Admit Rates, Standardized Test Averages, Cross Admit Results

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
101

But Harvard is never known for “intellectually quirky” as I stated above.

The academically intense U of C in 1970’s to 1990’s did not attract a lot of applications or succeed in job placement for College students. However, Graduate Schools and Professional schools were (and are still) strong. The effort of Sonnenschein and Zimmer has been and still is to unlock the actual strength of the school through better marketing and campus facilities. Have they done a perfect job? Of course not. But people who went to school 30 to 40 years ago (like I did) can certainly appreciate the positive changes on campus. If the price to be paid is the slight dilution in intellectual quality of the College students, so be it.

Besides, as I have repeated a million times in this forum, U of C is more than just College. Honestly, I don’t give a hoot if the College ranking falls to No. 10 or lower if the Graduate Schools and Professional Schools stay at the top of their game.

102

I dunno @85bears46 - while it might not be the dominant strain at Harvard, you can find your fair share of intellectually quirky (and brilliant, and possibly on the spectrum) students at Harvard.

Also, if it helps, I’m happy to narrow my analysis to the college alone. Nondorf has been a big net positive for the College. These threads primarily deal with the College, so when posters note “the institution,” they often are referring the College specifically.

103

@cue7 Well there you have it, you do want UChicago to be exactly like Harvard, I think that you would be happier now since UChicago is more like Harvard now then it was in the 90’s.

104

@CU123 - I am indeed happier about the proposition of attending Chicago now than in the 90s - no doubt.

I’ve said it before many times (often to @marlowe1 ) - I want Chicago education with a Harvard brand. We’re certainly closer to that now than at any time in the recent past.

I am much less a curmudgeon about Chicago’s current regime than people may think - especially nowadays.

105

For every 2 (or even 3 or 4) Rhodes Scholar U of C gets, I will trade them for a Field Medal or John Bates Clark Award winner. Nobels nowadays are awarded to some old scholars whose seminal works were done decades ago. I value a Nobel much less these days. If the scholars at U of C are still doing groundbreaking research, it is much more important to me than a scholarship for a student to go to Oxford. In my opinion the number of Rhodes Scholar is by no means an accurate measure of the school’s strength.

106

@Cue7 - to be accurate, George Clooney doesn’t have an “adopted son” at UChicago. He is sponsoring a student there. And the kid was anonymous till last year. Plus - he’s quite an impressive kid - intellectually and otherwise. He’s an asset to the place. He should have gotten in even if NOT connected to George Clooney.

Can’t speak to the other “celeb’s kids” - guessing that Rory Gates was an uncontroversial admit, regardless of who his parents would be. And the son of the Princeton pres. is the child of an academic. There are many such offspring attending UChicago.

The Joile-Pitts would seem to be a different sort altogether. They attract attention to themselves by breathing. Children should not be admitted to UChicago simply because they have famous parents. However, if AJ waxes enthusiastic at the idea of Scav, then I’m willing to give her kid the benefit of the doubt. Yes, that’s a high standard.

107

I bet Maddox’s essays were awesome though.

Scratching the surface one gets… Traveled the world - and not just the touristy type of travel. His work experience producing films. Volunteer opportunities and the people he met and what he learned from them. Internal struggles of an adoptee. Insecurities as an Asian trying to belong but not really fitting in with the Hollywood elite. His foundation work in Cambodia.

Think of the cross-domain possibilities: World travel and worldwide volunteerism and tie it to Scav. Freedom of Expression at UChicago and the role of traditional movie/tv media vs social media. Issues of population displacement caused by political upheavals and his personal background having left Cambodia in a tumultuous era.

Man, he could go wide or go deep, the essays still sound awesome in my mind.

And think about the video essay that he could have sent as an addendum.

108

@JBStillFlying - thanks for the correction re the clooney connection. I don’t doubt these kids - and the presumable hordes of rich kids from places like newton MA and highland park IL (wealthy suburbs) aren’t qualified.

But the number of quirky geniuses from south dakota or small town wisconsin probably haven’t increased by 50% on campus. I just don’t think that’s where Nobdorf has concentrated his outreach.

(And it looks like admitted students events have gotten more lavish/pre-professional in places like nyc and dallas and boston.)

But again, to confirm, the college is stronger now than in a long time.

Finally @85bears46 - the U would trade a few rhodes scholars for a bates medalist or probably even a nobel prize. They would also certainly do it for the millions of dollars the wealthy kids are bringing in every year.

109

“And think about the video essay that he could have sent as an addendum.”

