<p>But then again, the quality of the university is greatly defined by student body even more than the quality of professors. Does that mean that Uchi is at the same lvl as tufts? This sucks</p>
<p>BlacknBlue-- I believe you've answered your own question, that if Chicago students consider themselves apart from Ivy Leagues, it makes no sense to draw real comparisons between the two schools. I surmise that some students put Chicago before ivies (me, for example) and others put ivies before Chicago, which makes sense to the extent that both are fantastic sets of schools.</p>
<p>And again, Chicago is different from almost every school one is tempted to compare it to-- different in mission, different in attitude, and different in academic standards. Therefore it makes little sense to take numbers and look at them side by side-- I surely didn't when I considered Chicago. What did a yield or a graduation rate or even an admission rate mean to me if I went to the school and I liked what I saw?</p>
<p>Can you spell out its different mission, attitude & academic standards?</p>
<p>As a UC alum who grew up in Chicago and moved east I have a different perspective on UChicago's high admit rate, which I'm guessing is very affected by east coast applicants. In the Chicago area, Chicago is high prestige and is the first choice for many people, even over the ivies. When I first came east, I found that UChicago wasn't even on the radar. A couple people, after learning that I went there to college, said, oh is that like City College of New York? UChicago's visibility has improved greatly in the last 10 years or so, probably because of the stiffer competition to get into school, but I still think that it's not a school that comes to mind for most students in the east. And I think a lot of east coast kids (including my child) can't picture themselves going to a school in the midwest. Also, I do agree that UChicago is self-selecting, because of the core curriculum which scares students away. Ironically, the core was the most valuable part of my academic experience there, and most alums that I know agree. Finally, UChicago is a really intellectual environment - not just in the classroom but everywhere. I think students sense that and head elsewhere if that's not where they feel most comfortable socially.</p>
<p>amy: the issue is the high admit rate of the school, not what the school offers and how happy you are at uchi. i am quite happy that you are so enthralled, however, that doesn't change the constructs of the discussion. the fact that uchi accepts 41% of their applicants doesn't mean the school is not perfect for some and extremely well regarded by the masses. all it means, when coupled with low yield is that the school has a hard time attracting the bulk, if not their best admits. this is just an indication that, aside from yourself, most other admits choose to go elsewhere. i can see the "self selecting" argument coming right around now, but it really doesn't apply to accepted students. the self selecting argument does apply to students that may not think uchi is for them and choose not to apply. once they have applied, they will, indeed, consider attending uchi if other more attractive opportunities fall through. i beleive that uchi wants to keep their doors open to the more qualified and attractive students should their other choices fall through and they thus fall into their laps. there is nothing wrong with being the repository for highly qualified students that don't have a better choice. i just mention tufts because they go out of their way not to be seen as the ivy stepsister that gets the crumbs leftover by the ivy's. uchi, really doesn't do that. if you're qualified, they take you. if you are super qualified, uchi will even pay you to turn down the 20% or less school, but then again, one has to do what one has to do.</p>
<p>heh, I think Chicago is trying to buy me out</p>
<p>jaunita: there is no different mission, attitude or academic standard. all the schools from the best to community college have the same mission, attitude and academic standard. i might have to leave out a couple like webb institute or deep springs, but all the other traditional universities and colleges all strive to accomplish the same goals, they just say it differently. it's not really a rebuttal to why uchi has such a high admit rate.</p>
<p>meestasi: that's great, i hear that uchi is a really good school.</p>
<p>BlacknBlue,</p>
<p>We can probably debate this question till we're blue in the face, but in the end it feels as if we're going in circles. It's possible to argue that 41% (likely 36% this year) is "too high a figure" for an elite. On the other hand, it's certainly possible to make the case that selectivity is only one indicator of quality and that there are a myriad of other more valid indicators, all of which UC has in abundance. </p>
<p>The interesting thing to me is this. Assuming that this year's selectivity is about 36%, the university could easily lower that figure by ten to fifteen points or even more by taking four simple steps: adopting the common ap, utilizing ED, instituting a flood the mailbox policy aka Wash U, and funding enough merit scholarships to make Chicago competitive with places like Wash U or Northwestern. The school could even preserve its much loved Chicago essay by including that in a supplemental app, the same way that HYP does now. Do all this and both selectivity and yield would surely increase. </p>
<p>So why doesn't Chicago do this? Frankly,with the exception of merit money, none of this is likely to happen. When I sat and waited for my son to interview at Chicago, I leafed through a binder that was prominently displayed in the anteroom filled with articles arguing against binding ED and the use of a common application. I don't want to get into these arguments, since that's another thread, but I think we can agree it's extremely unlikely Chicago will be adopting such policies in the near future. That may drive you crazy, and give you great ammunition for poking people in the ribs over figures like "41%" but it also makes a lot of people happy. They would not want to go to Chicago if it was any different than what it is. </p>
<p>In an age when many schools look like carbon copies of each other, U Chicago is stubbornly unique. It's right for some and not for others. The hard thing is that students who are admitted have to decide if it is right for them. That can be difficult. Some will conclude the Ivies have more prestige. They certainly do with the man on the street, although you would get a different perspective if you interviewed a parcel of academics (there it would depend on the particular school discussed and their own discipline). Even if UC selectivity dropped to 19%, students who measure schools by "prestige" would likely choose an Ivy over Chicago. Other students will conclude that the core is too demanding, their future gpa too iffy, and the workload too daunting. I have a feeling that these elements factor into students' real life decisions far more frequently than worries about selectivity or whether the school is really "elite". Finally, there are those students who must make a decision based on the all too real financial factors. Their numbers are considerable....just take a look at the comments on the accepted students' thread.</p>
