Toggle navigation
Toggle navigation
Home
DCUM Forums
Nanny Forums
Events
About DCUM
Advertising
Search
Recent Topics
Hottest Topics
FAQs and Guidelines
Privacy Policy
Your current identity is: Anonymous
Login
Preview
Subject:
Forum Index
»
College and University Discussion
Reply to "Why all the Chicago bashing? "
Subject:
Emoticons
More smilies
Text Color:
Default
Dark Red
Red
Orange
Brown
Yellow
Green
Olive
Cyan
Blue
Dark Blue
Violet
White
Black
Font:
Very Small
Small
Normal
Big
Giant
Close Marks
[quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous][quote=Anonymous]The concealed acceptance rate at the University of Chicago is quite high in the three, yes 3, ED rounds (ED0, ED1, & ED2).[/quote] Billy? Is that you??[/quote] What “Billy” said is what everybody knows: The acceptance rate at the University of Chicago is quite high in the three, yes 3, ED rounds (ED0, ED1, & ED2). That’s really no change from the 80s/90s when their overall acceptance rate was quite high. Then and now, it’s a self-selecting pool of academic kids from wealthy families. The difference is that now Chicago spends a ton of money recruiting RD applications for the sole purpose of rejecting them. And of course this causes the people who apply RD to have negative feelings about the school. And since far more people apply RD than attend, the general view of Chicago is negative. [/quote] To be clear, the general view of Chicago from people who attend and other institutions is positive. The general view of people who applied but didn't get accepted. The rest of the world is indifferent because nobody cares where you went to school, Billy. Just like nobody cares exactly what is in Coca-Cola. It is a successful brand of soda pop. It is not a "mind control" serum or whatever batsh*t crazy thing you used to say. [/quote] I don’t know who Billy is, nor do I care; but I have no tolerance for bad analogies. I think UChicago is a “positive” outcome. So is Georgetown (a decidedly tougher admit than Chicago). But when people, like OP, call it a T6 (when it is somewhere in the back end of the top 20, if that) and think they are elite signaling, for undergrad that is, I feel sorry for them and their ilk. I don’t feel sorry for you, though. The answer to OP’s question, applying Occam’s razor, is simple: it’s not really a top 10 school.[/quote] I feel sorry for people who know so little about academia that they make all of their judgements based on how “tough” of an admit a school is.[/quote] So, tell me, why is Chicago the “bargain” top 10 school in reality but not in terms of selectivity (so all applicants and their parents can have their cake and eat it, too). Not talking about grad school. You have said nothing on that, continually: no more empty proclamations.[/quote] It has been said repeatedly on this thread. The core curriculum is both unique and rigorous with small discussion-based seminars. Chicago doesn’t grade inflate and you have to work very hard to do well. Quarter system allows for more exploration. It is a top 10 school in multiple disciplines, especially in social and physical sciences. This isn’t just a grad school thing, it both rates highly (including to the extent undergrad disciplines get rated, like in IR) and students benefit from research opportunities and access to top professors in their fields. Job placement is excellent, especially-but not only-in Chicago. Reputation is extremely high both in academia and amongst employers. You, on the other hand, haven’t said shit about anything other than admissions rates. Talk about empty proclamations.[/quote] - Twice as many core requirements than schools not named Columbia means less opportunity for exploration, not more - Most kids take a core course during the summer to even make a double major possible. This is a cash cow for Chicago, as it is another 10k tuition. Something applicants and their parents never think about at the time. - Most core classes are not taught by tenure track profs - IR? Really? You are making Georgetown look better and better than Chicago - Subject rankings are about grad school. But certain of its top grad programs and niche departments are being cut. - 30% of Chicago undergrads are Econ majors and that number increases yearly. At what point is the competition for jobs too much. - Enrollment has doubled the last generation Any other points to easily rebut? You are a pretty ignorant dude who apparently knows very little about Chicago. I’ll talk real slow and write real simple so you can understand better. You need help, after all. [/quote] IR is one of the few subjects that has an undergraduate-specific ranking from a well-respected ranking source, which is why I mentioned it. And yes, Chicago is top 10: https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Inside_the_Ivory_Tower But no, subject rankings are not “about grad school.” They are about departments, and Chicago is top 10 in most of them. And undergrads benefit from that when they study in those departments, whether it is having access to significant resources, access to professors (which is the case at Chicago) or benefitting from being part of a school and department whose reputation is very high (also the case). It’s almost like you never even went to college. You’re probably one of those people who think grad school is just for kids who can’t find jobs. As for jobs, it hasn’t seemed to hinder anyone thus far in the slightest. Probably benefitting from the reputation of the econ DEPARTMENT. In any event, whine more about those admissions practices and leave the substantive discussion to the adults.[/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