<p>Maybe one of their goals is to remain inferior to Harvard. In which case, idad's post still applies.</p>
<p>Excellent deduction, Eric. Now there's using your analytical skills. . . :P</p>
<p>I do have quite a **** load of "skittles" on my plate.</p>
<p>LOL it's always a party when Eric shows up!</p>
<p>The name "Eric" comes from the ancient Greek and is loosely derived from the word meaning "party." </p>
<p>That explains things. :P</p>
<p>drummer, the pitt yale comparison is no more bogus than your post.</p>
<p>What you forget is that the average student at yale is no more competitive for a G/T/U scholarship than an average Pitt student. So the scholarships measure the quality at the very top, which seems to compare well.</p>
<p>Regarding differences among schools it is easy to forget that some of your "inferior" schools are only inferior in such weighty matters as USNWR ranking, SAT scores within the standard deviation of the SAT and so forth.</p>
<p>The ironic thing is that the one factor that really can make a difference is expenditure per student. Few folks look at that, and the data is tough to get.</p>
<p>At any rate, if you really knew about elite universities, you'd know that many of them, including H, have a lot of slacker students who know they will get their B without working (sound like SIU?). Yea, they have some outstanding students. So does U of I. They also have some pretty ordinary ones. We just don't hear about those.</p>
<p>"At any rate, if you really knew about elite universities, you'd know that many of them, including H, have a lot of slacker students who know they will get their B without working" Slackers perhaps, but if so they are either URMs, athletes, or bloody rich. </p>
<p>"Yea, they have some outstanding students. So does U of I. They also have some pretty ordinary ones. We just don't hear about those." How do you know if you haven't heard of them? And I would say that the "ordinary" kid at Harvard is a tad bit more exceptional than the ordinary kid at UIUC. </p>
<p>"What you forget is that the average student at yale is no more competitive for a G/T/U scholarship than an average Pitt student. So the scholarships measure the quality at the very top, which seems to compare well." I understand what you are saying, but then it also coincides with my point and does not contradict it, as obviously those who are competitive for those scholarships go to Yale in disproportionate numbers as compared to their overall enrollment. Also, you cannot deny that Pitt's size DOES in fact skewer the numbers towards itself. Maybe not as big as one would expect because of the reasons you have noted, but still, via random chance or people who might become better students in college, the advantage is there.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>whoa really?</p>
<p>or am i just being stupidly gullible here yet again :-S</p>
<p>I am completely kidding, cookiemonkey! Dont be so gullible! I have taken ancient Greek, so now people will wonder if I was making that all up. . . ;)</p>
<p>OK, then I had to look up the meaning of "Eric." It is from the Scandinavian, and it means "ever-powerful."</p>
<p>So true. :)</p>
<p>So is there any merit scholarship in U of C besides the ones for freshman?</p>
<p>Merit awards for undergraduates are rare but available. One category is what are called national scholarships like the Goldwater and Udall. These are considered highly competitive (indeed, receiving one puts you in a good position for grad school admissions) and the money is only OK (5-7,500/year). (there are also programs like the Beckman, for science majors: <a href="http://ibd.uchicago.edu/beckman/%5B/url%5D">http://ibd.uchicago.edu/beckman/</a>)</p>
<p>There are some campus level awards for study abroad, summer work (such as Howard Hughes Fellowships for summer science research) and so forth that may be less competitive. Check the advising website:</p>
<p><a href="https://frogs.uchicago.edu/%5B/url%5D">https://frogs.uchicago.edu/</a></p>
<p>They recently revised it and lost much of the undergrad merit info, but some is still there.</p>
<p>The scholarship E^2 speaks of has nothing to do with me, so stop pming me about it.</p>
<p>Sorry, that's just me under various different names</p>
<p>
[quote]
The thing about Pitt having close to as many scholarship winners as Yale is totally bogus. Think about how many more kids are going to Pitt as opposed to Yale, which is quite small. An accurate statistic would use scholarships per student or something.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Bogus? Is this Yale's fault for having too few students or Pitt's fault for having too many students? </p>
<p>The comparison was not made to compare the average student at Pitt to the average student at Yale. In fact, the poster had specifically mentioned Pitt's honor college, saying it is "quite intellectual" -- hinting that Pitt's honor college has some very top notch students. The original comparison supports the conclusion that Pitt, by way of its honors college, is quite compettitive with highly ranked colleges in enrolling top notch students. </p>
<p>Calling any college "inferior" really upsets me. I fully agree with idad that colleges simply have different goals and objectives. I mean, it's outrageous to use the term "inferior". How is one college, say University of South Illinois, generally "inferior" to UChicago ? I would say that it is not inferior, but rather has different goals. For example, if I wanted to become a high school teacher because that is truly something that I am passionate about, I would opt for Southern Illinois over UChicago for finacial reasons, seeing that the teaching profession is not the best for paying back loans. In that scenario, one (perhaps an economics major) could make the case that UChicago is "inferior" to Southern Illinois. How about aeronautical colleges? Are those inferior to schools like Bates? Quite frankly, I would rather have a pilot flying my plane who majored in aeronautics rather than an English major at Bates college. I wouldn't consider my pilot's education "inferior" to that of my neighbor on the plane -- an English professor with a degree from Bates. Some colleges are ranked higher (ie higher stats) but no college is inferior to another. Period.</p>
<p>As a side note, I have always perceived UChicago has "anti-elitist"; the closet one can come to a University that is extremely intellectual yet void of snobbishness.</p>
<p>I resent your use of the word 'inferior'.</p>