@FStratford I mean that the only reason Harvard has a 50% yield rate and UChicago has a 100% yield rate is that one person did not choose Harvard. One person not choosing Harvard is not a trend.
UChicago is a great school. I was a fan of it until Nondorf, and until I came across this UChicago forum. My gold standards are MIT/Caltech (not HYPS, even though I also have direct experience with one of them). Caltech-MIT rivalry (Caltech–MIT rivalry - Wikipedia) is well known, but they, and their students, hold the other in the highest esteem. Caltech loses lots of cross-admits to MIT (primarily because of the better name recognition and the more extensive options its larger rival offers), but it sticks to its strengths (even more rigorous academics and a slightly more theoretical bend than MIT) without playing any admission tricks. Why couldn’t UChicago do the same thing? Modesty and humility will serve your cause better than excessive chest-pumping, which is frankly embarrassing and turns off many people outside of the UChicago bubble.
@Data10 I specifically included non-athletes in my response. There was no assumption that the lower test scores were from athletes. Remember Chicago is TO (I reported admitted student data test score ranges, and further, Chicago does not require a test score upon matriculation so we can be certain those low scores were submitted in the app) so there are students there whose test scores we don’t know. I am certain there were people on these boards who were very surprised to see UChicago admitted student test score ranges go as low as ACT 20 and SAT 1020.
@JBStillFlying I can’t explain why Chicago would accept athletes with lower than average transcript, rigor and test scores, but they sometimes do. I’m talking B average with no honors classes and no, or low test scores. Yet, when students with these lower stats (less than ‘stellar academic chops’) do attend highly selective schools they tend to succeed (graduate in 4 years with decent grades, get good jobs, etc.). What does that tell us?
1 Like
Great news! I added the 2016 figures, so now you can see the accepted, attended, and yield figures for 2016-2020 for Beverly Hills High School, so you can see how much more popular UChicago is than the other top private schools:
Beverly Hills High School Matriculations (2016-2020)
College, Accepted, Attended, Yield
- UChicago, 8 of 10, 80%
- Yale, 2 of 3, 66.7%
- Stanford, 3 of 5, 60%
- Cornell, 7 of 12, 58.3%
- Penn, 3 of 6, 50%
- Brown, 2 of 2, 100%
- Princeton, 2 of 4, 50%
- Berkeley, 40 of 83, 48.4%
- Harvard, 3 of 7, 42.9%
- Columbia, 1 of 3, 33.3%
- Duke, 1 of 6, 16.7%
- Dartmouth / Caltech, 0 of 1, 0%
- MIT not listed
Why cant MIT, Harvard, UChicago follow Caltech and not do any of these “tricks”? Yes I agree. The Ivies and Harvard specifically should stop discriminating against Asians, especially poor Asian demographics like Laotians, Filipinos, Vietnamese. Why cant they all follow Caltech/MIT and only have EA and none of these SCEA tricks that prevent kids from applying to more than one school early? Or ED that allows kids to apply to more than one school early but bind the back end?
You dont seem to lose your esteem for Harvard and the Ivies for playing these tricks though like you do with UChicago? Is it because you think that UChicago, like Caltech, is a quirky niche school and should not be seen as the same level as the Ivies?
Also, just to show how much more popular UChicago is throughout California than the other schools, I am adding the figures for the top prep school in Los Angeles and the whole state (Harvard-Westlake), for Oakland (College Preparatory School), and San Diego (St. Bishop’s School):
Harvard-Westlake Matricualtions (2020/2016-2020), San Diego
- NYU (25 / 92)
- University of Chicago (13 / 53)
- University of Michigan (13 / 52)
- Washington U. St.Louis (13 / 60)
- USC (10 / 71)
- Cornell ( 9 / 40)
- Brown ( 8 / 32)
- Georgetown (7 / 29 )
- Stanford (7 / 35)
- Yale (7 / 23 )
Matriculation
College Preparatory School Matriculations (2016-2020), Oakland
-
- UChicago 24
-
- Swarthmore 14
-
- Berkeley 16
-
- Georgetown 15
-
- WashU 14
-
- Harvard / NYU / Tufts 13
-
- Cornell 12
-
- Barnard 11
Bishop’s School San Diego Matriculations (2017-2019), San Diego
- USC 32
- Berkeley 31
- UChicago 16
- Santa Clara 13
- Stanford 12
- Yale 10
- Harvard / Penn /Brown / BU / SMU / UCLA 9
- NYU / Northeastern 8
- Princeton / Northwestern 7
https://www.bishops.com/academics/college-counseling/college-matriculation#
Hmm… are you saying “these uppity people should know their place and keep quiet?”
