What’s in the water in Chicagoland? (Univ. of Chicago & Northwestern)

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:If you’d like to peruse UChicago’s alumni list, Wikipedia has quite a long article on it: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_University_of_Chicago_alumni

But sure — it hasn’t been sought out. Maybe not by random suburban kids, but UChicago has always attracted impressive people.

Go away Chicago troll. Always so insecure

What a pithy response! You must be so proud of your wit

[Anonymous]

Chicago endowment is too limited for its "ambitions". For example, Notre Dame has a much larger endowment

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Chicago endowment is too limited for its "ambitions". For example, Notre Dame has a much larger endowment

What ambitions?

[Anonymous]

Do really think a per student endowment of 628,000 vs 712,000 is meaningful?

https://www.reachhighscholars.org/college_endowments.html

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Who are these household names? Meghan Markle??

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

Or to conclude that because alumni of a school are famous reflects negatively on the university.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

Or to conclude that because alumni of a school are famous reflects negatively on the university.

I never said it reflects negatively. PP used it as a way to argue Northwestern’s alumni are somehow more impressive than UChicago’s. That’s what I have a problem with.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

Northwestern doesn't only produce "celebrities". You mention UChicago alumni in the "journalism, the arts, etc." without realizing the irony of Northwestern producing distinguished alumni in all those aforementioned fields as well - perhaps even more than UChicago.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Who are these household names? Meghan Markle??

Don't be daft. You delirious Meghan Markle-hating harpies have infected every forum on this site. Get a new hobby.

https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University#Alumni

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

Northwestern doesn't only produce "celebrities". You mention UChicago alumni in the "journalism, the arts, etc." without realizing the irony of Northwestern producing distinguished alumni in all those aforementioned fields as well - perhaps even more than UChicago.

Prove it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.

This is simply not true. UChicago has always been a respected name in academia, but certainly not a “sought out” school. Northwestern, on the other hand, has always been fairly prestigious and popular among applicants, and has a long roster of significant alumni throughout its history to back it up. Both schools have ramped up in popularity in recent decades.

Says someone who has no idea what they’re talking about. UChicago has been “sought out” by kids who want a serious, intense academic experience.

And in terms of significant alumni throughout its history: the number of Nobel laureates who went to UChicago is practically unparalleled, so I’m not sure why you’re acting like Northwestern has a more impressive alumni roster.

I'm saying "sought out" in the sense that most people thinking about college are talking about: undergraduate applicants. In this regard, Chicago has made extremely noticeable strides. A couple of decades, it simply wasn't a destination for undergrads in the way that it is now. I already said that it was well regarded in academia, so there's no argument there. I don't think it's controversial at all to say that historically, Northwestern was much more of a "destination" for undergrad applicants, and its alumni reflect that: fewer notable alumni in academia, but noticeably more alumni that would be familiar names to laypeople. Don't get me wrong, they're both excellent institutions, just very different in approach and character, and in turn the types of alumni they've historically produced.

Don't worry, I'm not sh*tting on UChicago, I think it's a great school. Same with Northwestern.

It wasn’t a destination for your average suburban kid, sure. Until they started accepting the Common App, that is, and those kids started taking notice. And maybe Northwestern has more alumni who are household names, but is that really a mark of success for a university? Should they be in the business of producing celebrities?

Honestly, I think UChicago should’ve stayed the way they were before — producing absolutely excellent alumni, not only in academia, but across journalism, the arts, etc. and not trying to appeal to every random kid. Most UChicago alums agree with me. We think our university has lost what made it special.

Weird

Yeah, I agree that it’s weird to evaluate the success/quality of a university, based on how many famous people they’ve produced.

Northwestern doesn't only produce "celebrities". You mention UChicago alumni in the "journalism, the arts, etc." without realizing the irony of Northwestern producing distinguished alumni in all those aforementioned fields as well - perhaps even more than UChicago.

Prove it.

Northwestern is home to actual fully-fledged, dedicated schools of the aforementioned fields. In fact, its journalism school is number one in the country, its theater program is one of the best, and its music school is also arguably the best non-BFA program. Is this really a competition?