At highly selective colleges, placement tests are often an indication of high rigor courses, rather than a reflection of a weak study body. When you have highly rigorous courses at well beyond standard HS level, then not all students are going to be equally prepared. The college insures that students from relatively weaker HS backgrounds have a chance to be successful by giving them a chance to catch up in a different track. Once they catch up, they move to the standard track for the more rigorous sophomore+ year courses.
For example, Caltech and MIT are probably the 2 colleges in the United States whose incoming class is best prepared for highly rigorous freshman math classes, yet both Caltech and MIT require all students to take their own math placement test. Does that mean Caltech and MIT students are weaker in math than students from other colleges who do no not require a math placement test? Or does that more suggest that Caltech and MIT have an especially rigorous math curriculum and want to insure that students from not as rigorous HSs have an opportunity to be successful in such a challenging math curriculum?
Maybe. But once I received a B++ on an art history paper so I suppose anything is possible. By the way, the “+” didn’t make it onto my transcript; I don’t think my college’s grading system had an ability to translate that.
I don’t know how data driven their process is, but my suspicion is that their process is more “high touch”. They’re in a position to do this because they only need to send out a few hundred acceptances every year. Test scores were just one data point, probably a relatively minor one in their situation. They were more likely used just as another confirmation signal.
Ah yes. But that’s the ethos for good or ill. By the way, Northwestern/Weinburg requires 45 credits to graduate and most take four courses nearly every quarter, per our campus visit a few years ago.
There is an easier way.
This fall, along with the new nine-week quarters, UChicago will also add a new optional “Sept-Term” allowing students to arrive on campus early (or do a short Study Abroad once that opens up) and take one course at an accelerated pace. At least that was part of the new announced plan this time last year. Haven’t heard anything more since it was to unfold in Sept. '21 and all was announced before the pandemic hit. But anyway, assuming that everything goes forth as originally announced, then that gives everyone additional options to spread their schedules out beginning in second year. First years will not be allowed to do Sept-Term probably because it conflicts with their orientation, but they can probably scale down their course loads should they wish to knowing that they can always make it up later with two or three Sept courses.
And then, here’s the secret no one tells you: you are allowed to bring in up to 400 credits (4 courses) via AP/IB and so forth. Requires top scores, of course, but many bring some or all of this extra cushion in. Oftentimes it can’t be used because there are too many courses you want/need to take in order to meet your goals. My two kids are a great example, and neither is a hyper-competitive student quadruple-majoring in anything (although they know of several who are LOL). By the time you finish up your core or meet the three-course requirement or take all the courses you want to . . . using up those extra AP credits seems like a waste of an opportunity. But, if you can bring them in, they are there for you.
I see these as sensible ways to “de-stress” the schedule without holding anyone else back.
A Northwestern course is normally 4 quarter hours according to Courses and Credit < Northwestern University , unlike Chicago courses being considered 5 quarter hours. So Northwestern courses are “smaller”, but students take more of them (minimum of 45 = 180 quarter hours). If Chicago required the equivalent amount of credit to graduate, it would require 36 courses = 180 quarter hours, but it requires 42 courses = 210 quarter hours to graduate.
I think one of the big differences between the UChicago Core and other Colleges gen Ed requirements is how much they sell it. It is difficult to have any conversation without a mention of the Core. The video that is playing in the admissions office talks about the Core. The supplement to the magazine we just got in the mail is called The Core. This year even housing was influenced by the Core. They grouped people in the dorms by the Hum class that they are taking. Most colleges don’t even mention gen Ed requirements at an information session. At UChicago you can’t get away from it.
I’d take such conversions with a grain of salt. While a document may say all Chicago classes are 5 quarter hours, that doesn’t mean that all courses require exactly 5 hours per week of work. I expect that there will be a huge variation between different classes. Similarly while a document may say typical Northwestern classes are 4 quarter hours, that doesn’t mean all NU courses require 4 hours per week of work. There will also be a huge variation between different classes. I also wouldn’t trust that it means the averages will be 5 hours, 4 hours, or whatever. Some colleges will dramatically overestimate or underestimate actual hours to varying degrees for a variety of different reasons, so I wouldn’t even trust that the college that says their classes have more quarter hours per 4-year degree actually requires more hours per week of time than the college that has fewer quarter hours per 4-year degree. This makes it very difficult to convert units from one college to another.
Comparing the material covered in different classes may be more meaningful. However, even then, there are often large differences in how rigorously a particularly topic is reviewed or how much work/studying is typical among 2 colleges that both include the same topics.
A few colleges publish material in which students specify typical hours per week for specific classes, which may be more useful. For example an analysis of the hours per week for different types of courses Harvard students listed in the Q guide is at Analyzing the Harvard Q Guide. Harvard Course Ratings | by Fleija | Student Voices . It looks like students reported an average of 6 hours of work per week per Harvard course. This seems reasonably consistent with the senior survey in which Harvard students reported an average of 34 hours per week on academics.
