<p>I plan on applying to both. Which school is more selective?</p>
<p>Even with stellar stats, both are difficult to get into-and depending on your major can be even more so. IMHO-they are very different environs (weather not withstanding).</p>
<p>Both are rigorous and selective to gain admission. Both have different environments. Choose which school offers the best social and academic fit.</p>
<p>Admissions can be very random. Chicago has a tendency to send more kids to PhD programs, while Northwestern seems to tend to manufacture more entrants to the workforce. Northwestern also seems to value well-roundedness (including athletics, etc) while Chicago seems to value academic curiosity (think pragmatist vs. renaissance man). This is just based on observation, I don’t have experience in either admissions office.</p>
<p>Once you accept a place at either school, the on-campus environment is going to be very different, depending on your major. What are you planning on studying?</p>
<p>Ravenclaw and Gryffindor (or maybe Slytherin 
): Which is harder to get in to?</p>
<p>Though less humorously, NU is statistically harder to get into, but that numbers may belie the truth.</p>
<p>The valedictorian at my daughter’s high school did not get into Northwestern. She was waitlisted at the University of Chicago, then offered (and accepted) admission off the waitlist. I don’t know any statistics but that’s the only classmate who applied to both schools.</p>
<p>I say Northwestern because I believe the school takes more factors into consideration than U of Chicago does.</p>
<p>Umm. I got into Northwestern but was rejected from University of Chicago, and my essay for U.Chicago was pretty awesome. But then again, I didn’t send in a rec from a math/science teacher like they asked… Haha. I didn’t realize this until later. :]</p>
<p>I got into Northwestern with a sub-par essay and no external recommendations (other than those from my teachers). I actually decided to apply there 2 hours before the deadline. I spent days on my UChicago essay and sent a stellar rec from a professor I interned with and still got rejected. I’d say UChicago is harder to get in.</p>
<p>depends on each students’ strength i think more than what one has half-assed or whatnot. Effort counts of course, but either way I would believe admin officers are good at figuring out what kind of student they’re dealing with for each applicant. I myself got rejected from Chicago, got into NU, but reasonably so given my desire to do film/tv. a have a friend who got accepted at UChicago and rejected from NU, even though his grades/scores were wayyy superb. He’s planning on Premed.</p>
<p>As far as the difference, here’s the feeling i get:</p>
<p>u of chicago is more suited for the super studious, academically geared student, who still participates in clubs/organizations etc, but really has an intense focus on studies/classes… pretty big on academia basically. If you’re comfortable in academics mainly, as my friend is, UChicago should be nice. northwestern is for the type who invests in activities and classes a little more evenly i think. Plus a really strong arts/theatre program; if you’re academically inclined but really into the arts, NU is probably better.</p>
<p>just my two cents from researching the two colleges since sophomore year and obsessing over applications for the past year. i can’t say anything more since i’ve only just got through the application process a couple months ago. good luck</p>
<p>aabbccdd- In my experience, the personal essays that are just thrown together rapidly, if you’re a good writer, are better for college admissions than the ones that are polished to a mirror like finish. Most kids seem to kill off any contamination of themselves in their essays through excessive editing.</p>
<p>At our high school, which is very well regarded and places kids in almost all of the best schools nationwide, both are considered the province of only the top students, but I have seen kids get accepted at Chicago (RD) after having been rejected at NU (ED). Hardly a scientific sampling.
