Why all the Chicago bashing?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

I think this is generally correct.

For those of us who are a little older, Chicago was always known as the "intellectual" school. We visited three years ago - and it still seemed like one of the smart schools. Good vibe. Smart kids. Generally very good professors. Tons of opportunities. Great city. Very nice campus.

But private school families seem to have some disdain for it. Personally, I think Chicago should embrace their roots and be the intellectual school, never mind the Sidwell and Dalton families. Chicago has raised their profile enough in recent years. They should remember their identity - and be the difficult, passionate, intense, nerd school that made Chicago Chicago.

No one has distain for it. Everyone thinks of it as a highly intellectual place.

We are simply saying (for the one millionth time) that Chicago routinely takes kids with middle-of-the-class GPAs whereas the other top15 schools do not.

At our school, college counseling will suggest Chicago as a sure-thing ED2 for any top kid who was rejected ED1/SCEA from another top20 school. They will also suggest Chicago for families who want prestige and/or a high academic school but have a kid without top grades. Scoir/Naviance do not lie. Chicago takes kids down to a 3.5 at our school every year. As such, it has lost some of it's sparkle. As the saying goes, "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member." Chicago suffers from some of this at top privates.

Again, that may be true at your private. Our DMV private sends 3-4 kids to UChicago (out of 80-90) every year. The students who are encouraged to apply are top notch. Last year, they were all in the top 10 percent of the graduating class, with average SAT/ACT of 1540/35 (per Scoir). The rest of the top ten kids get into Ivy Plus schools, so it is truly the case that the UChicago students self-select into applying there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

I think this is generally correct.

For those of us who are a little older, Chicago was always known as the "intellectual" school. We visited three years ago - and it still seemed like one of the smart schools. Good vibe. Smart kids. Generally very good professors. Tons of opportunities. Great city. Very nice campus.

But private school families seem to have some disdain for it. Personally, I think Chicago should embrace their roots and be the intellectual school, never mind the Sidwell and Dalton families. Chicago has raised their profile enough in recent years. They should remember their identity - and be the difficult, passionate, intense, nerd school that made Chicago Chicago.

No one has distain for it. Everyone thinks of it as a highly intellectual place.

We are simply saying (for the one millionth time) that Chicago routinely takes kids with middle-of-the-class GPAs whereas the other top15 schools do not.

At our school, college counseling will suggest Chicago as a sure-thing ED2 for any top kid who was rejected ED1/SCEA from another top20 school. They will also suggest Chicago for families who want prestige and/or a high academic school but have a kid without top grades. Scoir/Naviance do not lie. Chicago takes kids down to a 3.5 at our school every year. As such, it has lost some of it's sparkle. As the saying goes, "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member." Chicago suffers from some of this at top privates.

Again, that may be true at your private. Our DMV private sends 3-4 kids to UChicago (out of 80-90) every year. The students who are encouraged to apply are top notch. Last year, they were all in the top 10 percent of the graduating class, with average SAT/ACT of 1540/35 (per Scoir). The rest of the top ten kids get into Ivy Plus schools, so it is truly the case that the UChicago students self-select into applying there.

p.s. At our private, it’s Dartmouth, Cornell and UPenn that take middle-of-the-GPA-distribution kids, not UChicago.

[Anonymous]

We went to visit University of Chicago and Northwestern on a recent college trip. We all loved Northwestern and all disliked Chicago. The vibes were very different. Chicago felt a lot less fun, for lack of a better word. The campus was beautiful but strangely depressing. All that being said, the reason I give Chicago the side eye is because of their ED games. It just seems like cheating/gaming the rankings. I don't know of another school in the top 25 that plays the ED game to that level. They only do it because they KNOW they can't possibly be the first choice of the majority of these candidates and their yield would be garbage if they had to rely on regular decision to meaningfully fill their class.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We went to visit University of Chicago and Northwestern on a recent college trip. We all loved Northwestern and all disliked Chicago. The vibes were very different. Chicago felt a lot less fun, for lack of a better word. The campus was beautiful but strangely depressing. All that being said, the reason I give Chicago the side eye is because of their ED games. It just seems like cheating/gaming the rankings. I don't know of another school in the top 25 that plays the ED game to that level. They only do it because they KNOW they can't possibly be the first choice of the majority of these candidates and their yield would be garbage if they had to rely on regular decision to meaningfully fill their class.

