Would you like the university to become more prestigious?

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
21

<p>I agree with you, uchicagoalum. As long as we maintain our academic standards, we should be a school open to anybody and everybody who wants it. My brother, an Ivy grad, went to school for four years without writing a paper or going to the library, and personal experience tells me that a lot of my high school classmates, as high-performing as they are, would rather do something else than work if given a structure where the grades came pretty easy for them. These students don't apply to Chicago and at least for now, I don't think they will, even though the school is gaining more mainstream appeal.</p>

<p>A lot of my "power" or "careerist" friends are also intensely involved with their academics. I've tried to point out on other threads that being highly motivated career-wise is an independent variable from being highly motivated academically.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I really don't think that allowing students to justify their matriculation decisions is an excuse for polluting the academic environment.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Students don't make their decisions about college in a vacuum. They are pushed by parents (many of whom are footing the bill), friends, college guides, this website, etc. etc. etc. etc. The better the reputation Chicago has among the public, the more parents and the public and such can ooh and aaah over Chicago.</p>

<p>Quick anecdote: I have a friend who ultimately was between Chicago and a tippy top LAC. Ended up choosing Chicago, and I have a feeling it was due it no small part to his mother's glowing about the "Harry Potter feel" and the "academic prestige." Parents are very influential in the college decision-making process, and as they want the "best" for their children, and not necessarily what their children want, they are even more interested in "expert" sources like rankings.</p>

22

<p>
[quote]
I think MIT, which does get a lot of students identical to HYP especially outside of the physical sciences, already embodies the success of this model.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem here is that I don't think MIT has the prestige to be a rival to its HYP counterparts. Most MIT/HYP cross admits would take the latter course, since the HYP name generates a lot in comparison with MIT. And considering the fact that there aren't many people out there who would gain acceptance at MIT and then be rejected by HYP, MIT really has never served as a backup school. I think that even if we increased our prestige, we would be a backup school for HYP, and people would settle on "second-rate" prestige. (Face it, we'll never be as prestigious as HYP.)</p>

<p>Although I do get what you're saying, uchicagoalum, I do have my own problems with your theory from anecdotal experience. I know people who do really well in their core sequences even though they hate them, as they simply want a high GPA, and these are the same people who tend to bring down the academic environment. They stay over summer so they can "get their Core classes over with", and they complain at meals when certain members of the house won't persist in talking about academic subjects. They completely take away the soul of the academic atmosphere. Just because they're "successful" in the school really means nothing.</p>

<p>
[quote]
I trust the admissions office, overworked as it is, to be able to sort out those who truly have a passion for what the school represents rather than be interested in it solely for the prestige factor.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem here is that time and time again, we've seen undeserving people get admitted into the school. We already have a handful of student thieves, and plenty of people who don't care about anything but getting a degree and getting out of here. High school students can put on quite a show; anyone can, really. You can't really tell how a person is from a few sheets of paper, and it's really not hard to make your application into representing something that you really aren't. No matter how good an admissions office is, they are unable to see some very valuable information, and thus they can often screw up on decisions.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Students don't make their decisions about college in a vacuum. They are pushed by parents (many of whom are footing the bill), friends, college guides, this website, etc. etc. etc. etc. The better the reputation Chicago has among the public, the more parents and the public and such can ooh and aaah over Chicago.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yes, but this works both ways. The better reputation our university has, the more applications from people uncommitted to academics. Do you think that there was ever someone who got into Harvard but really didn't want to go to Harvard, but was forced to by his/her parents? Of course there have been instances of this. A whole lot less for Chicago, most likely. If our prestige grows, this will become more commonplace.</p>

23

<p><a href="Face%20it,%20we'll%20never%20be%20as%20prestigious%20as%20HYP.">QUOTE</a>

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>Says who? Face it, the average Joe is a being who gets most of his information about education and academia from the media. Our media tends to focus on HYP and the like when describing crem-de-la-crem academics. If you mean prestiege as in public awareness, you're probably right.</p>

<p>On the same token, someone who graduated from MIT in the tech/math division would probably get many more oohs and ahhs from someone who actually knew their schools. Face it, MIT has surpassed the 8 in tech related areas.</p>

<p>Vague wishes aren't my style. If I wanted UC to become more prestigious, I would actively work towards that goal as one of its students. A univrsity acquires reputation from its students, NOT from the amount of money it has (although the two are often positively correlated, success tend to equal money and that tends to equal generous school donations). When UC starts admitting careerists they'll lose the students who actually go out and become senators, scientists, authors and the like.</p>

<p>"Ask not what your country can do for you, but what you can do for your country." The acceptance letter isn't 'Yeah give us your money and show up' it shows that the adcom saw some promise and dedication in you.</p>

24

<p>
[quote]
not all Duke students are out doing a headstand on a kegger; involvement with clubs, special events, free reading and so forth are enticing).

[/quote]

Yep. After spending several hours working in the lab and then doing ancient lit readings, this Duke student spent most of his night attending the showing of an award-winning documentary attempting to reconcile religion and homosexuality. Roughly 300 of his fellow students also attended.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Would you like the university to become more prestigious?

