In my opinion, all of them are well-written (I’d have given up by now if I didn’t think so), but I’m wondering if the topic areas are UChicago-y.
Common App: I explain a parable that instilled in me a strong perspective on problem-solving and a time that was challenged. In the end of the essay, I apply that parable in a new way that eventually solves my big problem.
Supplemental: I chose the paradox question. I explain how my paradox is that my first language is Japanese despite my appearing and acting very white. My parents didn’t push me to keep in touch with that culture as much as other first-generation Americans’ parents would, but I chose to pursue re-learning the language and keep being Japanese as a part of my identity.
Why UChicago: Basically, I love learning, the campus, and the political institute they have.
My “favorites” paragraph should come across as more intellectual since I’m talking about how I love Shakespeare, the aesthetic of old books, and my favorite political jokes and 2016 candidates. My biggest worry is that none of my essays are very philosophical or showcase my academic curiosity much. I think those elements are subtle in my essays and my transcript, but I’m worried I should be more explicit in expressing it. Thoughts?
Having done a FERPA request on my admissions files last spring, I can confidently assert that admissions weights the “Why UChicago” essay very heavily in determining fit. Remember to show, not tell - use your past experiences to explain your love of learning, and connect that to why you would love being a part of the academic community that is UChicago. Talk specifics about the university as well if there’s anything of interest to you (like the IOP), but that’s less important than demonstrating how your love of broad based learning and liberal education shows through your life experiences.
What do you mean, about “having done a FERPA request”?
FERPA is a Federal regulation recently invoked recently to allow admitted students to see their admissions files.
@ramboacid – so were you admitted or denied admission based on that question? In a holistic process it seems difficult to deduce how much weight a single component has in admissions decisions based on looking at only one application. That particular component could be the main strength or weakness of a specific application (or the one noted in the file vs. say, acceptable but not exceptional stats) rather than a voting issue more generally.
Obviously, pay attention to every component of the application and do each as well as you can isn’t bad advice, but I don’t think you can assess priorities or weights from the info you have. And “fit” may come down to the Why Chicago question in some cases (e.g. if other essays didn’t demonstrate it), but not in others.