<p>
</p>
<p>Academic Prestige =/= Social Prestige</p>
<p>Not to mention, there are plenty of people who’ve heard of a ton of schools who’ve never heard of U Chicago. Are you serious? The average Midwesterner probably couldn’t tell you the difference between U Chicago and UI @ Chicago. Outside of the Midwest, most people think U Chicago is a local city school, if they’ve even heard of it at all…</p>
<p>LOL I wasn’t talking about your average person on the street… Whatever, you just like to argue.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>lmao…dude, you’re out of control. </p>
<p>This was a reference to Andy Samberg’s popular SNL Mark Wahlberg skits. You should spend less time hyperventilating on the internet and more time watching TV.</p>
<p>In my Western New York city, when I was in college, most people hadn’t heard of Yale. Two 100% true stories:</p>
<p>– The people I worked with the summer after my freshman year in college finally got up the nerve to ask what was so wrong with me that I had to go as far away as Connecticut for college. One of them said that even his brother-in-law had been able to get into an adjacent county’s community college, and I couldn’t possibly be dumber than he. Had I maybe been a fugitive or something?</p>
<p>– The molecular-biology-major star quarterback of the Yale Ivy champion football team was from my city, too. A friend of mine met him when he chatted her up in a bar popular with Catholic high school jocks. He told her he went to Notre Dame. It so happened that she was one of about a dozen women who at the time was actually a Notre Dame student. (St. Mary’s did not have an engineering program, so even before it went co-ed Notre Dame allowed women to apply to its engineering program.) She had a great time forcing him to get more and more specific in his lying before finally calling him on it. When he fessed up, she told him she was way more impressed by Yale than Notre Dame. He said that he usually claimed to go to Notre Dame when he was talking to girls in bars, because none of them ever knew what Yale was. He got a lot more credit for being just anyone at Notre Dame than for being the Yale quarterback and a Scroll & Key member.</p>
<p>Anyway, the point is that “social prestige” is a pretty situation-specific thing.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I don’t watch SNL because it is no longer funny…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UChicago’s yield is roughly tied with the yield percentages at the top LACs, even those with great FA policies (i.e. Swarthmore). They both stand at around 40%. Are you now going to hold that the top LACs are backups for Ivy League students as well, or that they’re not self-selecting? I’m just curious, and I do think it’s odd that top LACs and UChicago (which is structured like an LAC) have such similar yields.</p>
<p>Prodigalson – you need to get out more. You obviously have a problem with Chicago, so go blow hot air somewhere else.</p>
<p>Actually, prodigalson, how about you just state the institutions (among the research univs, not LACs) that you see as the most prominent in the US? </p>
<p>I have a feeling your top 10 would include HYPS, Columbia, Brown, and Dartmouth, and that’d you place all these schools ahead of Chicago in terms of the “social prominence and selectivity” of these institutions. </p>
<p>While there has been a lot of vitriol directed toward Prodigalson, I have no problem with (for now) placing these 8 schools ahead of U of C according to the metric set out above. My only counterpoint to this, however, is that social prestige and prominence can be manipulated a bit more readily than resources and academic tradition can be improved. </p>
<p>So, while this may be, according to Prodigalson, an optimistic prediction on my part, I think Chicago can readily close the gap in the social prominence arena, and, again, be in the ball park of these other schools quite soon.</p>
<p>As I’ve said in other threads but will rehash here, for most of its history, Chicago remained bent on an academics ABOVE ALL ELSE mentality. The top ivies, on the other hand, focused much more heavily on realizing that schools were about MUCH MORE than academics, and the social status of a school was perhaps the paramount goal. So these other schools focused their energies on creating a power elite while Chicago feverishly looked to improve its research capabilities. This went on for decades until Chicago slowly began to change in the late 1990s. </p>
<p>As I’ve said before, the Chicago approach to higher ed has FAILED, and Chicago is now looking to reconcile its old view with the view taken by the top ivies for decades (or perhaps, even centuries). Luckily, Chicago has the resources and the clout to improve on this front quickly. Chicago has closed the gap in admissions quite rapidly (a decade ago, remember, Chicago’s accept rate was DOUBLE the rate at UPenn or Cornell, even), and I imagine it’s forseeable that Chicago closes the gap on the “social prominence” front. Remember, Brown was a backwater school back in the 50s and early 60s, but by the 1970s, they began to skyrocket in their social cache. Chicago, operating with even more wealth and resources and clout in some circles, could very well emulate that path to a certain degree.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I agree. I truly do believe that increasing the yield is Chicago’s foremost priority. The higher volume of EA applicants admitted this year demonstrates this. Also, with the far greater chances of receiving admittance through the EA program, I believe that this may also be an attempt to attract students away from the ED/SCEA programs of other schools. