<p>
[quote]
The real reason, IMHO, that Chicago is not more selective is just because fewer kids apply. The "why" is curious, though.
[/quote]
I heard some were actually scared by uncommon essaies.</p>
<p>I'm wondering though, by browsing this forumn seems quite a few 'high stats' students got waitting listed or rejected.</p>
<p>Too many qualified applicants, NJmom</p>
<p>For Chicago, I think the essays carry the most weight. That's what Libby Pearson, one of the admissions officers, said.</p>
<p>College</a> Search - University of Chicago - Chicago - Admission </p>
<p>The College Board figures, based on Common Data Set reporting, are the most recent available for most colleges (they generally reflect the fall of 2007 enrolled class by this time of year).</p>
<p>In our HS, the top couple of kids usually apply to H or Y 'because they have earned the right to' - not necessarily because they have researched the schools carefully. These kids would do just fine there - but their application are not likely to stand out in Harvard's 27,000, and I would not consider them competitive unless they are star athletes as well. We're pretty average, so my guess is that a lot of the H Y apps are like that - numbers up there, but no real chance.</p>
<p>Funny. The story below fits me almost to a T. The only difference is that my HS guidance counselor's brother used to be in UofC's admissions office so we qualified for some free applications. That was the only reason I applied, but 10 years later, I'm glad that I did.</p>
<p>Go Maroons!</p>
<hr>
<p>These schools, and more importantly, the families of their kids, are not well informed. All too commonly, they think that because their valedictorian, perhaps for the first time in many years, was a NM finalist (to use an example), that the kid is a shoe-in at Yale, Princeton or Harvard. After all, this poor unhooked kid is within the middle band of stats, and was all-state in band, so has great ECs. Of course, you and your friends know better, but why judge them with YOUR yardstick?</p>
<p>At any rate, you won't find a school or family saying "you're our best student in a long time. You should apply to Chicago." You will hear them saying "..apply to Yale." or Harvard. You will also hear others say, "Johnny is a double legacy..." and so forth. (yes, I agree, many legacies DO get turned down - at Harvard, about 60%!)</p>
<p>I really don't get it when people say uchicago has no prestige and just hard work... it really depends, I am from Argentina and will attend uofc this fall to major in econ. And, down here in the south most people know UofC much more than cornell, dartmouth (they didn't know it even exists!)Caltech?! extremely few average people know this university abroad. Nobody knows Northwestern either. In south america if you want to major in econ, UofC is where you have to go, everybody knows the famous Chicago boys
so well, i don't think it is as many of you said...</p>
<p>just wait 3 years and you'll see the acceptance rate with the common appl.</p>
<p>arggg:</p>
<p>Chicago is incredibly prestigious in South America for the reason that it reformed South American economies in the 70s. However, I also know that Chicago is very prestigious in Japan. It seems that Chicago has a lot of international recognition, much more than it has at home.</p>
<p>Next year, under the Common App, we'll probably have closer to a 25% acceptance rate, which I think is very respectable.</p>
<p>I think the Common App will destroy the uniqueness of the U of C, unless they add the uncommon app essay topics to the U of C supplement.</p>
<p>They are doing exactly that, Consolation.</p>
<p>Uncommon essay topics ( some or all?) will be included in the supplement.</p>
<p>But they should still call it the UnCommon Application supplement!</p>
<p>I would agree that as far as international prestige goes, UChicago has lots of it, especially because of the formidable reputation of its school of economics.