Are you trying to prevent/preempt people from posting and discussing news about UChicago that you don’t agree with? Or worse from look down upon? Are you also saying that posters should not use figures of speech: irony, hyperbole, because you dont get the flourish? This smacks of prior censorship… and leaves a bad taste
That is so un-UChicago… you probably want to be in a different forum and never visit anymore since prior censorship will never be universally appreciated in this board.
I don’t care for some of the admission policies of HYPS (not to mention the other Ivies) either. I don’t really hold them in any special esteem. If you’ve read my comments in the now-closed “race thread”, you’d noticed that I prefer a more meritocratic admission practice with preferential adjustments to take into account applicants in the lower SES. Academically, UChicago is certainly their equal (and better than quite few other Ivies), so why does it make even more restrictive for its applicants than HYPS?
I have no interest in censorship, BTW. I believe in the freedom of expressions, especially in academics. People can certainly post whatever they want. I just think those posts have the opposite effect their posters intended.
To me, the “data” looks like UChicago prefers the high schools, not that the high school students prefer UChicago.
This isn’t “news”. UChicago has been quite clear in its admissions strategy.
This discussion shows why data analytics should be taught in high schools. You can’t tell a dang thing from that data.
3 Likes
Actually, UChicago really doesn’t. Athletes aren’t evaluated in the same way that they are at an elite D1 such as Harvard. Things might have changed the past couple of years on the score front due to TO, but I’ve never heard of athletes at UChicago coming in with sub-par grades or academic performance. They are subject to the same academic criteria that everyone else is.
1 Like
Can’t speak to all of HYPS, since I’m not familiar with the curriculum, but UChicago is academically superior to at least a couple of those schools, where it’s actually relatively easy to float through without being challenged much. Course flexibility is key in achieving that goal, and UChicago’s pace, graduation requirements, and even attendance expectations require a lot more attention to studies than happens elsewhere. Most students would do fine in either type of institution. But those who like filling their days with other activities than their schoolwork are going to find it more difficult at UChicago.
1 Like
I have no direct personal experience with UChicago but I’ve looked at its curriculum (and those of other schools). I’d say it is comparable in breadth with Columbia’s (and perhaps slightly more rigorous). It’s on a quarter system (so is Stanford as well as Caltech), so it’s arguably on a somewhat faster pace than HYP. Its rigor is more comparable to Princeton’s (slightly above HYS), but not at the same level as Caltech/MIT. UChicago, however, doesn’t have the broadest distribution of students, especially at the far ends compared to HPS. Harvard, in particular, has some of the best students in the country and internationally that UChicago simply doesn’t have (partially due to the latter’s admission practices), but it also has some weaker students in its midst.
And yet they still show up time and again on this forum . . .
By the way, there is nothing modest or humble about competing in the arena of ideas. UChicago is an aggressive competitor there, and it will continue to be. This is academia, not a country club.
This is true. Athletes have to be at least as good as the average student; at HYPS then can be substantially worse.
I’d put the education at UChicago above the Ivy’s actually.
1 Like
The post you are referencing said Chicago was test optional 3 different times within the post and discussed TO relevance on stats. There is no need to remind me that Chicago is TO. Regardless of whether some people were surprised that Chicago admitted 1 student with an ACT/SAT of 20/1020, it’s still only 1-2 students. A common theme of this thread seems to be listing stats for a ridiculously small sample, then suggesting that ridiculously small sample in some way provides evidence of something in a large group. 1-2 students is not a good evidence of recruited athletes being accepted “without stellar academic chops.” Or if you meant non-athletes in spite of replying to a post about recruited athletes being accepted “without stellar academic chops”, then 1-2 students is not good evidence for non-athletes as well. The 25th percentile scores are more representative of typical lower stat admits and they are tremendously higher – 34/1510 in the current class and 33/1490 before going test optional.
“Brain or braun,” why is being a student-athlete boiled down to a binary choice? Why can’t they be both? There are college applicants that desire to be both. Get their college degree and they ply their athletic skills in college and maybe even professionally.
1 Like
So would I. And I can confirm/correct some of @1NJParent’s thoughts on curriculum at UChicgo vs. some those peers. The basic pre-med track at Columbia, for instance, is less rigorous than at UChicago (that’s no slam on Columbia - it’s just one school I’ve looked at in particular, and UChicago’s pre-med is particularly challenging). UChicago’s Core is also more intense and more comprehensive than Columbia’s and I believe it takes up more of the requirements to graduation though someone is welcome to correct me there. H and Y indeed run at a slower pace generally and have a more flexible curriculum allowing for the selection of easier courses for those who wish that. Not sure about Y, but for some majors it’s easier to get into an “honors” version at H than to be granted that distinction at UChicago. H’s culture is also far more nurturing and interventionist about helping you select a concentration.
