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

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Since when did this devolve into who has better journalism and arts schools? I was using those as examples. But if we’re talking about journalism, it’s pretty impressive that UChicago has produced so many noteworthy journalists, despite not having a journalism school. Rick Atkinson (4 Pulitzers), David Blum (Editor in Chief of the Village Voice), David Brooks, Roger Ebert, Katherine Graham (editor in chief of WaPo), Seymour Hersh (exposed the My Lai massacre), Daniel Hertzberg (managing editor of the Wall Street Journal), Nate Silver, Bret Stephens, etc.

UChicago’s arts program is exceptional, but even if Northwestern’s is ranked higher, UChicago still produced Philip Glass, Ed Asner, David Auburn (Pulitzer and Tony), Katherine Dunham (National Medal of Arts winner), John Grierson — the man who literally coined the term “documentary”—Mike Nichols (director of The Graduate), Bernard Sahlins (co-founder of Second City), etc.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Since when did this devolve into who has better journalism and arts schools? I was using those as examples. But if we’re talking about journalism, it’s pretty impressive that UChicago has produced so many noteworthy journalists, despite not having a journalism school. Rick Atkinson (4 Pulitzers), David Blum (Editor in Chief of the Village Voice), David Brooks, Roger Ebert, Katherine Graham (editor in chief of WaPo), Seymour Hersh (exposed the My Lai massacre), Daniel Hertzberg (managing editor of the Wall Street Journal), Nate Silver, Bret Stephens, etc.

UChicago’s arts program is exceptional, but even if Northwestern’s is ranked higher, UChicago still produced Philip Glass, Ed Asner, David Auburn (Pulitzer and Tony), Katherine Dunham (National Medal of Arts winner), John Grierson — the man who literally coined the term “documentary”—Mike Nichols (director of The Graduate), Bernard Sahlins (co-founder of Second City), etc.

Uh you were the one who started this weird oneupmanship by characterizing Northwestern as a school that's only in the business of producing celebrities while UChicago *adjusts monocle and straightens tweed jacket* produces alumni in journalism and the arts. So quirky! So intellectual! But, I mean, are we surprised? This particular brand of ignorant pretentiousness is par for the course.

You can read it and weep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medill_School_of_Journalism#Notable_alumni
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University_School_of_Communication#Notable_alumni

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

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?

Since when did this devolve into who has better journalism and arts schools? I was using those as examples. But if we’re talking about journalism, it’s pretty impressive that UChicago has produced so many noteworthy journalists, despite not having a journalism school. Rick Atkinson (4 Pulitzers), David Blum (Editor in Chief of the Village Voice), David Brooks, Roger Ebert, Katherine Graham (editor in chief of WaPo), Seymour Hersh (exposed the My Lai massacre), Daniel Hertzberg (managing editor of the Wall Street Journal), Nate Silver, Bret Stephens, etc.

UChicago’s arts program is exceptional, but even if Northwestern’s is ranked higher, UChicago still produced Philip Glass, Ed Asner, David Auburn (Pulitzer and Tony), Katherine Dunham (National Medal of Arts winner), John Grierson — the man who literally coined the term “documentary”—Mike Nichols (director of The Graduate), Bernard Sahlins (co-founder of Second City), etc.

Uh you were the one who started this weird oneupmanship by characterizing Northwestern as a school that's only in the business of producing celebrities while UChicago *adjusts monocle and straightens tweed jacket* produces alumni in journalism and the arts. So quirky! So intellectual! But, I mean, are we surprised? This particular brand of ignorant pretentiousness is par for the course.

You can read it and weep.
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Medill_School_of_Journalism#Notable_alumni
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Northwestern_University_School_of_Communication#Notable_alumni

Nah, you were the one who started the whole battle of the alumni bases, arguing that Northwestern’s is more well-known.

[Anonymous]

Oh and, perusing those notable alumni lists, it looks pretty on par with UChicago’s journalism list, despite UChicago not having a journalism or communications school.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Oh and, perusing those notable alumni lists, it looks pretty on par with UChicago’s journalism list, despite UChicago not having a journalism or communications school.

Nope. Most people would agree that Northwestern has more distinguished alumni in journalism. Not sure why you're insisting on this being the hill you die on, of all hills.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh and, perusing those notable alumni lists, it looks pretty on par with UChicago’s journalism list, despite UChicago not having a journalism or communications school.

Nope. Most people would agree that Northwestern has more distinguished alumni in journalism. Not sure why you're insisting on this being the hill you die on, of all hills.

