<p>You know, it’s interesting, ever since Sonnenschein started instituting his practical but wildly controversial changes in the mid-1990s, alums, students, parents of students, and a host of other people decried Sonnenschein’s initiatives. Newmassdad summarized the fear when he stated: “So what we’re all too likely to see is a dilution in the brand (watch the quirky essay questions go soon!) in pursuit of who knows what.”</p>
<p>We are now more than a decade into the much-maligned Sonnenschein initiatives. Has there been any dilution in the Chicago brand? Is the university weaker? Is the commitment to careful intellectual inquiry more tepid now than it was in the mid-1990s? </p>
<p>I think the answer to each of these questions is a resounding NO. The only way we’ll know if the College is deviating from its mission is when the faculty announce their discontentment with the students they teach. If anything, faculty have grown happier with the stronger students at the U of C, and I doubt Zimmer’s directive to make a more selective college will really frustrate the faculty in any tangible way. Again, Chicago selects students that the faculty would enjoy teaching, and I don’t think Zimmer’s strategies will hamper faculty contentment in this front. In the end, that’s all that really matters - the faculty and their satisfaction and production are what make Chicago truly special. The college is nice, but its not the integral cog to the Chicago machine. </p>
<p>Also, I think Chicago has targeted finishined in the top half-dozen or so schools in US News (right around where the blatantly overrated UPenn is now). Increasing selectivity might push Chicago into the #6-#7 range, and I think most interested parties would be perfectly content with this as a consistent finish. As other posters have mentioned, however, US News is not really the reason Zimmer wants to make these quantitative improvements to the college. Having a more selective, elite atmosphere along the lines of a Yale or Williams leads to a more loyal and committed alumni base. </p>
<p>Even now, senior giving at U of C greatly outpaces my cohort classes from the early 2000s. I think my year, maybe 35% of seniors gave back to the school. Now, that number is around 80%. For better or worse, alums from Yale, Williams, Dartmouth, and the like express a higher level of satisfaction with their alma maters than their colleagues at Chicago. There are people (like me) who love Chicago and what it stands for, but we all acknowledge there’s a lot that could be improved on the college front. If by instituting some changes Zimmer can ensure decades of loyalty in the future, it’s a worthwhile expenditure to undertake.</p>
<p>On the note of financial aid, I don’t know if Chicago has the financial clout to compete with Princeton, Williams, etc. It is more likely that the U of C will continue what it’s doing now - make sure it’s financial assistance remains competitive with schools such as Columbia, Duke, Brown, Penn, etc. Since Chicago now has better financial resources than pretty much all of these institutions, this is also a manageable goal.</p>