Why Chicago?

<p>As a current student here, and somebody who is prone to many doubts, I've been asking myself this question over and over again and I've never come to a satisfying answer, until earlier today:</p>

<p>I was thinking back to my junior year, when I was touring colleges by storm. I made a point of going on tours, even though all the tours began to sound like each other, and I went to all the information sessions, and there, too, it seemed like all the parents who asked dumb questions in the first info session traveled with me to ask the same dumb questions in the next one. I ate lunch in the school cafeterias; I walked around campus to get "feels" and "vibes," though I have to be honest and say that I didn't really get any "feels" or "vibes." I liked every school I saw, more or less, and I thought that I could make each one work for me.</p>

<p>At one school, I even went so far as to sit in on a class, because I had been told that the school was a good "fit" for somebody like me, who was both outgoing and nerdy, and who wanted both a campus and a city. (I would probably be better off keeping this school nameless, but for amusement's sake it was actually Northwestern). Northwestern prided itself on having strong professors and a committed student body, and certainly what I saw in the classroom was a strong professor and students committed to learning. I was even impressed by the way that different students had bonded with each other-- one girl, who looked like a supermodel, was chatting casually with an obese and greasy-haired guy, and the whole class seemed to like each other, the professor, and being there. It was cool.</p>

<p>This was a class on fiction, and the teacher offhandedly mentioned an Edith Wharton novel. She couldn't remember the name of it, but she started to describe it. As soon as she started to describe it, I heard myself mutter:</p>

<p>"Ethan Frome."</p>

<p>And with that, all the students in the class turned around to glare at me. It was clear to me that in this "relaxed" and "engaging" environment, I had broken at least four of the unwritten Rules of Academic Conduct. </p>

<p>1) Pretend you don't know any more than anybody else
2) This applies doubly if you're a visitor; triply if you haven't done the readings for class
3) If you're going to know something, make sure that it's important and relevant to class, not "random trivia" that's external to class (Ethan Frome wasn't assigned for the class, I had only known about the book because I had read it on my own).
4) Don't say anything that may be perceived as contradicting the professor</p>

<p>How "academic" was this environment, I wondered, if students were dumb about things that happened outside of class? How "open" was it if there was a standard of conformity and an agree-upon level of how much and how deeply students could contribute to discussion? This experience left me with such a bad taste in my mouth, that went I went to Chicago and saw students over-participating and over-arguing, it came as a total relief, unnerving as it was and unnerving as it can sometimes be, to suffer through a class with a "that kid," who uses big words for the sake of using big words and brings up points that are irrelevant and books and ideas that nobody else is familiar with.</p>

<p>I can't say that Chicago is the most wonderful place in the world or that everybody should come here; I can't say that all Chicagoans are blindingly smart or that all professors are shiny and engaging. What I can say, though, is that there is no Code whatsoever determining what contributions are and are not socially acceptable in a classroom. There's nothing wrong with talking about Karl Marx when you're drunk. This isn't to say that Chicagoans ALWAYS talk about intellectual things, but it's to say that they ALWAYS CAN. It's never a wrong time to bring academics up; it's never wrong to help a professor out by supplying the title to a book.</p>

<p>And I think it's that, that freedom, that warmth, that acceptance, that really has me drooling over being at Chicago.</p>

<p>:d :d :d :d</p>

<p>Good post. I think a lot of what you say is true in my experience, as well.</p>

<p>This is especially true:
[quote]
This isn't to say that Chicagoans ALWAYS talk about intellectual things, but it's to say that they ALWAYS CAN.

[/quote]
You phrased that very well. There were some posters on this board unhappy after the overnight because students didn't talk about intellectual things. Jack and I and maybe some others tried to explain, but you've described it perfectly and succinctly. </p>

<p>As long as you're not a "that kid," you are encouraged to talk in class (and out of class). This is also true for prospective students: if you can add to a class discussion, which would probably be a hum class and not a sosc class, it's fine to talk. I had a class during an accepted student overnight that had about ten prospies; after class, the professor congratulated us on creating an environment in which X number of prospectives contributed to the discussion. </p>

<p>The other thing is that normal conversation are often had intellectually. I overheard a discussion about a video game, and these two guys were discussing the possible impact on future games if a certain game was released before others or if the technology developed in a slightly different way and how production costs impact the games and how consumer expectations versus consumer desires impact new games. They were factoring in inflation rates when talking about the rising prices of games, even. Another time recently someone mentioned wanting to get drunk instead of doing their reading that night, and somehow that morphed into a discussion on how Kant relates to game theory. These are all very normal things to happen to daily conversations.</p>

