<p>We, all know the University of Chicago is better academically, why is anyone even arguing the fact?</p>
<p>"Chicago does worse with consulting recruiters and equally with banks, Chicago does worse at every grad school metric I've seen, every revealed preference stat points to Northwestern,..."</p>
<p>--- Slipper1234, when you say something, you pretend that you really know that. But actually not. For instance, this time, your above statement is ridiculous. I say this based on WSJ's feeder school survey. Keep in mind, although it's not perfect, it's the best survey of its kind so far.</p>
<p>UChicago is ranked #14 overall with 6.22% feeder score while Northwestern is ranked #21 with 3.69% feeder score - that's almost 70% difference, for God's sake, Slipper1234.</p>
<p>Considering the fact that Northwestern is a typical pre-professional school while UChicago is not, how the heck on the planet did Slipper1234 make that kind of crappy statement?</p>
<p>Slipper1234, make sure you know what you are talking about before you even open your big fat mouth.</p>
<p>Northwestern has <em>plenty</em> of east-coast prep-school types. I went to Baldwin (on the main line if you didnt know), albeit only up until middle school, and i go here. </p>
<p>honestly though, i like the fact that there are lots of public school, west coast and midwest kids here. its very laid back and there are tons of different types of people. university of chicago is a fine school, and it does have more of a nerdy intellectual reputation, but the kids there are by no means smarter than the kids here. they're just different. </p>
<p>dont make sweeping generalizations about academics. NU has a number of programs that dont even exist at chicago, and some that do but are lesser ranked.</p>
<p>and to second kk, up until this year NU was ranked <em>higher</em> than U of C in the us news rankings, if you care about them at all. it's only when U of C consulted with the us news rankings people that they mysteriously jumped in ranking.</p>
<p>My blunt post was a reaction to all the blantant NU bashing by some people on this thread. They are different schools with different strengths, but chicago is not indisputably better. </p>
<p>Sorry, I guess I was wrong about the feeder score. I knew Chicago was lower than most of its peers so I assumed NU as well.</p>
<p>How exactly is saying NU and Chicago are both fantastic schools just quite different bashing NU?</p>
<p>UChicago has better academic only in most liberal arts. UChicago has no engineering, communications, performing arts, education, journalism..etc. So how can it be better in those? UChicago is also ranked LOWER in chemistry or art history. :)</p>
<p>Sam, no one is arguing that Chicago is better in the preprofessions. Matter of fact most everyone here championing Chicago is saying that both schools are excellent but in different ways.</p>
<p>But Sam do take a look at Chicago's alumni page, you'll be suprised at who you will find from communications, performing arts, education and journalism. Liberal arts does a fantastic job preparing one for life.</p>
<p>Sorry for multiple postings but Slipper said: "Sorry, I guess I was wrong about the feeder score. I knew Chicago was lower than most of its peers so I assumed NU as well."</p>
<p>Gosh Slipper, since Chicago was lower only than Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Stanford, Williams, Duke, Dartmouth, Amherst, MIT, Swarthmore, Columbia and Brown, are you maybe conceding that Chicago is a peer to all the other elite schools?(Man don't you hate it when your irrational venom trips you up?)</p>
<p>As someone who works at the University of Chicago and did graduate programs here, this is an odd discussion. People in Chicago don't think this way.
It's like comparing St. Johns College (MD) with Babson College or studying drama at NYU.
Nobody I know thinks one is better than another in any global sense.</p>
<p>Listen in regard to that study, Chicago had not one BUT TWO grad schools used in the study. Gee, I think that there is a good chance that Chicago is feeding its own schools, which would help its percentage. However, NU did not have one grad school in there even though Kellogg is a fantastic program.</p>
<p>i don't understand the hostility here. Both are excellent schools. I agree with Ramses' analysis, but that doesn't mean that if someone feels Northwestern is a good fit for them that they are lowering their standards. My D looked at Northwestern but found the voice program inadequate. She loved the rest of the package, though. WildChild has applied for transfer to Chicago out of the Ivy which he felt was a huge disappointment.
