@Sam-I-Am is correct - it’s a very informal rivalry at best and primarily in terms of academics, school culture, and so forth - not athletics. Although I think the various professional schools might have an intramural competition or two? Seem to remember that from my b-school days (Kellogg vs. Booth or actually, GSB at the time).
At the undergrad level, I do remember hearing thatNU kids thought “U of C” kids were weirdos and the UChicago kids thought NU kids were snots. This was nearly 30 years ago and the kind of stuff you’d hear in the break-room. In reality, Chicago employers hired both in droves and benefitted tremendously from having two academic powerhouses nearby.
Many kids apply to both schools as well (depending on major, of course). D, being very interested in economics, applied to NU as well as UChicago, and had she ended up at NU we would have been very happy for her.
Each is distinct, has a different feel, and even a different philosophy on some big topics (safe-spaces, for instance). But both are world-class R1 universities with stellar reputations and excellent undergrad. and grad schools. I’d be surprised if there weren’t a bit of a rivalry, given all that.
@Chchill - 25+ years ago in the B-schools it was flipped - the rivalry was on OUR end, and it was Kellogg who didn’t seem to give Booth (GSB in those days) much of any thought. Kellogg had the higher ranking and that bugged administrators and students (I doubt it bugged the faculty, who clearly benefit from another world class institution nearby). The LEAD program - which I think still exists today - originated with my class specifically to address shortcomings that Booth was said to have had relative to Kellogg, Harvard, Wharton and Stanford. It stung that we were perceived as out of the top five with our neighbor to the north ranked significantly ahead of us. More than one top administrator made reference to the school “named after a breakfast cereal company”. This was, of course, 18 years before the GSB was able to announce its own historic donation and re-naming. And students, naturally, relished stories about who got into both schools and chose the rigors of the GSB over the breakfast cereal.
25 years is not a long time in the life of an institution or grad program and what goes up can certainly come down again. Competitive posturing and being aware of who is nipping at your heels or who it is you want to catch and surpass is a very good thing because it keeps everyone on their toes and delivering an excellent product. It wasn’t long ago that NU was ranked ahead of UChicago undergrad. The latter might “act” like they are in a different league, and right now the rankings support that, but you can bet they are keeping an eye on NU nonetheless. If NU gets its hands on some humongous donation, it’s game on.
I wonder how the city and the community would have been affected if the merger of the two schools had gone through. They came very close to becoming one school in the thirties if I remember correctly
Competition that close can only help, I see atleast one Nobel laureate was at NU for 25 years before joining the maroons. I’m sure it’s a two way street.
NU is nowhere near UChicago in any of the major academic subjects, ranging from science, social science, humanities to area studies. But I will conceded that NU Is closer to UChicago than NYU is to Columbia, expect in law and philosophy.
It’s tied with Sloan (MIT) for 5th in Business. It’s ranked 7th in Chem (ahead of UChicago). Ranked 7th in Economics due to some major hitters who are tied. Slightly ahead of UChicago in the field of medicine in some areas, behind in others. So not exactly “nowhere near”. Law is probably one area where UChicago has simply dominated historically and might be hard for NU to catch up. For the other programs and grad departments, not so clear.
At the college level, It has less work than NYU would have to catch up to the higher ranked school. Also noteworthy about those two different relationships is that Columbia ALWAYS out-ranked NYU. UChicago, however, is not only new to the top 5 - it’s new to the top 10, and surpassed NU along the way! Not yet clear that’s due to permanent differences.
NU can also offer something to STEM kids that UChicago simply cannot and that’s a real engineering school. To the extent that engineering remains popular, that will continue to be a drawback (engineering tends to be cyclical, of course, but the question is where are we now in the cycle and are things different this time?).
NU is also distinct in that you can choose various entering schools and colleges rather than one liberal arts program (albeit one that has broadened its offerings to include pre-professional programs). It’s good to have two distinct fits and personalities in the Chicago area and the city, not to mention the world, benefits tremendously from both institutions.
UChicago College is finally getting the recognition it deserves and it’s wonderful to cheer them on. But no one should be getting too comfortable too quickly. Bigger names than NU might bump UChicago out of 3rd place - should that happen, and should NU rise a few notches in the meantime, the two schools will generally be considered pretty much as equals.
