chicago - northwestern

<p>"Looks like the pool that report test scores to Northwestern is actually more self-selecting and competitive. The problem is this is not the actual applicant pool and it's for ACT takers only."</p>

<p>Just be aware that ALL Illinois high school students (regardless of whether they are even interested in four-year-colleges) are required to take the ACT as part of the Prairie State Achievement Exam. </p>

<p>NU and U of Chicago are both very difficult to get into. NU is a more popular, broadly appealing school due to its more typical blend of academics and social experiences / sports, so more people apply for each open spot. NU also attracts a broader range of people insofar that it has world-class journalism, drama and music programs. U of Chicago is a school that attracts a narrower range of people due to its unique quirky culture, so fewer people apply for each open spot. The schools themselves have high levels of respect and cooperation with their cross-town buddies; in fact, some of you may not know that there was actually a proposal to merge NU and U of Chicago in the first half of the 20th century, which got tabled. The stats of the incoming classes are generally comparable to one another. What more is there to say?</p>

<p>Sanjenferrer: "They become so obsessed that they develop bitterness for schools with better numbers and extracurricular achievements, nicer people, and better-looking ones too."</p>

<p>Hey Sanjenferrer, I have to tell you I find it the height of irony that on NU-specific boards, you had no problem dissing the alleged superficiality of NU's Greek culture (even before you stepped foot on campus!) but here you are asserting superiority over U of C because NU people are (supposedly) better-looking? What's up with that logic?</p>

<p>
[quote]
Btw, I noticed that many kids with lower stats convince themselves into thinking they will like they're intellectual just so they could apply to UChicago. They then become obsessed with the University because it's their most realistic chance of getting into a top school. They become so obsessed that they develop bitterness for schools with better numbers and extracurricular achievements, nicer people, and better-looking ones too.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>lol. dude, are you saying that U of C students are ugly and NU students are good looking? NU kids are nicer people? NU kids have better numbers and ecs? In my frank opinion, NU is not "that" better than U of C. They are peers in terms of prestige and other factors. If we are talking about the difference between Stanford and NU, the comparison becomes a legit one bc Stanford is clearly much better than NU. But, we are talking about two similar schools at least in terms of academics, rank, etc. This is getting ridiculous.</p>

<p>Pizzagirl, I'm not asserting superiority based on looks. I simply pointed out that some people have taken a defensive stance based on it. If you look at my past threads, I've considered UChicago people good-looking but that's besides the point. </p>

<p>Also, I now don't believe that NU Greek culture is superficial, if I ever believed that... first of all, the frats don't recruit based on looks (maybe it's different for sororities, I don't know). I understand that some people need socially-focused structured groups to initiate friendships, hence the frats/sororities. What I'm saying is that despite their benefits, frats sometimes perpetuate strong in-group biases that are unhealthy... for example, how could a gay feminist thrive among brothers who promote heteronormativity?</p>

<p>

...despite evidence against that claim?? Okay...</p>

<p>
[quote]
all im saying is that either way students are gonna believe that their college is better than any other college because they have a special bond with their institution.

[/quote]

Nope, not true for me. Any assertion I make, I support with evidence. It just so happens that NU is harder to get into, period. I'm not afraid to admit, however, that it's less selective than Rice, WashU, Columbia and many other schools but not UChicago.</p>

<p>

No, I didn't say that UChicago students are ugly nor NU students good-looking. NU students are less intellectually snobby though. Better numbers and ECs? yes.</p>

<p>Another thread that comes up every two months. Fifs on OP</p>

<p>

Well, I attacked only after you provoked me, so I guess that counts as being defensive. Being on the defensive here is definitely a good thing because it shows that I don't have the need to assert my school's alleged superiority all the freakin' time. Btw, being on the offensive isn't something you should be proud of when you don't have evidence to back up your claim.</p>

<p>
[quote]
No, I didn't say that UChicago students are ugly nor NU students good-looking. NU students are less intellectually snobby though. Better numbers and ECs? yes.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, I repeat. The statistical data indicates that the numerical differences between the two student bodies at these two schools are insignificant. Like I said before, if we are comparing NU to Stanford or Columbia or even UPenn, we would start seeing subtle differences in students' qualifications since the students at these schools are noticeably stronger than NU students on average. But, UChicago and NU are similar and are equally respected with similar caliber students on average. With this said, I think that it is ridiculous to be arguing which school has higher caliber student body in general.</p>

