Food For Thought

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

<p>I found this blog entry on another patch of the internet, and I thought it was worth sharing:</p>

<p>The</a> Risk Of Insult Is The Price of Clarity U B r a n d e r</p>

<p>A couple of things to consider:
1) People make money based getting you to apply to the school that they're working for.
2) The people who make money doing this have to balance a careful line between making their college universally appealing without being too general and making their college distinct without being too polarizing.</p>

<p>I felt that this blog entry was particularly interesting in light of a lot of university image discussions we have here. The university pays people to send you a "Life of the Mind" catalog and funny postcards, which distinguishes Chicago as an intellectual and offbeat school but probably turns off a lot of students in the process. (Some students probably think "Oh, I don't want to go to a school where I have to do a lot of work!" in which case I say good riddance, but I'm afraid there's a significant group of kids who say, "Yeah, I like the idea of reading Marx and Plato for class, but this brochure is so darn self-righteous and snooty!", in which case I'm angry the brochure was such a turn-off).</p>

<p>For those who haven't seen our marketing, you can see it here:
<a href="https://collegeadmissions.uchicago.edu/lifeofthemind/%5B/url%5D"&gt;https://collegeadmissions.uchicago.edu/lifeofthemind/&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>On my end, as a high school student, I did the best I could to ignore college marketing for exactly these reasons: the people being paid to market a school to me were not the people I was going to be attending classes with, so why bother paying attention to what schools were sending me? At the same time, I did read what was sent to me, and while I don't remember Chicago's stuff at all, I remember that Brandeis, USC, Harvey Mudd, and Reed all sent me material that appealed to me. </p>

<p>I guess my general question is: to what extent has U of C-issued marketing played into your conception of the school? Do you think the marketing is truthful? Effective? Did it key you into the school or did it turn you away? If you've visited the school or know people who have attended, how does your impression of what you've seen (or heard) differ from what you've read?</p>

2

<p>The writing romanticizes the school a bit, as can be expected. Nonetheless, I and I feel many others here do identify with the image of the school that the admissions folks put out. It is on the right track.</p>

3

<p>^^Totally agree. When I visited the people there seemed like those highlighted on "Life of the Mind." I like that Chicago was open about its quirkiness and that really drew me to the school. Of course the LOM makes no mention of Chicago's grade deflation that I've read on this board. But who would bring up something like that in colllege propaganda?</p>

4

<p>I don't know that either of my kids loved "Life of the Mind" -- it's a little too slick and too eager to please. The postcards were somewhat important to my daughter, though. For whatever reason, they hit her just right, and reinforced the notion (that she was getting from lots of directions) that Chicago would be a good community for her. </p>

<p>The school's marketing materials were pretty much beside the point for her brother, since he had a ton of information and had spent several days there, gone to classes, etc. But there were two pieces of material that really sealed the deal for him: (1) The poster that shows the entire university shot south-to-north from the air, with the perspective foreshortened so that it looks like the Loop is right behind it. Damn, that's an exciting picture if you want to go to a cool university in a cool city. (2) The 2006 Scav Hunt list, which he carried around with him for weeks, showed to all his friends, studied . . . It was exactly his sense of humor, his frame of reference. He wanted to do (or try) everything on it, and to figure out all the weird things he didn't understand. He might have chosen Yale if he'd had the chance, but before he made his decision he would have looked at that Scav Hunt list one more time . . . .</p>

<p>The other thing that is effective is Dean O'Neill's letters. They are really good, and quite different from everybody else's. Substantive. That was true with my older child. And just last week, we had dinner with friends including an 11th grader who had just gotten the form letter and was absolutely enthralled by it. She had never showed any interest in Chicago previously (despite having two very good, lifelong friends there), but that letter had put it on her list.</p>

5

<p>Absolutely, Ted O'Neill's letters began the process that sold my daughter. The "Life of the Mind" did strike me (and maybe my D) as overly pretentious. But that thought faded or was explained with a on-campus interview that she will always remember.</p>

<p>And that poster continues to thrill me, as we have several copies, one of which is right behind me as I type.</p>

6

<p>I liked getting all the small postcards etc. Getting college mail (from good colleges) excites me.</p>

7

<p>There's something about U Chicago that really makes it stand out, especially in all the mailings sent out. These aren't just the usual papers seeking a student's attention, there's something else behind it. Perhaps it's nerdiness and academics, but it's still effective. The essay questions cannot be beat. :)</p>

8

<p>Something that appealed to me was that I couldn't find anything anywhere about UChicago boasting its rankings or reputation. When I first fell in love with UC, I had no idea it was an "elite" university. I mean, I knew it was super-awesome, but loved it because I thought I found my own awesome place that nobody knew about. When I did see the USNWR, I wanted to throw up and die, but it seemed to me as if UC didn't exploit itself like other universities of its stature. So I still loved it. :)</p>

9

<p>The marketing issue is too often not well understood, especially when it comes to higher ed - colleges marketing themselves.</p>

<p>In brief, colleges need to brand themselves and differentiate themselves from others. Branding means, essentially, defining the place as standing for something, be it sports, professional training (as in wall street internships, an IVY specialty), intellectual activities, social life etc. Differentiation is a bit more subtle, but involves recognizing that you can't be all things to all people, and recognizing that you are never going to win some competitive matches. For example, while UofC's admissions materials may turn off some students, I have no doubt that Ted and co have studied this and decided that the turned off prospects would have never attended uofc anyway. </p>

<p>Then we enter the realm of revenue management - the art of getting enough full pay students to make the books balance. It is no surprise that uofc has not revised its fin aid policies to match Harvard, Yale, Brown, Stanford et al. They will never win against these schools based on $, I suspect they concluded, so why try. </p>

<p>Keep in mind that, although uofc would never discuss it, it is relatively easy to run "experiments" to test out various hypotheses regarding admissions practices, and I'm sure they do. They can easily offer more generous financial aid to targeted groups of students (targeted via any parameter you can imagine: zip code, type of HS, test scores, family income) to see what approaches have the desired impact. They can do retrospective or prospective analysis, and I'm sure they do both.</p>

<p>So, if you really want to exercise your brain, try to figure out what they're trying to do (the message they are trying to convey, for example) with each action they take, be it uofc or anywhere else. You may see some interesting patterns.</p>

10

<p>That first O'Neill letter was a big deal for a lot of people, myself included. </p>

<p>The most important experiment is how they promote themselves. If they market themselves as having a certain kind of student, that kind of student will come.</p>

11

<p>I really liked the postcards. They were funny, and (most importantly) didn't promise to teach you the "five things that will help you get into college (except our college if you have bad stats)." Those letters annoy me. At least UChicago put itself out there with a particular viewpoint. Even if it isn't what the school is actually like (which it may or may not be), it helps to know what the school wants itself to be like, right?</p>

12

<p>I received a small booklet detailing a day in different u of c students. That's what sealed the deal for me.</p>

13

<p>I just loved this one postcard that had the chemical structure of caffeine and a map of all of the coffee shops on campus on the back.</p>

<p>I don't know, but as a coffee lover, it just reasonated really strongly with me.</p>

14

<p>ketty, i remember that postcard as well! it had fake coffee ring stains on it... i miss getting those postcards.</p>

15

<p>i never got those postcards....</p>

16

<p>Neither did I! I don't think my PSAT scores were bought by Chicago, because they were low for Chicago's target audience.</p>

17

<p>"i wanted to throw up and die" ... haha!</p>

<p>i loooooved those postcards. i really don't think i would have considered uchicago without them, which is kinda crazy, but whatever-- they captured my attention. what letter did o'neill send?</p>