<p>Cue7: Contact the admission office and talk to them about your concerns. :D</p>
<p>Why would adding 100 students to your class put such a strain on the system? I would think the problem is more with housing/feeding them than teaching to them. The new dorm seems to have emboldened the administration. $3.8 million (almost $15 million over 4 years) just in tuition money can go a long way when all you need to do is add one or two very bright students to each class. These are hard economic times, and their School of Economics has world-wide recognition. I agree with that they should be more open with their rationale, though.</p>
<p>J’adoube - My primary concern is transparency - I just want to know the decisions the administration is making. </p>
<p>Now, in terms of class size, it’s not exactly just 100 students more per class. When I graduated around 8 years ago, we had around 950 students in my class. I think growth really started at full capacity by the 2004 or 2005 class. So in 2000 (my graduating year) we had a College of about 3800. In 2004, I think the college was about 4000. By 2010, the college should be around 5600 or so. That’s a SIGNIFICANT growth in just 6 years - about 30-40% growth. In that same period of time, has the rest of the university grown at a commensurate pace? Have we added 30-40% more world-class professors? Has the student/faculty ratio remained 4 to 1 (what it was when I was at the college)?</p>
<p>My hunch is that the answers to these questions is No. That’s fine, but again, I wish I’d know the reasoning behind the school’s decisions, and just how large they anticipate making the U of C. If they just said, listen, what do you expect, we can’t keep up with Harvard and Stanford with our current economic model, we need an additional revenue stream, then so be it. Come on, doing this surreptitiously is garbage though.</p>
<p>Somebody seems to have something to prove. Maybe in “university years” UofC is in its 40’s and it’s having a midlife crisis.</p>
<p>Cue7, </p>
<p>From 4000 to 5600 is “SIGNIFICANT”? In an organization the size of UofC? I hardly think so. Besides, prospective students are perfectly entitled to go elsewhere if they think the place is too big, or classes too large. But you’ve presented no evidence of that happening.</p>
<p>I’m not sure what your problem with UofC is. First you start two thread trying to lamblast the place, without a shred of evidence, that (1) UofC students are disadvantaged w/r/t law and med school because of grading practices and (2) UofC administration is hiding this fact. Now you keep accusing the administration of (1) having some covert agenda to harm students by increasing class size and (2) having an incompetent admissions department because they admitted more students than you think is appropriate. </p>
<p>Geesh, what an agenda. For what purpose? </p>
<p>Why not just hang up the phone when the fund-raisers call. Maybe write a letter or two to the administration letting them know you’re on to their game! but don’t look for sympathizers here. You’re not finding any.</p>
<p>I wonder how this will play for a waitlisted applicated.</p>
<p>Not looking good, I guess.</p>
<p>Newmassdad - wow that was a little harsh. Keep in mind I went to the U of C during the height of the Sonnenschein controversy, so this has (and continues) to color my views about the administration. </p>
<p>I have absolutely no problems with what Sonnenschein did, and I think his initiatives actually strengthened the school in many ways. What concerns me is a lack of transparency about the process. Want to see how Penn and Cornell or Yale do in law placement? The info is publicly available. Want to see how much Yale will grow in the next 5-7 years? That info is publicly available as well. </p>
<p>What I’ve talked about countless times is increasing Chicago’s own level of transparency. When they don’t, I eye their decisions with cynicism or skepticism, because it smacks of the poor process Sonnenschein chose when he ran things. Make no doubt, Chicago is a very different place now than it was even 8 years ago, and the administration - from the Sonnenschein days to now - had a firm sense of where they were taking the school. </p>
<p>Also, 4000 to 5600 is not significant? I am not looking at the organization overall - I’m looking at the college specifically. I don’t take into account, for example, how large our medical system is or how big our Business school is when looking at the college specifically. Taking a College and growing it by more than 30% in a 5 years span seems considerable to me. If I am off, what would be at least significant growth for you? If all of a sudden we have 12000 undergrads on campus and rival UIUC? </p>
<p>Finally, I apologize if my tone in my posts have been as severe and as harsh as you imply. I really didn’t think I accused the admissions dept of being “incompetent,” and I didn’t think my posts about grad school lampooned Chicago comprehensively. Moreover, I make sure to mention my affinity for and loyalty to the U of C in many of my posts. Additionally, I praise Chicago when I believe it’s merited. I’ve oftentimes mentioned Chicago’s proficiency at aiding students looking to do PhDs, and I’ve discussed Chicago’s strengths in finance and mba placement. I do really think for PhD programs and finance, Chicago is one of the top 5 or so places to go. Chicago’s placement on both these fronts easily rivals Harvard and Princeton. On the other hand, I criticize Chicago when I believe it’s merited. In looking at Yale’s and Princeton’s law placement stats (all publicly available), I’d be very, very surprised if Chicago’s numbers were similar. I criticize because I want to raise awareness of the problem and see if Chicago can get better on this front. Frankly, after attending Chicago, I see no reason why our graduates can’t - just like the graduates from other places - enjoy commensurate levels of success across the board. We certainly can on the PhD and finance front, in Rhodes and Marshall scholarships, and the like. So why not in law and medical placement as well? </p>
<p>With all this being said, do I eye the administration with some distrust after attending the U of C during one of the rockiest presidencies in its history? Sure. Do I think that, in some ways, the U of C can definitely catch up to its peers (esp. in law and medical school admissions)? Sure. Most of all though, I just want the information. Post law placement stats. Say we need this economic model to keep up with Harvard, Stanford et al. Show the rationale behind the decisions. The biggest problem with Sonnenschein wasn’t his decisions, it was his inability to explain WHY he made those decisions. Many of Zimmer’s policies have also followed suit. </p>
<p>I don’t see your need to patronize me (“Maybe write a letter or two to the administration letting them know you’re on to their game!”), and I don’t see how it’s wrong - with an institution as in flux as the U of C - to have a dose of skepticism about the administration. Others on this board have talked about the “shiftiness” of the administration, so I’m not alone on this front. </p>
<p>I found your post to be rude. If you feel that Chicago’s policies and decisions should go unquestioned and unexamined, that’s your prerogative. I think, however, that such an approach is a decidedly un-Chicago way to assess an administrations initiatives.</p>
<p>PS - I did in fact e-mail the alumni house and members of the admin (college advisers specifically) to inquire about getting some stats about proposed college growth and Chicago’s law placement stats. I e-mailed about a week ago, and I’ve heard nothing since. Newmassdad, I’d encourage you to do the same, and maybe you’d receive a more favorable response. I get the sense though, that you’re pretty complacent and content with regard to what’s going on at Chicago, so you might not see a need to take that step.</p>