  • Applicants were counseled to focus on content rather than "film quality." The video wasn't supposed to be a production piece. Let's hope that young Maddox was under the same application guidelines as everyone else.
110

So what’s the deal with Maddox Pitt-Jolie? Was he at Chicago with his mom for admitted students day, or just there for a prospective tour? One is different from the other.

If he’s admitted (and not ED), Nondorf better be rolling out the red carpet. He’s a VIP admit for sure.

111

“But the number of quirky geniuses from south dakota or small town wisconsin probably haven’t increased by 50% on campus. I just don’t think that’s where Nobdorf has concentrated his outreach.”

  • Urban centers have grown, small towns have diminished in size. Nevertheless, when we attended our local reception with our son (very hospitable and welcoming, great food and company, NOT lavish) it seemed that a good number of those kids actually WEREN'T from the metro but from outlying areas. So at least here in MN, they have increased the number from other parts of the state compared to two years ago.

“(And it looks like admitted students events have gotten more lavish/pre-professional in places like nyc and dallas and boston.)”

  • Don't forget Chicago. Yes, the trustee-sponsored events are very high end. But the overwhelming majority of admitted student events aren't trustee-sponsored. They are local events sponsored by parents of current students. Even in those four major urban areas.

“But again, to confirm, the college is stronger now than in a long time.”

  • Yes, it's clear that you think so. But not really sure your criteria are valid. For instance, whether the institution is now academically or financially stronger is a subject of earnest discussion and even debate on this forum. Neither challenge has been resolved, and we haven't seen any announcements yet about the Jolie-Pitt Division of Biological Sciences :wink:

There is a wonderful Aesop’s fable that cautions against counting your chickens.

112

“So what’s the deal with Maddox Pitt-Jolie? Was he at Chicago with his mom for admitted students day, or just there for a prospective tour? One is different from the other.”

  • AJ sent out a recent press release that young Maddox will be attending college in the fall. There is much speculation on news outlets such as E! where that will be. Unlike Rory Gates, young Maddox wasn't there during an admitted student event.

“If he’s admitted (and not ED), Nondorf better be rolling out the red carpet. He’s a VIP admit for sure.”

  • Different rules for privileged children of the rich and notorious? That would certainly knock "Fundgate" off the front page of the student rag LOL. Actually, on second thought, it probably wouldn't and we'd have to read all about it in the Chicago Mar-Swoon. Not all wealth and privilege is viewed with the same negativity.
113

I got my Rhodes Scholar lists from the Association of American Rhodes Scholar webpage, which has the annual lists. Joshua Pickar is there, but he was a Chicago law student and GWU undergraduate. It turns out that Yali Peng, Lilian Dube and Lucas Tse weren’t American Rhodes Scholars. Peng was chosen as a Scholar by China, Dube was selected by the committee in Zimbabwe, and Tse was chosen to represent Hong Kong. Peng is a graduate law student pursuing a JSD degree; her undergraduate institution was Tsinghua University. Dube and Tse were both Chicago undergraduates. It’s a huge honor for all of them, and something legitimate for the University to brag about, but it’s not necessarily a validation of current admissions strategies.

I’m in general agreement with a lot of what Cue7 is saying, but there’s one point on which I think he’s wrong. In the hallowed Ted O’Neill days, Chicago’s financial aid policies were really not competitive with those of peer institutions, unless your family was close to destitute. There was a limited merit scholarship program, which included 20 or so full tuition scholarships that could be used to lure Ivy-type candidates (but that just as often went to quirky, big-risk Chicago-type candidates), and maybe 100 $5,000/yr. scholarships. It was very difficult for a true middle-class kid to attend Chicago back then. It’s not easy now, but it’s not entirely out of the question. So I’m not sure there’s more focus on the wealthy today than there was back then.

114

@JHS - what do you think the socio-economic breakdown of Chicago undergrad looks like these days?

I’m guessing it’s some fairly low SES kids, probably a bit larger of a band of middle class kids (larger than in the 90s, anyway), and then a fairly big number of wealthy/super-wealthy kids.

The biggest change would be maybe a modest bump in middle class students (and low SES students), but then a much higher concentration of wealthy/full freight paying students.

In the 90s, as I remember it, there were a good number of students from the higher end of the middle class/upper middle class, who were using some loans to get through (and/or doing work study).

So, as I recall, lots of students whose parents were say, teachers, junior faculty members, lab techs/employees, bookstore owners (back when that was reasonably profitable), some doctors and lawyers.

