fortune3

Since no one has really answered this yet...
I'm currently getting fairly decent financial aid from the school. It covers roughly 75% of the total cost of tuition + room and board. However, my family is not very wealthy and is more or less average compared to America's average household income.

That said, UChicago financial aid is nothing compared to Harvard, Yale or Princeton's. If I got in one of those schools, I would have most likely not had to pay anything because I know some people in similar financial situations doing so.

It might just be that the numbers worked out for me, but as a percentage of tuition + room and board covered, Uchicago was the highest need based financial aid I received.

I don't know much about international financial aid, but from what i know you pretty much arn't going to get any money from any school in the states unless you at least have a green card.

Cue7

mrstreak101 - I actually don't agree that it's "all about the knowledge." I cite from this work often, and while some of it is outdated now, the book "The Chosen" by James Karabel does a good job of explaining how, in actuality, schools are in the business of much more than dispensing knowledge at the undergrad level. Indeed, elite schools function as a connection between undergraduates and systems of power. Some schools do this better than others.

With this in mind, when I meet the few students choosing between Chicago and a HYP school, even as a proud alum, I find it difficult to wholeheartedly recommend Chicago. On an academic level, Chicago compares favorably. In terms of placement at professional schools, connecting graduates to systems of power, Chicago falls off the pace. I think there is still some weight given to attending the most "illustrious" of American colleges.

idad

Academically, in terms of the education one receives, I would give Chicago the edge over HYP. Notoriety is still the province of those schools. At HYP it is often the ECs that are emphasized over the classroom experience, which is another difference.

newmassdad

Chicago is not Ivy League because it is Div III in sports.

Seriously, as others have said, how you compare to Chicago depends to a great degree on what you expect from your college education. On the one hand, we have the philosophy espoused by Cue7 that higher ed is about "connections" and grad school placement as much as about "knowledge" (not that anyone would even agree on that!). On the other hand, you have those that believe college is about knowledge and personal growth. Finally, we have the elephant in the room - prestige.

Only you as an applicant can decide what is important.

Regarding financial aid, with endowments suffering as they are, you can expect this to be a volatile year everywhere. And since you can't predict very well in advance what your award will be anywhere (just read past posts regarding any "all need" college to see what I mean - awards have a lot of variance), you might consider waiting to see what award you get rather than worry about it now. You have no control anyway.

BTW, another example of the respect Chicago gets: When my D interviewed for a well known national post college scholarship as a UofC senior, quite a few questions lobbed to her were about what she thought of the difficulty of UofC. In other words, they knew the place expects a lot of its students, and she felt they had great respect for her background (the UofC part...)

unalove

This is somewhat OT, but it's worth saying.

The U of C is a "sleeper" school. The people who care about university prestige (and academia, etc.) know it and know it well. People in Chicago confuse it with the University of Illinois-Chicago. And hey, my relatives who went to Michigan thought I was going to Illinois and made all sorts of disparaging comments until I corrected them ;-)

As a high school student, I think it makes sense that you want to go to a school that has a great name and a great reputation. However, based on my family's experiences (four degrees across three different Ivies), that reputation can be a setback as well. Two of my immediate family members entered fields where Ivy grads don't traditionally go, and both of them had to "overcome" their degree. One, who was a career-changer, had to basically prove that she wasn't a "snob" and the other, who had just finished an undergrad, came from a school that wasn't a "target" for the employers. In a way, the "University of Chicago" sounds perfectly unassuming. Of course, if you know it, it's a different story ;-)

So what I'm saying is that an Ivy degree or a Chicago degree does not beat out all degrees in all the hiring situations you'll be in for the rest of your lives. Of course, this situation is further complicated or even becomes moot once you add in other variables, like networking and previous experience.

Cue7

Unalove - You raise some fair points, and I realize the position I'm about to take will not at all be popular on a board that espouses education and development, and after having attended a school which places an absolute premium on scholarship. Nevertheless, when deciding between schools, I absolutely think that strength of brand of a school should be taken into account and become a factor in the decision making process.

You may have encountered a few situations where a school's strong brand can be a "setback." Despite this fact, I strongly doubt that many Harvard or Yale grads often feel as if they could attain a certain job or internship, except their Yale or Harvard degree is "holding them back."

At the same time, I don't think Chicago grads feel the same way. Indeed, at times, I'm sure Chicago students felt they were just as qualified as their compatriots at Harvard or Princeton, but employers/professional schools clearly had a preference for taking graduates from more prestigious schools.

