I wish the world worked differently, but it is not a coincidence that some of the most recognized brands namely HYPSM all have large and growing endowments. Stanford and Chicago started off more or less at the same time, but Stanford’s very different policies and robust endowment means there is no way for Chicago to catch up to Stanford in the near future. This was not the case in the 30,40’s or even the 50’s. If Chicago had jettisoned some its strange policies after world war II sooner, the school would have been on a very strong footing now. Now they are playing catch up. It is not an accident that the Tech industry blossomed around Stanford. Today they are reaping the benefits of that boom even threatening Harvard for dominance.
Chicago is swimming in debt now. The first order of business is to fix the financial situation. Every other good that Chicago can do is based on long term solvency and yes institutional wealth. I know of no poor schools that dominate the education landscape over long periods of time. Being poor is not a virtue in higher education. It is a huge Liability.
I personally believe that the move to ED is being done in some measure to improve Chicago’s financial picture. I believe they are trying to cut the cost of financial awards by courting a larger percentage of richer kids. Could this change the culture at Chicago? Maybe, but given the billions of debt the University has accrued and the razor thin operating margins year after year, some belt tightening is sorely needed. Having said that, it is sad that it is coming on the backs of students, but then even the staff and faculty of the school are paying the price now, so its not as if students are the only ones suffering.