Why don't ppl want UChicago to surpass HYPSMC sometime?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
21

<p>I think all these are great colleges, but some statements, such as the one someone brought up earlier [paraphrased] “why is Harvard no. 1 still with all its grade inflation?” is clearly misinformed. </p>

<p>1) As people have stated earlier on this thread, there are multiple rankings out there, and colleges generally place differently depending on how each factor is weighted (admission rate, standardized testing, yield rate, endowment, research authorships, etc.)</p>

<p>2) Just because Harvard and many other ivy league and top colleges have grade inflation doesn’t take any of Harvard’s credibility; it has the highest endowment of any colleges in the world, its research is undoubtedly world-class, alumni are very successful, professors are knowledgeable, etc.</p>

<p>3) UChicago and some other top notch colleges (such as Duke, Caltech, etc.) are great colleges, but one reason its undergraduate isn’t as renowned is because of endowment. You can argue all you that UChicago has a lot of endowment (which it does), but the fact the its undergraduate financial aid is not nearly as generous as schools like Harvard, Yale, and Columbia takes the chance away for a high yield rate (many high caliber students from middle class and lower class, if they get in say, Yale and UChicago, will choose Yale maybe solely for the fact that Yale gives a lot more money). I have personal experience on this; I got in UChicago and Columbia, and basically, at UChicago, I would be pay twice (not exaggerating) as much as I would be at Columbia, and that doesn’t even include the loans (Uchicago gives loans too but Columbia covers everything in grants, which you don’t have to pay back)</p>

<p>4) With that said, each school still has its own merits. For example, UChicago has more Rhodes Scholars than any other school, and its econ department is world class and definitely beats similar department in more “prestigious” schools like Stanford and Princeton. </p>

<p>5) Going back to the endowment issue, I hate to say this because I feel it makes everything shallow, but at the end of the say, endowment and how much money a school has makes so much difference. With a endowment that’s multi-fold Uchicago’s, for example, Harvard has the advantage in terms of research (which needs a crap load of money), attract the best professors/researchers (salary, grants, etc.), and, once again, many high-achieving students from middle and lower class families. Harvard can also give financial aid to international students (which is only offered by Harvard and Yale, last time I checked), which gives them a great advantage (more diversity, different perspectives, intl students bring connections and innovations from other nations, etc.).</p>

22

<p>Faculty salaries at Chicago are among the top in the nation. Further, Chicago’s ongoing expansion of its faculty by about 100 is perhaps unique in the nation. It appears that money for facilities (given the rate of new building) and faculty seems to be available. I recently attended a presentation about the new Molecular Engineering Institute. The goal is to raise $500 million for the institute buildings, equipment, and faculty (about 25). Money from the endowment is being used to launch it, and will be paid back from institute specific fund raising. (And yes, they are planning an undergraduate major.) </p>

<p>UChicago has incredible prestige in the academy and in business, the automatic respect, or perhaps admiration is a better word, its students receive for having attended is quite remarkable. S1 has found that his UChicago affiliation has opened many doors, and that he has been given opportunities not typical for his standing where he works because of it. He finds a particular respect from those from Ivy league schools who have said they consider Chicago to be America’s most rigorous and intellectual university. If that is its reputation, than I hope it continues as is, regardless of rankings.</p>

23

<p>I heard this same opinion from students at Pomona College (top 5 LAC) and Harvey Mudd (impressive engineering LAC, considered one of most rigorous schools along with UChicago, sometimes comparative to MIT, Caltech in education). Students believed UChicago was the quintessential liberal arts university, academically superior to some of the best schools, and highly acclaimed and recognized.</p>

24

<p>Chicago’s endowment is not that much smaller than Columbia’s (about 17%). If it is offering less attractive financial aid, it’s because of how it chooses to deploy the endowment, not its size.</p>

25

<p>JHS, Chicago is actually wealthier than Columbia since its endowment per capita is much larger.</p>

26

<p>Here’s my stance on this. I see each school differently not in terms of its endownment or acceptance rate or salaries. I characterize each school by the atmosphere, the style of learning, the kinds of students, the student life, and other “soulful” qualities like those. I don’t think many people choose Chicago because it is “not HYP.” Rather, they choose Chicago from their selections because Chicago is the type of school they want to attend through its “life of the mind”, Core, house system, etc.</p>

<p>So if Chicago ends up “surpassing” other schools in salaries, endowment, etc…so be it! I have nothing wrong with that! The University of Chicago is a distinct school with distinct culture and distinct academics. And that is what really defines a school.</p>

27

<p>[List</a> of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_colleges_and_universities_in_the_United_States_by_endowment]List”>List of colleges and universities in the United States by endowment - Wikipedia)</p>

<p>this is the size of the total endowment up to 2011. It’s not per student, but given that U Chicago is smaller than most of the peers, the relative endowment for U Chicago is probably higher than what the absolute number shows.</p>