There aren't many threads on this forum where there is such animosity over comparison of two schools, which really makes me wonder about you Northwestern folks. Why so defensive? If I were you I wouldn't give a $hit what the perception was if I was happy at my school. I don't think Chicago is for everyone- probably not a good fit for MOST people. However, it is know as a very serious school with a unique intellectual focus. I don't see how anyone can dispute that. I would have NOT been happy there as an undergrad- that doesn't change how it is viewed in the business and academic communities. Get over it.</p>
<p>Personally, I think that Chicago is benefiting just like Michigan. It is benefiting from nothing else but its reputation. It has a great reputation. Does it deserve it. Does having nobel prize winning professors really improve undergrad education. In fact, the few people I knew who attended so that professors there only care about research and publishing their findings. So what gives here? Does it really matter to an undergrad that Dartmouth is not even ranked for half of its disciplines and that Chicago is #4 in like 20 of them. It means nothing!</p>
<p>I was the kind of student who fell in love with Chicago first, and then became utterly surprised at how well-esteemed it was.</p>
<p>(Considering that my favorite Spice Girl was Scary Spice and that I thought The Godfather Part III was good, I have a history of liking things that are more or less reviled).</p>
<p>I do not care how many Nobel Prize winners are associated with the school, it's one of those fun facts that people like to throw around to show the school's history and association with top researchers. I don't think any of us are naive enough to think that that number will translate into a great undergraduate education. (Maybe some of us are...?)</p>
<p>The thing is, though, when it comes to "reputation," I could give you a list of things that Chicago could do to bolster its reputation among undergrads, and yet it doesn't, so the idea that it is "benefiting from nothing else but its reputation" is not necessarily so.</p>
<p>For example, the school could:</p>
<p>--eliminate the Uncommon prompts and stop alienating prospective students by inviting them to write on any one of a number of given topics about large jars of mustard, strings (my essay was on strings!!!), or the day Wednesday. (The fact that there's a make-your-own-prompt option goes vastly overlooked-- I have a feeling "describe an important event in your life" isn't going to cut it.)
-- stop using the "life of the mind" tagline and stop sending ridiculous postcards
-- eliminate the core, because who really needs to suffer through Kant?
-- make double-majoring and major-minoring easier
-- institute Early Decision instead of non-binding, non-exclusive Early Action.</p>
<p>Chicago's a school that's true to its word. I agree that these rankings mean nothing, but the school as a whole means something to those who choose to attend.</p>
<p>Amykins, thats exactly what Uchicago students want to avoid - becoming just another common app, albeit excellent university. Eliminating the Uncommon app, Core, etc. takes away the uniqueness of Uchicago, and its something that I, as well as many prospective and current students will vehemently oppose.</p>
<p>that's absolutely correct-- I guess I should have made it clearer that my point was that the spirit of the school is put at risk if one wants to increase the school's prestige bonus points.</p>
<p>Students are by and large incredibly opposed to the Common App (we applied to be a member of the Common App school consortium thing and we are, though I think even at this point it's unclear whether we'll be accepting the Common App this fall) and wear t-shirts with the school's emblem that say, "I AM UNCOMMON." We are incredibly proud of who we are, but it says something that we would benefit in the eyes of the public if we sacrificed some of that for reputation's sake.</p>
<p>(NB: the school has already gone through a few overhauls and is much more conventional than it was even 7 or 8 years ago, when the core was modified to be easier to complete, and the school added a beautiful gym facility and a dorm designed to encourage sociability. In my mind, these have been overall good changes, because it allows Chicago to compete on a serious level with other top schools rather than be seen as the chronically bedridden cousin of the Ivy League. I wonder how many posters' evaluations of the school are outdated).</p>
<p>im going to go to NU next year, and one of my good friends is going to UChicago. this thread upsets me. IMO, i think chicago is better academically but I dont think that makes it the better school. i think they are peers since NU has so much other facets (already mentioned array of schools, athletics, location, more social student body) that make up the difference in academics. i reiterate, i think they are peers, and the college experience isnt just about who has the best academics. four years of one's life is spent there. more has to be taken into consideration and when it is, i think one sees that NU and UChicago are peers.</p>
<p>Ridewitbd24, why does this thread upset you? Not a single person said that NU was anything but an excellent school. It's a fantastic place that shouldn't be compared to Chicago.(Nor should Chicago be compared to NU) It's apples to oranges, not really peers as much as two fine choices for very different students/educational experiences.</p>
<p>i guess upset was too strong of a word but its pointless for two threads with almost 300 posts of back and forth when there is only one conclusion IMO: they are both peers</p>
<p>I think that uc is a little nerdier....sorry
i mean, people that are fans of the college say that the people that go there look like they just crawled out of a library somewhere (pasty white pple obsessed with academics)</p>
<p>Don't get me wrong, I'm sure that it's fine as an institution. I'm just saying that i don't think you'll get a good college undergrad experience out of it--unless you do like to bury your head in books all day....in which case, i'm so sorry for you (go see a psychiatrist)</p>
<p>northwestern, in reply to epidemic's remarks.....lmfao.....i think that it's beautiful, i have no idea what castle/palace epidemic lives in.....but wherever it is, go for him/her.....some of us have lower expectations.</p>
<p>plus, i'm going after epidemic again (sorry), northwestern is snobby? lmfao</p>
<p>have you met the uc people? they've got their heads so far up in the clouds due to their "intelligence".....well, they're stuck up if anyone is and let's leave it at that</p>
<p>uc is also is a bad neighborhood (really seedy)--i wouldn't feel safe there
northwestern is in a safe neighborhood with chicago very close by (you're getting best of both worlds)</p>
<p>all in all...northwestern is the package (not that it's perfect....it's definitely not) but it is just well rounded while uc is so one dimensional that their kids don't even see it </p>
<p>peace out</p>