<p>Maybe you guys are right about NU, but I find it difficult to understand how schools manage to enroll students with similar tests scores as Stanford when they clearly are not on par academically and will not be as appealing to top students if they do not specifically target high scorers (no offense intended, but NU is no Stanford). That is not limited only to NU by the way. Vanderbilt, WUSTL and a couple other universities seem to weigh standardized test scores very heavily in their admissions decisions. I can see how Harvard, Princeton or Yale have 31-34 AC/1380-1580 SAT ranges. MIT and Caltech openly admit that they weigh standardized tests heavily. But I do not understand how Northwester, Notre Dame, Vanderbilt and WUSTL can have such high ranges if not done intentionally. </p>
<p>Michigan is pretty transparent about its approach to SAT/ACT scores. It even had a formula which it had to abandon because it was supposedly unconstitutional. According to that formula, Michigan awarded 80 points for a perfect 4.0 GPA (unweighed), and dropped 2 points for wach 0.1 drop in GPA. So a 3.9 GPA would be granted 78 points, a 3.8 GPA would be granted 76 points, a 3.7 GPA would be granted 74 points etc… At the same time, Michigan awarded a whopping 12 points for a perfect 1600 (W not included) on the SAT or a perfect 36 on the ACT. In order to drop to 11 points, one had to score less than a 1300 on the SAT (CR + M only) or less than a 30 on the ACT. In other words, a student with a 3.9 GPA and a 1600 on the SAT or 36 on the ACT had fewer points than a student with a 4.0 GPA and a 1300 on the SAT or a 30 on the ACT. There is no questioning Michigan’s stance on standardized tests. They matter very little to the University. Comparing SAT/ACT ranges between Michigan and most universities that use test scores more substantially is pointless and proves nothing. </p>
<p>I do not think one needs to be defensive about a university’s practices. There is nothing wrong with a university assigning added weight to test scores. But not admitting to such a clear inclination seems disingenuous. Brown, Cornell and Michigan could easily enroll students with similar test scores as Northwestern, Vanderbilt and WUSTL. If you think that the former three are less appealing that the latter three, you are kidding yourselves. The former obviously do not feel that doing so will necessarily improve the quality of the student body or the level of undergraduate education. All I am saying is that comparing student bodies at two universities based on test scores when those two universities visibly (regardless of what they may claim) have very different admissions philosophies is pointless. Look at the accomplishments of the alums of those two universities instead. I am fairly certain that students at Michigan and NU have equally impressive track records.</p>
<p>Stanford get the majority of top kids from California so it is drawing the large bulk of high achievers from one environment (roughly 50%). The same can be said for Northwestern pulling high scoring kids from the Midwest who might not want to go to Stanford or the Ivies. </p>
<p>That is not to say of course that these schools don’t play with their SAT score ranges when reporting. They likely do</p>
<p>Northwestern follows holistic admissions practices, like all the other top private universities. I MENTIONED test scores as a way to quickly assess the relative strength of the student body. In no way was I suggesting that that makes them the be-all, end-all for NU or Michigan or any other school. </p>
<p>bclintonk, you say “For my money, Ann Arbor is a far better college town than Evanston, even with Chicago right next door–which I think most NU students, if they’re being honest, would tell you they don’t actually use all that much.”</p>
<p>I think most people would disagree that Ann Arbor is better than Evanston, or that the overall locational advantage would favor UM. Chicago is a fantastic city literally a short el ride or drive from Evanston. Ann Arbor is a ways away from the nearest city, which is Detroit. Most NU students DO go into Chicago frequently–not just downtown but all the restaurants, bars, clubs, theaters, etc. on the North Side as well. There are tons of cheap ethnic restaurants just across the Evanston/Chicago border that appeal to poor college kids. The location also makes it easy for students who want to do internships at any of the many businesses in Chicago.</p>
<p>“When choosing between Vandy and Michigan: 24% Chose Michigan, 76% Chose Vandy.”</p>
<p>No kidding? The small percentage of students who sent in applications to both of these schools and ended up overwhelmingly choosing Vanderbilt is absolutely no surprise. I can assure you that the vast majority of matriculated students at Michigan never even considered Vanderbilt as an option.</p>