<p>

If you read this thread carefully, we haven't been arguing about which school has a higher caliber student body. We did say that NU has better numbers, and that's true.</p>

<p>2007 admission stats for enrolled students:</p>

<p>Chicago
SAT 1350-1510 (uchicago website)
SAT 1330-1530 (collegeboard)
ACT 28-33
Admit rate 34.7%</p>

<p>Northwestern
SAT 1350-1520
ACT 30-34
Admit rate 26.8%</p>

<p>I don't know about you, but these two schools look pretty even to me. NU seems to have slightly higher ACT on lower end. But, U of C's high end score of 33 is right there with NU's ACT of 34. SATs look nearly identical. NU's admit rate is only 7.9% lower than U of C. But, this is probably due to the fact that NU uses common app and U of C doesn't, therefore resulting in way more applicants for NU. Remember that NU did not switch to common app until last year. Just a couple of years ago, NU's admit rate was over 30%. (before switching to common app)</p>

<p>I forgot to mention this as well. Last year, NU accepted the majority of students who were waitlisted bc of the fact that they were facing all time low yield rates. All my friends from h.s. who were waitlisted from NU ended up getting in. (4) This would make NU's admit rate even higher than what the previous number suggests. The reason NU's yield was so low last year is bc while NU's admit pool suddenly got much more competitive as a result of common app, many who were accepted by NU were too good to chose NU at the same time. In other words, many accepted students last year chose Ivies or Stanford and just applied to NU in the first place just as a safety.
Thus, NU accepted tons of people off waitlist. So, NU's admit rate should be considerably higher than 26.8% considering the fact that they ended up accepting many waitlisted people in the end.</p>

<p>Well, what you just posted works against beefs' argument then.</p>

<p>This is an endless debate. Both have their strengths and weaknesses. just go to the one you like better.</p>

<p>"In other words, many accepted students last year chose Ivies or Stanford and just applied to NU in the first place just as a safety."</p>

<p>You don't know that. That's total conjecture on your part that they all went to Ivies or Stanford. Hint: There's more to the world than Ivies and Stanford. Maybe a prospective NU music student went to Juilliard instead.</p>

<p>What part of "the two student bodies have generally equal (and high) stats" aren't you understanding? </p>

<p>Here's another way of looking at it. Having great grades, ACT/SAT, and EC's is in essence buying yourself a lottery ticket to get into elite schools of the caliber of NU and U Chicago. They turn away tons of qualified kids and they could easily create a new freshman class out of whole cloth if they had to.</p>

<p>The caliber of the ticket that you need to compete in either the NU lottery or the U of C lottery is very high. More people choose to ENTER the NU lottery because NU has a more typical college experience to offer (Greeks, Big 10, sports) and has additional programs such as journalism, music and drama, than choose to enter the U of C lottery because U of C has a more unique and self-selecting culture. But the caliber of the ticket itself is high, and the students who get in are uniformly of high quality. It is stupid and pointless to argue which one is "harder to get into" or which one has "smarter students." U of C may have a higher admit rate, but you still had to punch the high caliber ticket to get in the game in the first place, so the higher admit rate does not translate into "less prepared."</p>

<p>It is embarrassing that people who are associated with such fine universities have to pick at and downgrade the other. (It's also embarrassing that people try to differentiate the Ivies into upper and lower, or try to distinguish between Stanford and NU as if one's worthwhile and the other isn't, but whatever.) Truly smart people understand that all the top 30 or so USN&WR schools attract the cream of the crop, offer fine educations, and the distinctions are ones of personal preference and fit.</p>

<p>Sanjenferrer: "He was a special case but not in a good way. I will definitely not admit a brilliant student who I sensed would commit such atrocities. I don't care how brilliant he or she is."</p>

<p>Oh, well, that certainly distinguishes you from the fine folks at the U of Chicago, who undoubtedly DID sense that he'd commit atrocities but figured ***, they'd let him in anyway. @@</p>

<p>There are certain schools like Middlebury who take in students despite perceived risks. There was a widely circulated article about this.</p>