Here is a different perspective. During junior year, we visited NU and UChicago. DC loved UChicago and hated NU (we, the parents, liked both). DC thought NU looked too preppy and pre-professional. Was excited to write the quirky essay and got in early. Yale was only other school under consideration. After writing a pros and cons list, DC decided that UChicago was a better fit (including on location preferences). Grateful that ED is an option, so that DC can be done early and enjoy senior year.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:We went to visit University of Chicago and Northwestern on a recent college trip. We all loved Northwestern and all disliked Chicago. The vibes were very different. Chicago felt a lot less fun, for lack of a better word. The campus was beautiful but strangely depressing. All that being said, the reason I give Chicago the side eye is because of their ED games. It just seems like cheating/gaming the rankings. I don't know of another school in the top 25 that plays the ED game to that level. They only do it because they KNOW they can't possibly be the first choice of the majority of these candidates and their yield would be garbage if they had to rely on regular decision to meaningfully fill their class.

So... why did you bother visiting the campus? Was it because you respect their results even while you wonder over their methods?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

I think this is generally correct.

For those of us who are a little older, Chicago was always known as the "intellectual" school. We visited three years ago - and it still seemed like one of the smart schools. Good vibe. Smart kids. Generally very good professors. Tons of opportunities. Great city. Very nice campus.

But private school families seem to have some disdain for it. Personally, I think Chicago should embrace their roots and be the intellectual school, never mind the Sidwell and Dalton families. Chicago has raised their profile enough in recent years. They should remember their identity - and be the difficult, passionate, intense, nerd school that made Chicago Chicago.

No one has distain for it. Everyone thinks of it as a highly intellectual place.

We are simply saying (for the one millionth time) that Chicago routinely takes kids with middle-of-the-class GPAs whereas the other top15 schools do not.

At our school, college counseling will suggest Chicago as a sure-thing ED2 for any top kid who was rejected ED1/SCEA from another top20 school. They will also suggest Chicago for families who want prestige and/or a high academic school but have a kid without top grades. Scoir/Naviance do not lie. Chicago takes kids down to a 3.5 at our school every year. As such, it has lost some of it's sparkle. As the saying goes, "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member." Chicago suffers from some of this at top privates.

But how is this different from taking a DEI with a 1350 SAT like Yale? This is what I don't get, are you telling me then that the 3.8 GPA from a no name public is better than the 3.6 at HW or HM, if that's the case then I have a bridge to sell you. I'd take the HW HM educated kid as the better bet any day of the week. Please people, this can't be your hill to die on.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure a lot of students get a great education at Chicago and would encourage my kids to apply early if they wanted to go. But overall, do I think their strategy of taking most applicants ED is good for society or consistent with the obligations of a tax-exempt institution? No I do not. It is clearly a way of gaming the US News rankings. But again, don't hate the player, hate the game. My real ire is directed at US News.

Why? You can choose not to look at the US News ranking. It's a magazine, why giving it any credibility?

I have not looked at the US News rankings in about a decade but I know colleges care about their rankings and the way they rank on other lists and that can impact who gets accepted so it impacts my kids whether or not we ever look at the lists.

This is why you are wrong. The admissions data do not affect the US News ranking. Chicago is actually quite innovative with their admissions innovations, and many schools are following its model. That's pretty impressive.

THIS, don't hate the player.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure a lot of students get a great education at Chicago and would encourage my kids to apply early if they wanted to go. But overall, do I think their strategy of taking most applicants ED is good for society or consistent with the obligations of a tax-exempt institution? No I do not. It is clearly a way of gaming the US News rankings. But again, don't hate the player, hate the game. My real ire is directed at US News.