<p>“That is not to say of course that these schools don’t play with their SAT score ranges when reporting. They likely do.”</p>
<p>When a school superscores SAT/ACT tests, which automatically encourages many students to retake them over and over, then there can be only one reason. Obviously they are used to weed out applicants. It is quite naive to think otherwise.</p>
<p>The acceptance rate of UMich is significantly higher than Northwestern. At the same time, it’s a Michigan flagship that gets many in-state applicants that aren’t nearly as strong. That’s not accounting for the fact that the USN college ranking doesn’t rank it as high. Regardless of how you think about that ranking, it’s the one many HS kids in the US take seriously. I don’t know why it’s so surprising to you that Northwestern has higher stats. I am very certain if you look at the applicant pool of Michigan, they don’t have half the kids above 1420/4.0. Why? Because I’ve seen such info for Cal before though I can’t find it at the moment (it was not on Cal website; it’s from some kind of centralized database for the UC system).</p>
<p>Also, you have the wrong range for Northwestern. It’s 1380-1540; the 75th-percentile point is definitely lower than HYPS. As for how it gets so close to them, there are just that many high-scoring kids out there that they fill most of the slots available at other schools and one of them happens to be NU. </p>
<p>As for Vandy/WashU, their increases were more dramatic and sudden so I don’t think it’s fair to group them together with NU.</p>
<p>“I was simply challenging the notion that Michigan/Cornell have more appeal than Vandy/Northwestern - They don’t.”</p>
<p>Between students who are apply to both of these schools, I would concur. My point is the vast majority of students don’t apply to both Michigan and Vanderbilt. They are just too different to appeal to the same student. They are only using Michigan as a backup school in case they don’t get into any smaller elite private.</p>
<p>misjump, how accurate is Parchment? Is it quote-worthy? Would you put your life on the line. I highly doubt that half the students choosing between Cornell and Vanderbilt would choose Vanderbilt…or that the majority of students choosing between Vanderbilt and Michigan would choose Vanderbilt.</p>
<p>“Personally, I could see roughly half of people choosing Vanderbilt over Cornell, and I could also see a majority choosing Vanderbilt over Michigan.”</p>
<p>But I cannot see why. And parchment may encompass thousands of students, but spread very thinly among thousands of cross-admit situations. I doubt more than 20 or 30 students who were faced with the decision between Cornell and Vanderbilt or Michigan and Vanderbilt responded. Cross admit data is never reliable.</p>
<p>A comparison between their CDS shows that Northwestern and UMich put the same weight for test scores. However, NU weights class rank, essays and recommendation as “very important” but UMich considers them as “important”. </p>
<p>“Very Important” for NU
Rigor of HS record
Class rank
Academic GPA
Aplication essay (note: NU has “Why NU” essay)
Recommendation</p>
<p>Important for NU
Test scores
EC
Talent/Ability
Character/Personal quality</p>
<p>Very Important for UMich
Rigor of secondary school record
Academic GPA</p>
<p>Important for UMich
Test scores
Application essay
Recommendation
Character/Personal quality
First generation</p>
<p>Back when I applied to college, I had the choice between Vandy and Cornell. And Brown, Emory, and a couple of other schools. I chose Northwestern. Would I do the same today? Probably, if I hadn’t gotten so sick of midwestern winters over the past several decades. The point is, these schools ARE all in the same range of quality and desirability and positive student outcomes. I don’t think public institutions can really be compared the same way, especially these days with all the state budget issues and education-haters in positions of power in many states.</p>
<p>Seems class rank is more important at Northwestern than at Michigan. If that isn’t a stats driven number I don’t know what is. Michigan takes into account if the student is a first generation; NU doesn’t. I don’t see Northwestern being any less driven by stats than Michigan. Adding the fact that superscoring is allowed, I see it the other way around.</p>
<p>You are missing the point. If 40% of the schools don’t rank, they have to use other measures to evaluate those students. Just as they have to come up with ways to evaluate home-schooled kids, internationals, or other students with less-common backgrounds.</p>
<p>Are you suggesting kids from schools that don’t rank can’t get into NU, since ranking is allegedly so important?</p>