<p>What I take away from the original post is that (for whatever reason) the crap-shoot aspect of college admissions is spreading beyond the Ivies and breeding more cynicism about the whole process.</p>
<p>I do tend to doubt that the University of Chicago is systematically rejecting top applicants as a yield-management strategy. That would be a really dumb policy. However, its admissions policies and practices certainly have changed since the days when Ted Cohen was admission director. It used to be the case that if you had excellent grades and scores, and could present a decent set of essays or other evidence of “fit”, admission was fairly assured (even without a lot of extracurricular mumbo jumbo). Chicago admissions were said to be “self-selecting”.</p>
<p>Now, in the annual College Confidential admission results thread, you’ll see more of the same bewildering outcomes we’ve been seeing for years at many peer schools. Whether for better or worse from the school’s perspective, it’s not surprising if this trend breeds speculation that not everything is above board in the process.</p>
<p>I don’t see how anything is possibly “bewildering” about admission results at top, highly selective universities with more qualified applicants than they can possibly handle. Of course there are going to be qualified people not admitted.</p>
<p>phuriku,
Please don’t be the pot calling the kettle black. None of us from Northwestern even bothered to go UChicago broad to ■■■■■. Yet, you have been the one that likes ■■■■■■■■ at NU forum and others.</p>
<p>In that first sentence you wrote, you should substitute “Northwestern” with your name:
<p>Yes, I couldn’t remember his name when I was posting and didn’t feel like looking it up. But I went to grad school at Northwestern, and I believe that he is a good thing for the University.</p>
<p>I have likewise been impressed with him in his role at NU. When I met him at a new student event, I identified myself as an alum as well as parent. He asked what year I had graduated, I told him, and he immediately launched into an anecdote regarding that era that made it very evident that he had studied his NU history. It was well played.</p>
<p>I met Morty at Williams on a recruiting weekend with WildChild and I was very impressed by him. I was ready to enroll at Williams myself, but, sadly, I wasn’t the applicant.</p>
<p>That sounds very much like an experience my son had. Morty knows “his stuff” in a way that he can personalize and connect with others.</p>
<p>Morty was known for casually visiting all the entries, during snacks. (It’s the name of the dorm system that Williams has for the first year students. Snacks is a weekend break organized each week by each entry for itself.) </p>
<p>As the students are chatting with him, he asks where each of them are from and where they went to high school. Morty knew my son’s high school well enough to convey that typically alumni of my son’s school go to Williams rival, Amherst. </p>
<p>I think experiences like that make for a happy campus- A delightful experience becomes an anecdote to share.</p>
<p>To the point of what percentage of an entering class is made of early admits, the plus side is both students who want to be there and managing incoming tuition dollars. As I wrote, Morty knows his stuff.</p>
<p>I personally think yield is a useful number that is not often attended to.But to act all surprisedthat these schools consider it doesnt make much sense to me.</p>
<p>No, the fact that qualified people won’t be admitted, under current supply/demand conditions, is not surprising at all. Nor is the cynical reaction of individual parents and students surprising when objectively qualified students are rejected. Students and parents are expected to trust the wisdom of admission committees to discriminate based in part on highly subjective factors. Now, maybe many colleges are doing an excellent job of that. However, it shouldn’t be surprising if many people are bewildered at their individual outcomes when they think they’ve done everything right, then look for evidence that the system is rigged.</p>
<p>I spent several years at Chicago as a graduate student, and that was a while ago. I’m limited in my ability to comment on the school today, or the college. But I can say there was a cultural attitude that, despite rankings, it “was the greatest school in the world,” and this was said assertively and not defensively. It was a internally generated feeling, generated in part by the tenure of the legendary and controversial Robert Hutchins. Some thought he runed the school. Others thought he put it on a unique path to excellence with the great books curriculum. I would say that when Northwestern was thought of, and in my time it was not thought of often, it was seen as an upstart. </p>
<p>Chicago is the Second City, and the university with its name would always like to think of NW as the second university.</p>
