Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Actually only tier 3, 4 students go to U Chicago. At least that has been the case with TJ.
TJ is such a yawn.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Actually only tier 3, 4 students go to U Chicago. At least that has been the case with TJ.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Actually only tier 3, 4 students go to U Chicago. At least that has been the case with TJ.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My son never applied to U Chicago. He wanted a more fun school and ended up at a lower ivy. I think U Chicago has a hard time shaking off the slogan - Where fun goes to die. Lots of kids get turned off by that.
They should. That means it's not a good fit for them. UChicago is just different and students who are a good fit will appreciate that. Others should and do apply elsewhere.
Who actually appreciates- Where fun goes to die? Kids who believe in slogging through life? I guess I can’t relate.
Well, MIT, Caltech, and the CS students at a number of schools (e.g., Berkeley, CMU, etc.) are even tougher. Few people are smart enough to relate, but many complain about income inequality. Which profession produced the largest number of billionaires in the past three decades?
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I do believe U Chicago is one the best academic institutions in America and internationally.
If they are gaming the system is it because they are looking to attract more kids with different backgrounds to apply ?
Is it more name recognition?
They are not "gaming the system". These are posts from people who have looked at a few statistics and decided they know something everyone else is too dumb to realize and they want to show you how special they are.
Yet many of them do not have a definition for "gaming the system". Many of them claim that UChi does this to improve their ranking and don't know that these numbers are not included in the rankings and haven't been for years. They haven't done an iota of reading about the thing they are claiming. It's way past shameful and on to silly.
You people should either do your homework or stop posting on a topic you know nearly nothing about. You might misinform someone in a way that matters. Don't you care about that?
Will always find it difficult to see a University that gave us trickle down and the laffer curve as anything but 3rd rate
+100
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
I wouldn't call them tier 2 students. They tend to be high-stats unhooked kids. 4.0 and 1,600 is not tier 2.
Anonymous wrote:U Chicago takes a ton of private school kids.
They have a direct relationship with many private schools to absorb many of their strong but tier 2 students. They don’t care about poor or middle class kids at all
Anonymous wrote:I don’t think it’s second rate at all, but I do think all the massaging of the admit and yield rates has sparked a trend that overall has not been a positive for kids and families. So many schools are so focused on the ED round that the strategizing needed is worse than ever and more confusing than ever. It is dangerously easy to overshoot in ways that was not the case in a prior generation. Kids feel so much pressure to ED now and parents feel pressure to pay. Wish they didn’t.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:I do believe U Chicago is one the best academic institutions in America and internationally.
If they are gaming the system is it because they are looking to attract more kids with different backgrounds to apply ?
Is it more name recognition?
They are not "gaming the system". These are posts from people who have looked at a few statistics and decided they know something everyone else is too dumb to realize and they want to show you how special they are.
Yet many of them do not have a definition for "gaming the system". Many of them claim that UChi does this to improve their ranking and don't know that these numbers are not included in the rankings and haven't been for years. They haven't done an iota of reading about the thing they are claiming. It's way past shameful and on to silly.
You people should either do your homework or stop posting on a topic you know nearly nothing about. You might misinform someone in a way that matters. Don't you care about that?
Oh do go on. You are amusing at this point.
Yes, I was talking about you. Exactly you. You are ignorant of the facts and apparently have no interest in changing that. I am glad you find that amusing. It would pain me to learn that about myself.
Man. You are so hysterically defensive. It’s funny.
This isn’t a hard math problem, my friend. What Chicago does and how the rankings are calculated are easy to figure out. You can see what the school does. I know this bothers you deeply which is why you’re having a total meltdown, but that doesn’t change the underlying mathematics.
Keep fuming.
I'm not fuming. I am continuing to be amazed on how you refuse to accept certain basic facts.
Such as the fact that acceptance rate and yield are not used in USN ranking calculations.
Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:Anonymous wrote:My son never applied to U Chicago. He wanted a more fun school and ended up at a lower ivy. I think U Chicago has a hard time shaking off the slogan - Where fun goes to die. Lots of kids get turned off by that.
They should. That means it's not a good fit for them. UChicago is just different and students who are a good fit will appreciate that. Others should and do apply elsewhere.
Who actually appreciates- Where fun goes to die? Kids who believe in slogging through life? I guess I can’t relate.
Well, MIT, Caltech, and the CS students at a number of schools (e.g., Berkeley, CMU, etc.) are even tougher. Few people are smart enough to relate, but many complain about income inequality. Which profession produced the largest number of billionaires in the past three decades?