Why? You can choose not to look at the US News ranking. It's a magazine, why giving it any credibility?

I have not looked at the US News rankings in about a decade but I know colleges care about their rankings and the way they rank on other lists and that can impact who gets accepted so it impacts my kids whether or not we ever look at the lists.

This is why you are wrong. The admissions data do not affect the US News ranking. Chicago is actually quite innovative with their admissions innovations, and many schools are following its model. That's pretty impressive.

THIS, don't hate the player.

I don’t hate the players - the applicants. I do hate the game and those who make the rules. The schools talk a good game about caring about the whole student but they actually make it more and more difficult for those students. Chicago is one of the worst. These “innovations” are just additional ways they have created to juice their numbers and snag wealthy full pay students.

And yes, my student was admitted and went elsewhere.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure a lot of students get a great education at Chicago and would encourage my kids to apply early if they wanted to go. But overall, do I think their strategy of taking most applicants ED is good for society or consistent with the obligations of a tax-exempt institution? No I do not. It is clearly a way of gaming the US News rankings. But again, don't hate the player, hate the game. My real ire is directed at US News.

Why? You can choose not to look at the US News ranking. It's a magazine, why giving it any credibility?

I have not looked at the US News rankings in about a decade but I know colleges care about their rankings and the way they rank on other lists and that can impact who gets accepted so it impacts my kids whether or not we ever look at the lists.

This is why you are wrong. The admissions data do not affect the US News ranking. Chicago is actually quite innovative with their admissions innovations, and many schools are following its model. That's pretty impressive.

THIS, don't hate the player.

I don’t hate the players - the applicants. I do hate the game and those who make the rules. The schools talk a good game about caring about the whole student but they actually make it more and more difficult for those students. Chicago is one of the worst. These “innovations” are just additional ways they have created to juice their numbers and snag wealthy full pay students.

And yes, my student was admitted and went elsewhere.

Yeah, ok, this is a matching game, not a "make mom feel good about not EDing and having to wait it out until March game. Disconnect.
Hope you're kid is enjoying his grade inflated classes that no one attends with his high GPA low test score peers.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:
Here is the evidence for sane minds

From USnews

Year
U.S. News National Ranking (Approx.)
2010
#9 nationally
2011
#5 nationally
2012
#4 nationally
2013
#5 nationally
2014
#4 nationally
2015
#4 nationally
2016
#3 nationally
2017
#3 nationally
2018
#3 nationally
2019
#6 nationally
2020
#6 nationally
2021
#6 nationally
2022
#6 nationally
2023
#12 nationally
2024
#11 nationally
2025
likely #11 nationally (Based on reported data)
2026
#6 nationally (latest confirmed)
Year

U.S. News National Ranking (Approx.)

I remember the days when Chicago was T3 for a long period of time. And Columbia was T2.

Thanks for posting this!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure a lot of students get a great education at Chicago and would encourage my kids to apply early if they wanted to go. But overall, do I think their strategy of taking most applicants ED is good for society or consistent with the obligations of a tax-exempt institution? No I do not. It is clearly a way of gaming the US News rankings. But again, don't hate the player, hate the game. My real ire is directed at US News.

Why? You can choose not to look at the US News ranking. It's a magazine, why giving it any credibility?

I have not looked at the US News rankings in about a decade but I know colleges care about their rankings and the way they rank on other lists and that can impact who gets accepted so it impacts my kids whether or not we ever look at the lists.

This is why you are wrong. The admissions data do not affect the US News ranking. Chicago is actually quite innovative with their admissions innovations, and many schools are following its model. That's pretty impressive.

THIS, don't hate the player.

I don’t hate the players - the applicants. I do hate the game and those who make the rules. The schools talk a good game about caring about the whole student but they actually make it more and more difficult for those students. Chicago is one of the worst. These “innovations” are just additional ways they have created to juice their numbers and snag wealthy full pay students.