For long stretches of its history, Chicago snubbed its nose at the idea of brand strength and awareness. Now, however, I think the school is taking a more vested interest on this front. For most students, I don't think there are many advantages to going to a "sleeper" school as opposed to a school with a clearly stronger brand. It's why - again perhaps to the consternation of some - I defer a bit to HYP's brand strength, and more often group Chicago with schools such as Duke, Cornell, etc. in terms of its strengths in aspects OUTSIDE the realm of education offered.

(Again, for strength of academics, Chicago is much more on par with HYP and stronger than schools such as Duke or Brown. As I've said before, however, in reading more of the relevant scholarship on universities and the roles they play, a leading univ. is about much, much more than the academics it offers.)

newmassdad

Cue7, you may have a beef against UofC, but please, this statement is a bit over the top. How can anyone make such a sweeping generalization, especially since UofC tends to enroll a student different from "more prestigious schools". For instance, if one is looking for engineers, one might well pass on UofC students and take an MIT grad. But this is not a preference for a "more prestigious" school. It's a preference for a skill UofC students don't have.

Then there's the issue of prestige. What does that mean? Am I to give a preference to a Duke student because I heard they're good in basketball?

The little understood side note of "name" schools is that it can work against you, too:

If you went to Harvard, you are far more likely to be interviewing with someone whose kid was rejected by Harvard or its peers than to be interviewing with an alum. IMHO, that interviewer is as likely to be hostile to the elitism you represent as a Harvard grad as to be impressed. I've been on enough interviewing committees to have seen this in action many times, especially when you get out of the Northeast.

Chew on that thought.

Cue7

Newmassdad - you're right, I may defer too much to the weight given to a HYP degree. At the same time, I don't want to make it seem like I have a "beef" against the U of C. I received a great education and great exit options, and it was a good fit for me. I just think, though, that overall, HYP are better schools. Outside of academia, Chicago doesn't hold much of an edge over these schools. In my past, if I'd gotten into Chicago and Yale, I'd have gone to Yale in a heartbeat. I was not, however, a Yale-caliber applicant, and I had no hooks. I still don't really look at Chicago as one of Yale's peers, overall. I'd heartily endorse Chicago when in a conversation comparing Chicago to Cornell or Duke or Brown, but when it comes to the HYP schools, I just sort of shrug and look at these places as Chicago's superiors.

Again, from what I know, and in thinking about the fields most students of elite colleges enter, I just don't see a HYP degree as any sort of hinderance whatsoever. As with most classes at Chicago, my year, finance/banking held jobs a lot of kids in my class wanted. I think overall, they were pretty happy w the level of interest given to Chicago grads, but I don't think most held the notion that Chicago grads were more coveted than their peers at Princeton. In academia, Chicago was probably toward the top of the heap, but I think thoughtful grads from HYP have great opportunities in that realm too.

Maybe outside the northeast, you're right, it is a disadvantage to go to Harvard or Yale. I dunno tho - from what I've seen, graduates from these schools seem to do quite well, and I rarely have heard the complaint that these places hinder their grads in some way.

It seems like on this board, posters ask how Chicago compares to Harvard or Yale or whatever. Outside of academia, I just don't see that much of a comparison.

With prestige - all I really meant was there seems to be a gap between HYP (and MIT Cal Tech for science types) and everyone else. That's all. If you're selecting between any other roughly similar schools, brand strength doesn't really come into play - but I do think HYP have established a stronger brand than pretty much everyone else out there. To me, distinctions between Duke and Chicago or Cornell and Rice or whatever are pretty much irrelevant. I'd still see a gap, though, between HYP and the rest.

Again, all I was really doing in my original post was deferring to the HYP schools. Maybe I defer too much, but especially after graduation, I've only become more impressed with the strength of brand surrounding those schools. Maybe I'm way off base, but, even after attending Chicago and enjoying my time there, I just don't see U of C on the level of a Yale or Harvard. Maybe that's crazy, but I just don't see it.

newmassdad

Cue7,

OK. Peace.

Please don't misunderstand, I did not mean to imply that a Harvard degree is a negative factor overall in job hunting. In many cases it is not. But not always. In some settings, there are real biases against these grads. And we must keep in mind that the places that value a HYP credential, such as consulting and I banking don't have room for everyone that wants to head there. Some folks do, indeed, end up in more traditional roles for a variety of reasons.

Another reference point: I lived in the Boston area for many years - a place crawling with Harvard grads and a good number of grads from other elite colleges. The people that seemed to care the most about having a HYP degree (throw MIT into the mix too..) were fellow HYP/M grads. Granted, if they're the hiring or admissions decision maker, maybe these biases matter. But even in Boston, most hiring managers graduated from "lesser" colleges like BU and UMass. Guess what they value?