Ultimately, this is the better sort of reputation, since it's not public perception, but prestige that will matter to your future employer, especially overseas.</p>
<p>I would even hazard a guess that as far as specialisation is concerned, the increased respect granted from employers when you say that you're an economics graduate in UChicago (compared to just an economics student) is greater than say, telling people that you practice law and you're from Harvard Law School. Probably because Harvard's law school has a great deal of equally or nearly-equally competitive competition from other schools (though the former enjoys the most public prestige), but it's not like there are any equals (as far as reputation goes) to Chicago's school of economics.</p>
<p>The 100 page document being referred to (I believe): </p>
<p>“However, the University did not financially weather the otherwise boom years of the 1990’s well. According to consulting firm McKinsey & Company, which was hired to undertake an analysis of the school’s operations, the University’s tradition of student top-heavy graduate programs requiring considerable financial funding compared to the revenues being generated by collegiate tuition had resulted in several years of operating deficits. Ultimately, the imbalance was driving the University at large into dire financial straits, in the worst-case projections, insolvency. The firm subsequently recommended that the College expand its student body, and that a major capital raising campaign be prepared for within a decade.</p>
<p>At the time of the recommendations, the College was admitting the majority of students who applied, and subsequently it was feared by administrators that to fill additional spots an already unusually loose admissions system would have to be further relaxed. Parties on all sides of the later debate agreed that part of what was keeping admissions numbers low was many prospective students marked disinterest in the core curriculum. Sonneschein, having been pleased with the undergraduate program at Princeton where he had been previously Provost, subsequently moved to amend the set of courses to be more, “appealing to the average eighteen year old.” This move was seen as an erroneous step by those who believed the core gave the College its distinct identity, and that it furthermore was responsible for the steeped intellectual atmosphere on campus by providing a framework for learned interdisciplinary debate.”</p>
<p>As a TA during that period, though the admission rate was indeed higher, the workload and intellectual requirements were no less, and actually in many cases greater.</p>
<p>As someone from Duke had told me: Duke "is actually a bit easier (from what I've heard) than UC, grade-wise," even though its acceptance rate is around 20% whereas UChicago was double that last year (although this year's, it was 28%). Self-selectivity is definitely present in UChicago admissions (Even though this person was in fact trying to get me to accept admissions to Duke instead of UChicago, he unwittingly convinced me to do the opposite.)</p>
<p>Someone else earlier said that their school's valedictorians chose not to apply to UC b/c they didn't want the demanding coursework, and instead wanted to go to a prestigious school to basically chill and party from all the hard work they've done in high school (<em>cough</em> dartmouth <em>cough</em>). I think the picture painted here is highly accurate: that, as alumni have said in the past, the U of C is not where the valedictorian goes to school; it is where the people who once intimidated the valedictorian go to school. This is because the valedictorian goes to school to get good grades and a high class rank, whereas the U of C consists of students who learn for the sake of learning and have hence intimidated the valedictorian because they consisted of values and/or knowledge that he/she did not. </p>
<p>So yeah, if you're turned off by this picture of a school full of nerds, then typically you won't apply here (hence, U of C is self selective because applicants are picky about coming here too, like you would be). </p>
<p>If you've looked anywhere else but the US rankings, UChicago is ranked much higher than other well-known US schools on the international level.</p>
<p>Moreover, I think by looking at the reviews of Harvard vs. UChicago on studentreviewsDOTcom, I found that the UChicago reviews seemed consistently more positive than those on Harvard's...and also 90% of people said they'd go back to UChi and do it all over again if they could, whereas only 69% said the same about Harvard (sure, these surveys may be skewed, but at the same time, the enormity of these discrepancies definitely says something). </p>
<p>PS: Also, I really don't like how they're getting rid of the Uncommon App! I highly enjoyed the process of completing the UC's app and checking its funny and quirky admissions blog (er, compulsively); on the other hand when i completed the Common App it seemed more like *****work for me. Its very unique essay prompts and evaluation of applicants was a great draw for me to apply to the u of c, because it catered to people who were, first off, willing to complete the off-the-wall essays. Those who found the app "inconvenient" and didn't apply were, in my opinion, those who were not the "UChicagan type". </p>
<p>Feel free to criticize. I welcome opposing viewpoints.</p>
<p>bohbeep,</p>
<p>only comment is that many rankings that rank Chicago highly are ranking the place overall, including grad programs, so you can't compare those to USNWR rankings. </p>
<p>Another way to look at Chicago is that you attend it because of who you are and who you want to be: you value learning highly. You attend other schools because of what you want to SAY to others: you're making a statement by attending Yale regardless of what you learn. To put it another way, I suspect UofC students may be less fashion conscious - one surely does not gain "fashion" by attending...is this another way of talking about "image" and status? perhaps.</p>
<p>Princeton Review ranked Chicago as having the #1 undergrad experience (which is done from student surveys). Thats why I chose to apply, and probably will attend.</p>
<p>On that token,
YouTube</a> - University of Chicago: Best University</p>
<p>Princeton Review is really a ridiculous criterion on which to base your judgment. It's only used to bring in cash. Promoting Chicago via Princeton Review isn't a good idea.</p>
<p>Yea but it's a nice video anyway</p>