And yes, my student was admitted and went elsewhere.

Yeah, ok, this is a matching game, not a "make mom feel good about not EDing and having to wait it out until March game. Disconnect.
Hope you're kid is enjoying his grade inflated classes that no one attends with his high GPA low test score peers.

So much aggression that you didn’t even read the post. Calm down.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

I think this is generally correct.

For those of us who are a little older, Chicago was always known as the "intellectual" school. We visited three years ago - and it still seemed like one of the smart schools. Good vibe. Smart kids. Generally very good professors. Tons of opportunities. Great city. Very nice campus.

But private school families seem to have some disdain for it. Personally, I think Chicago should embrace their roots and be the intellectual school, never mind the Sidwell and Dalton families. Chicago has raised their profile enough in recent years. They should remember their identity - and be the difficult, passionate, intense, nerd school that made Chicago Chicago.

No one has distain for it. Everyone thinks of it as a highly intellectual place.

We are simply saying (for the one millionth time) that Chicago routinely takes kids with middle-of-the-class GPAs whereas the other top15 schools do not.

At our school, college counseling will suggest Chicago as a sure-thing ED2 for any top kid who was rejected ED1/SCEA from another top20 school. They will also suggest Chicago for families who want prestige and/or a high academic school but have a kid without top grades. Scoir/Naviance do not lie. Chicago takes kids down to a 3.5 at our school every year. As such, it has lost some of it's sparkle. As the saying goes, "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member." Chicago suffers from some of this at top privates.

Again, that may be true at your private. Our DMV private sends 3-4 kids to UChicago (out of 80-90) every year. The students who are encouraged to apply are top notch. Last year, they were all in the top 10 percent of the graduating class, with average SAT/ACT of 1540/35 (per Scoir). The rest of the top ten kids get into Ivy Plus schools, so it is truly the case that the UChicago students self-select into applying there.

They self-select in terms of either recognizing they do not have the intangibles to otherwise get in to a top school and/or because they are risk averse.

I really don’t get the defensiveness with Chicago. We all know it’s an easier admit. It is still probably a top 20 school. So what’s the problem?

Either you care about its top 10 ranking (too much) or you don’t really believe the self-selection argument you are making.

It used to be an intellectual place. Those days are gone. (Unfortunately, as I loved the old Chicago.) The only school that is arguably still like that (Swarthmore having gone pre-professional) is Reed.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I am sure a lot of students get a great education at Chicago and would encourage my kids to apply early if they wanted to go. But overall, do I think their strategy of taking most applicants ED is good for society or consistent with the obligations of a tax-exempt institution? No I do not. It is clearly a way of gaming the US News rankings. But again, don't hate the player, hate the game. My real ire is directed at US News.

The rankings are NOT based on acceptance rate. How many times does this need to be pointed out?

How many times does it need to be pointed out that the rankings are indirectly still based on acceptance rate. Witness all the “reputation” scorers who base their views on…acceptance rate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

While you were on the phone, why did you ED?
OP’s premise is that those in her milieu apply precisely because they are obsessed with rankings and it is the best way (easiest) to attend a T6 school.
How are you different? Would you have gone if it was ranked 20?

I ED'd because I visited the school and loved it. I'm studying Economics (popular choice), and I knew that ED would actually give me some boost. If it was ranked 20, I probably would have explored my other top ED choices more, but I applied when it was ranked #13 or so. I don't think anyone I've met here applied ED just because its supposedly the 'easiest' top 10 school to be admitted to. That sentiment seems like something manufactured by this forum.

I appreciate your honesty. But if you cared enough about rankings such that 7 notches might (probably?) have changed your ED decision, what gives you such confidence that Chicago’s increase in rankings by 7 has not changed many others’ decision?

