Does Chicago win head to heads vs any Ivys?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

My understanding is Harvard's Z list was to sneak in a few hyper-rich kids. Chicago does this on a large scale to finagle admissions stats.

[Anonymous]

This Z list is known by different names but has been used by schools for eons. One of the ways that schools address summer melt among other reasons. I also don't see how any poster on this board would have any creditable idea of the extent of use by any school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

My understanding is Harvard's Z list was to sneak in a few hyper-rich kids. Chicago does this on a large scale to finagle admissions stats.

So it'd cease to be desperate and scummy if UChicago were smuggling in rich kids?

[Anonymous]

+1 PP - You have a terrific sense of humor. So enjoying this thread now.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

My understanding is Harvard's Z list was to sneak in a few hyper-rich kids. Chicago does this on a large scale to finagle admissions stats.

So it'd cease to be desperate and scummy if UChicago were smuggling in rich kids?

What kind of rich kid would ask their family to bribe them into UChicago? Daddy please pledge $2million so I can spend 4 years in the Chicago slums surrounded by neurotic passive-aggressive dorks. Just not realistic.

[Anonymous]

FWIW, for a variety of reasons (some within their control, some not) UChicago has had a hard time accurately predicting yield (preED) and predicting which applicant pools (postED) will contain the most desirable applicants. It has also been in the process of expanding its class size and has had difficulty predicting availability of beds on campus (the hope has been new dorms will keep undergrads on campus longer). One reason for late admissssions and/or required gap years is to deal with such contingencies. Another is probably financial. I think that the need blind policies essentially expire wrt admissions from the waitlist which, judging from CC, seem to be disproportionately full pay kids from feeder privates.

ED has made UChicago's yield stats meaningless for comparison with HYPSM and other schools that don't do ED. For the class of 2020 (pre ED), they were impressive -- 66% pre-summer melt, which was a bit lower than but comparable to Princeton) but not Harvard/Stanford impressive (81%).

Lots of kids who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting in apply to HYPS. So I've never seen % admitted as a meaningful measure of selectivity. I can see why UChicago's direct mail pisses people off, especially when the school doesn't interest and/or isn't within reach for their kid. That said, the mailings are weird enough and the application essays labor-intensive enough that I think there's truth in advertising there. Apps were down last year with the introduction of ED1/2 and my guess is they may drop further this year, given how hopeless RD seemed last year.

It does feel as if admissions is running bizarre game theory experiments and/or deconstructing the absurdity of the rankings system. I preferred the previous set-up (same as MIT), just plain old EA, secure in the knowledge that you offer a distinctive experience that will be attractive to the kinds of kids you hope to educate.

[Anonymous]

Well the most recent donation is $125M targeted towards cutting edge economics research, an applied economics incubator and financial aid. Somebody believes in them and the kids that will be participating in that research. BTW UChicago is one of the most beautiful campuses in the US and Hyde Park has been gentrified. You should visit sometime. Bon Appetite just voted Chicago Restaurant City of the year and that includes the neighbourhoods around the college.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Major Loss:
Harvard
UChicago
Stanford

Minor Loss:
Princeton
Columbia

Tie:
UPenn
Brown
Dartmouth

Win:
Cornell

Almost right, but Parchment is not 100% accurate. Princeton clearly wins by a lot. Columbia and Penn also win but less so. Parchment is heavily biased towards the midwest, which skews things in favor of Chicago.

Major Loss:
Harvard
UChicago
Stanford
Princeton

Minor Loss:
Columbia
Penn

Tie:
Brown
Dartmouth

Win:
Cornell

Sounds about right as far as general public perceptions are concerned.

All you UChi and Cornell ladder climbers: focus on yourselves more, and less on these shallow desigations. Will do you a world of good in the long run. I promise.

[Anonymous]

It's not just the marketing materials and game theory bullshit. I've been on two tours and both times they aggressively pitched parents on how 'different' they are; that they look beyond GPA and SAT/ACT. Both times they went way out of their way to highlight low SAT/ACTs that were admitted and are soaring. It's misleading bullshit to con kids that have no chance into applying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:FWIW, for a variety of reasons (some within their control, some not) UChicago has had a hard time accurately predicting yield (preED) and predicting which applicant pools (postED) will contain the most desirable applicants. It has also been in the process of expanding its class size and has had difficulty predicting availability of beds on campus (the hope has been new dorms will keep undergrads on campus longer). One reason for late admissssions and/or required gap years is to deal with such contingencies. Another is probably financial. I think that the need blind policies essentially expire wrt admissions from the waitlist which, judging from CC, seem to be disproportionately full pay kids from feeder privates.

ED has made UChicago's yield stats meaningless for comparison with HYPSM and other schools that don't do ED. For the class of 2020 (pre ED), they were impressive -- 66% pre-summer melt, which was a bit lower than but comparable to Princeton) but not Harvard/Stanford impressive (81%).