<p>now now, theres no reason to taunt me</p>

<p>oh reachy dream schools, how i loathe theeeeeeee</p>

<p>good post, I notice these differences at my own school. It's funny because a lot of the kids that wear northwestern sweatshirts are just like the kids at northwestern that you described</p>

<p>Cannot a student be too argumentative? And challenge the professor too often? </p>

<p>More often than not, I don't like it when a student challenges a learned professor with a Ph.D at my institution (not Chicago). If it becomes a common occurence, it can detract from the intellectual atmosphere. Granted, that's largely because the student is usually wrong. But in any case, IMO, too many challenges thrown at the professor is a bad thing. It takes up too much class time and throws the professor off track. I think there is a fine line between positive challenges and arguments and negatives ones, between speaking out and biting the bullet and shutting up.</p>

<p>I have heard a Chicago student say something along these lines before, "Every class here always has one or two students who are always arguing with the professoer. In fact, this student has a name, 'That kid.' No one likes 'that kid.'"</p>

<p>Yeah, there are always some That Kids, and they'll always be contrary, no matter what. I'd rather be in class with a That Kid than somebody who didn't say anything any day, though.</p>

<p>

According to your description, the girl actually knew about the novel. How is she dumb just for forgetting the name? Forgetting happens to the best of us. Also, one's knowledge about names, places, things, etc. is dependent on different life circumstances that may lead her to know about one thing but not another. Perhaps her high school curriculum was different. Are you confident that your knowledge is the standard, whereby if someone doesn't know something that you happen to know, he or she is "dumb"? She probably possesses other academic knowledge that you don't.</p>

<p>
[quote]
How 'open' was it if there was a standard of conformity and an agree-upon level of how much and how deeply students could contribute to discussion?"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Are you sure the students were "glaring" at you in disapproval? How are the students pretending they don't know more than anybody else? This would require that you know what each student knows. Also, I'm genuinely curious as to how the students sustained the conversation. What was the topic and how was the conversation carried out? What ideas were introduced?</p>

<p>
[quote]
...triply if you haven't done the readings for class.

[/quote]

I've read Chicago students on this forum describing an unwritten rule applied by students who haven't done the required reading but are expected to contribute to class. Something along the lines of BSing their way through it. </p>

<p>
[quote]
If you're going to know something, make sure that it's important and relevant to class, not "random trivia" that's external to class.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I believe that students should bring up only the most relevant and important knowledge in class discussions so that others could get the most out of class time. If you want to ask a question that does not serve to accomplish the professor and class's goals, ask the professor outside of class. If the question improves students' understanding of the subject at hand and is clearly important (even if the connection is not outright apparent), bring it up. By definition, "trivia" are obscure facts that are often unimportant. As you know, mastering the knowledge process is more important than knowing obscure facts (good to know many of them, but one shouldn't be called "dumb" for forgetting the name of something)</p>

<p>Btw, if the girl was describing the Ethan Frome novel (which you say was brought up by the professor), then it wasn't external and not irrelevant. From which other examples did you extract the rule? How did the class react to the girl for describing what you perceived as external and "random trivia"?</p>

<p>What other contributions did you make in class?</p>

<p>
[quote]
What I can say, though, is that there is no Code whatsoever determining what contributions are and are not socially acceptable in a classroom. There's nothing wrong with talking about Karl Marx when you're drunk. This isn't to say that Chicagoans ALWAYS talk about intellectual things, but it's to say that they ALWAYS CAN.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You said "classroom," and yet you gave an example about a discussion outside of the classroom. </p>

<p>How are Northwestern students not able to talk about intellectual things outside the classroom?</p>

<p>I see your final point... my anecdote does not prove that Northwestern students are not able to talk about intellectual things outside of class.</p>

<p>(clarification: a professor brought up Ethan Frome, and none of the students knew the book/ felt comfortable enough to help her out. I don't discredit the Northwestern students' intelligence because they didn't know this book, that's why I categorized it under "random trivia." I know the post came off as if I was so ****ed off that NU students didn't know this book and I imagined that all Chicagoans did).</p>

<p>What DID bother me, though, was that it was somehow UNACCEPTABLE for me to have brought the title up. In other words, the classroom atmosphere was extremely strained, and students only said certain things when they thought it appropriate of them, and there was no real interplay, no real throwing around of ideas. I agree that students shouldn't knowingly subvert the conversation, but at the same time, making free connections (Marx's theories remind me of a Twix bar...) can be helpful for students and can, if nothing else, be incredibly amusing. That's why we still have the uncommon app: we don't care about "something important that happened to you," we care about how you connect ideas.</p>