<p>As it stands now, even at the absolute level, U Chicago is within top 10 (the state school numbers are PULLED numbers for the whole system: multiple campuses). For the average endowment per student, only HYPSM has a higher number. Whatever “perceived” gap in terms of fin aid between U Chicago and its peer schools such as U Penn, Columbia, Duke, etc is NOT due to the size of the endowment. Rather, it’s a matter of how they are deploying their resources. </p>

<p>It’s interesting that U Penn with Wharton school of business, a law school, a medical school, and engineering program has a total endowment that is only slight larger than that of U Chicago while their student body size is much greater than that of U Chicago. </p>

<p>So, allegedly pre-professional tradition of U Penn that allegedly produces A LOT more college graduates who are likely to have much higher earning potential is not translating into much more generous giving on the part of the alumni than those life of the mind type academicians that U Chicago graduates, so far, are likely to be found among more abundantly.</p>

28

<p>Whoever hinted that Caltech offers better opportunities for its undergrads needs to understand how horrible the undergrad program is at Caltech.</p>

<p>Those who look beyond prestige know to avoid Caltech for undergraduate degrees.</p>

29

<p>Because most of the people ive met from UChicago arent pretentious pricks that care about prestige.</p>

30

<p>OP, what does this mean? Care to elaborate? "I was choosing between Brown and UChicago too.</p>

<p>But UChicago forced me to turn down my offer because I accidentally went into the female’s restroom there. </p>

<p>Which says things about the administration there." I’m just a little confused as to what this means</p>

31

<p>

In my experience, this holds true literally.</p>

32

<p>The endowment is a big part of it. With lots more money, HYP maintains its building just a little bit nicer, offers scholarships just a little bit more and a little bit more often. People say but its only x% lower than X school? That’s exactly the point! If any of you guys took a class in econ, its in the margins where these schools are differentiated and superior funding will definitely put one school over another.</p>

<p>There’s no difference in faculty, because faculty are loved at UChicago. In fact professors would move to Uchicago from any HYPSM school in a heartbeat if the university offers them a position. Uchicago has that much cache in academia. The law and business schools are already on par with the other top schools, its just the college that needs catching up and it has done well over the last 10 years. And as the law and business schools show, it can be done. There’s still a lot of hand wringing, for example, everytime people talk of Booth as the Number 1 business school, a lot of people protest and mention HSW, but that’s becoming less and less so over the years. The way I see it is that Booth has to be better in all aspects than all of HSW to shut the whole cacophony of deniers. The college will have a harder time doing so with HYPSM but its doable. USNews already puts UChicago over Stanford and MIT this year. And as you all know, USNews affects the masses’ perception, and its effect nationwide. Keep that up for 4 more years, and drum up the Obama connection. Bring back all the people that Obama “borrowed” to run its adnministration into the Institute of Politics and into econ, business, and social work. Make a huge splash everytime some big name guy comes back home to UChicago and the momentum will be sustainable.</p>

<p>And yes, there is value in prestige. And no, UChicago’s unique culture will not be obliterated if it becomes more prestigious than HYPSM. People who claim that are just deluding themselves.</p>

33

<p>As someone that’s applying to several of these schools, I can say that the biggest draws towards UChicago for me was how Mr. Cudworth described it as a community moreso focused on learning than grades. Also… it reminded me a lot of my high school and it was in a city, which was another big draw.
Honestly once you reach above #30 or so I’m pretty sure rankings break down entirely and stop being important. I generally applied to the schools I applied to because I liked the coursework available at those schools in my major, not quite so much because of their rank.<br>
Also, keep this in mind. When UChicago surpasses HYPSMC, it’ll go through the same kind of sinking admission rates all of those other schools have (in fact, it’s there now… I’m so glad I’m applying this year as a senior and not next).</p>

34

<p>Number one, it’s never going to happen because those schools have way too much history (and much more money). Secondly, I think a lot of people believe that Chicago is resorting to cheap tactics like mass mailing to improve its reputation (a la WashU). This approach seems to be reaping returns in the short term, but it will likely prove to be detrimental to the university in the future. Chicago’s administration is willfully undermining the characteristics that made the university unique in the past. The students also appear to be becoming increasingly smug and conceited (in the past Chicago’s students were admired for their humility). The very existence of this thread proves that current students are less sure of themselves than their predecessors. Virtually every post on this forum alludes to some obscure admissions statistic (students in the past would have scoffed at something so trivial). There are posts where students are claiming credit for the Nobel prizes won by Lefkowitz and Kobilka (both of whom had virtually nothing to do with the UofC). It just seems like the university has completely lost its soul. This thread is also rife with misinformation. Chicago has nowhere close to the highest number of Rhodes scholars in the country (as someone in this thread mentioned). Patting yourself on the back is one thing. Passing off blatant falsehoods as the truth is quite another. </p>

<p>This coming from a prospective international applicant who has a tremendous amount of respect for the university and the educational philosophy that it used to represent.</p>

