<p>To call Northwestern a Harvard reject school is a pretty ridiculous claim to say the least.</p>
<p>"U Chi, tends to have kids that are probably smarter, it's harder working and more purist intellectually, but the average student will probably have poorer social skills,"</p>
<p>"You have absolutely no idea what you're talking about.... Not only are those generalizations, but they're bad one's at that. How in the world can you say Chicago has smarter, harder working, less social students? I'm so tired of people assuming that Chicago students have less fun than those at other schools, so they must be more "intellectual". </p>
<p>"And no offense to Northwestern, but at least among some circles, it's viewed as the school for Harvard rejects." </p>
<p>-Whatever.... Most top schools are for Harvard 'rejects', so, who cares what those in these "circles" say. In fact, I'm willing to bet that a good portion of the Ivy League is comprised of those who were rejected from Harvard. Does that make the schools worse? No, of course not. </p>
<p>"I'm just going off of my experiences, my parent's experiences, and my college visits, which to be honest, don't add up to much."</p>
<p>-No, no they don't. You should know what you're talking about before you post things. Hiding behind disclaimers doesn't change the fact that the post is absurd.</p>
<p>First, off, I'd like to appologize if I've offended anyone. I certainly wasn't tyring to step on anyone's toes or knock any schools.
While these may be generalizations, I've heard them numerous times from many different sources, including current Northwestern students.
And all anyone has in the application process are generalizations. When people decide where to apply, they base those decisions on what they've heard/read about the schools and possibly a visit. And even if one has first hand knowledge of a school, everyone's experiences are bound to be different. So, maybe you're experience at this school was one way, but others certainly have different opinions.<br>
When I said that it was seen as a school for Harvard rejects, I was getting at the social aspect of the school, not it's academic merit. By "some circles" I meant older generations. Northwestern is generally more conservative, especially relative to U Chi, and Harvard was certianly more socially conservative (i.e. socially elitist, and probably still is) than the average school. Over 20,000 people apply to Harvard. Of course slightly less competitive schools (but equally commendable) are going to accept their fair share of Harvard rejects. Including Northwestern, and U Chic.<br>
Check out what one student said from U Chic. on Princeton Review: Typically "wonkish, nerdy, cloistered, extremely studious, and religiously dedicated to academic performance," Chicago students are "brilliant, on par with those at any other school, but not the kind of people that you want to have a casual conversation with." That's more or less what I was saying.
And how could I possibly hide behind my disclaimer. The whole purpose of it was to expose myself as an amateur and to make sure any readers understood that I was making generalizations. What was I possibly hiding?
Oh, and because you objected so strongly to my post, I would sincerely like to hear what you have to say about Northwestern. Like I said, my references don't add up to much; enlighten me.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The revealed preference ranking is such bs.... Wellesley and Notre Dame are ranked above Swarthmore, Georgetown, Rice, Duke, Williams, Cornell, Northwestern, Chicago, Pomona...