<p>The number "41%" is not a real decider for anyone; it's just a ghost figure floating here and there in the air, and we can argue about it, getting all worked up in the process. That figure exists because Chicago refuses to budge on certain basic principles and policies. It would be far more fruitful to try and understand why they do this. You may agree with them, or you may not, but that is the reality of the school.</p>
<p>P.S. For what it's worth, my son is still deciding and does not know where he is going. I do resent your reference to Tufts. There are valid reason why a kid would want to go to Tufts rather than UChi or Harvard, and vice versa. Different schools have different strengths and feels to them. This slavish USNWR mentality is like a horse with blinders on. The poor beast sees so very little of the reality of life that's going on around him.</p>
<p>P.P.S. Where are you going next year?</p>
<p>I admire many of you for your persistence, and I congratulate Cami on the wonderful posts, which, I must say, synthesized points which people have been posting for a very long time. It is my impression that unlike the atmosphere we are looking for at Chicago, BlacknBlue seems genuinely disinterested in the fair discussion of the topic, but rather, he seems to be set on trying to claim that Chicago isn't as good of a school as it could be because its yield is this high. To me its fine if that's what he wants to do, but please don't come here with the false claims that you are just looking for an honest discussion.... </p>
<p>P.S.: Since I don't have as strong of a character as some of you, and since I have submitted my deposit already - making BlacknBlue's comments indirectly attack me - I can't refrain from the ad hominem: BlacknBlue, where are YOU going to school?</p>
<p>From over 20 years out of school, this is how it looks: From the time you enter graduate school or start your first job, the significance of where you went to school in terms of prestige disminishes tremendously (often to zero if you go to a good grad school or to a challenging or respected job). Also, the weird thing is that these rankings change over time. My grad school has zoomed up, while my undergrad (UC) has slipped significantly in the rankings (which I do think will change soon). (So at a party I guess you can just namedrop the higher ranking school!)
So bottom line is, go where it feels really really right to you. Because that's where you'll be happy and you'll flourish - and any employer or grad school is impressed by the college student who is a top achiever, wherever they went to college (I say that with authority, since I've had years of recruiting experience for my company). I'll take the #1 student at nowhere university anyday over anyone ranking lower anywhere else.</p>
<p>cammi: we could probably discuss this until we're blacknblue in the face, but it is your posting that most people on the uchi forum will NOT take to heart. all your points are very valid. the 41% figure really means nothing in in the scheme of college life. yet, when this one aspect of uchi and its yield is discussed, it inevitably turns into a referendum on the quality of the university, which it is not. uchi's admit rate is what it is. it is derived from historical precendent as to what uchi needs to fill out a class based upon their yield figures. just about everyone here is so sensitive to even the slightest hint that uchi may not be the top choice for everyone that they refuse to acknowledge what the yield is used to measure and what it means. everyone here is so caught up in the "i could have gone to a 20% or less school, but i choose to attend uchi." this may be the case with some (especially those that got beaucoupe merit bucks), but frankly, it's really not true. i think if you asked the student population, most will say that they didn't get into a 20% or lower school, that's why they're at uchi or that they got more money from uchi and that's why they're there instead of the 20% or lower. This is my analysis for the op. the true bottom line is that the op will visit both places and choose the one he or she likes better and better may mean lower acceptance rate or more prestige or more nobel laureates or more areas that accommodated the butt of gwyneth paltrow in proof. who knows. btw, everyones admit rate will drop this year, there has been an increase in apps to every school it seems. so 36% is a step in the right direction.</p>
<p>Amazing. This forum. Truly, I moved here to U.S 2 years ago and went to a brooklyn high school. And my first impression about this forum was that it is full of dorks and conceited people. I was wrong. Great responses from all of you. Very helpful I am still deciding on the school I am going to attend though. I am visiting all 3 (Cornell AMherst and CHicago) in the next two weeks</p>
<p>BTW....First my college acceptances seemed promising...I was rejected from princeton and Yale, however, I got into AMherst, Chicago and Cornell.....now I realize that these schools are so individual that it's impossible to make either a right or a wrong choice. Might as well toss a coin. But I am now actually considering cornell because it seems some sort of a median between the two extremes, not because its an ivy....I am still not deciding until I visit all. Thanx to all</p>
<p>Enjoy your visits, dendankin - I am sure that you will find the school that suits you best!</p>
<p>Three fantastic institutions... Congrats... but after you visit, come with us to Chicago!!!! heheh</p>
<p>I live on the U. of C. campus, and I know many students who turned down top schools (acceptance rate 20% or less) for Chicago. Students want Chicago because it is unique. Sure, some are Harvard rejects, but many I know wanted the kind of eduacation that UChicago-and UChicago alone- has to offer.</p>
<p>My guess why the acceptance rate is so high is that many students simply don't want to work their butts off to get out of college. Note that the SAT etc. scores at the U. of C. are almost as high, and higher in some cases, than Ivy League schools. The students are just as bright, but what makes them different is that they are true intellectuals who want to live the "life of the mind." They will sacrifice prestige for one of the best educations one can receive in the country.</p>
<p>Congratulations on getting into three great schools. I'm very familiar with all three - went to one, have a son in another, and live near the third. They are SO different. I go back to my earlier unsolicited advice to go with the one that feels right when you are there (but don't judge it by the student guide that you get for the tour!!).</p>
<p>Ha sound advice there sir... My guide at UofC was pretty nerdy.</p>
<p>"but don't judge it by the student guide that you get for the tour!!"</p>
<p>---I'm so guilty of doing that. My Georgetown and Northwestern guides were incredibly dull, and that certainly influenced my opinion of the school (the admissions officers I met were pretty dull, too).</p>