Is U of C still "Gritty"?

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 7:25pm

Shempi,

For some articles discussing the U of C’s poor relationship with the south side generally, see here:

[Michelle</a> Obama’s early alienation from the University of Chicago. UC Merced speech transcript - Lynn Sweet](<a href=“http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienati.html]Michelle”>http://blogs.suntimes.com/sweet/2009/05/michelle_obamas_early_alienati.html)

and here:

[Community</a> by othermeans - The Chicago Maroon](<a href=“Behind the scenes of new exhibit, our reviewer gets Smart to the art of the print – Chicago Maroon”>Behind the scenes of new exhibit, our reviewer gets Smart to the art of the print – Chicago Maroon)

I only did a quick search, and I’m sure there’s more out there. I also remember - and I think this was found in David Kirp’s “Shakespeare, Einstein, and the Bottom-line” - that guidance counselors at schools around Illinois were always frustrated with the U of C back in the 80s and 90s - apparently the school made no real effort to reach out or showed any interest in a particular school’s kids. It gave the school an “aloof, detached” air.

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 7:32pm

Menloparkmom - I don’t think the U of C, at least in this generation, can establish the clout or staying power of a Harvard or Yale. I also don’t think it’s necessary for Chicago to go THAT far in facilitating opportunities for its graduates.

I do think, though, that with administrative and some structural changes, Chicago can do a better job of broadening the goals of its place as a training ground. These changes can occur by diversifying the types of students admitted, getting the administration to be more aggressive about opening up internships and such for students, and improving the quality of counseling and options present for students while on campus.

When I was at Chicago, there was a huge emphasis on going into academia, and then a little push from the econ-types to take finance jobs. Besides that, there didn’t seem to be a lot of a push for anything else.

Again, I’m not looking for HYP-levels of success on this front. I just think it’s a little ridiculous, if you look at my initial post, that schools that are in no way superior to U of C, such as Brown, etc. have a bit different of a feel about them when it comes to opportunity after college. There’s no reason for that.

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 8:03pm

Oh and about the fin aid - yeah that’s definitely a concern. It’s why I try to give back as much as possible to the college fund every year!

menloparkmom · July 2, 2009, 8:47pm

"Chicago can do a better job of broadening the goals of its place as a training ground. "
Oh, I totally agree! But that requires a real change in the mindset of the profs., as well as the administration. As long as the thinking behind the “core” is it is primarily designed to prepare young fertile minds for graduate school and academia [which is why the College was created in the first place, and Chicago loves to pay homage to it’s history], I think there will be a lack willingness to offer different UG options that are widely available at so many other colleges. Chicago has a very anti-pre-professional slant at the UG level. Look how reluctant they have been to establish a school of Engineering! and the thought of an undergraduate school of business? furgetaboutit.

JBVirtuoso · July 2, 2009, 10:25pm

Harvard, Yale, and Princeton do not have undergraduate business schools. I doubt there are very many people affiliated with UChicago who want it to become a trade school. However, a more active alumni network would be nice. I picked the university because of its academics, as I didn’t want to go enter college looking only toward the dollar signs at the end of the road, but I don’t plan to become a professor either. I’m sure it will still be possible for me to do what I want; I just won’t have an extensive network of other UChicago alums in key positions to help me get there.

Additionally, as a student reliant on financial aid, I can say that the school needs to drastically improve its policies before it can think of competing with Ivies. It worked out well for me, but I can see how UChicago’s system can leave some students in the cold.

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 10:31pm

Menloparkmom, you state: “But that requires a real change in the mindset of the profs., as well as the administration.”

I don’t know if the core is really the issue. Columbia, for example, has an even more traditional core than Chicago, and Columbia’s faculty has pretty much the same training and merits of the Chicago faculty. Nevertheless, Columbia’s students generally pursue broader paths than their Chicago counterparts. Of course, being right in NYC, with all the options of the city, probably has something to do with it.

While I don’t want Chicago to be as pre-professional as Columbia, I think the school can do a better job of facilitating options for Chicago students. I think it’s started down this path, with events like “Taking the Next Step” for third years, and the new “Chicago GPS” center.

Coming back around to my initial point, though, I do wish Chicago would present opportunities in the city a bit more aggressively. To use the Columbia example, I feel like Columbia students are well connected with opportunities present in NYC. From finance to marketing to the publishing world, Columbia students go off and use their education in myriad fields. I think the U of C under-utilizes the City of Chicago, and there is a lot of promise for a more cooperative partnership between the University and the City.

