<p>Interesting article in the Maroon:</p>
<p>Editorial</a> understates social changes at U ofC - The Chicago Maroon</p>
<p>Thoughts from current students or from anyone else?</p>
<p>I commented on the article, but I should’ve just done it here. I think the admissions council is trying to find kids that have U of Chicago’s philosophy on “the life of the mind” and education for the sake of education. My son (class of 2014) expressed these thoughts on his essay and despite not having the highest of SAT scores (2100) got accepted over many with higher scores. He loves learning and can’t even pick a major yet because he loves Literature, Physics, Linguistics and Mathematics all equally. He certainly has no idea what he wants his career to be. All he knows is he wants to learn and he wants to be with proferssors and students who love learning.</p>
<p>My son complains about this, although anyone who looked at his application would have concluded he was part of the problem (such as it is). You know who else had very similar complaints? The seniors at my college when I was a freshman. And my friends, when we were seniors. The world is always getting dumber and less interesting, haven’t you noticed? Or maybe it’s just that people actually learn and grow in college, so that 22 year-old fourth-years are more interesting and confident in their unique abilities than 18 year-old high school seniors.</p>
<p>I think Chicago is one of the few places that actually has an effect on the students there. There is a powerful local academic and intellectual culture that students learn, whatever their proclivities coming in. So I don’t think that it is in any danger of losing its special character. There may be somewhat fewer students there who are, as they say, on the spectrum, but I don’t think that’s the end of the University of Chicago as we know it.</p>
<p>I do feel badly for the highly intellectual, quirky kids for whom Chicago was probably an attainable “match” five years ago. Now it’s clearly a “reach” for them and almost everyone else. Some of them will be accepted, but not most. But, really, it’s not the only place in the world for kids like that. One of the most “Chicago” kids I know is happy as a clam at a large, urban, public university which costs about half as much and has completely predictable, stats-based admissions.</p>
<p>So you know, that article is a letter to the editor in response to an Editorial that says the opposite, that these worries are unfounded.</p>
<p>[Weird</a> socialscience - The Chicago Maroon](<a href=“Rambling and flat, this family turmoil doesn’t amount to a handful of cherries – Chicago Maroon”>Rambling and flat, this family turmoil doesn’t amount to a handful of cherries – Chicago Maroon)</p>
<p>I think they’re founded. Overall, people are pretty worried about the direction the student body is taking. As a member of the Class of 2013, I’ve heard many mentions of how my class was the first one to apply on the Common Application, how we’re too normal, how there are too many attractive people, haha, you know. And I’m worried too, what with the giant increase in applications and all. Here, the word “normal” is a negatively charged word. As in, “She didn’t Scav at all? She’s so normal.” As the UChicago application process becomes more and more “Common”, I worry that UChicago will turn into just another good school. And we’re not! We’re the BEST school. The Core, the self-deprecating slogans, the dollar shakes, the all-nighters on the A-Level, Scav, the atmosphere of cooperation and collaboration, just the vibe, man! I know it’s a good school, but if our classrooms start being frequented by that GPA-clutching, athletic, generic Ivy League sort of kid, Imma be ticked. KEEP UCHICAGO WEIRD.</p>
<p>For some reason that letter seemed to point out pre-professional and intellectual as mutually exclusive… Honestly, while I would be devastated if UChicago lost these quirky qualities, I’m glad they upped their marketing campaign. If not, I probably wouldn’t have heard of the school, wouldn’t have fallen in love with it and would not be attending - I’m sure there are other ‘life of the mind’ kids who didn’t have Chicago on their radar before this year, even though it was mostly due to our own ignorance. Also, it is possible that high-profile admits were drawn to Chicago for these very quirky qualities, so there’s still hope! :)</p>
<p>As I was reading the article, I thought, well, I don’t agree with everything he is saying, but I can understand his angst watching the cherished tradition and culture he long nurtured and has been part of turning into something he may no longer be able to recognize… Then, I noticed, he is a member of the class of 2012. He is only a sophomore, and there, he lost all credibility. </p>
<p>It’s one thing for somebody who has been part of the community for a long time, has a first hand experience with the overall atmosphere, the sacred tradition and all that to lament over the changes. As a 2012’er, he have no first hand personal experience that enables him to say “woe is me, my beloved U Chicago as I have known is no more”. So, he is personally experiencing the changing tide at Chicago after only one year, without any real, personal experience that enables him to do “before and after” comparison? Or, is he just repeating what others told him about U Chicago well before he ever came to the place without any critical thinking and evaluation of his own -does not sound like a serious intellectual to me.</p>
<p>The whole article sounded rather like a quasi, half baked, “the young people these days are no good” type lament that was found on a 4000 year old clay Mesopotamian tablet. </p>
<p>By the way, why are we continuing to think that pre-professionalism is incompatible with an intellectual pursuit? Where is it written that profound thoughts are only to be found among those with an empty stomach or those who only occasionally peak out of the academic hideouts? </p>
<p>I DO want to see Chicago remain true to its mantra of the life of the mind - that’s why we are paying through the nose for our son (2013)'s education there. I want U Chicago to educate the next generation of business leaders, political leaders, thought leaders, artists and so on who have a serious intellectual fire power and the the mindset of looking at the problems we are all facing with a nuanced understanding of the world’s history, culture, and diversity. </p>
