Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:
No, I mean that any reasonably intelligent person and reasonably good parent wouldn't obsessively chase rankings but instead focus on the college that presented the best fit with their child's personality, learning objectives, career goals, etc.
Lol. On what planet do you live in where kids in 2018 have a say or choice? Very very few non-URMs get into more than one top 15 college.
Anonymous wrote:
No, I mean that any reasonably intelligent person and reasonably good parent wouldn't obsessively chase rankings but instead focus on the college that presented the best fit with their child's personality, learning objectives, career goals, etc.
Anonymous wrote:UChicago, like Johns Hopkins and MIT, was founded over a century later (actually more than 250 years after Harvard) and on a different model (German rather than English). These were research universities that embraced a scientific model of knowledge. Earlier universities in what is now the US were more oriented to instilling religious and moral values in a social elite (and enabling that elite to get to know each other. Chicago admitted women from the start. And it was the largest producer of African American PhDs in the world prior to WW2. So it has a different kind of history/raison d’etre/cultural DNA than the Ivies.
We’re in a moment now when institutional values of elite colleges in the US have pretty much converged, but, by virtue of their different histories, each school starts with a different set of strengths and handicaps. So Yale has to worry about the implications of having named campus buildings after defenders of slavery and having comparatively weak STEM programs, while UChicago has to worry about name recognition and cash flow and how to rethink the Core.
Lots of Americans have a tendency to confuse wealth/social status with merit. And there’s a real strain of anti-intellectualism in our culture. So they act like the barbarians are at the gates when the hegemony of certain educational institutions gets challenged or when those institutions make room for different kinds of students.
[Stanford has a foot in both camps — started out a rich kids school despite being founded in the 19th, but gained status as the result of a tech boom, so science is a core part of its identity.]
Anonymous wrote:
Literally no one is buying that Chicago is a top 3 school. Top 5 are HYPSM everyone knows this. Chicago is comfortably top 6-10 along with Columbia, Penn, Caltech and either Duke or one of the other ivies depending on who you ask.
I think that you'd have to be clinically deranged to spend time trying to parse the rank ordering of the top 10 colleges.....just batshit crazy. I would hope that you approach the rest of your life with better perspective.
Oh really? So I you mean to say for most people HYPSM is seen as interchangeable with a place like Chicago?! Or I guess Harvard's yield of 80%+ compared to Columbia's mid-60% (with ED mind you) is purely coincidental. Get real here.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?
Oh- I've got it.
Her cookie cutter smart rich kid cast a wide net when applying for schools and mom expected him to get in, with awards and fanfare, to every university he applied to. Only the University of Chicago rejected her son outright. What right does this inferior school have to reject her special Pookie?? The nerve!!!
A pox on those bad people forever!
I'll show them! I'll trash the school on DCUM at every possible opportunity! Then they'll know the huge mistake they made in rejecting my darling! Mwahahahaa.
She must feel better now...
You are not helping Chicago's case here. Chicago notoriously employs yield protection, this is widely known. The negative comments for Chicago are due to the fact that it tries way too hard.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?
Oh- I've got it.
Her cookie cutter smart rich kid cast a wide net when applying for schools and mom expected him to get in, with awards and fanfare, to every university he applied to. Only the University of Chicago rejected her son outright. What right does this inferior school have to reject her special Pookie?? The nerve!!!
A pox on those bad people forever!
I'll show them! I'll trash the school on DCUM at every possible opportunity! Then they'll know the huge mistake they made in rejecting my darling! Mwahahahaa.
She must feel better now...
Anonymous wrote:^Princeton grade deflation and UChicago grade deflation are not similar. UofC is way worse
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:The malevolence is tangible. What happened between you and the school?
Oh- I've got it.
Her cookie cutter smart rich kid cast a wide net when applying for schools and mom expected him to get in, with awards and fanfare, to every university he applied to. Only the University of Chicago rejected her son outright. What right does this inferior school have to reject her special Pookie?? The nerve!!!
A pox on those bad people forever!
I'll show them! I'll trash the school on DCUM at every possible opportunity! Then they'll know the huge mistake they made in rejecting my darling! Mwahahahaa.
Anonymous wrote:I agree that you don’t have to sacrifice networking/credentialing to attend UChicago*, but in terms of how you’re going to spend your time in college, there will be a helluva lot more time spent studying than building your network.
*Depends on career goal, ability, alternative school(s).
Literally no one is buying that Chicago is a top 3 school. Top 5 are HYPSM everyone knows this. Chicago is comfortably top 6-10 along with Columbia, Penn, Caltech and either Duke or one of the other ivies depending on who you ask.
I think that you'd have to be clinically deranged to spend time trying to parse the rank ordering of the top 10 colleges.....just batshit crazy. I would hope that you approach the rest of your life with better perspective.