I agree that UofC is not a HYP. Heck, it does not have the endowment $$, and its fin aid shows it. So do the SAT scores (the best, albeit imperfect, proxy, and the only publicly available one, for student quality).

idad

Not long ago S1 and I were sitting at a table with a mix of students from a variety of schools including HYP. At the table was a well known Harvard scholar who quite nicely asked each student about themselves. After each said their piece, he would smile nod his head and go one to the next student. When he got to S1 and heard he attended Chicago, he sat back in his chair smiled, turned to the others and said, "We have a genius at the table." "Now there is a school." After being out in the world for many years, this reaction is more common than one might imagine. I have many many more such stories ranging from academic settings to powerful hedge fund managers and founders of wall street investment firms. Chicago has considerable prestige (perhaps more than HYP), particularly as newmassdad suggests, for what Chicago is good at, graduating people who can think, argue, and revel in inquiry.

Interestingly, this is not a recent phenomenon nor the result of increased admissions marketing. Here is quote by William James not long after the University was founded:
As far as I can tell, little has changed.

Cue7

idad - Yah, Chicago occupies a strange place because in some circles, it commands more respect than ANY other school. Many today still talk about Chicago being the BEST american university.

Having said this, I think a Harvard or Yale degree is more universally recognized and respected in a wider range of circles. Sure, as others have mentioned, it may cut the other way and place certain connotations on the specific graduate, but overall, HYP are well known, strong brand degrees.

You are always going to get the types that strong value a Chicago education or a Reed College or St. John's College background. Overall, though, I think HYP has a significant edge in terms of strength of brand and the benefits the brand can offer its graduates.

Again, I've said this before, but I still look at a place like Yale as Chicago's superior. I don't mean for this to detract from my alma mater, its just more of a pragmatic nod toward the established pecking order amongst top schools.

(Also, on a random note, I've also had the U of C rep work completely the opposite way. As in, "Oh, you went to Univ of Chicago? The really weird school on the south side?" or "U of C? I hear the undergrad has an... odd reputation." Has no one else seen this side of things? I think a lot of people - and probably some employers - see Chicago as just kind of a weird, nerdy place)

idad

I can go with HYP more prestigious for some things, more well known in general, and perhaps better for pre-professional preparation, but I would not equate that with superior. Chicago is superior at what it does, H & Y are superior at what they do. Hopefully Chicago will not try to do the same thing, and remain Chicago. The nation (world) has enough HYPs, it only has one Chicago.

An amusing excerpt from a 2005 Atlantic article:

Cue7

idad - my only contention for what you say is, right now, Chicago (The College) does not (and I believe, should not) exist SOLELY as a training ground for future intellectuals. I thought the original poster was asking about Chicago - The College in comparison to Yale College or Harvard College. If I was picking a PhD program or thinking about taking a professorial position somewhere, then yes, Chicago is right up there with HYP.

As I've said before, on the undergrad level, a college is about more than just the academics it offers. Chicago is on par with HYP on the academic level, but certainly not in other areas.

Finally, I think there is considerable overlap in what Chicago "does" and what HYP "does". These are all large research universities with a vested interest in scholarship and learning. Yes, Chicago may be "more pure" in certain instances, but Harvard, Princeton, etc. have an exceptional collection of outstanding academic departments. These schools are - at the least - comparable to Chicago in their academic offerings. They may not have the same culture of intensity, but I don't think Chicago is clearly superior to Princeton or Harvard on the academic dept front. I think it's more of a toss up in this regard.

JHS

I don't know what we are fighting about. What Cue7 has been saying makes perfect sense. Chicago is a great university, no question, but to argue that its undergraduate program is academically superior to HYP is a little silly. It isn't clearly inferior, either, but if you think HYP is awash in anti-intellectualism you have another think coming.

Comparing our children's experience at Chicago with our own at Yale, my wife and I see the following differences:

-- Academics: very comparable, which is a good thing. The quarter system theoretically allows one to take more classes, but the Core eats a lot of them up. Neither of our kids has ranged far from his or her main areas of interest other than as required by the Core. We stretched more, and were encouraged to do that. (We both were in Directed Studies, by the way, so that the differences vs. the Chicago Core were not so pronounced.) But these are minor differences.

-- Advising: I know newmassdad's daughter had a great experience at Chicago, but my kids' experience with their advisors has been mediocre, very cookie-cutter. Our advisors at Yale were mainly full faculty members, and important mentors for us. (Except that my wife clashed a lot with her advisor in the Psychology Department, whom she thought was anti-feminist: Judith Rodin, later president of Penn and now the Carnegie Foundation.)