<p>Maybe I should clarify my overall point, and I agree, it will never be solid enough for a courtroom. When I was in high school, things like this happened all the time to me. I'd bring up something about the book we were reading, and I'd relate it to another event, or I'd talk about how I scribbled out the outline to my 10-page research paper on a MetroCard, and people in the class would turn around and stare at me. I was having a good time in class; they were not amused. These were (in a large part) the same people who looked at the Uncommon App and wanted to cry/scream/ask why Chicago had to be so weird.</p>

<p>At Northwestern, I felt like it was high school all over again. I happen to think NU is a great place and I even thought, after this classroom experience, that the students were quite smart, but I didn't like that there were things that were appropriate to say in class and things that would make everybody stare at you.</p>

<p>At Chicago, there's really nothing you can say that will make people stare at you, either inside or outside a classroom. I needed a place where I could make my crazy analogies and I could tell stories and connections that I had to help me make a point and then take it further. I remember a student on the c/o 2011 uncommon app thread started a conversation by saying "I love Ann Coulter" and a bunch of students, who were hardcore liberals, started unpacking that statement. Who is Ann Coulter really, what is her job, and what does she mean to society?</p>

<p>unalove,</p>

<p>Great way to generalize based on ONE class! I am very impressed by how much you can theorize with so little substance--kudos to your SUPERIOR education at Chicago! We understand your real point: other schools are like "high schools" and Chicago is only real COLLEGE!</p>

<p>Sam--</p>

<p>I would be very much inclined to agree, but when you feel a whole classroom of eyes fall on you, the experience is not very welcoming.</p>

<p>"WHOLE classroom of eyes fall on you"--you've done a great job in dramatizing because from my experience, reminding professors names of formula or books... (in this case the name of the novel) is nothing unusual at Northwestern. It happens ALL THE TIME. Maybe AT THAT MOMENT, some students knew the name and just happened to think it's not THAT important whether people knew it or not. After all, if the name was so important, the professor wouldn't bring it up as she already knew she forgot about it. Are you sure people didn't "stare at" you because they thought you had your nose up in the air? Maybe they were a little surprised by a non-student contributing to the class? Never judge a school based on one class or one professor, let alone a "trivial" event like that which lasted for no more than 2 seconds.</p>

<p>If you're right, that's a good thing rather than a bad thing. I don't WANT Chicago to be the only place where students feel free to add to classroom discussion. And I apologize-- the post wasn't exactly meant to knock Northwestern, but rather to contrast Chicago with the other schools that are out there.</p>

<p>Sam, chill. Unalove was just describing a personal experience. She felt uncomfortable in one class at Northwestern, and said that this might be indicative of the attitudes of people at the school overall - that's it. I can't see the wild overgeneralizations that you're going bezerk over. Can you really say that you wouldn't be worried if you sat in on a class at a school you were applying to and something that happened made you very uncomfortable?</p>

<p>Jesus, she wasn't even knocking Northwestern - she even says that she still respects it as a great school. It's just one experience, one that she doesn't think would ever happen at UChicago.</p>

<p>This is especially funny in light of that "serchingon" weirdo who's convinced that UC students are the only one who go nuts if people criticize the school.</p>

<p>^^^ Relax jack. You do seem a little bit uptight right now at the insinuation of someone making a criticism of someone else ( that from where I am getting is part of the UChicago wagon)</p>

<p>Please, do not call me names. I do not want you to get kicked out for rude comments. You are in violation of TOS here. Keep it civil. Let's try to represent the UChicago with decorum and respect.</p>

<p>Yes, yes lets please keep it PG. "Weirdo" is much to harsh a word. Please watch your potty mouth Jack, or I'll have to report you!</p>

<p>Please, davnasca. It would be a shame to lose jack's valuable frequent contributions to the forum. I think that reporting him is unnecessary.</p>

<p>jack,</p>

<p>When you posted your message, I was swimming and sunbathing; I was pretty relaxed. Thanks for your concern. </p>

<p>Even the OP acknowledged he/she might have overgeneralized (post #13). If you couldn't see it or follow her/his post, that's your issue, not mine. Since when "describing personal experience" is immune to criticism especially when it leads to generalization that I know is not true? Your logic is kinda funny.</p>

<p>NU vs Uchicago. 3:00 AM. Garfield Station. No weapons.</p>

<p>Garfield won't know what hit them.</p>