??? Booth is tied at second with Stanford and ahead of Wharton. Check out some of the leading world university rankings. See if you can find NU anywhere near UChicago, which usually is in the top 5 in the US and top 10 world wide. NU is simply a non entity in terms of global reputation. UChicago is one of the world’s leading universities. NU Has however done a great job in college rankings.
@Chrchill - was referring to Kellogg at #5. And from my post above, once upon a time it was ahead of Booth. As for Booth, it’s a superb program but I’m hesitant to think it’s better than Wharton just due to the ranking (I realize you haven’t said that either). Fact is, schools rotate within the top 5 but any place in that coveted set is a good one! That includes Kellogg, of course.
Per CWUR (worldwide), NU is about 21 while UChicago is 8. The ordinal is correct, not sure the cardinal is that stable. Fact is, NU has climbed quite a bit in the past few years according to that particular ranking system. CWUR ranks overall research, faculty quality and student training. They tend to mimic Shanghai more or less (and both rank Oxbridge way too high I think). I’ve spoken to academics who see very few surprises on either. Many parents who just follow the college ranking system on USNews and similar would be surprised to see CalTech ranked so high (#11 worldwide, #9 US, ahead of Penn), but the academics agree with that placement and believe that any college ranking that places it lower is simply wrong. It all comes down to relative weighting of factors and how you view research vs. “undergrad experience” specifically.
NU is ranked on par with or ahead of UCL and Toronto (behind Univ. of Tokyo but I don’t know much about that institution). Definitely NOT a “non-entity” in terms of global reputation, LOL. The US clearly dominates that global stage, btw, and attracts a much bigger number of foreign-born scholars who come here to obtain their undergrad or grad. degrees than the other direction.
To me, the bigger issue is the intellectual environments at both schools. While, as I mentioned, we would have been delighted had our daughter ended up at NU, in truth we think that UChicago has a more vibrant intellectual atmosphere at the undergraduate level than does NU. For my kid, that’s a better fit. However, there are going to be some who disagree with this assessment vehemently, and I can’t say that there are disengaged kids at NU (we’ve certainly never met any). This is one of those subtle cultural differences between the two schools. When meeting for coffee, UChicgo kids tend to discuss Kant, while NU kids tend to discuss their weekend plans. Neither is bad or good - it comes down to fit.
Re Cal Tech, it is really sui generis. It is a boutique school in size and focus. But in its fields, it is world class at the very top. Hard for it not to be in top ten. I do agree with you that the U.K. schools are overrated in the world ranking.
@Chrchill
Northwestern’s chemistry is now one of the very best in the world. Chicago has already been lagging in that department. NU has received higher federal research funding, even excluding engineering. Northwestern hospital/medical center has outperformed UChicago (may not be as relevant). These are reasons that UChicago will continue to keep as eye on NU. It’s not as one-sided as you think.
This thread has really digressed off the subject, which was to discuss the early decision 2 admission process, not to debate Chicago with other schools.
Why do you have to compare like this? I’m all for discussion, but some users on this thread simply just seem to be stating their opinions/anecdotes/biases as fact. Both NU and UofC are absolutely incredible schools that are among the best in the world. You are simply splitting hairs here and it would be a great honor to go to either Northwestern or Uchicago. Honestly choosing between them should come down to “fit” because these schools are about as different in terms of “vibe” as elite institutions can be.
@jaecha I agree. I think that it’s very natural to compare the two schools, given their close proximity. Some might actually find that helpful, though perhaps it’s best put in another thread.
I’ll close by saying that I detested the dorm food at I-House, and my kids really hated the dorm food at NU when they were there for precollege. On that aspect, the two schools are absolute equals. :))
I agree, “fit” is the most important factor. It’s fair to point out the largest banks, consulting firms, MA, IB recruitment, etc. interchange the M5 and to some degree M7 as equals.
UChicago, Harvard, MIT, Northwestern, Penn and Stanford is an incredible pool of peers IMHO.
Probably why they are tied in most rankings for Eco.