<p>As a New Yorker, I saw a similar dynamic between Columbia and NYU. At Columbia they sing, “We own New York,” and I have a sense they look with slack-jawed astonishment at the rise of NYU, which in my youth had the reputation of a school where if you could pay the tuition they’d let you in.</p>
<p>laticher, I’m sure you don’t mean to compare the “rise” of NU to the rise of NYU? But, just to clarify, I have experience with both UChicago (H did his grad work there) and NU (I did my grad work there), and I don’t think either one of us would point to some discernible difference in the quality of our education, though certainly to a difference in the personality type (broad generalization, I know) of our peers.</p>
<p>Neither of these schools is better than the other. They are both quite good, at the grad and undergrad level, and being different isn’t appreciably better.</p>
<p>However, I do think OP was mostly just referring to a preference on the part, at this point, of each UG institution for students who prefer it above other schools, which makes absolute sense to me.</p>
<p>We were at Northwestern several months back and the Admissions Rep doing the info session could not have been more clear in stating that Shapiro has stated that he wants more students admitted through Early Decision. He also could not have been more clear that demonstrated interest makes a huge difference at Northwestern. He used the words “demonstrated interest” several times and gave examples of what he meant by the term. I, for one, really appreciated how upfront he was about what they are looking for and appreciated his candor. All applicants to Northwestern should know this or they haven’t done sufficient research.</p>
<p>Right. And even though I hate Northwestern (at least according to PizzaGirl, don’t know where she got that idea), I think they are both fine schools and that most students who wind up at either one of them have an opportunity to get a fine education. There are a lot of reasons to choose one over the other (they’re about as similar as a fish and a donkey), but educational merit isn’t one of them.</p>
<p>But of course to stay in character, I’d say the same if we were comparing, oh, SIU-Carbondale and SIU-Edwardsville.</p>
<p>EDIT: Or to really stay in character, SIU-Carbondale and Northwestern! (how do you make that evil grin smiley?)</p>
<p>SunnyAndClear, I’m sure that’s right - but all the demonstrated interest in the world won’t get you in with a 31 ACT, unless there’s something else especially compelling about your application - whereas two years ago, the bar was significantly lower. That’s neither a bad thing nor a good thing, it’s just a thing.</p>
<p>“So the University of Chicago has adopted a practice of turning down the very top applicants, who it believes will almost certainly turn down Chicago if they are admitted to an even more prestigious university. (She said she was told this, explicitly, by her admissions contact.)”</p>
<p>This is news? Its called Tufts syndrome.
And by the way, “yield” is very dependant on the amount of FA a student is offered, especially these days. Less FA = less chance a Middle Class student will be able to attend. When my son was admitted in 2006 [ before the common app and when their acceptance rate was 40%] the FA offered us was a pitiful 1K, against tens of thousands of dollars from other higher ranked U’s and Ivys. If they want to snag the HYPS level kids , even with SCEA or ED, they will have to offer even more FA than they do today.</p>
<p>@poetgrl
I was not talking data or the fact that you could get a great education at either. I was speaking of purely subjective attitudes and cultural impressions. </p>
<p>I don’t think there is a perfect parallel between the history of Northwestern and NYU, but in 1977, the average freshman SAT was 1180’ and around 50 percent of applicants were accepted. </p>
<p>I’ll admit it’s harder to get into a lot of places. My wife and her Williams alum friends wonder about how few of them could have entered today when they look at the amazing stats of current students.</p>
<p>You can’t compare the uncentered 1977 SAT’s to now.</p>
<p>But, it’s all good. I could have gotten into NU now and then. Plus, I think those comparisions are silly. If we had all grown up with things the way they are now, the same students would have had the necessary CV’s, with rare exceptions, imho.</p>
<p>Northwestern was always an excellent university, even back in 1977 when nobody really even cared about those things. What were the 1977 SAT’s for Columbia? I wonder.</p>
<p>"he wants more students admitted through Early Decision. He also could not have been more clear that demonstrated interest makes a huge difference at Northwestern. He used the words “demonstrated interest” several times and gave examples of what he meant by the term. "</p>
<p>and ED is the best way to “demonstrate interest”. so yeah, duh. …</p>