is in terms of relative investment; I believe that Michigan has more highly cited researchers and the facilities are bleeding edge; 5) Michigan has 100 departments (whole university, not just med) ranked in the top10 nationally…if she hits a bump she’ll find something to do at either school, but Michigan also has a great biomedical program and a great engineering school…though Cornell is probably, again, a wash in this regard; 6) UM medical school “matches” either 100% or close to 100% of its graduating medical school class.</p>
<p>If the final goal is medical school it is worth noting that UM medical school and hospitals are very highly ranked for both primary care and research, but excel particularly in research. So, in part, is she a potential academician or a potential practitioner?</p>
<p>Over all, while I’m not that familiar with Cornell, my sense is that they are an institutional wash. For people who don’t know Michigan, Cornell may benefit from a halo effect.</p>
<p>BTW: I looked at the common data set for 1 dimension only: number of enrolled students above Ivy League 25th percentile on the ACT (which is 30, on average).</p>
<p>Cornell: 14,394 undergraduates * 77.9%=11,140 students with an ACT greater than the 25th percentile bound</p>
<p>Michigan: 28,283 undergraduates * 63.1%=17,846 students with an ACT greater than the 25th percentile bound</p>
<p>So, for every 100 students at Cornell with a “quasi-elite” ACT score, there are 160 such students at Michigan (roughly).</p>
<p>Obviously, this is an extremely narrow comparison, but she will find plenty of competition at Michigan to sharpen her wits.</p>
<p>Short Answer:
I do not believe choosing one over the other will have any effect on pursuing a medical career. </p>
<p>Long Answer:
I would not get hung up on the percentage of people who are accepted that apply from a given institution for 3 main reasons. 1) The school may be more selective in who they let apply to medical school. Meaning there may be more competition in the prereqs leading to the “weeding” out of large numbers of students. Also, some schools have committees that write letters of rec for their medical school applicants. I have heard anecdotes of applicants not getting the “blessing” from their committee to apply. 2) UM produces a very large pool of medical school applicants (as the previous poster suggested) while Princeton does not. When you have a small sample size it makes it hard to compare schools by numbers, such as the percentage of those who are admitted. Cornell is somewhere between UM and Princeton in terms of number of applicants.</p>
<p><a href=“https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/86042/table2.html”>https://www.aamc.org/data/facts/applicantmatriculant/86042/table2.html</a></p>
<p>I disagree with the above poster in that I do not believe the medical school at UM takes preference to their own undergrads. They do have a weird auto-interviewing policy (which I do not know all of the details of) that gives preference to applicants from more prestigious schools. But I would be very surprised if Cornell did not provide this boost to the application as well.</p>
<p>There is something to be said for having the medical campus near the undergraduate campus. Getting clinical experience is an unspoken rule for applying to medical school. It also makes it much easier to do clinical research (for those not interested in basic science). However, there were many Cornell undergrads in my medical school class so it must be possible to do these things while at Cornell.</p>
<p>In terms of applying to medical school, I would not get hung up on the rankings of the UM hospitals, research funding or match statistics. While these things may eventually become important (if she gets accepted to the UM medical school or does residency there), that is a few steps (and many years) down the road. For the purposes of the medical school application, where your undergrad institution’s affiliated hospital/medical school stands has no influence. </p>
<p>The most important things to consider when applying to medical school are college GPA, MCAT score, clinical experience, volunteering and somewhere far down the list is the relative prestige of your undergrad school. Therefore, I would really just make sure that wherever your daughter goes she will be happy. If she is miserable then she is not going to do well. For some people this may be at a large, public school with high profile sporting events near a large metropolitan area that is somewhat close to family and high school friends (but not too close). For others this may be a smaller, private school that is far removed from the city atmosphere with tons of outdoor activities close by that has the ivy-league “glow” to it.</p>