[/quote]

I can only answer this from a prospie's POV, but I would say no. I've consulted several profs about my grad school plans, and virtually every single one has highly recommended Chicago (including profs abroad). Seems pretty prestigious to me!</p>

25

<p>
[quote]
Says who? Face it, the average Joe is a being who gets most of his information about education and academia from the media. Our media tends to focus on HYP and the like when describing crem-de-la-crem academics. If you mean prestiege as in public awareness, you're probably right.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, considering the context (we're talking about the pressures exerted by one's parents/friends and their effects on matriculation), yes, I am speaking of prestige in the plebeian arena. The University of Chicago already has a reputation as a top-10 (maybe even 5) university in the academic world.</p>

26

<p>It's prestigious among the people who matter. Does saying that make me pretentious? God, I hope not. I don't even care any more. Whatever.</p>

27

<p>"It's prestigious among the people who matter."</p>

<p>I'd express it as 'among people who have an (academic) clue'. Unfortunately, this isn't everybody, which means that, to exist in the real world, you need a dollop of phuriku's plebian prestige.</p>

<p>If you are comparing Harvard (a very fine institution) with Chicago, Harvard does have more name cache and 'plebian prestige', even in the midwest. However, among non-academics in my area, Harvard is considered more elite as well as more <em>elitist</em>, so there is a perceptual downside to the spotlight.</p>

28

<p>
[quote]
I know people who do really well in their core sequences even though they hate them, as they simply want a high GPA, and these are the same people who tend to bring down the academic environment. They stay over summer so they can "get their Core classes over with", and they complain at meals when certain members of the house won't persist in talking about academic subjects. They completely take away the soul of the academic atmosphere. Just because they're "successful" in the school really means nothing.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I don't know anybody like you described, phuriku, which isn't to say that such people don't exist, but rather that if they do, they're avoidable. People who aren't interested in academics are not going to enjoy this school, end of story, and I like to spend time with people that enjoy themselves, whether academically or not. </p>

<p>What I will say is that this year's incoming class seems a lot more well-rounded than last year or the year before's incoming class. The kids are still smart and academically motivated, but they were also the captains of their high school cheerleading teams and were student body presidents. They're somewhat more fashionable, and to anybody seeing them as they walked down the street, they'd appear normal in every way.</p>

<p>When it comes down to it, the reason I chose Chicago was I felt that this place would be the easiest school for me to be myself-- I'm very happy naturally, really into academics, not into oneupmanship of any kind, somewhat introverted at times, champion of long, pointless, ridiculous conversations. I felt like this was a school where, if I wanted to, I could go to class without brushing my hair, go to the dining hall in my pajamas. go to parties without dressing up, and where I could get some work done in the library on a Saturday without feeling like an incredible loser. This is a great place for all those things, and more.</p>

<p>I absolutely believe I made the right decision for myself, but I'm not about to say that I don't think I would have been able to find my geek counterparts at other schools, even if those other schools are <em>gasp</em> normal.</p>

<p>Sometimes I think that we as Chicagoans tend to be a little too self-righteous about who and what we are.</p>

29

<p>Look, Chicago was founded less than 120 years ago, near the tail end of a wave of ambitious private academic reform that gave us Cornell, Stanford, Carnegie Mellon, Rice, and Vanderbilt, too, among others. Harvard will celebate its 400th anniversary in our lifetimes -- "first child of their wilderness, star of their night", it predates the establishment of all but a handful of North American municipalities. Chicago has an impressive endowment of about $6 billion, which is about 1/6th of Harvard's endowment. (And the difference is more pronounced than that. Harvard doesn't own a money-sucking hospital, and Chicago does.)</p>

<p>So, yes, there are factors that will probably ensure Harvard's relative prestige advantage for generations, absent some really incompetent leadership. And not only among the know-nothing plebeians -- tenure at Harvard is about as close to godhood as academia offers (although Chicago seems to be able to guarantee an eventual Nobel Prize to its economics faculty).</p>

<p>Meanwhile, at the sub-HYP level academic prestige has been pretty dynamic during my lifetime. When I was in high school, Stanford wasn't really comparable to Harvard et al., and Duke was not that distinguishable from Vanderbilt or Tulane. Washington University and Northwestern were good regional schools, with little national draw. Dartmouth was a clear #4 in the Ivy League, a place students with a choice frequently chose over HYP. And you wouldn't believe the emotional effort it has taken for me to accept that you have to be smart to get into Williams or Hamilton now.</p>

<p>From my vantage point, Chicago has held its own perfectly well. I saw it as roughly equivalent to Columbia -- a place for eggheads who wanted a core curriculum, top faculty, and a real city, and who didn't mind hard work and some iffiness about the neighborhood or the amount of fun available on campus. And that's pretty much where it stands today. Which is fine.</p>

