Most intellectual colleges?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

[Anonymous]

Great school with very smart students and dedicated faculty. I hesitate about the intellectual label. It's very small so IMO there's a great education to be found there but may be not enough kids to create the synergy needed for everyday discourse on a wide variety of areas There's also a great deal of emphasis on sports so not for every kid.

[Anonymous]

UChicago using marketing/mailings to increase applications and decrease the acceptance rate would seem pretty standard. The various other stats like middle fifty percentile test scores, freshman retention rate, etc. speak for themselves.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Wesleyan.

+1 . Students are very intellectually engaged in a completely noncompetitive way.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

So some marketing is okay but not too much. Gotcha. Tell us, what is the correct level? Surely you know.

[Anonymous]

Not a fan of Forbes. Williams has great placement whether that be finance or grad schools. Swarthmore and UChicago kids do not always choose to go post graduation right into careers. That's the thing about intellectual colleges. Their students tend to give a lot of thought into what they really want to do. As a parent you have to be comfortable with giving them some space. It's worth it IMO.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

So some marketing is okay but not too much. Gotcha. Tell us, what is the correct level? Surely you know.

I am like Socrates who knows what I don’t know. And just like Jesus, I know a porn when I see one. When you have to start wondering if chicago’s 70% admit drop to 7%, that’s when you need to start digging before committing $75000 + per year for 4 years.

[Anonymous]

Worth every penny. Happy parent.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Worth every penny. Happy parent.

Wait ‘till ur kid graduates and is barely competitive with UVA students.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

So some marketing is okay but not too much. Gotcha. Tell us, what is the correct level? Surely you know.

I am like Socrates who knows what I don’t know. And just like Jesus, I know a porn when I see one. When you have to start wondering if chicago’s 70% admit drop to 7%, that’s when you need to start digging before committing $75000 + per year for 4 years.

It wasn’t Jesus, dummy. Such a weird post. Not surprising.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Worth every penny. Happy parent.

Wait ‘till ur kid graduates and is barely competitive with UVA students.

You're funny. I value a happy life filled with work that is a joy. It also happens to be well paying.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

So some marketing is okay but not too much. Gotcha. Tell us, what is the correct level? Surely you know.

I am like Socrates who knows what I don’t know. And just like Jesus, I know a porn when I see one. When you have to start wondering if chicago’s 70% admit drop to 7%, that’s when you need to start digging before committing $75000 + per year for 4 years.

I am genuinely curious because Chicago is one of the schools DD is interested in, but out-dated admission rates and the fact they supposedly do a lot of marketing isn't giving me pause...

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%.

Genuinely curious about this. What PR campaign specifically? Different from other schools?

One of the things it does is to send out junk mail to everyone in the country, including to all the neighborhood dogs and cats. The more people apply, better it’s selectivity. It’s that simple.

What are your thoughts on Williams? We’ve been inundated with their mailings.

Not sure about Williams. I don’t think they inundate the whole country at the level of Chicago or Swarthmore. There are different college rankings that use different criteria, some even discounting selectivity factor. You’ll have to google to find those. Forbes uses it’s own criteria focusing on various outcome factors. Williams does better than Chicago and Swarthmore there.

So some marketing is okay but not too much. Gotcha. Tell us, what is the correct level? Surely you know.

I am like Socrates who knows what I don’t know. And just like Jesus, I know a porn when I see one. When you have to start wondering if chicago’s 70% admit drop to 7%, that’s when you need to start digging before committing $75000 + per year for 4 years.

I am genuinely curious because Chicago is one of the schools DD is interested in, but out-dated admission rates and the fact they supposedly do a lot of marketing isn't giving me pause...

Go right ahead. Never said it’s a bad school. It’s a good school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Tulane and U Chicago aren’t even in the same stratosphere. Just look at their acceptance rates and stats. Tulane takes 25% of applicants and Chicago takes 7%.

Chicago used to take 70% in ‘90s, 40% in ‘07 or so. It’s a scam.

Back then undergraduates were little more than an afterthought at Chicago, while the graduate school was top notch. That has changed as part of an affirmative strategy and investment in improving undergraduate academics and experience. The institution has in fact changed, and so has interest in the school.

It is not a scam.

If Chicago stops pouring money into its PR campaign to play the USNews game, it’s admit rate will go back up to 40-70%. It’s illusion.

I'm sure your posts on this thread will single-handedly undo their momentum.