Most parents incomes were probably in the $80-160k range. Enough for their kids to live comfortably and get through Chicago with some manageable loans. Certainly some making a lot more than that, but it never felt pervasive (like I was surrounded by the sons and daughters of the titans of industry).

Now, I think there are lots - LOTS - more students with parents earning big sums of money ($500k+?). I say this just from admitted student receptions I’ve attended - I’ve met many more finance types, corporate lawyers, high-level CEOs, etc. I joke that I should personally ask for money at these events - there’s seemingly so much to go around!

To sum then, while the groups you mention may be amplified, the general, major strain would be… wealth. (Whether admissions focused on it or not, I think that’s the biggest change, on the ground.)

115

^ It might be the case that as a college enters the tippy-top tier, it starts to skew toward wealth. There is a high correlation between wealth and stuff like selectivity of your kids’ college.

Interestingly, however, it appeared that many of the parents at the recent admitted event I attended were NOT finance- types, high-level CEO’s or corporate lawyers. They were just regular folks and were thrilled with their fin. aid. packages. So, @Cue7 the College is, in fact, spreading the wealth around.

116

May be a bit of wishful thinking there, Cue. The question for me isn’t whether the demographic of the student body is trending your way - it probably is - but (a) how far things will go in that direction, and (b) the extent of the changes in student culture thus brought about.

The very rich may be different from you and me, as Fitzgerald asserted, but they are also different from one another. Some of them may be curious about the world, some may be gluttons for hard work, some may be kind and modest and earnest. The ones coming to Chicago may be different from the ones going elsewhere - and they may be rather more like their less opulent class-mates.

It sounds as if in your day as in mine the wealthy weren’t a big deal. Nobody made a fuss about them, nobody thought about them, nobody had much of an idea who they were. To me that seems like an educational ideal and a special characteristic of this college of all colleges. If that ideal is lost in this new age I will not regard it as any sort of triumph of James Nondorf.

117

@JBStillFlying - maybe you misread my more light-hearted comment, and maybe I am misreading yours (in post #114). You know, when I was discussing wealth at admitted student receptions, I wasn’t doing so to show, definitively, that the College is getting wealthier, right?

And I’m supposed to know, right, that when you discuss your admitted event surrounded by “regular folks,” you don’t definitively mean that the College “is, in fact, spreading the wealth around”?

Because the anecdotes don’t hold much explanatory power.

BUT, we can also agree that the schools that employ ED and tend to be ultra-selective attract a disproportionate share of wealthy applicants and admitted students, right? And, given that Chicago makes use of multiple rounds of ED and is ultra-selective, we can agree that, most likely, the student body then skews toward wealth - more now than before it used these tactics?

118

ED biases towards people who are well off, but giving consistently crappy financial aid also biases pretty heavily towards people who are well off. As does being a sort of secret handshake among people with sophisticated knowledge about American higher education, who also tend to be, on the whole, well off. At my kids’ public academic magnet, the students in their classes applying to UChicago would all have been in the top 3-4% of the school for family income.

119

@JHS - and being seen as less desire-able than its peers amongst the very wealthy, with a lower US News ranking, at a time when college admissions was generally not as competitive, probably dampens the numbers of wealthy students on campus. (This was certainly the case in the 90s, when Chicago would still lose considerable numbers of cross admits to Tufts, Emory, etc.)

I’d wager that two rounds of ED, an ultra-high ranking (that can draw attention both nationally and internationally), and a clear impetus to over-enroll is skewing the population much harder towards wealth now than before.

120

We have had a battle of anecdotes above on the demographic issue, and we have also had the confident assertion that the trending of the U of C demographic to the upper end is due to the adoption of ED. I am still waiting for actual statistics that would contradict the only statistics I know of, which show the U of C student body considerably lagging that of all its peers in wealth. Do either of you know of more recent statistics? Otherwise we are restricted to speculation and such limited anecdotal observation as we are capable of.

I have to question Cue’s belief in the superior “explanatory power” of the effect of ED. If it is true that that regime is having this extreme wealth-skewing effect at Chicago, then there must be examples of peer schools that do not use it and consequently have less wealthy student bodies than Chicago’s. What are these schools? If you can’t think of one, Cue, then isn’t that telling you that the explanation for the increasing wealth of the student body at Chicago (if in fact this is verefiably so) is not due to ED but to other factors?

My own belief is that Chicago needs to do a better job of reaching a middling demographic through publicization of its FA programs and the trumpeting of its egalitarian culture rather than through abandoning an admissions structure designed to net kids suited to its ethos. Perhaps, however, we may be dealing with social trends difficult to overcome by any single institution.