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This is true – even for students who are well-educated on Chicago’s numerous qualities. My only recoil with Chicago is its financial aid (since I come from a $40,000 per year family); therefore, I have pending admission decisions present at HYPS and Pennsylvania. Would I still have applied to other universities even if Chicago guaranteed an all-expenses-paid education? It is difficult to know exactly despite my enthusiasm for Chicago. Even if I am able to use any financial aid offers from those schools as leverage material for Chicago, choosing to attend Chicago over any one of those institutions is a very difficult decision.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Prodigalson is correct. Attendance at Chicago is not as socially prestigious relative to the top-tier Ivy League institutions. Even those who are acquainted with the academic rigor and intellectual stimulation of the environment will have qualms accepting Chicago’s offer if admission has been attained at any of the HYPS institutions. But financial aid, as idad affirms, is a significant factor for those not at the upper socioeconomic echelons and will be the main contributory factor if I ultimately do not attend Chicago in the event of an alternate acceptance.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Very well said!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Yes, I agree with your point. But to you truly believe that Brown and Columbia will achieve acceptance rates of 6.5% within the next couple decades? Demographically, considering that we are currently at a numerical crest, I believe that the acceptance rates will not plunge indefinitely or even asymptotically approach immovable low figures.</p>
<p>“UChicago’s yield is roughly tied with the yield percentages at the top LACs, even those with great FA policies (i.e. Swarthmore). They both stand at around 40%. Are you now going to hold that the top LACs are backups for Ivy League students as well, or that they’re not self-selecting? I’m just curious, and I do think it’s odd that top LACs and UChicago (which is structured like an LAC) have such similar yields.”</p>
<p>I think there’s some people who want to go to LACs, and others who want the ivy league. but i’m pretty sure for those that want the ivy league, but can’t get it, their backup option is LACs, even if they’re quite prestigious. i mean, who would go to Bowdoin in BFE, Maine, if they could get into Yale? or even Cornell?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Don’t over generalize. After S1 got an U Chicago EA acceptance, he ditched RD applications to Stanford and lower Ivies. Yes, if he had gotten into HYP, he would have chosen them over Chicago. But, by now, he and we are all VERY happy that he is there, not in any other school, for a variety of reasons. They are plenty of kids who turn down Ivies for other options, with or WITHOUT financial incentives. </p>
<p>In terms of social prestige and such, this is way over subscribed to also. When the Ivy and Chicago type kids look for their place in the world upon graduation, the kind of people they are likely to encounter know enough about the higher education world, and U Chicago, Ivies, and top public schools like Berkeley and U Michigan will be considered all highly respectable institutions. When S1 interned at a Wall Street firm summer before the first year at Chicago, he reported the reactions from senior executive officers when they heard that S is heading toward U CHicago in the fall. “Oh, where the fun goes to die!” And, this was said in a tone of “respect” (I guess academic equivalent to joining a Navy SEAL team: Gosh, I wound’t want that for my son, but more power to you if you manage go through with it)</p>
<p>Furthermore, internationally, Chicago is a much more respected name than any other American university except for HYP. I worked with a lot of elite international business associates: most of them have a lot of respect for Chicago (they were all very impressed when I told them that S is a student at Chicago). A lot of them have not heard much about the Ivies other than HYP. In a world we live in, international currency is something that cannot be easily dismissed.</p>
<p>I couldn’t care less if Joe Blow the gas station attendant at central Wyoming ever heard of U Chicago. Do you??? No offense for honest, hardworking people in those place. I am just using this as an example of somebody who S1 is not likely to work with or for, and someone who is very unlikely to have any influence over his success in life. </p>
<p>But, all this is pretty silly. I think top 50 or so American universities are all stellar institutions to get top level education from. I think Ivies are amazing schools. I also believe that it’s a really long shot that Chicago matches HYP in many aspects. But in things that matter to us, Chicago is actually a better deal for S1 than even these schools. Just personal preference - nothing more. I am sure others will disagree and will make a different choice, and that’s perfectly understandable. </p>
<p>Most of us with a skin in the game here about Chicago are simply happy that U Chicago, which has amazing academic experience to offer to its students, is getting better recognition. I don’t think folks on this board are out to conduct smear campaign against the Ivies. </p>
