<p>Puzzled to see that Princeton Review gave NW a 75 for Q of L in its
Campus Life reviews. Seems awfully low to me for what sounds like a wonderful campus in lovely surroundings... </p>
<p>How come?</p>
<p>Ottoline</p>
<p>Several years ago, it was in the 90s and now it's 75. The school and Evanston don't change that much in few years. PR probably mistook Evanston as Iraq...</p>
<p>princeton review is retarded. on the "best academic experience" or whatever listing, uchicago went from not even being on the list (meaning not even top 20) to number 1 the next year.</p>
<p>arbitrary and ridiculous.</p>
<p>I'm a freshman here, and I love it so far. You study hard in the weekdays, and have plenty of fun in the weekends (parties, movies, Evanston, CHICAGO, etc.).</p>
<p>The PR stated "Town-Gown Relations are Strained"; I wonder if they mistook the nature of it. If I didn't know anything about Evanston and I read the PR, I would probably think of it as Duke vs Durham when the tension actually comes from the fight over NU's exemption of property taxes. Evanston isn't like Durham; the downtown looks very nice; residents living nearby are middle/upper-middle class so it's not like there's a socio-economic divide between students and the surrouding residents. Many students enjoy hanging out in Evanston.</p>
<p>Speaking of "best academic experience", it's the PR that put NU #1 in 2003. Now, it says it has poor quality of life. :)</p>
<p>PR says that their ratings are not meant to be compared year-to-year, since they tweak the formulas every year. Of course, it is silly for them to hope this since people naturally like to look for year-to-year trends. They don't help the situation by the way since ratings are branded "best overall academic experience". Somehow, they think, "best overall academic experience, with a definition of best that may not be the same as last year's definition, which may give the impression of large shifts in quality when none exist" doesn't have quite the same ring to it.</p>