Regarding STEM specifically, can’t speak to Cal-Tech but MIT does NOT have “more rigor” than UChicago unless “rigor” is defined solely by the number of STEM courses taken. That’s a mistaken notion. Most students gravitate to degree programs that make the best use of their abilities; for some STEM-oriented kids, the heavy emphasis on critical reading and writing at UChicago would be not only a real turn-off, but a real struggle. A better comparative metric would be the academic aptitude (measured by the standard HS metrics and supplemented by outside indicators such as AP, subject tests, academic competitions, and so on) of those kids coming in to both schools and how much time they spend in coursework relative to other things once they matriculate. By that metric, knowing kids of relatively comparable aptitude at both places, we have seen no difference. Both groups show up to their respective first choice, and both spend a lot of time doing what they love doing once they get there. Both round out their studies with clubs and other activities, but that doesn’t take the place of their academic pursuits. Both schools have a reputation of being grueling and even a hellish experience. The one main difference might be that the student culture at MIT is more competitive and at UChicago it’s more supportive/“we’re all in this together” - but that’s only what I’ve generally heard. The students at UChicago are quite kind to one another and that has to help.
There is evidence that UChicago’s academic talent at the highest level of study is increasing - they may not get the same number of genius kids as does Harvard, but that has less to do with the admissions practices and more with the unmatched resources of Harvard. When it comes to the average kid at both, ED simply hasn’t compromised quality, per the available stats and course. In terms of intellectual ability, UChicago should NOT have a broad distribution, especially at the lower end. Harvard is a different school that looks for leaders of all types and all academic inclinations, and finds a place for them. UChicago’s purpose in offering an undergraduate education is very different from that, and the College uses more narrowly-defined criteria for admission even despite their efforts to broaden and diversify the student population. You simply must have a strong and intense desire to devote a LOT of time to your studies. Not only is that necessary to do well, but if you don’t have those attributes, you can easily get into trouble.
If we’re selecting top private high schools, in the SF Bay Area, how about the college destinations of Harker (Saratoga) Graduates from 2018-2020:
Cal (UCB) 41
Stanford 23
USC 23
UIUC 22
Harvard 21
CMU 21
NYU 20
Chapman 19
MIT 15
Duke 14
Penn 13
SCU 13
UW (Seattle) 13
UCLA 13
Chicago 13
Columbia 11
Cornell 11
Purdue 10
Mich 10
WashU 9
GT 8
Georgetown 8
UCI 8
Princeton 6
etc. That list is pretty top heavy with engineering schools. In the SF Bay Area, there’s going to be locational differences, like College Prep in Oakland and Harker in Saratoga.
The totals listed above are not yield rates. Instead you are dividing the class of 2020 matriculations by the 5-year total matriculations, then for some reason you are ranking according to the number of matriculations in 2020, rather than larger sample of 5 year matriculations.
Number of matriculations from prep school kids does not “show how much more popular UChicago is throughout California than the other schools.” Instead it suggests a disproportionate number of kids from the listed prep schools attend Chicago. One can speculate why this relationship exists.
For example, the fact that Harvard does not appear in the top 10 does not indicate that Harvard-Westlake kids hate Harvard, making it an unpopular school. Instead I’d expect the opposite relationship is true – Harvard is very popular among Harvard-Westlake kids. I expect plenty of Harvard-Westlake kids applied to Harvard, but Harvard probably only admitted ~5 kids that year, so they only had 5 matriculations. If Harvard had admitted a larger portion of applicants, it’s a safe bet that the number of matriculations would have a corresponding increase.
If you look at the full class population, both Harvard and Chicago get a similar portion of their class from CA . Specific numbers are below for the most recent year in IPEDS – 12.0% at Harvard vs 12.6% at Chicago. The overall % from CA is similar, yet certain private prep schools have more from Chicago. It’s possible that the two colleges have different degrees of preference/penalty for private prep school kids, such as not wanting to admit a dozen students from a single class at a particular HS. Or it’s possible that the selected schools are cherry picked to show high Chicago numbers and are not representative of all private prep schools. There are many possible explanations.
Portion of Class from California
Chicago – 12.6% from CA
Harvard – 12.0% from CA
Stanford – 38% from CA
1 Like
If you think MIT is less collaborative than UChicago, you’re simply mistaken. MIT, as well as Caltech, is far more collaborative among its students. The notion that these schools are “intense” so they must be competitive is plainly wrong. Homeworks at these schools are designed to be worked on collaboratively (exams, on the other hand, must obviously be taken individually). Another misperception about these two STEM schools is that they have few requirements in humanities courses. The opposite is true. Their requirements in humanties are actually more numerous and broader than other general-purpose schools, while their rigors in STEM courses in most disciplines go meaningfully and significantly further. Since they’re primarily focused on STEM, their offerings in humanities certainly aren’t as deep as the top general-purpose schools.