<p>And that should read “2 main reasons”. But if you are looking for a 3rd then I would consider the student make up of UM vs. Ivy league schools. While there are just as many “smart” people at UM, there are way more “less qualified” students at UM because it is so large in comparison. When these “less qualified” students apply to medical school from UM they will bring down the overall percentage of applicants from UM who are accepted.</p>
<p>1) “While there are just as many “smart” people at UM…” </p>
<p>No: “…just as many…” is not consistent with the numbers which I posted above, which are easily verified using the common data sets from Michigan et.al. Given Michigan’s large size there are demostrably <em>more</em> students with elite schools and perfect or near perfect GPAs at Michigan than at any of the Ivy League schools…so “just as many” is – however unintentionally – a misleading way to frame the discussion.</p>
<p>2) “there are way more “less qualified” students at UM because it is so large in comparison.” </p>
<p>The foregoing statement is accurate but not completely dispositive: while it is true that Michigan has less qualified students that an elite school might not accept, that is not the way to make the comparison. In effect, the question is what happens if you pair off the two sets? For each Cornell student you’d pair off a Michigan student. When you have run out of Cornell students, there are still many “elite” Michigan students waiting for a match. So UM both has less qualified students, but that ignores the fact that Michigan also has many more highly qualified students. So if you want to slack off and compete with the lower tail you can do so; if you want to compete against well qualified students in the upper tail, you can do that as well. The point is that given Michigan’s size, you will be sitting in classes with a number of students with whom you will directly compete against to earn your grades;</p>
<p>3) “When these “less qualified” students apply to medical school from UM they will bring down the overall percentage of applicants from UM who are accepted.” </p>
<p>This is statistically true, but somewhat irrelevant. I don’t know the figures but if Princeton sends 90% of, purely for example, 300 students to medical school, one can argue that there are 270 Princeton matriculants. If UM sends 60% of 700 students or 420 matriculants, does any one of the 420 Michigan matriculants care about the lower tail? In other words, if we are not worshipping the statistic for its own sake, would you rather attend a medical school from an undergraduate class with a higher or lower matriculation rate into medical school? It shouldn’t matter due to the ecological fallacy: it doesn’t matter what the ambient set (your class) achieves, the only thing that counts for a potential matriculant is that they personally be above the cutoff for matriculating. If you are a matriculant from Princeton or from UM, I seriously doubt that you care what the total population acceptance rate is from your undergraduate institution.</p>
<p>From UM webpage:</p>
<p>U-M doctor training programs rank among best in nation, according to new national survey
Top-tier performance for U-M Health System residency programs in all 20 specialties rated in Doximity/U.S. News poll
ANN ARBOR, Mich. — Doctors nationwide rate the University of Michigan Health System as one of the best places for young doctors to train in their chosen field, across 20 medical specialties, according to a new ranking released today.</p>
<p>simcenter.jpg</p>
<p>U-M residency programs earned a top spot in the country in all ranked specialties, from anesthesiology and dermatology to surgery and urology. The first-ever ranking was compiled by the physician network Doximity and U.S. News & World Report.</p>
<p>In 12 of those specialties, U-M ranked in the top 10 in the country. And for new doctors seeking to train at large public hospitals, U-M ranked even higher. Three specialties – otolaryngology (ear, nose and throat), pathology and surgery – ranked at number one in the country among programs at such hospitals. See all of U-M’s specialty rankings below.</p>
<p>The new rankings derive from board-certified physicians’ answers to a survey about the best residency programs in their specialty. Each could name up to five. Nearly 3,700 residency programs were mentioned in more than 50,000 physician nominations, and U-M’s consistently rose to the top.</p>
<p>Doximity residency navigator
The new Residency Navigator will allow logged-in medical students and physicians to see comprehensive data on residency programs.
