Guess who’s paying for the free tuition for the $125k and under students. Everyone making $125k and more.
Personally I believe that it will be helpful for some of the liberal arts majors, why do they need a 32+ on the math and science portion of the ACT if they’re an art history major (I know that was specifically mentioned by UChicago and it makes sense). On the other hand, I still think their is a decent correlation between high scores and success in the STEM fields so I imagine it will still be important for those majors to submit some scores or risk being denied. I doubt Cal Tech follows as they love the high scores and it seems to work for them.
Do people ever question why society needs a college “education”?
I actually find this a bit troubling. Why should a wealthy first generation student be granted that kind of tuition assistance?
I guess I have to think that for some students with less than stellar schools and application guidance these tests where the great equalizer. How do they not miss out on their opportunity.
And also I am asking in a real way,was there a problem at Chicago with their current student body not being as successful as past classes? if not what are they looking to fix?
As a female, first-generation mom of Mexican-heritage, I believe this is a way for the university to bring in more minority/diverse students without having to report that the school’s accepted students have lower test scores. And I think it’s despicable. Minorities can score just as high as white kids. If the schools want to make a difference, they should offer programs during the summers to minority students who are in high school…programs that will help the students lift their scores through the knowledge acquisition and test-taking familiarity that many are lacking. This dropping of test scores/dropping of transparency is a lazy “solution” that will circle back around and bite the university in the butt with ill-prepared students who will not complete degrees (unless the university then drops grades at the university level). And making people who earn more than $125k/year pay for the education of everyone who makes less than $125k/year is b.s. There’s got to be a better way. I worked three jobs, got merit scholarships and lived at home. And guess what. I appreciated my education more because of the hard work I put in.
I think that there is a misperception that now half the admitted class won’t have submitted scores. I would be shocked if it was even 5%. UChicago probably won’t release that stat either.
@privatebanker they simply don’t believe they have been able to cast a wide enough net with their previous policies, and with this new policy they will have wider latitude to select their cohorts.
Test scores are a predictor of future academic achievement; preparedness to date and for some tests a broad measure of IQ. Further it is very very difficult to prep to a 1600. Most students who prep raise their scores a fairly modest amount relative to baseline–preparation is more about familiarity than learning that which has not or cannot be learned.
So if I get a 36 on the ACT I’ll be a world renown art historian???
Cast a wide enough net to catch what type of student? Who are they missing now. It seems they have classes that reflect society and different economic backgrounds. Are the students complaining about too many students with same background. Professors. I say this because they seem to have great track record of achievement in grad med school. Stem and academic scholars. Who’s missing?
@privatebanker at #258 and #264: the classes by all measures have had excellent outcomes in terms of career and grad school placement - and much better than, say 25 years ago. This new policy is an attempt to reach a type of applicant they haven’t yet, not to dumb down the curriculum or opportunities awaiting the current students.
BTW, it’s not clear at all that they have maxed out in enrollments. We don’t know the matriculation numbers yet for class of '22 but if higher this year than last, that might mean that next year is higher still. Therefore, everyone who “deserves” to be accepted next year wouldn’t be compromised in the least by this new outreach. 
@CU123 - was thinking the same thing when Nondorf mentioned “art history”! Their humanities division is looking a bit lonely compared to some of the others so maybe they are also looking to expand enrollments there.
@StudyingIsBad OK I guess studying the arts is not for you.
@privatebanker its to encourage those with scores that are lower then the average to apply, so that UChicago can determine if they are a good fit. This isn’t that hard to understand.
My anecdotal experience with CalTech students suggests it is quite a bit more demanding than MIT, to the point that perhaps a third of the students are completely overwhelmed.
This is a situation where the dumbing down of the SAT over the last 20 years has hurt CalTech’s ability to discriminate based on different levels of math skill. Currently, the compression at the top of the SAT I/II only really allows CalTech to differentiate between woefully unqualified and potentially qualified.
Personally I think both Cal Tech and MIT eat their undergrads alive! Well OK just a euphemism.
I get it. I am just trying to understand who the elite schools think they are missing. And if they could articulate it who wouldn’t jump on board.
Many of the posts point to the tests don’t work. Or they are poor indicators of success. I think taken with everything else they are very helpful. Especially for the academic superstar who might be at a disadvantage in their school district or with access to college counseling help.
Also if the current formula wasnt working, their results, as you mention, in grad school placements etc -?now being better than 25 years ago, t’wouldn’t be possible. They must be choosing great students and their endowment is getting filled by them as well.
I like the economic ideas they’ve implemented. But with so many critics saying this in fact hurts the diamond hiding within a lower performing school etc I wonder who the missing ingredient is for them. They seem to be doing great just the way they are in many categories.
^^@privatebanker’s point is valid - if this is a diversity play there are several who think it’s unnecessary. If it’s a way to make sure every family is aware of UChicago and able to apply, then that’s a different story. BTW, the latter one is more consistent with it’s overall non-conventional and aggressive marketing over the years. And just think - now we have something different to complain about other that all those mailings!
One area that Uchicago lags behind others in is the number of low SES enrollees. These have been increasing signficantly at other top schools of late. This new policy is a way to explore whether UChicago could do more in that category. It doesn’t mean they need to accept a high number of opt-outers, as has been pointed out, nor are most kids going to be able to get away with opting out, especially for certain majors (also pointed out). They know as well as you whether you should be submitting a test score. This policy is really for those who otherwise wouldn’t be applying. It’s outreach.
@CU123 - they really DO need to publish the % of acceptees who have opted out, though I’m not particularly hopeful on that.
@Cu123. Ok. I can agree with that as a rationale. But it took hundreds of posts. And many many posts talked about the lack or efficacy in testing.
@privatebanker I think of it this way, of the two things that matter the most for success in a career, one is intelligence and the other is dedication. Some careers do take both (that’s where people question why drop the scores?). Many (and I mean the majority) careers only take dedication to be highly successful. The second of the two is far more important and is difficult to test or measure.
Agreed. 100%