Does Chicago win head to heads vs any Ivys?

[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.

1. Admitted one dumb athlete with sh*t scores
2. Pitch thousands of gullible status-obsessed rubes on how any joe blow can get in + 100% financial aid if they write super quirky essays

LOL!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

1. Admitted one dumb athlete with sh*t scores
2. Pitch thousands of gullible status-obsessed rubes on how any joe blow can get in + 100% financial aid if they write super quirky essays

LOL!

I have to ask well why you went on TWO tours if obviously your opinion is so low and sounds like your kid had sub par scores based on the judgemental tone? BTW, my kid and friends did compares and the only commonality they could discern in their stats were very unusual essays.
Also, athletes aren't provided much if any leeway in admissions. In case you missed it, most of the teams are far from stellar. "Dumb" athletes need not apply.

Harvard must be really low in your book. They have the highest number of ring toss apps.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

1. Admitted one dumb athlete with sh*t scores
2. Pitch thousands of gullible status-obsessed rubes on how any joe blow can get in + 100% financial aid if they write super quirky essays

LOL!

1. Admits a bunch of brainy jocks who have their priorities straight, enjoy their sport in college, and leave well-prepared for rewarding careers.
2. Admits a potential Einstein, despite his GPA, along with a diverse group of kids with mediocre SATs but obvious promise in a particular field.

Most live happily ever after. Every few years one strikes it rich and is deeply grateful to the school that took a chance on him or her. Meanwhile the first group becomes part of a pool of reliable annual givers. And some from each group become artists or academics and contribute to the school's rep as a good place for intellectual types. (And every few years one famously goes over to the dark side and makes you regret that particular admissions decision).

If you're looking for something rare or unconventional, you cast a wide net, signal what you're looking for, and develop ways to assess/identify it in the admissions process. Historically, the essays were useful in that respect.

[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.

Literally no one is buying that Chicago is a top 3 school. Top 5 are HYPSM everyone knows this. Chicago is comfortably top 6-10 along with Columbia, Penn, Caltech and either Duke or one of the other ivies depending on who you ask.

[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.

Chicago's yield is not comparable even to other elite schools which do ED. Chicago accepted over 75% of its class through EA/ED1/ED2 (over 60% ED reportedly). The rest of the non-HYPSM elites accept 40-55% of the class with simply ED. There is no comparison. The only elite that uses these gimmicks is Chicago.

[Anonymous]

The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?

I would LOVE if the U of C hater poster did an AMA about how Chicago burned him.

It's like... this thread does not deserve to exist in the first place because, as the first PP said, WHO CARES but then it just... keeps... going.

[Anonymous]

+1. Hater's gotta hate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?

Oh- I've got it.

Her cookie cutter smart rich kid cast a wide net when applying for schools and mom expected him to get in, with awards and fanfare, to every university he applied to. Only the University of Chicago rejected her son outright. What right does this inferior school have to reject her special Pookie?? The nerve!!!
A pox on those bad people forever!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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.

Literally no one is buying that Chicago is a top 3 school. Top 5 are HYPSM everyone knows this. Chicago is comfortably top 6-10 along with Columbia, Penn, Caltech and either Duke or one of the other ivies depending on who you ask.

I think that you'd have to be clinically deranged to spend time trying to parse the rank ordering of the top 10 colleges.....just batshit crazy. I would hope that you approach the rest of your life with better perspective.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?

Oh- I've got it.

Her cookie cutter smart rich kid cast a wide net when applying for schools and mom expected him to get in, with awards and fanfare, to every university he applied to. Only the University of Chicago rejected her son outright. What right does this inferior school have to reject her special Pookie?? The nerve!!!
A pox on those bad people forever!

I'll show them! I'll trash the school on DCUM at every possible opportunity! Then they'll know the huge mistake they made in rejecting my darling! Mwahahahaa.

[Anonymous]

NP. Why is this thread still going? OP’s initial premise is laughable. The haters and the boosters are clearly idiots. Is this another example of DCUMers’ love of a good fight and drama?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:
Literally no one is buying that Chicago is a top 3 school. Top 5 are HYPSM everyone knows this. Chicago is comfortably top 6-10 along with Columbia, Penn, Caltech and either Duke or one of the other ivies depending on who you ask.

Penn and Duke have a more traditional college vibe. Columbia and Penn are more prestigious.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:NP. Why is this thread still going? OP’s initial premise is laughable. The haters and the boosters are clearly idiots. Is this another example of DCUMers’ love of a good fight and drama?

OMG...it almost died and then you woke them up from their nap.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:NP. Why is this thread still going? OP’s initial premise is laughable. The haters and the boosters are clearly idiots. Is this another example of DCUMers’ love of a good fight and drama?

OMG...it almost died and then you woke them up from their nap.

Sorry!!! In my defense, it was only at #3 or #4 down the list and I didn’t check the time of the last post.