<p>Since there are so many questions about U. Chicago safety etc, I thought you might enjoy some first hand data.</p>
<p>I just returned from three days in Hyde Park, on business at U. Chi. I stayed in the Quadrangle Club, right down the street from the library, and walked all over the area, day and night (no car). I saw NOTHING threatening, not even remotely. Compared to when I lived there 24 years ago, there is no comparison. All the way north to 47th street is completely gentrified (yuppified maybe?). North of 47th to the loop is being quickly redeveloped, too. Who do you think can afford $300 thousand and up townhouses? Not lowlife. South to 67th is taking off with redevelopment, too, but is mostly vacant land right now. West of Cottege Grove is the only remaining problem in some parts, but, except for the part SW of the campus, is changing quickly, too, especially the area north of Garfield Blvd (55th street).</p>
<p>It is a new world there. You do not see burgler bars. You do not see security fences. You do not see stores that close early with heavy duty security shutters. You DO see families everywhere. And college kids.</p>
<p>Thank you. I have been stewing about suggesting to my young (17) , somewhat unworldly daughter that she look at the University of Chicago. How would you feel about it for your daughter?</p>
<p>A telling statistic is the female/male ratio for incoming class. 51% female and 49% male. Seems many families find the campus safe for their daughters. I also feel safe on campus. Chicago recently announced they are building a new dorm on 61st street expanding the campus the campus south.</p>
<p>We only had a short visit, but the UChicago campus was fantastic. It is really just campus for block after block, and I think that runs a mile by a mile and a half.</p>
<p>Sorry we did not have time to explore the neighborhood. We are used to urban life. But we did end up going on the wrong line and ended up in an all black urban area SW of town about 20 city blocks away. We are white and looked like rubes hauling our luggage along the street trying to figure out where to go. Everyone was pretty nice and helped us get on the right bus, but some people did not know which direction the UChicago campus was at all. Having lived in SF for a long time, I am used to more of a racial mix in most neighborhoods, so this was a first. I even live in a mostly black neighborhood here, but something was really different about this area in Chicago, I can't quite put my finger on.</p>
<p>I would have really liked to see the area north of campus which serves the campus and local community. That we didn't allow time for because we were on campus all day.</p>
<p>paleozoic, my D is a first year there, livin in Max P. She loves it, and even takes public transit to the Wicker Park area once a week for a violin lesson. Her only complaint is that the 55th street/Garfield Blvd bus seems to run erratically.</p>
<p>bettina, with the demise of a series of hideous, crime ridden high rise projects along the Dan Ryan expressway, the south side of Chicago is undergoing a real change, mostly driven by cheap land ripe for redevelopment, and a highly pro-developer mayor. I don't think the south side of Chicago will ever be an upscale, yuppified environment like Lincon Park, but I think it will return to its middle class roots. After all, Chicago requires that city employees live within the city. Every worker priced out of the north side (and you should see the prices up there) needs to live somewhere. That's becoming the south side - Bridgeport, Bronzeville (former site of some of the projects!) and the area between U. Chi and downtown first, followed by Woodlawn (just south of U. Chi), and perhaps the area you saw later.</p>
<p>The troubling part to me is the displacement issue. Where have the poor gone? I suspect Chicagolanders would tell us that some suburbs have become the new ghettos, without the public transit and any infrastructure to support anyone. Of course, in an ownership society, we don't do much support anyway. You don't own? You don't get.</p>
<p>I was a graduate student at Chicago between 1972-75 which may have been when the racial tension was at it worst. I loved the university but never could get quite used to the sense of insecurity at night and the bleakness of Hyde Park engendered by the antiburglary screens/security locks everywhere. I was back in 1987 for the last time and even then the situation was much improved. I would be thrilled if my daughter would consider U of C as it has always remained a unique academic experience for me.</p>
<p>It is interesting how many folks post here regarding U. Chicago safety that have not been back since grad school when you went. I suspect they would be as shocked as I was when I walked around, especially if they walk up through Kenwood or down to Woodlawn. Woodlawn is still a bit depressing because so much is empty, but that's about all.</p>
<p>paleozoic, I was in law school at UChicago 73-76. I am glad to hear it has improved so much. I agree with your assessment of the bleakness. I began my running career there- left the law school and headed down to the path along the lake. I went south. Big mistake. It was truly frightening.</p>
<p>I wouldn't hesitate about UChicago for a "worldly" daughter. However, I 'm not sure it (or any other large urban university) would necessarily be the cosiest place for a "rather unworldly" 17 year old.</p>
<p>Why do you distinguish between worldly and unworldly? Are you thinking street smarts? Not sure any of these kids have that. Maybe you think cities pose some unusual risks? Compared to what? Sururbs where drunk and drugged HS kids smash into phone poles every weekend? Where one never sees a person of color?</p>
<p>Just remember that many of these kids that choose to go to nice, cozy suburban or rural universities are going to head to a large city for work. I'd rather they learn how to use urban resources within the safety net of a college than within the jungle of a new job.</p>
<p>I wasn't assuming any particular definition of "worldly". I was simply keying off the parent's own characterization of a "somewhat unworldly" 17 year old. </p>
<p>I think that large urban universities are fine for some kids, probably a bit much for others. It's all in the fit between the individual student and the typical experience that can be expected at a particular school. </p>
<p>If I described my kid as "unathletic" I would expect knowledgeable parents to at least suggest that a jock school like Williams might not be the optimum fit. Likewise, a "somewhat unworldly" student might find UChicago or Columbia somewhat overwhelming.</p>