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 10:38pm

One other note, there has been a lot of direct comparison to Harvard, Yale, etc. on this thread. While Chicago has the tradition and academic clout to compete in the scholarly sphere with these schools, I think it’s unrealistic to compare the U of C to Harvard etc. in terms of practical opportunities, strength of alum network, etc. They are on different planes when it comes to this, for reasons certainly not limited to Harvard’s longer history and connection to the local power elite for centuries.

When assessing practical concerns, I think it makes more sense to compare Chicago to its more immediate brethren in terms of finances, alum network, and the like. Comparing Chicago to Columbia, Duke, Brown, etc. seems like a more realistic comparison to make. On this front I think Chicago does well generally, but improvements could certainly be made - and several of you have recounted some of those improvements in this thread. I also think, that the direct comparisons to Harvard, etc. aren’t particularly useful. Its more productive to compare Chicago to its more immediate peers.

hyeonjlee · July 2, 2009, 10:44pm

Interesting thread. Regarding the lack of magic escalator, I think it could be a motivating factor, in a way.

My son will be a freshman this fall. I call him an unrepentant capitalist, eager to enter the world of high finance upon graduation. Having read enough already about how Chicago, in spite of its awesome reputation in the field of economics, does not really have a clout in the Wall Street, my son is determined to overcompensate for it.

A month ago, he won an econ/finance scholarship competition sponsored by one of the well known wall street firms. He was excited about the outcome, not really because of the honor or even money, but because of the possibility that it may open doors for him. So, he went to the final oral presentation day armed with resumes. Upon learning that he won the competition, he immediately started to scan the hall to see who from the firm came for the award ceremony. He approached “senior looking” people, and lo and behold, one of them happened to be a senior HR exec. he hustled with him, and managed to get a paid internship this summer even though the internship positions are really for college kids. The rest of the interns are mostly college juniors and some sophomores from the likes of Harvard, Yale, and U Penn. So far, as an intern, he seems to be holding his own in this crowd and thriving, AND growing leaps and bounds right before my eyes with his observations on interpersonal dynamics and organizational culture at work.

Later, when we were talking about all this, he made an interesting observation about his own motive: if he were heading to Harvard or Princeton this fall, he may not have had the urgency not to let this opportunity slip. It looks like he felt the lack of Wall Street connection through UChicago would disadvantage him compared to his cohorts at HYP, and he had to be far more “vigilant” to stay on top of things…

Anyway, I am extremely gratified that he is going to Chicago. My son will get the world class education with a focus on intellectual growth rather than professional emphasis. Contrary to popular wisdom, in my mind, this is even more important because he is intent on entering the business world, rather than academia. One way or the other, he will do well in the business world, but if he misses the opportunity when he is 18-22 to hone the intellectual side of his mind, where else, and when else will he get a truly intense intellectual challenge to stimulate him?

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 10:56pm

Hyeonjlee - interesting post, and congrats to your son!

In terms of wall street and finance, I never felt Chicago students were at a disadvantage in comparison to their counterparts anywhere b/c of lack of brand name rep of Chicago economics. I felt like a lack of social acumen amongst the undergrads might have held them back a bit, but Chicago economics seems as respected as any other degree from anywhere.

Financial employers want Chicago grads with an ability to deal with long hours and lots of quant. work, but they also want those “team players”. (Ever notice how many finance people seem to have played football at Dartmouth or rowed at Yale?) The “social” aspect of the interviewing process is where some Chicago kids fall short. If your son is already schmoozing with high level execs, I see no problem here at all.

Again, I don’t think its the strength or brand name of Chicago economics that holds students back, its the rep of being a “quirkier” place (i.e. not conforming to the business standard) that makes Chicago kids lag a half step behind HYP and Wharton. If your son already has the social acumen part down pat, I can’t see anything but myriad finance options available for him (if and when the market recovers).

Cue7 · July 2, 2009, 10:59pm

Quick note of clarification - my initial post had nothing to do with Chicago’s strength of placement in either finance or academia. Chicago excels in both these areas. I just wish Chicago had more of a presence in other areas, from students working on the Hill in DC to more of a broad network in fields such as journalism, publishing, etc.

hyeonjlee · July 2, 2009, 11:12pm

Cue7,

thanks for your input. It’s good to know that UChicago is well respected on Wall Street.

I read somewhere that still, the Chicago network is rather weak there compared with other top schools, while Uchicago is far better represented in the academia side of the industry.

Anyway, I don’t think it matters much for motivated kids. The lack of “rising water effect” does not hurt those who cam swim to the surface on his/her own.

