<p>haha you don’t have anything better to do than go on a forum to argue to people that there’s better stuff to do than argue on that forum?</p>
<p>Cue7: Among the highly educated, Chicago’s reputation has hardly changed. And in most cases, employers tend to be highly educated, so I don’t think Chicago’s recent resurrection will have THAT much of an effect on overall employer mindset.</p>
<p>What Chicago’s trying to do is get some mind-share among the well-educated segment of the population that isn’t the MOST highly educated. And let’s admit it; there are plenty of well-educated people out there that don’t know UChicago’s brand name, and some of those people are bound to be employers. And when an employer is picking between two candidates and he’s aware of the prestige of one school, he’s going to give the advantage to that candidate; it’s human nature.</p>
<p>I work in a field where most people are very highly educated and know that Chicago is a top 10 school (and not by virtue of USNWR). I can probably safely assume that you work in a similar environment, so it’s very difficult to see the actual results from our standpoints. But the majority of Ivy League graduates get work at normal high-5-figure jobs where employers aren’t necessarily the most educated, and THIS is where the effect of Chicago’s prestige boost is going to come in handy. It’s irrelevant to you or me, but I would argue that it’s relevant to a hell of a lot of other graduates, maybe even the majority.</p>
<p>I do agree that “the abilities/focus of the students and the decreased use in harsher grading” has had a considerable, perhaps even larger, effect on graduate outcomes though.</p>
<p>Sunshine, it’s not about arguing. It’s about the topic. Think that over for a bit.</p>
<p>Follow the money. It seems clear that the current admin wants to grow the endowment by expanding the undergraduate "user base”. </p>
<p>Increasing the subjective quality and rankings of the school will also result in a greater percentage of alums donating money to their alma mater. </p>
<p>The rankings game is a win-win situation for the school as long as it’s able to stay ahead of the cost curve.</p>
<p>Phuriku said:</p>
<p>“But the majority of Ivy League graduates get work at normal high-5-figure jobs where employers aren’t necessarily the most educated, and THIS is where the effect of Chicago’s prestige boost is going to come in handy.”</p>
<p>I’m not sure if this is that accurate. If you look at where elite grads end up after college, they all tend to go to a VERY small band of employers/places. If you take out consulting/finance/teach for america/ and a few other select employers, I highly doubt you have a majority of any elite graduate school class. </p>
<p>All that being said, I think you’re focused on UChicago’s “ascendance” on the wrong end of the chain. I certainly think UChicago is more popular now than ever with high school students, and it has become more of a hot school for high school seniors. </p>
<p>At the same time, I really don’t think these admissions strategies really impact the perception of the school on the employer/grad school part of the chain. Sure, UChicago is “normalizing” a bit more, and its graduates are generally more interested in lucrative careers than before, but, again, I don’t think UChicago is now in a different pile with employers/schools now that it was 10, 15, or 20 years ago. </p>
<p>On the other hand, UChicago is almost certainly in a different pile with high school seniors. It’s probably moved from the WashU/Rice/Tufts pile it was in 10-15 years ago to the Columbia/Brown/Duke pile now. </p>
<p>Put another way, sure, the admissions frenzy around UChicago will probably increase, it will get a lot more selective, but, meh, I don’t see the admissions stats as that big a deal. I think the factors I discussed (less grade inflation, less emphasis on socially awkward students, more resources and info for kids in the college) are much more important at improving exit options for a school that, to employers and schools waiting for undergrads, has always been finely regarded. </p>
<p>In terms of your comment about “MOST” educated people, again, meh. I’m not sure if this group <em>really</em> knows about schools like Penn or Williams or Dartmouth or whatever. Maybe they’ve heard of them vaguely, maybe they haven’t. Unless you go to Harvard/Stanford etc., I don’t think the name really moves the dial. The student’s achievements, GPA, etc., really will move the dial.</p>
<p>Also, in today’s digital age, if an employer doesn’t know a school, it can find out about it very, very easily. This isn’t like the 80s, where information isn’t readily available. If a hiring employer looks at a student that has great grades, an impressive background, but is nonetheless puzzled that the school on the resume says “Univ of Penn” or “UChicago,” the employer can find out all they need to know about the school in mere seconds.</p>