<p>Conversely, if the parent had said, "my daughter is used to taking mass transit around Boston on her own and has lived or worked in the city", then I would feel more confident that the student would be comfortable at a large urban college, if (after having visited all types) that is what the student prefers.</p>
<p>I do think it is worth giving some consideration to the transition from "here" to "there". The "here" varies wildly from student to student. The transition would be different for a student who had grown up on a ranch in west Texas and a student who grew up in an apartment on the Upper East Side in NYC -- with lots of shadings in between.</p>
<p>Perhaps the biggest lesson I've learned this year on CC is the wide spectrum of adjustments to college among the various kids -- from wildly ecstatic to utterly miserable. Some kids are probably more adaptable than others, but I think the root of disparity lies more with whether or not the kid found a comfort level at the school or, for one reason or another, was "freaked out" by the experience due to a poor match. Most parents know their kids. I think they should be honest in trying to assess what kind of leap will be comfortable. To go to UChicago and be uncomfortable with the big city experience would be a shame. There's enough stress in going off to college without that.</p>
<p>I'm sorry if the characterization "unworldly" gives the wrong impression of what I was really asking. Although the classic stereotype of the Chicago intellectual is someone who can read War and Peace in 5 languages but cannot tie his shoes, the point is that Chicago does tend to attract undergraduates who come from academic homes and thus may be in a bit of a bubble as far as streetsmarts are concerned. There was nothing in my experience prior to coming to Chicago in the early seventies to prepare me for the tooth and claw existence on 47th street. It felt like a combat zone to me at a time when my idea of a university was still set by the relative civility of a large European University. If the ambience around UChicago now compares favourably to with that of Columbia, Yale or Penn, a lot has changed for the better and perhaps the University should publicize this to its alumni</p>
<p>UChicago is not quite a "big city experience". Hyde Park has a very surburban feel in many ways, yet has all the resources of a large city at its doorstep.</p>
<p>I went there as a typical sheltered surburban child in the late 70's. During the school year, we really didn't make it into the city often - just too darn busy! Starting the summer after my soph year, I started working there in the summers and that's when I really started taking advantage of all the city has to offer - the night life on the north side, the lake shore, the shopping.</p>
<p>Crime was certainly a concern, but I don't recall it feeling oppressive. The worse experience I had was the spring and summer of my junior year when I was living off campus and was burgularized 4 times in 4 months. 3 of those break ins happened at night when my roommate and I were home asleep. It was traumatic at the time, it prompted me to move back into campus housing (which I never had problems in), and has provided great stories to tell ever since!!! But I did learn alot about being "street smart" and how to be safe in marginal neighborhoods which served me well in later years as I travelled and lived abroad. I feel more confident going into unfamiliar areas than I think I would be if I hadn't gone to U of C.</p>
<p>As an epilogue, my hubby and I (we met there) went back last spring for our 25th reunion and our overwhelming reaction was how much nicer the place has become. Not just Hyde Park, but the city overall. The campus is growing by leaps and bounds, and the new buildings are spectacular. We really would have liked our son to go there, but he's set on studying engineering and Chicago simply isn't a fit as it doesn't have that major.</p>
<p>
[quote]
UChicago is not quite a "big city experience".
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't know that I buy that! I certainly think that taking the train north from UChicago is a "big city" experience. A wonderful big city, but a big city, nevertheless.</p>
<p>I think getting from either O'Hare or Midway to UChicago is certainly a "big city experience".</p>
<p>I'm not saying that any of that is bad. I suggested that my daughter look at UChicago, as did her mother. In fact, her mom took the train from the Loop down to Hyde Park during a business trip, just to scout UChicago. </p>
<p>I'm just suggesting that parents (and prospective students) should consider the reality of a large city university and how it relates to their personalities, experiences, maturity, street smarts, etc. I would offer the same advice concerning Harvard, Vanderbilt, Ga Tech, Penn, and so on and so forth. These are all schools that are very much urban and require an "urban" mindset unless you lock yourself on campus and don't explore (in which case, what is the point? Might as well go to Bowdoin or Dartmouth.)</p>
<p>The point I was making is that Hyde Park doesn't feel like a "big city". Urban, yes (certainly not the suburbs!!!) and but very gentrified (and getting more that way). </p>
<p>When I was a undergrad there I dated a boy from Manhattan and used to visit him in the summers. Now that was a city!!! And even though I'd spent a year at UChicago, Manhattan was quite different and intimidating to me!</p>
<p>Of course it is a very different than a rural campus like Dartmouth or a suburban campus like Stanford (where I went for grad school). But I never felt like I was in a big city - I guess there's urban and then there's URBAN. This has been a big point of discussion with my son, as he's certainly not a "city boy" - he loves the outdoors. But he did eventually decide that although he didn't want to be in a city, he did like the idea of being close to one. Hence he's leaning towards suburban campuses.</p>
<p>Another question I have which some of you who have daughters at Chicago may want to address--what is the current social ambience at Chicago for undergraduates? In my day as a graduate student there were not that many places to discuss the great issues of life with your fellow students out of class and perhaps I worked too hard. Yet in the end the value of a great school like Chicago is that you are actually in a place where your real education should be the common room. What is the situation today?</p>
<p>paleozoic--I guess your experience as a grad student was different from mine as an undergrad in the late 70's. I remember discussing "the great issues" in the dorms, in the library, sitting outside on the quads, walking to and from class/the dorms/friends apts., in the dining halls, at parties--basically everywhere.</p>