No matter where they are ranked in the top 20, UChicago's education quality doesn't change. I doubt that it being ranked #20 when I applied would have swayed my ED decision––it would've only made me slightly less "sure" about it because I admittedly look at the rankings, but not in an obsessive way. I feel sorry for whoever is compelled to switch a binding agreement to a college just because of an increase from #13 to #7. These rankings really don't matter that much, and they shouldn't have such a grip on families/students to sway big decisions like that. Besides, in the early 2000s, UChicago was ranked consistently from #3-#6. Only now that people are upset over having to ED there to have solid chances of admission do they debate its "true" ranking.

I also think your question about whether I would change my decision lacks nuance. If Harvard was ranked #20 instead of #3, would people stop applying? Many people would say no, because Harvard is unmatched in many areas of study, undergraduate education, and lay prestige. Whats so different about this hypothetical with UChicago? Additionally, there isn't a reality where Harvard or UChicago are ranked #20 because they deserve their higher spots based on merit. I don't see a reason why they would be ranked #20 in this alternate reality you refer to.

Just apply where you want, and don't get hyper-fixated on where a news company decides to rank universities. It’s unproductive.

How I long for the old Chicago where the vast majority of students were not pre-professional Econ and STEM hacks, and where not a one student would so lower themselves intellectually by making such a misfit analogy as part of their “argument.”

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I feel like this is the general consensus of the thread:

Those who are hyper-obsessed with rankings & prestige over academics & post-grad outcomes tend to think lower of UChicago because they attract the majority of their students from the ED pool (which, in their minds, must make the school an undeserving T10).

Those who know about academics, job placement, and support their children no matter what college they fall in love with think UChicago is an excellent school that equips students with the skills they need to do extremely well in their future.

Signed, a concerned UChicago student from the DC area.

I think this is generally correct.

For those of us who are a little older, Chicago was always known as the "intellectual" school. We visited three years ago - and it still seemed like one of the smart schools. Good vibe. Smart kids. Generally very good professors. Tons of opportunities. Great city. Very nice campus.

But private school families seem to have some disdain for it. Personally, I think Chicago should embrace their roots and be the intellectual school, never mind the Sidwell and Dalton families. Chicago has raised their profile enough in recent years. They should remember their identity - and be the difficult, passionate, intense, nerd school that made Chicago Chicago.

No one has distain for it. Everyone thinks of it as a highly intellectual place.

We are simply saying (for the one millionth time) that Chicago routinely takes kids with middle-of-the-class GPAs whereas the other top15 schools do not.

At our school, college counseling will suggest Chicago as a sure-thing ED2 for any top kid who was rejected ED1/SCEA from another top20 school. They will also suggest Chicago for families who want prestige and/or a high academic school but have a kid without top grades. Scoir/Naviance do not lie. Chicago takes kids down to a 3.5 at our school every year. As such, it has lost some of it's sparkle. As the saying goes, "I don't want to belong to any club that will accept me as a member." Chicago suffers from some of this at top privates.

Again, that may be true at your private. Our DMV private sends 3-4 kids to UChicago (out of 80-90) every year. The students who are encouraged to apply are top notch. Last year, they were all in the top 10 percent of the graduating class, with average SAT/ACT of 1540/35 (per Scoir). The rest of the top ten kids get into Ivy Plus schools, so it is truly the case that the UChicago students self-select into applying there.

They self-select in terms of either recognizing they do not have the intangibles to otherwise get in to a top school and/or because they are risk averse.

I really don’t get the defensiveness with Chicago. We all know it’s an easier admit. It is still probably a top 20 school. So what’s the problem?

Either you care about its top 10 ranking (too much) or you don’t really believe the self-selection argument you are making.

It used to be an intellectual place. Those days are gone. (Unfortunately, as I loved the old Chicago.) The only school that is arguably still like that (Swarthmore having gone pre-professional) is Reed.

Why is it so hard to accept that the self-selection is not always based on risk aversion. UChicago still has the reputation of being nerdy and intellectual, at least compared with many/most other T10 schools. For instance, my UChicago kid could have easily gotten into ED Cornell, Dartmouth or Upenn. But they knew that it was the wrong fit for them. (And I know this because kids from our school get in with worse stats and ECs).