In general, both of us had closer relationships with faculty than our children have had. Some of that is just luck, and some personality. My son's major is in a smaller department than my daughter's, and his emerging sense of really knowing the faculty and grad students is much closer to what we experienced. I think the Math Department at Chicago does an incredible job of this, though, and of providing undergraduates opportunities to work closely with faculty.

-- Career help. People at Yale felt very connected to the business and political Establishment; I think people at Chicago feel more ivory-towerish. Both of us got neat paid internships with a lot of university help, and outside of our comfort zones. Mine was with a Wall St. bank, my wife's with the NYC City Planning department. Neither of us continued on that career path, exactly, but the experience really broadened our sense of what we could do, and definitely bent our trajectories. Chicago's internship programs seem very linear, not quite as cool.

-- Student life. The residential colleges at Yale were wonderful, special. The Chicago house system is OK, but really pale in comparison. Chicago is far from anti-social, but Yale was very social -- all the parties you could want, if that's what you wanted. Extracurriculars at Yale were both higher quality and more robust, especially in the arts, but also, well, everything. Compare the Yale Daily News to the Maroon, the Whiffs to whatever the best Chicago a capella group is called, the Political Union to . . . nothing. Points to Chicago, though, for Scav, and Kuvia'/Kangeiko, and Off-Off, and for being in Chicago with all that has to offer (but also note that you have to leave Hyde Park for almost anything).

Chicago has been improving in all of these areas, and will continue to do so. I don't think it's at the point yet where it gets a lot of students turning down HYP to go there without either a strong financial motive (i.e., full merit scholarship and EFC > $50,000) or idiosyncratic personal reasons (e.g., don't want to be more than two hours from Milwaukee). If I recall correctly, even newmassdaughter would probably have gone to HYP if one had asked her nicely (by saying yes). The great thing, though, is that HYP misses enough newmassdaughters to allow Chicago to have a vibrant, impressive student body, and that's great.

hyeonjlee

I am definitely an ignoramus here: my S is just a freshman and I never attended U Chicago.

That said, I would venture to add my two cents (maybe literally only worth 2 cents: I claim no expert knowledge or professional quality opinion here!)

In terms of the "overall package", I, as a "lay person", would say Chicago is below HYP and on par with the other Ivies and Ivy equivalent. After U Chicago gave him EA, he did not bother with safeties and matches and other Ivies for RD. If any one of the HYP trio accepted him, he would not be in Chicago. So, his actions reflect very clearly where he put Chicago.

By Spring while he was waiting for the HYP RD outcome, we all became very aware of the strength and weakness of Chicago. One thing that became abundantly clear to us all is that U Chicago will give him unsurpassed quality education ("unsurpassed", not "unparalleled" - you get my drift here), but when it comes to professional and career networking, he will have little baby sitting or hand holding with ready made professional networking opportunities and access to the inner sanctum of the field he wants to be in (Investment Banking) at a comparable level rumored to be available in HYP. It is this awareness on his part that put him on an overdrive to be his own rainmaker.

I honestly believe that if he had gotten into HYP, he might have had the drive to hunt for the summer internship at Wall Street between high school and college. He felt that he was already in a disadvantaged position for Wall Street internship and such compared with his future competitors in HYP, and would need a head start and more aggressive approach and he got himself into an "overcompensating mode". If he had gotten into HYP, there is a very good chance that he might have sat on his laurel for the whole summer - a few of his friends did sit on their laurel for the whole summer secure in their knowledge that soon they would have their key to the kingdom handed over to them in a silver platter as soon as they start their school year (OK I am being half facetious here and exaggerating things )

His summer Wall Street experience turned out 100 times better than what he expected in his wildest dream. Not only in terms of the work experience, but access to some really key movers and shakers in the industry (the senior executives he worked for AND their spouses and friends in other key Wall Street positions, etc). He is very actively managing his professional network now, and became very good at it, especially for a kid his age.

So, all in all, I think the end result is really ideal for him: the best education at Chicago and all the professional networking and access he drummed up on his own.

Moral of the story? Anyone who comes to Chicago with burning ambition in a field outside of academia should be encouraged to become their own rainmaker if they want to be on par with the HYP type kids with similar ambition. I may be grossly underestimating U Chicago's resources in non-academic fields for career minded kids, but I believe it's better that the kids underestimate U Chicago's resources and go into an "overcompensating mode", rather than find themselves at the beginning of the 4th year that they have been greatly out gunned and outsmarted by their peers at HYP with far better institutional support and access.

By now, the only weakness of U Chicago for my son is the distance from home (I bet this is not the weakness "he" feels, it's the weakness "we" feel). Yes, for this reason, I still would prefer HYP which are all within an easy (comparatively speaking) distance from home, but it really is a very small preference even on our part by now. I couldn't be happier that S is at U Chicago.