Lots of kids who don't have a snowball's chance in hell of getting in apply to HYPS. So I've never seen % admitted as a meaningful measure of selectivity. I can see why UChicago's direct mail pisses people off, especially when the school doesn't interest and/or isn't within reach for their kid. That said, the mailings are weird enough and the application essays labor-intensive enough that I think there's truth in advertising there. Apps were down last year with the introduction of ED1/2 and my guess is they may drop further this year, given how hopeless RD seemed last year.

It does feel as if admissions is running bizarre game theory experiments and/or deconstructing the absurdity of the rankings system. I preferred the previous set-up (same as MIT), just plain old EA, secure in the knowledge that you offer a distinctive experience that will be attractive to the kinds of kids you hope to educate.

It does feel like an experiment. We all preferred the previous set up because it was totally in favour of the kids and it asked for NO return commitment and allowed total freedom to apply elsewhere. I think though that sticking with EA when your liberal arts competitors are restricting choice, which essentially SCEA does since the RD round is useless at the elite level, probably doesn't make business sense. EA was certainly a high road but UChicago travelled that alone for a long time. Remember Harvard along with Princeton tried and promptly drew back the next admissions cycle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

My understanding is Harvard's Z list was to sneak in a few hyper-rich kids. Chicago does this on a large scale to finagle admissions stats.

So it'd cease to be desperate and scummy if UChicago were smuggling in rich kids?

What kind of rich kid would ask their family to bribe them into UChicago? Daddy please pledge $2million so I can spend 4 years in the Chicago slums surrounded by neurotic passive-aggressive dorks. Just not realistic.

A kid who decided to forego his multigenerational legacy at Princeton in order to SCEA Harvard, which turned him down -- as did YPS in the RD round. Now, faced with the horror and shame that would be Penn (shudder), he decides to go off the grid and settle for the #3 ranked school (tied with Yale) where he can cast himself as a maverick intellectual type while still hanging out with douchey Ec majors who are all headed to Goldman Sachs or McKinsey. Money well spent to preserve the family's honor! We're all allowed the occasional erratic genius, especially if he subsequently redeems himself by making tons of money.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:It's not just the marketing materials and game theory bullshit. I've been on two tours and both times they aggressively pitched parents on how 'different' they are; that they look beyond GPA and SAT/ACT. Both times they went way out of their way to highlight low SAT/ACTs that were admitted and are soaring. It's misleading bullshit to con kids that have no chance into applying.

Yeah, the real message should be if you're brilliant but suck at standardized tests, we aren't going to let a poor SAT/ACT score keep you out. So dazzle us with your essays, recs, and/or achievements. The "If you're brilliant" part is either unvoiced or unheard.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Major Loss:
Harvard
UChicago
Stanford

Minor Loss:
Princeton
Columbia

Tie:
UPenn
Brown
Dartmouth

Win:
Cornell

Almost right, but Parchment is not 100% accurate. Princeton clearly wins by a lot. Columbia and Penn also win but less so. Parchment is heavily biased towards the midwest, which skews things in favor of Chicago.

Major Loss:
Harvard
UChicago
Stanford
Princeton

Minor Loss:
Columbia
Penn

Tie:
Brown
Dartmouth

Win:
Cornell

Sounds about right as far as general public perceptions are concerned.

All you UChi and Cornell ladder climbers: focus on yourselves more, and less on these shallow desigations. Will do you a world of good in the long run. I promise.

It is unlikely that these designations were thought up by a UChicago proponent. Would you provide your credentials so we can assess the worth of your recommendation and promise? Thank you.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OMG how would any school know where else a student athlete committed. So I know that a very talented hockey player recruit was "stolen" by Harvard after an early commitment to Princeton. Does that mean all of Harvard is scummy and desperate. I don't think so...one never knows the situation of individual recruits unless you live it.

I'm convinced this thread was started by the UChicago denigrators so they would have a whole thread to spread their poison as if all the evils of colleges rest solely on Chicago's shoulders. Too bad they're too busy running their university to focus in on that huge responsibility. We should hijack this and make it funny as did the earlier poster.

No, the late admits and forced gap years teases out desperate and scummy admissions trickery to goose stats.

Harvard has late admits and forced gap years. That's what the Z list is.

My understanding is Harvard's Z list was to sneak in a few hyper-rich kids. Chicago does this on a large scale to finagle admissions stats.

So it'd cease to be desperate and scummy if UChicago were smuggling in rich kids?

What kind of rich kid would ask their family to bribe them into UChicago? Daddy please pledge $2million so I can spend 4 years in the Chicago slums surrounded by neurotic passive-aggressive dorks. Just not realistic.

A kid who decided to forego his multigenerational legacy at Princeton in order to SCEA Harvard, which turned him down -- as did YPS in the RD round. Now, faced with the horror and shame that would be Penn (shudder), he decides to go off the grid and settle for the #3 ranked school (tied with Yale) where he can cast himself as a maverick intellectual type while still hanging out with douchey Ec majors who are all headed to Goldman Sachs or McKinsey. Money well spent to preserve the family's honor! We're all allowed the occasional erratic genius, especially if he subsequently redeems himself by making tons of money.

With some college names switching around in the story, this is what actually happened to my kid's roommate! Parents keep asking her to transfer to the legacy school but she won't even apply. They are besides themselves. Meanwhile she's happy.