This only seems to give us information about the admittance criteria of Michigan. Without understanding the distributions of other institutions (especially the more competitive ones), it seems hard to draw stronger conclusions.
This only seems to give us information about the admittance criteria of Michigan. Without understanding the distributions of other institutions (especially the more competitive ones), it seems hard to draw stronger conclusions.
Michigan CS is like Carnegie Mellon CS -- getting into the school for non-CS is waaay easier than getting into the school with the intention to major in CS, and the filter starts at admissions. Michigan is closer to an ivy than a "state school" for CS.
Some state flagships serve as "come all" institutions -- any decent student gets admitted. States like Missouri, Kansas, Minnesota, and I think still Wisconsin come to mind. Michigan doesn't work like that. Lots of their undergraduate programs are extremely competitive, and therefore admissions overall is competitive. Saying "better school than Michigan" is like saying "better school than Carnegie Mellon". The acceptance rate is around 20%. It's not a safety school, for anyone, particularly with an intended major in much of STEM. It's a highly selective institution. Which changes the nature of your question.
Thinking of Michigan as a "median school" is not an accurate mental model. If you want a "median school" use Michigan State instead.
I'm not saying either is true, just commenting that this data on its own is too incomplete to draw the kinds of conclusions people are assuming here.
Sometimes. I'm not sure about Michigan's policy here. I would assume no, or at least "ambivalent" is okay.
> Or apply for a different major and then switch to CS after you get in?
MANY try, few succeed. Not worth the risk if you intend for CS to be your primary major. If you want a double major with CS as the secondary of the two, maybe.