The release of the rankings comes just as this year’s class of graduating medical students prepares to apply for their residency spots, through a national system that allows them to rank their preferred training sites, and interview at those that select them for consideration.</p>
<p>Next spring, most of these students will open an envelope and learn where they will go, in a simultaneous national event called Match Day.</p>
<p>In addition to the rankings, Doximity is offering medical students and physicians access to additional data on each residency program in the 20 ranked specialties, such as the percentage of residency alumni who went on to sub-specialize, and the rank of past trainees in publication of research findings.</p>
<p>UMHS has the fourth-largest residency program in the U.S., according to Modern Healthcare, based on Medicare data. Training opportunities go well beyond the 20 specialties ranked by Doximity: UMHS offers physicians clinical training in 105 accredited specialties, from primary care to highly advanced subspecialties.</p>
<p>Currently, more than 1,199 residents are training in their specialty while helping to care for patients at U-M’s Hospitals and Health Centers, under the supervision of U-M Medical School faculty physicians.</p>
<p>Additional facts about UMHS residency programs:</p>
<p>Some UMHS residency programs also give trainees the chance to learn and provide care at partner hospitals, including the VA Ann Arbor Health Care System, St. Joseph Mercy Ann Arbor Hospital, St. Joseph Mercy Chelsea Hospital and Hurley Medical Center in Flint.</p>
<p>The reputation of UMHS training programs attracts a large number of medical residents and fellows (advanced residents) from other states, who move to Michigan for three to seven years of training. In fact, two-thirds of each year’s incoming class of residents comes from out of state.</p>
<p>UMHS patients benefit from the expertise of residents and fellows, as well as the faculty physicians who supervise them. About one-third of UMHS residents are doing second or third residencies in complex specialties available at few other hospitals.</p>
<p>After residency, doctors tend to practice near where they trained. About 40 percent of UMHS residents stay in Michigan – and most of those staying are not originally from Michigan.</p>
<p>In recognition of the importance of this training, state and federal governments provide funds to teaching hospitals such as UMHS, to offset the costs associated with involving residents in patient care while also training them. UMHS receives funding for 765 residency slots, but supports additional positions for residents as part of its educational and patient care mission.</p>
<p>Doximity/US News & World Report 2014 Residency Program rankings for University of Michigan :</p>
<p>Specialty 2014 Rank 2014 Rank
Among Large
Public Hospitals
Anesthesiology 9 2
Dermatology 5 2
Emergency Medicine 17 11
Family Medicine 8 5
Internal Medicine 14 4
Neurosurgery 12 5
Neurology 10 2
Nuclear Medicine 7 3
Obstetrics & Gynecology 14 7
Orthopaedic Surgery 22 10
Otolaryngology 2 1
Pathology - Anatomic and Clinical 7 1
Pediatrics 22 5
Physical Medicine and Rehabilitation 12 3
Plastic Surgery - Integrated 5 2
Psychiatry 19 6
Radiation Oncology 6 2
Radiology - Diagnostic 9 2
Surgery 3 1
Urology 7 3</p>
<p>Rankings methodology - <a href=“http://umhealth.me/doxmeth”>http://umhealth.me/doxmeth</a></p>
<p>Access to rankings: <a href=“Doximity Residency Navigator”>www.doximity.com/residency_navigator/programs</a></p>
<p>1/2) I agree with everything you said. However, I think you are obsessing over absolute numbers when I was addressing a statistic that is a percentage, or relative. UM is a phenomenal school and if I had to choose to go to UM again or Cornell, I would choose UM in a heartbeat. However, it doesn’t change the fact that there is a higher percentage of “less qualified” students at UM and a lower percentage of “smart” people at UM in comparison to Ivy League schools, such as Cornell, using your metric.</p>
<p>3) I don’t think that statistic should be relevant, but the OP brought it up, so I addressed it.</p>
<p>“However, it doesn’t change the fact that there is a higher percentage of “less qualified” students at UM and a lower percentage of “smart” people at UM in comparison to Ivy League schools, such as Cornell, using your metric.”</p>
<p>1) Some people use normalization where it isn’t really relevant. For example, do you compete against individuals or against a percentage? If you sat the CPA test, do you care that the pass rate is 50%, or in a room of 2000 people are you competing against the person in the 1000th position? If you mixed the Cornell population into the Michigan population and started pairing off the Cornell population against the Michigan population, the highly skilled Michigan kids and the highly skilled Cornell neither cohort would not be competing against the bottom of the class. The bottom of the class becomes irrelevent. In the person to person competitions, the Cornell kids would be competing against many more qualified Michigan kids. Do you think the Cornell kids will then go home and say "Guess what mom, I bested the bottom third of the Michigan class? No, they will ignore that bottom third and compete against their natural competition. Those bottom quartiles will be irrelevant to their ability to pull good grades, so what does it matter what either the percentage or the headcount is. So in that context, what is the value of your statement.</p>
<p>As to you using percentage and say “…using your metric…” inverts the characterization which I made: I explicitly disagree with the use and importance of percentage and think your point is irrelevant…what counts is the person to person competition which people face off against because they faceoff against headcount, not percentage. </p>
<p>As an alumnus of both Cornell (graduate school) and Michigan (undergrad), I have observed that the two universities have much in common, from a shared history to a similar overall setup. I do not think attending one over the other offers a significant edge. If a student is fortunate to be admitted to both, I would recommend going with the more affordable option. If cost of attendance is not a concern, then I recommend going for fit. </p>
<p>This thread is fairly stale, but just noticed this set of rankings:</p>
<p><a href=“UM medical training program ranked in top 10 by U.S. News & World Report”>UM medical training program ranked in top 10 by U.S. News & World Report;