<p>This is a little bit of a feedback loop. This article is by the same person who wrote the NYT article being commented on elsewhere, and it’s like the bonus disc in a special-edition CD release: the stuff that was dropped from the main article when they tightened it up.</p>
<p>Nevertheless, I think it does a really good job of explaining exactly were the University of Chicago is these days with admissions, although for some stuff you have to read between the lines:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Admissions isn’t just admissions; it’s also one of the main PR channels to the world. People pay attention to universities when they or their children/grandchildren are applying to college, and going after applicants is also promoting the brand. It’s not just a question of trying to ratchet up a USNWR ranking; it’s much more getting the story out there.</p></li>
<li><p>Chicago IS somewhat unique compared to HYP (or Columbia, probably the better reference point). But it’s not THAT unique. The vast majority of students who “fit” at Columbia or Yale would also “fit” just fine at Chicago.</p></li>
<li><p>Self-selection by quirky intellectuals, and finding more and more quirky intellectuals who might self-select themselves, was a great strategy for coaxing the college back from the brink, but long-term it’s self-limiting and a surrender. Chicago will not be considered the equal of HYP or Columbia until it is competing straight up for the same students and winning some of the head-to-heads. For better or worse, Zimmer – I think it’s his decision, with the trustees of course – has decided it’s time to start acting, at least, like Chicago is competing for the same students. It may not be winning a lot of head-to-heads now, but it won’t ever win them if it isn’t competing, and now it is competing. That’s the difference between the O’Neill Era and now.</p></li>
<li><p>The administration HAS to say that the former undergraduates were great. It wouldn’t exactly advance the university’s goal of repairing and building alumni relationships if it were trashing its alumni. But everyone knows that one of the consequences of having a weak and problematic college was that the students were not as strong as those at (otherwise) peer institutions. And that part of what’s happening now is that the college is upgrading its student corps. And that of course that’s a little hurtful to alums who are essentially being told that it’s not going to be their special club anymore. Hence all the vitriol and O’Neill worship in the comments.</p></li>
</ol>