30

<p>Every now and then I wish the name got out there......like today, I went to see my guidance counselor-She had an application for some full-ride scholarship and asked if I was interested. She asked if I was admitted anywhere and I said University of Chicago (I pointed at the Chicago hoodie I was wearing and cheesed really hard). She said "It wouldn't happen to be predominately black, would it?"....I said no....and then she said "oh.....so you're sure Chicago University is where you want to go?".........................O_o WHAT THE CRAP?! who says "Chicago University" anyways?!?! Nobody at my school has any idea about Chicago. Whenever I'm asked the college question, I say University of Chicago, and then five minutes later (If I don't get the "oh....." dazed look), they'll say: "So where are you going in Chicago?"-GUH! Chicago is my top choice and is the only school I applied to....which probably wasn't very smart, but I adore UC. Sometimes I wish that people would appreciate how awesome Chicago is and how difficult it is to gain admittance. A lot of people think its just some state or community college....and then I have to mercilessly correct them. It's not that I love to talk it up or anything...it's just...frustrating. I said Chicago 9 times in this post...now 10. Always good to end with an even number.</p>

31

<p>The academic strength meets prestige of UChicago aside, (which I would agree with JHS is basically identical to Columbia and in my book a very respectable second to HYPSMC), there is a bigger issue going on for Chicago as the composition of its UG body changes (which is what phuriku is alluding to as I understand it). Even if the school has a curriculum and policies that gear students towards being rather intellectually involved, there is still is room for students to define themselves significantly on the side through their extracurricular activities. Increasingly, the lounge culture of the U of C, the idea of spending a few hours just throwing around ideas, is giving way to the “organization kid” who just does not have time as discussed in the article linked to below.
The</a> Organization Kid
Frankly, I straddled both sides at the U of C. I spent my first two years very much involved in the “life of the mind,” but through no structured organizations as that is how the life of the mind necessarily works. I genuinely liked it, and really thought it was a pleasant respite from the rigors of the school’s coursework (which took up the remainder of my time as I was a hapless chap with the ladies). However, after going two summers without a meaningful internship as a direct result of having no extracurriculars, I sucked it up and got on board with the whole personal planner culture (I even spent $450 on a fancy palm pilot). Before I knew it, I really didn’t have time to waste in the dining hall, but I did have a much more solid resume and eventually a great summer gig. All in all, the tradeoff is kind of crappy I suppose, but it one that students have to face and decide what matters to them. I guess what is unique is that Chicago is one of the only elite schools, save perhaps Cal Tech, where the majority of students still prefer the former compared to the latter. However, those days seem to be numbered, since society definitely values the latter.</p>

32

<p>Your guidance counselor doesn't know what the University of Chicago is? That's... kind of pathetic. (Looks like someone doesn't have the qualifications for the job.) Even my ex-guidance counselor at an extremely urban school was pretty thrilled when he found out I was going there.</p>

33

<p>uh, my guidance counselor almost frenched me in the guidance office when i told her. in front of like 5 60 year old secretarie.</p>

34

<p>My guidance counselor didn't know either. She also didn't know what Wharton business school was...</p>

35

<p>Lord have mercy</p>

36

<p>
[quote]
I think we already have an example present where Chicago has become prestigious. I'm talking about economics, of course. And look at what's happened in that department. A lot of the econ majors really don't care about the education they receive here. They just want to get out of here with a prestigious degree and get a high-paying job.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>You made quite the leap from the prestige of UChicago's graduate econ program (which is filled with future Nobels and has one of the most competitive admissions rates for any institution in the world) to the prestige of UChicago's undergraduate econ program (which doesn't even have a separate admissions process from the college). The undergrad econ dept. has only benefited from a halo effect from the grad econ dept.; it is fairly equivalent to all other top ~10 econ programs. </p>

<p>
[quote]

If we become more prestigious, this will be the same for any field, and we'll have a bunch of academically non-committed students (we already have enough as it is)... which is exactly what we've been trying to avoid.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Yeah, I'm sure the classics dept. will be swarmed by aspiring i-bankers. [/sarcasm]</p>

<p>I think previous samples would lead one to believe that if there was a large influx of career-minded students, they would gravitate towards "career-oriented" fields (i.e. economics, etc.)</p>

<p>
[quote]

Although I do get what you're saying, uchicagoalum, I do have my own problems with your theory from anecdotal experience. I know people who do really well in their core sequences even though they hate them, as they simply want a high GPA, and these are the same people who tend to bring down the academic environment.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I hated the core (for the most part), but I still worked hard, because I wanted a high GPA, and I held out the vain hope that I might actually learn something of value in the liberal arts tradition. What are people like me supposed to do? Stop going to class and fail out? No thanks, I'll stick it out to the end, and give the University the benefit of the doubt, even though it has ultimately failed to inspire me. </p>

<p>Although the pure academics are the heroes of the university, I don't think it is the careerists who are its real enemies, but the elitist sophists who claim wisdom as an esoteric, Straussian knowledge--revealed only to a "select few." Unfortunately, the University is full of these types.</p>

<p>
[quote]

They stay over summer so they can "get their Core classes over with"

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Again, that describes my situation well. I took Western Civ over 1st year summer & Core Bio over 2nd year summer, and this has enabled me to get these worthless, watered down classes out of the way so that I can take as many real courses as possible during the school year.</p>