But more importantly, why do you ask? They are both top schools, but many would say that they are not equally suited to the same top students. NU is a happier and, to my mind, more well balanced place.</p>
<p>deeefinitely chicago</p>
<p>Northwestern used to be much more competitive, but they’re now about equals with NU having a slight edge. beware of UChicago students who post on this forum from time to time who have some vendetta against NU. All my UChicago friends tell me we’re more social, a bit more intelligent, and are better-looking to boot (girls especially), and many are jealous of us for that.</p>
<p>In terms of baseline stats for entry (SAT scores, grades, etc.), these schools are now roughly equivalent. In the past, I think NU was traditionally more selective, but they now boast similar accept rates (around 25%) and similar yields (around 35-40%). The best way to distinguish the two, however, comes down to this:</p>
<ul>
<li><p>For U of C, the main rubric used to select students is this –> how much would the faculty enjoy teaching this particular student? It’s a bit more of the European model, where students are chosen based more on their academic promise (as seen through grades, essays, etc.), rather than their well-roundedness. </p></li>
<li><p>For NU, the traditional ivy league model of admissions applies. This means, well-roundedness matters because the school is not necessarily looking to produce the future academics, but the future leaders of society. So the school cares more about stuff that connotes leadership - being captain of a soccer team, etc. Moreover, the school needs to appeal to more constituencies (sports teams, alum from the arts/theater school etc.), so they have a more varied admissions process. </p></li>
<li><p>Final note, be aware that the U of C recently appointed a brand new admissions dean (who spent his formative years in Yale’s admissions office), and many assume the school will focus more on the “big numbers” approach to admissions. Chicago’s president, Robert Zimmer, has already approved of a plan that would see Chicago receive thousands more application in the future. This means, in the next 3-4 years, expect applications to increase substantially. Zimmer, from what I know, has kind of an elitist air about him (coupled with a Princeton pedigree). I think he is aiming for Chicago to be more traditionally elite (like, say, a Princeton), rather than just an academic powerhouse. Put another way, Zimmer wants Chicago to have more social cachet. One good way to do this is to present the appearance of hyper-selectivity (as most of the Ivies, Duke, etc. do). So, in the next 3-4 years, expect the acceptance rate to drop to around 15-18%, and don’t be surprised if Chicago goes to ED rather than Early action. ED is a great way to give the appearance of a higher yield (and schools like Princeton, Dartmouth, etc. love it). I’d imagine applying to Chicago for the class of 2016 would look quite different than it does now. Maybe a 16% accept rate, and, through ED, a 55% yield. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>That’s a big change from the 26% accept rate, 38% yield Chicago sees now. I’m expecting that increase in selectivity to slowly change the way Chicago’s perceived. In short, it will get more in line with the Dartmouths and Dukes of the world, rather than being seen as a more particular sort of school. </p>
<p>Nevertheless, expect Chicago to approach admissions in kind of the current “oxbridge” way –> academics are still paramount, but other factors such as leadership, ability to show balance, etc. will matter more. Note that I distinguish the current oxbridge way from the ivy model on admissions because, in England, scores and grades are still by far the most important factor, whereas in the states, other abilities can really compensate for lower academic abilities.</p>
<p>^^ I don’t think that Princeton loves ED that much. I thought they dropped it a few years ago.</p>
<p>WCASParent - my mistake, Princeton did indeed eliminate early decision a couple years ago. Schools like Dartmouth, Duke, etc. still rely on early decision quite heavily. </p>
<p>Also, if I remember correctly, there was a study done on how Princeton modulated its admissions criteria to ensure a high yield despite dropping early decision. I can’t remember the study off the top of my head, but I believe it asserted that Princeton admitted more of the students just below the Harvard/Yale level to ensure that it would most likely grab those students.</p>
<p>UChicago will need to change its character a lot to see massive increases in applications, but I suspect students, faculty, and alumni will take issue with that.</p>
<p>…bump please</p>
<p>brebeuff - I actually don’t think Chicago will need to change its character too much to receive a pretty big bump in applications. “Top” (read: very highly ranked) colleges are in extremely high demand now, and as many studies and books have shown, the admissions game and garnering applications is more about marketing than anything else. Even schools like Harvard recruit and market VERY hard. Look at books like Karabel’s The Chosen and “Shakespeare, Einstein, and the bottom line” for more info on this. </p>
<p>It’s not really a question about the character of the school, but the marketing and outreach the admissions office does on a year to year basis. Chicago’s new admissions dean, Jim Nondorf, was director of Student outreach at Yale, and I don’t think this is just a coincidence. Nondorf is known for his ability to drum up applications anywhere, and Chicago’s President seems to have hired him to do just that at the U of C.</p>
<p>Even in the past few years, as the new U of C President made big numbers admissions more of a core goal, Chicago has gotten a pretty big bump in apps. I think around 4-5 years ago, the school was getting around 8500 apps. This past year, the school received 13500 apps. Around a 55% increase in 5 years - without any tangible or known change to the basic character of the school - isn’t bad.</p>