Ah, now we’re going with the “most people” argument. Relying on the opinion of the masses is always the best way to go when you’re trying to figure out the truth.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Oh and, perusing those notable alumni lists, it looks pretty on par with UChicago’s journalism list, despite UChicago not having a journalism or communications school.

Nope. Most people would agree that Northwestern has more distinguished alumni in journalism. Not sure why you're insisting on this being the hill you die on, of all hills.

Ah, now we’re going with the “most people” argument. Relying on the opinion of the masses is always the best way to go when you’re trying to figure out the truth.

Just stop. You have no idea what you're talking about.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I’ve observed with increasing interest that the two main universities in the Chicago area, Northwestern and Univ. of Chicago have exploded both in popularity and general awareness but also seem to be climbing the rankings steadily. What are these colleges doing right? Niece is interested in both and a ton of her friends have either or both of those two schools on their wish-lists.

Getting back to the title of the original poster….

This whole thread starts with the supposition that America’s third largest city, loccated in the Midwest, has two highly rated universities in its metropolitan area that really should not be there. If they were on the coasts, then the OP never would have mentioned either one.

[Anonymous]

UChicago boosters and their perennial chip on the shoulder. Classic!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve observed with increasing interest that the two main universities in the Chicago area, Northwestern and Univ. of Chicago have exploded both in popularity and general awareness but also seem to be climbing the rankings steadily. What are these colleges doing right? Niece is interested in both and a ton of her friends have either or both of those two schools on their wish-lists.

Getting back to the title of the original poster….

This whole thread starts with the supposition that America’s third largest city, loccated in the Midwest, has two highly rated universities in its metropolitan area that really should not be there. If they were on the coasts, then the OP never would have mentioned either one.

I think it's a great thing that more and more people on the coasts are increasingly aware of NU + UC.

[Anonymous]

Can anyone point us to alums in the last 10 to 20 years who've made a killing? Both Chicago schools are really lacking for their supposed top 10 high status. Likely because flyover country has been dying for decades. Sharp and talented people don't want to live in cold, grey, high tax, and crime-filled Chicago land, so why bother going to college there? It's not like UC and NU offer a unique experience not found anywhere else. The handful of UC and NU young kids who make big bucks on Wall Street were already connected via family before they stepped on campus. UC especially has atrocious salary outcomes. NU's is probably a little better because they have more west coast kids, who boomerang back home and tap their family connections for higher-paying west coast careers.

[Anonymous]

These are great schools, but in the past two years they have benefited from test optional policies at HYPSM that have shutout more traditional, top-ranked talent. This is true with other schools in the Top 30. Call it a trickle-down effect.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve observed with increasing interest that the two main universities in the Chicago area, Northwestern and Univ. of Chicago have exploded both in popularity and general awareness but also seem to be climbing the rankings steadily. What are these colleges doing right? Niece is interested in both and a ton of her friends have either or both of those two schools on their wish-lists.

Getting back to the title of the original poster….

This whole thread starts with the supposition that America’s third largest city, located in the Midwest, has two highly rated universities in its metropolitan area that really should not be there. If they were on the coasts, then the OP never would have mentioned either one.

Dimwitted alcoholic Big Ten alums control the city of Chicago. Notre Dame kids don't bother going to Chicago after graduation anymore; almost all of our son's friends are headed to Manhattan and the District. I say that to say, Chicago is fine if you grew up within a few hundred miles of it and you were a frat boy or sorority girl at some Big Ten degree mill. Otherwise you're going to feel like and be considered an outsider.

[Anonymous]

Anti-Chicago troll's alarm went off. Time to skedaddle.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I’ve observed with increasing interest that the two main universities in the Chicago area, Northwestern and Univ. of Chicago have exploded both in popularity and general awareness but also seem to be climbing the rankings steadily. What are these colleges doing right? Niece is interested in both and a ton of her friends have either or both of those two schools on their wish-lists.

Getting back to the title of the original poster….

This whole thread starts with the supposition that America’s third largest city, located in the Midwest, has two highly rated universities in its metropolitan area that really should not be there. If they were on the coasts, then the OP never would have mentioned either one.

Dimwitted alcoholic Big Ten alums control the city of Chicago. Notre Dame kids don't bother going to Chicago after graduation anymore; almost all of our son's friends are headed to Manhattan and the District. I say that to say, Chicago is fine if you grew up within a few hundred miles of it and you were a frat boy or sorority girl at some Big Ten degree mill. Otherwise you're going to feel like and be considered an outsider.

Lmfao "the District" no one outside of DMV cares about DMV. Seriously. The self-importance is really something else.