[/quote]
</p>
<p>all girls school, religious school.</p>
<p>
[quote]
I mean, even Brigham Young is ranked above Northwestern.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>religious school.</p>
<p>"all girls school, religious school."</p>
<p>-So are you admitting that Brigham Young is more selective than Northwestern?</p>
<ul>
<li>You can try to explain away the numbers if you like, but the facts are the facts. The RP study predicts that students admitted to a school higher on the list are more likely to pick that school over one lower on the list. Simply saying "all girls school, religious school" doesn't explain away the data. Barnard College is an all-girls school, yet is ranked number 33, not 11 like Wellesley- the same with Smith College, which is ranked number 56, or Bryn Mawr which is ranked 67. If "all girls school" were the real explanation behind Wellesley being ranked so high, then it should apply for other, similar all-girls schools. </li>
</ul>
<p>The same can be said for "religious school". Why are Catholic University, Boston College, SMU, etc not also ranked above Northwestern?... Again, the fact that the schools are religious is not justification for their rank on the list. </p>
<p>Thus, if one is to use the RP as evidence that Northwestern is more selective than Chicago, then he also has to say that all schools ranked above Northwestern are more selective than Northwestern- and Chicago too for that matter- this includes all-girl and religious schools.</p>
<p>Actually, they are kk. His poitn was only that RP should be used in conjunction with selectivity ratings. As for his valid point about girls schools and religious schools, I direct you here: <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias%5B/url%5D">http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Self-selection_bias</a></p>
<p>The reason I think NU and Chicago are in different planes is simply by perusing the data that students on CC provide.. for students looking at top schools, it seems to me that they either do Penn+Cornell+HYP+ Northwestern, or MIT+Swarthmore+Reed+HYP+Chicago, meaning that students are looking for different experiences in different schools.</p>
<p>I do know a handful of Chicago kids rejected by Northwestern... but I don't think that they can prove for sure that Chicago is easier to get into than Northwestern... the students I know who got into Chicago and not into NU are a good fit for Chicago and may not have had the grades/scores NU was looking for, I have no idea. And for all I know, there are 20 kids at NU who didn't get into Chicago.</p>
<p>How about, for the OP's sake, we say that they are both hard to get into, and that maybe he or she, given the luxury of deciding between the two next year, gives both of the schools a good, hard, consideration?</p>
<p>(My friend gives tours and she says she can tell who will like the school and who will not based on proudly telling them that Chicago students are required to get cozy with Karl Marx et. al. For concerns that the academic program is not as rigorous as reputed, I can give you my reading lists, discussion questions, and essay topics for core classes...)</p>
<p>That's what most of the ACTUAL students of either NU or Chicago have been saying, its all the students from schools that rhyme with puke and ignorant high schoolers that have implied otherwise.</p>
<p>
[quote]
then he also has to say that all schools ranked above Northwestern are more selective than Northwestern- and Chicago too for that matter- this includes all-girl and religious schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>no. read pages 42 and 48 of the study. it directly addresses what i said.</p>
<p>
[quote]
How about, for the OP's sake, we say that they are both hard to get into, and that maybe he or she, given the luxury of deciding between the two next year, gives both of the schools a good, hard, consideration?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Agreed.. </p>
<p>However, my main point was simply that we cannot say that Northwestern is harder to get into than Chicago.. however, last night I learned a little more about Northwestern and have realized that it does in fact have a student body which is, for the most part, on par with Chicago. </p>
<p>I apologize for my ignorance..</p>
<p>Also.. rhyming puke with Duke.. very very clever, arbiter213... :p</p>
<p>The reasonable arguments on both sides I think proves the conclusion: the two schools have very different campus cultures. In terms of selectivity, the schools are roughly equal. Maybe one has a good year or a bad year, but they are certainly "peers".
To say that UofC students, by and large, are more bookish and intellectual purists whereas NU kids are more socially active, probably due to Big 10 membership and a strong Greek community. Are there exceptions? absolutely.
Different students apply to UofC than to NU. Different students get in to these schools. Different students enjoy these schools.
The college preference certainly has its value, but is not the bible. Nor is USNWR rankings. You have to look at ND, Wellesley, and especially BYU as very self-selecting. A 2400 SAT student that is mormon may choose BYU over Harvard. You don't apply to BYU unless you are strongly tied to its culture, and therefore you may choose it over other "stronger" universities. Ditto for ND and Wellesley.
As much as I'd love to say that I go to the "best school in the midwest" there's no point in actually attempting to prove it. I can't say it any more or less than a U of C or WUSTL student could. I understand the natural competitiveness given the close distance and similar prestige, but this battle seems unnecessary. Few NU students would trade spots with a U of C kid and vice versa. So if you're at the school that is the best fit for you, I don't see the value in attempting to beat down on other equally happy kids...though we all know NU students could destroy U of C students in a streetfight (assuming we play in a neutral environment).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Few NU students would trade spots with a U of C kid and vice versa.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>this is probably the most accurate thing said yet, and very descriptive of the difference between the schools, the problem is, knowing which one you'd like better, because it's not always immediately obvious (some kids might feel like they're in-between).</p>