<p>I find it quite puzzling that some folks just can’t stand the idea of Chicago gaining a momentum. I see some posters who have nothing to do with Chicago are going forum to forum to put down Chicago, and I wonder where this passion is coming from??? If anything, I consider this level of anti-sentiment a real indication that Chicago is fast becoming an “it” school. Nobody would spend this much time and energy on a Podunk University somewhere they have nothing to do with, would they?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>My thoughts exactly. Frankly, these people are protecting their territory. They had no reason to criticize Chicago before because it was very unlikely that Chicago was infringing on their space. That attacks have begun is an indication that Chicago’s prestige is growing and is becoming a threat to schools it normally has not threatened.</p>
<p>Chicago has attained quite a bit of attention over its 42% increase. I see a lot of people on other colleges’ boards saying “At least the increase wasn’t as large as that at Chicago!” and a recent post on the Daily Princetonian referenced the Ivies and made a point to include Chicago in this group as well. It’s good publicity.</p>
<p>Good call, phiruku and hyeonjlee. I hadn’t thought of it that way.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>(I would argue that Cal Berkeley would exceed Chicago in the international arena. Having your name on the Periodic Table of Elements is kinda hard to beat.) But, assuming your post is correct, why did you have to…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>by the way, i still love chicago…it’s my first choice 
i just think that to some people chicago is a backup for their 1st choice, as are many other LACs</p>
<p>Wait wait - for what it is right now, Chicago’s yield really isn’t that bad at all. Yield right now is probably around 37%. There are really only a handful of schools (HYPS, maybe Columbia or Brown) that have an overall yield that’s much higher than 50%. I’d say Dartmouth, Duke, maybe one of Columbia or Brown all have overall yields (when not inflated by Ealy Decision) of maybe 45-50%. </p>
<p>Right now, with what is still a “where fun comes to die” reputation and a rep for being an intense, grind-it-out academic atmosphere, Chicago still has about a 37% yield rate. Say 5-6 years from now, as Chicago’s rep improves and word of mouth spreads, it’s not inconceivable that Chicago’s overall yield will be say, around 42-43% or so. </p>
<p>Chicago’s had a very poor reputation amongst 18 year olds for most of its history, and it’s yield right now is still around 37% - which isn’t really that far behind its most immediate peers. If Chicago’s rep and recruitment efforts improve (or really, Chicago STARTS to recruit as most schools do - Chicago’s never done this before), it’s conceivable the yield will rise a little bit, and Chicago’s overall yield will be quite comparable to most other places out there.</p>
<p>(I’m assuming stagnant growth in open-market yields for the other schools because, well, yield has remained quite consistent at all these schools for decades.)</p>
<p>Chicago stated they weren’t going to increase the number of accepted students. However, they increased the number of applicants by a huge, self admitted publicity campaign. 17 emails per student, and personalized letters touting the school’s merits. So they now have the pleasure of sending out more rejection letters. Let me see, does this make sense ? They are supposedly already happy with the quality of student they are accepting, all that malarkey about "self -selecting " , i.e., the ones accepted in last 4 years ( unless they want to turn around and say to the current classes that they are substandard ) , at the 28-35% admit rate. So why did they have to increase the number of applicants? Obviously, to increase their prestige, the university feels it’s the “poor cousin” of the ivies, and wants to buy a Lexus to show everyone up. </p>
<p>Only problem is, there will now be 10,000 more extremely disappointed applicants this year than last year…Chicago had NO intention of admitting ANY of these kids ( they said they’re not increasing their class size by even one seat )…this is no small matter…I know some kids were crying in the halls, don’t forget , these are very motivated kids, and when they each get 17 emails, and a personal letter touting the arts program, or Judaic studies program , there’s a certain level of expectation on the kid’s part, they develop quite a bond to Chicago. …and all for what,to get rejected just so Chicago can micturate in the tall grass with the big boys?</p>
<p>As a parent, I think this is despicable. At what price prestige? Too expensive for this parent.</p>
<p>And that 85th Nobel laureate of theirs ain’t exactly doing our country any favors anyway.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These two statements are not inconsistent. I never said ALL foreigners are in love with U Chicago. Of course, there are exceptions. Just like there are people who think XXX school is even better than Harvard, whatever, even though by all consensus HYP are the most prestigious institutions.</p>
<p>By the way, I noticed that you are coming and going between Parent Forum and U Chicago Forum to put down the school. You are quoting a portion of my post on the Parent Forum to dispute my post on the U Chicago forum. This takes some dedication and attention to detail, and some would say “obsession” and maybe even a sort of stalking. Why all this negative passion when you have nothing to do with the school? </p>
<p>It’s highly entertaining to see U Chicago to generate this level of negative passion among folks that have nothing to do with them. If anything, this is an indication that Chicago is fast becoming an “it” school.</p>
<p>I don’t know what the issue is, chicago is a great school, of you want to go there, and can get in, by all means go.</p>
<p>GoBlueJays, wow! your words are sooo true!
i’d never really looked at it that way, but now that I do, i don’t really want to go to a school that destroys hopes for the sake of prestige
perhaps chicago is not my number one choice…</p>