However, there were some courses in the Q guide in which students reported far more or less than the 6 hour average. For example, students reported an average of >30 hours per week of work for CS 161 = Operating Systems. It looks like CS classes in general tend to have high workloads at Harvard, with an average reported workload of ~10 hours per week (9 hours per week per average of all CS classes, 11 hours of week per average of all reporting students taking CS classes) .
Interestingly enough, every year one or two sections of “Intro to the Humanities” which focuses specifically on "writing "- although they insist that this is not a remedial course - shows up at pre-reg time. It’s one of the core Hum sequences listed. And every year they decline to enroll anybody and end up cancelling it. It’s always been a mystery to me why it never fills or why they offer such a small number of sections in the first place. I’ve always assumed it actually was for those who were not as skilled in or familiar with the humanities and needed something basic. There are no placement tests, but if there were a core Hum equivalent to 130’s Calc, Intro to the Humanities would probably be it.
There is relatively little ability to account for differing and even disparate skill sets in these particular sequences. However, the College’s own writing program - a required supplement to core Hum - probably helps even the field by the end of the sequence. Also there does seem to be “common knowledge” among the student population that certain sequences are just less demanding (although they are still loaded with work) so students might be self-selecting into the sequence that meets their needs. For instance, if you want to replicate the “fun comes to die” experience and read several hundred pages every week, you will probably select Philosophical Perspectives, Greece and Rome, and Human Being and Citizen. Those are known to attract the die-hards. If you want to get through Hum with the least amount of pain, you might select another three choices. Theoretically, it’s possible to end up in a sequence you just didn’t want and didn’t register for. But it’s rare (and, I suspect, might result from clever attempts to beat the algorithm at its own game, rather than simply following the directions and recommendations for selecting your courses). So in short, analytical reading and writing ability differences might just take care of themselves with the type of Hum the matriculant selects into. People still struggle, but that’s because core Hum is still challenging, even if you are in an “easier” version of it.
I do believe that the College weeds out the bad writers with the Uncommon Essay. There are many aspects to it that would suggest it might be the only writing “placement test” the College needs.
Oh interesting - this is insightful. How are you coming up with conversions to quarter hours for UChicago? I’d never seen that before. Is it something people are estimating online or did I miss something in the catalog? Do you know Stanford’s quarter hour equivalent, by any chance (sorry if you posted and I missed)
Edit/update: Nvm. Found them on the registrar page for both universities.
This is true. And they used to have a big portion of the admissions website devoted to the Core. Nondorf cleaned it up when he moved in but before that it was like a tome.
What about the (likely) large proportion of applicants who get professional help with their essay? AOs can not generally discern the difference between applicants who wrote essays on their own, or with the help of an English teacher and/or other professional, or at a summer college essay writing course.
Even some of the the low-SES Chicago applicants receive essay assistance via the thousands of CBOs across the country that shepherd low-SES students through the highly selective college admissions process. Not to mention all of the websites/books with specific examples of how to write U Chicago style essays.
I don’t doubt that Chicago essays are very meaningful to the admissions review process, but much of the weeding out probably happens more due to treatment of the subject/fit of the essays vs general writing ability.
I too think it’s problematic to use admission essays as indicators of students’ abilities to write. How much help an applicant had in writing, even the authorship is sometime uncertain.
I just went to Caltech’s website to look up its writing placement test. I didn’t find the actual test but found its instructions and stated purpose. It appears to be broader and deeper than my original reaction on the test to @JBStillFlying when she raised the question. It’s required of all incoming students and those students have a fixed window to complete the writing independently in adherence to Caltech’s honor code (violations of the honor code is considered among the worse offences a student can commit at Caltech). Now I’m wondering if other colleges have similar type of writing test for their incoming students.
Yes, converting each university’s credit system to the typical credit-hour system makes it obvious why Chicago seems to have a higher workload (because it actually requires more course credit to graduate than most universities, and because the only course load options for each term are a standard load (3 courses = 15 credits) and an overload (4 courses = 20 credits)*) and why some course sequences at Chicago cover material faster than at other universities (because they are sequences of 5 credit courses instead of the more usual 4 credit courses at other universities).
*In contrast, a student at Northwestern can take a light full time load (3 courses = 12 credits, the minimum to be full time for financial aid purposes), standard load (4 courses = 16 credits), or overload (5 courses = 20 credits). Northwestern also says that it has some courses with different amounts of credit, so there are more possible credit/work loads per term. At some other universities, there is more variation in credit per course (from 0.5 to 6 credits, for example).
