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

Forum Index » College and University Discussion

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

Subject:

Emoticons





More smilies

Text Color: Font: Close Marks

[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]UChicago has been a sought after school since the 70’s.[/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [/quote]

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.[/quote]

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. [b]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? [/b]

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. [/quote]

Weird[/quote]

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

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 - [b]perhaps even more than UChicago.[/b][/quote]

Prove it.[/quote]

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?[/quote]

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. 
[/quote]

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 [i]*adjusts monocle and straightens tweed jacket*[/i] 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[/quote]

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

Options

	Disable HTML in this message
	Disable BB Code in this message
	Disable smilies in this message

Review message

Search Recent Topics Hottest Topics