<p>I am hoping for a president who would never say things like “Crusade” when he is dealing with the Middle Eastern powers with a 10 tone historical baggage dating bake 1000 years. I am hoping that my Wall Street bound son will have a much greater understanding of the entire ecosystem - cultural, economical, political -he is operating in. </p>
<p>Education for this, I firmly believe, is much more likely to be found at U Chicago than other top universities. So far, he is far exceeding my expectation. His growth at Chicago has been so satisfying for me to watch.</p>
<p>hyeonjlee said “why are we continuing to think that pre-professionalism is incompatible with an intellectual pursuit?”</p>
<p>It’s not that it’s incompatible . . it’s that going to college primarily for pre-professional purposes will de facto crowd out those who are going to college primarily for OTHER purposes . . . like intellectual pursuits.</p>
<p>It’s great your child is thriving . . . but that’s off-topic in a discussion about how U Chicago is changing. </p>
<p>P.S. So you thought the article’s points were fairly well-founded until you found out who wrote it? Improper credentials, I suppose . . .</p>
<p>On the pre-professional point, I think they key difference in attitudes is between “learning for the sake of learning” and “learning because I have to get into law/business/medical school”.</p>
<p>Well, some people learn for the sake of learning and want to go to law/business/med school…</p>
<p>I’m really amazed that Chicago continues to thrill me, even when I’m committed to another school. Guess I should’ve stayed on the waitlist…</p>
<p>Hear hear, JHS and hyjeonlee.</p>
<p>A top administrator at UChicago who is an alum of the college has said that this stream of thought (“The freshmen don’t care about learning for the sake of learning! They’re better-looking than us! They’re more NORMAL!”) has been around since at least his time, and he graduated from the College in the late 80’s/early 90’s. So if we really have been “regressing” each year, there should be more data to show for it in some form or another. </p>
<p>Here are CAPS’s career outcomes for the graduating classes of 2007-2009. The College became more selective over this time frame, but what students choose to pursue and how remained remarkably stable, even with the economy tossed in as a wrench: <a href=“Home | CareerAdv”>Home | CareerAdv;
<p>So College graduates go on into finance/business AND to grad school in relatively large numbers and have been doing so well before you even knew this school existed/ back when it was more “nerdy.” What we don’t know was whether the finance person was a classics major or whether the grad school in American Studies kid majored in econ, so “love of learning” and “UChicago-ness” are hard to measure. On a pure anecdotal level, it’s hard to be successful in the finance/business field if you don’t love what you’re doing, and many of my alumni friends in such fields love the knowledge that they have acquired, with other kinds of knowledge, too. I know many “UChicago” personalities, if we measure by the “learn for the sake of learning” metric, who are now in medical school, business school, law school, and other “pre-professional” fields. What the writer of the piece does not have that somebody like me has is a span of time in which to track acquaintances and friends through their majors and after graduation.</p>
<p>My best friend from high school attends an institution that puts about as much pride on itself and its exceptionality as UChicago, and even she has become bitter about the “growing pre-professionalism” at her school, which is funny to me, because if anything, the school successfully rebranded itself a few years ago to communicate its difference better.</p>
<p>I chalk it up to the lack of experience/ naivete of college freshmen nationwide.</p>
<p>zaku said: “Well, some people learn for the sake of learning and want to go to law/business/med school…”</p>
<p>and others learn solely for the sake of making money and treat every college as a technical school</p>
<p>ah, I just love reasoning by obscure hypothetical example . . .</p>
<p>As a physician I would say that he premed criticism is mostly true. It is complicated by the fact that premed is not a major per se so it is hard to achieve a dept of knowledge that spans multiple subjects. I dropped out of premed for this reason and opted for a degree in philosophy and then psychology only to later return to premed studies as a “mature” undergraduate before medical school. It was much more enjoyable the second time around as I went to school at night with other older premeds. I enjoyed my life of the mind by being a philosophy major in a small department where every class was tiny (6-12) students. I retain the ability to process information and write articles and teach on occasion mostly due to my undergraduate and graduate training NOT my medical training. Critical thought is not learned in medical school, in my opinion. While there will always be exceptions that make the rule, for the most part the premedical life of the mind is fairly anemic. However, I do not think that Uchicago will lose its intellectual rigor because of admissions changes - the ethos is too well established and changes that include more preprofessional students should be welcomed as a move toward diversity.</p>
<p>@Kei-o-lei - I meant that one cannot assume that a pre-professional student is solely defined by being pre-professional and has no other intellectual aspirations. Clearly, they can - I agree with everything drdom said. </p>
<p>My point is, there are students who aspire to both ideals and you can’t write them off. (My viewpoint is probably biased because I am one of those students and am probably vastly outnumbered, hopefully, however not by pre-profs at Chicago!)</p>
<p>Also, this may be random, but in the medical case, I know kids who just want to be doctors and could care less about undergraduate studies - they aimed solely for BA/MD or 6-year programs. While there definitely could be those who just want to go to a ‘good’ undergrad so they can go to a ‘good’ medical school, they probably aren’t coming to Chicago renowned as it is for “grade deflation”… On the law/business front, I have no clue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Oh, me too. Oddly enough I think we’re admitted to the same school? Hahaha.</p>
<p>Another response to this topic in the Maroon, this time by a fourth-year columnist:</p>
<p>[Not</a> a bornidentity - The Chicago Maroon](<a href=“Rambling and flat, this family turmoil doesn’t amount to a handful of cherries – Chicago Maroon”>Rambling and flat, this family turmoil doesn’t amount to a handful of cherries – Chicago Maroon)</p>