I agree. These credit hours are only useful as a very rough indicator within the same school. Even within the same school, the actual amount of work can vary dramatically. The better method is to look at course reviews by students, if available. Comparisons between schools based on credit hours are highly problematic, if not impossible. I wouldn’t trust those comparisons. Besides, what’s point of these comparisons? When I compared courses across different schools with my S a few years ago, I never paid attention to those credit hours. Different schools have different metrics.
Actually, the definition of a credit hour is 3 hours of work per week, including in-class and out-of-class time. The standard load of 15 credit hours (to complete the minimum needed for a bachelor’s degree in 8 semesters or 12 quarters) is supposed to represent 45 hours of school work per week.
Obviously, there can be workload/credit variation between courses at a college, and between different colleges. However, a college that makes all of most its courses 5 credits is presumably targeting having “larger” courses than a peer college that makes all or most of its courses 4 credits.
I’d give more weight to in-class time. It may be a better indicator than credit hours. Out-of-class time is likely an estimate and it depends on so many other factors.
The essays probably function in two different ways at Chicago. The trivial one is that they are a form of test of writing skills in the mundane sense of correct punctuation, word usage, sentence construction and so on. I quite agree that these things can be improved, cleaned up, or outright rewritten by other hands than the student. For that reason I doubt that a show of adequate skill in that department counts for much in admissions. Highly inadequate skills probably do count against admission, however, inasmuch as any kid who doesn’t care enough to get these things right, with or without help, will be doomed at Chicago.
The message is given often and strongly at Chicago that writing matters. Nondorf has said it in the most explicit terms. We hear it anecdotally over and over again on this forum. That message (together with the additional effort involved in crafting a Chicago-style essay) probably deters would-be applicants who doubt they have writing skills. Sure, some will attempt to cheat, but those that do must be in a minority and within that minority many will be smelled out (Nondorf says they can always do this). It would be dangerous to attempt this for another reason: the reward of success will be coming to a school where real writing, not the ersatz kind, matters. These cheaters would be true imposters, not merely the faux-syndrome kind. That must give them pause.
The more important point about a Chicago-style essay is that an effective one will capture some mixture of the spirit of aspiration, argumentativeness, originality, creativity and perhaps a few similar virtues that this school really cares about in a student. A lot more is at stake than commas and semi-colons. These intangibles of spirit are going to be harder to fake than grammar. They will be sui generis to each successful applicant, not reproducible from style manuals. They must be demonstrated and not simply prated about. Middle-aged parents who might be tempted to try their hands will have to have the genius of a Shakespeare to create the speech and thought of their 18-year-old kids. Parents with the lack of integrity that this implies would surely lack those skills and would surely tip their hands. Anyone who has read much student writing knows this. In the Admissions Office I reckon they get to be pretty good at it.
I agree with much of this especially the points about content and fit. But, getting professional help on essays is not cheating, from HS GCs and English teachers, to hiring private college counselors, applying for various CBO programs, or participating in summer essay writing programs…students are encouraged to seek out this help.
I agree that AOs are likely to spot a parent written essay, but doubt there are many parents writing essays like Chicago’s. It’s much more difficult for AOs to discern whether a student had professional help, and to what degree. Some professionals are incredibly facile at directing students in college essay writing…cheating? Nope. An advantage? Absolutely.
Most AO’s can spot an essay that received professional help over and above an appropriate set of eyes. UChicago’s Uncommon Essay prompts are odd enough that any such help would need to be in crafting the essay itself, not in the subject. Grown-ups have a different voice than a high school student, and a grownup who writes won’t be able to avoid their own style emerging if they meddle too much. My guess is that admissions offices see a lot of professionally-crafted essays in general, and see a lot more where the parent has been a bit too enthusiastic with that red pen. Admissions directors have always warned against it. While it’s possible that the next generation of college consultants are “unfairly” dinged from Elite U because their essays read like a professionally crafted piece, it’s not very likely.
I’d venture that UChicago isn’t looking for the “best” essay. They are looking for the “best” potential. Who knows their criteria. But the essays are Uncommonly important. And I’d put money on them dinging a majority just for not answering the prompt. It’s their #1 piece of advice. When you show up, you have to answer the prompt a bunch of times, so starting with the admissions essays is an easy signal as to fit.
Getting help with your admissions essay is encouraged. Someone who takes the written word seriously should never turn in a first draft. You just have to make sure it’s your essay and not someone else’s; that they have provided advice, not a re-work of your essay. Once students arrive on campus, there will be a ton of resources to advise you on your academic writing, and getting help is a sign that you’ve taken the endeavor seriously. The applicant who loves their work will never allow someone else to butt in. But they will seek out competent advice.
It’s a delusion to believe that a well trained and practiced professional writer can’t replicate the voice of a 17 year old. Assessing a student’s fit based on the stories in the essays that may or may not be genuine and how well s/he writes based on the qualities of the writings that may or may not have been professionally assisted is neither reliable nor fair to all students.