35

<p>kenyanpride: That’s cute, but your so-called respect for the university must have been founded on quite a bit of ignorance. Your image of what the school used to be is laughable misguided: 1) Students in the past were MUCH more insecure than they are today, 2) Caltech/Stanford are the same age as UChicago and MIT is close, and 3) past a certain $X billion, it doesn’t really matter what a school’s endowment is, esp. in relation to brand name, as marketing only costs so much money.</p>

<p>People like you are precisely the reason WHY the University had to change. Many people in the past (and you’re a great example) said they had great respect for Chicago, while also classifying it on a much lower tier than HYPSMC. In other words, they stated their supposedly great respect while in reality not having that great of respect for the school. You yourself just stated that Chicago is inevitably doomed to be inferior to HYPSMC (citing obviously wrong information in the process).</p>

<p>Now, the University has decided to move past the misguided opinions of people like yourself for a lot of good reasons, and has decided to invest its time and money in more productive endeavors, like establishing an Institute of Politics with David Axelrod at head, hosting Henry Paulson’s institute on campus, and being the frontrunner for Barack Obama’s presidential library. The fact that some people, most of whom lament the current state of Chicago because it’s more likely that their application will be rejected or because Chicago dares (and how DARE they!) to compete face-to-face with HYPSMC, is no longer a legitimate concern for the University.</p>

36

<p>kenyapride, this thread exists because IT IS RELEVANT to the actual US and World’s Universities rankings. In case you have not noticed as a college applicant , Uchicago is ranked #4 above Stanford and MIT in the US universities rankings, and #8 in the world rankings above some of this Universities includng Princeton. It is the ACTUAL situation, it is not created by some of the Uchicago’s students because an inferiority complex as you implied. I totally agreed with phuriku in the fact that some people, most of whom lament the current UCHICAGO status because is more likely that their application will be rejected, or was already rejected, and the others that can not accept that Uchicago is competing face to face and in some instances AHEAD with HYPMS, is indeed reason for an inferioty complex.</p>

37

<p>

</p>

<p>I do not feel for an instant that the USNews rankings affect the masses’ perceptions. The masses’ perceptions are formed by what constitutes educational royalty, a shorthand for “smart” or “made it” – which is why movies most often have protagonists with Harvard or Stanford or MIT connections. I have not yet seen anyone where the “Chicago” t-shirt in a mass movie, as the “Chicago” brand conveys completely nothing to a mass audience in comparison with the Ivy brand(s). Chicago people will insist on stapling the USNews ranking to their foreheads, and the “masses” will still react with an indifferent shrug. It simply is not a “name” that the masses associate with any shorthand or paradigm in the way that MIT conveys mathematical brilliance or Harvard conveys brilliance. To the masses, “University of Chicago” just means a school in a city, no different really than the “University of San Francisco” or the “University of Dallas.” If you have to keep explaining yourself, you know you haven’t arrived yet (at least in the heads of the "masses’).</p>

38

<p>KELLYBKK, It is indeed very ignorant and sad to categorized high education institutions by movies and the masses perception.EDUCATIONAL ROYALTY ??? Hahaha, excuse me but is funny. Uchicago is well know to the people that matters, academia , prospective employers, Nobel Prize winners and EDUCATED PEOPLE. in general. And the students of UCHICAGO do not need to stick any rankings in their foreheads, because anybody whom can read and think knows UChicago’s prestige, and position as one of the World’s Top Universities. this thread is about uCHicago competing face to face and in some cases winning in rankings with HYPMS. That is a fact, a reality . Maybe somebody sitting in a Walmart store cafeteria with a finding MEMO shirt does not that The Economist, Forbes, tops graduates schools, business schools, and law schools among others knows that. At the end of the day, that it is important. Educational Royalty…hahaha, it is so funny!!</p>

39

<p>@realeducation I think the whole point of the thread is to ask the question why don’t people want Chicago to pass HYPSM in prestige, because Chicago has already passed SM in rank, and it could be argued Chicago has a higher educational value than all of them. What’s left for Chicago to surpass them in? Prestige. How does a college get prestige? Name recognition. So yes, until the people of “Walmart store cafeterias” hear UChicago and don’t think state school, Chicago won’t be considered more prestigious than HYPSM.</p>

<p>Like you said, UChicago is known by people who matter in academia and the work-world. So is HYPSM, but they’re also known by the common man. That’s what HYPSM has on Chicago. They aren’t better schools (you could argue that they are, but not by much). So whats left for Chicago to pass them in other than common man prestige?</p>

40

<p>My question is thus:</p>

<p>Why does it matter?</p>

<p>I will grant all of you that Chicago is not as prestigious among the mass as HYPSM. However, we all know Chicago is a phenomenal school, better than HYPSM in many areas. Why do we care if some shmuck down at the deli is really impressed if we say “Yeah, I go to U of C?” Shouldn’t the prestige of those who count matter? Go to any professor at a top tier university and tell him or her you go to U of C and he or she will be impressed or at least aware of your academic ability. </p>

<p>It just seems like ego stroking which is quite unfortunate.</p>