That said, I hope UChicago lets its students utilize the alum network to get a toehold in the industry. Do they have anything like that? Like, an alum mentoring program, etc. I used to be an alum mentor for college kids/new hires in my company…

unalove · July 2, 2009, 11:45pm

^^hyeonjlee: The University has a pretty solid alumni network, and I like using it more than the three other Ivy league alumni networks I have access to through my immediate family members. I like the people I meet through it more, and I think they’re doing more interesting things. And of course, there’s an emotional connection there as well.

My own personal views on what Chicago should and should not do and what I think Chicago should and should not do to keep up with the Joneses, so to speak, run counter to each other. For the sake of the institution’s health, I think administrators should pursue ways to augment what’s already there, even if it goes against the traditional, stereotypical, “Chicago.”

I chose Chicago because I wanted to run away my Ivy/elite pedigree to a place where I could read books in dead languages without feeling broader social/elite pressures. My choice was somewhat ironic-- in running away from one kind of elite and elitism, I stepped into another… but to be fair, I had no exposure to Chicago branding or marketing before I sent in my app. I only became familiar with the “Uncommon” questions only when I started to answer one. I had no idea we sent out postcards to juniors until I read about them on CC years and years later.

In short, if I was presented with “new Chicago,” or “Chicago through keen marketing and branding,” or “outreach Chicago” I’m not sure I would have still applied. But the nice part about advertising is that it isn’t always bad and it doesn’t always lie. And for that Ideal Chicago Kid living in a place where college isn’t talked about and where peers and family members don’t know the University of Chicago, the way I did… then outreach is vital.

Something that does bear mention in this conversation, though, in paraphrasing JHS: we are treating these schools as if they are entirely internally consistent entities. We know that’s not true. So while there might be something different and Chicagoy about Chicago, I would find it hard to argue that it’s so much different from any of the other schools being mentioned. I imagine that most elite students visiting Chicago would notice reflections of themselves in the student body. A few differences, maybe, but I don’t know-- however, you look at it, smart kids are smart kids.

Cue7 · July 3, 2009, 12:56am

Unalove - if you came to Chicago post-2003 or so, any materials you received from the U of C were the “new chicago” way of marketing. From around 2001 or so onwards, much of the way Chicago marketed itself to students was furnished by a report from, ironically, McKinsey & Company. A McKinsey report conducted around the time I graduated concluded that Chicago was too much of an unknown quantity, and its marketing materials were bland and ineffective. Following this study, then Dean of College Enrollment, Michael Behnke, drastically re-tooled the admissions materials and brochures.

The new admissions materials - ones that are still sent out today and deal with “The Life of the Mind,” actually came forth through a study by the most prominent consulting firm on earth. The new materials showed students doing all sorts of stuff besides studying, and there was a public outcry at the school about all of it. In the decade since its inception, though, I think Chicago has only strengthened the college.

By about 2003 or so, most students have first heard about the school through the new “outreach Chicago.”

Cue7 · July 3, 2009, 1:05am

Hyeonjlee - I think it’s accurate to say that, in terms of sheer numbers, Chicago is not as well represented as its peers on Wall Street. From what I know, this has nothing to do with a lack of perceived strength at chicago, and much more to do with wall street culture and how it runs at odds with what Chicago aspires to be.

Put another way, I’d imagine the top students at a Dartmouth or Princeton or whatever aspire to join a bulge-bracket firm. As an Princeton Anthropology major recently told me when I asked what he wanted to do after college, “If you f&$#& breathe the air at Princeton, you go into finance.” At Chicago, I just don’t think that’s the case. The very best students in economics probably want to go on and do grad work in economics.

Also, Chicago’s more bookish culture leads to a lack of marketability on the “social” side of finance. My U of C friends who went on to great financial firms quickly grew tired of the “work hard/play hard” lifestyle. In many ways, the fratty, loosely team-based culture of lower-rung finance positions is a continuation of what Dartmouth and Princeton folks see at the college level. Like begets like, and the sheer numbers are higher from those other schools.

Chicago just doesn’t have that culture, and it does produce more scholarly, intellectual types. Having met and instructed scores of future bankers during my time at Penn, I can tell you that I would not think of young finance associates as “scholarly and intellectual.” Those are certainly not the first two adjectives I would use to describe these sorts of people.

With all that in mind, it just leads to less Chicago people on the Street. If Chicago started recruiting more brazenly pre-professional types, focused more creating connections to wall street, and had more alum/college mixers, etc. I’m sure this would change. That’s just not Chicago’s focus, however.

Edit: Put another way, my friends that did the best in the finance route were those that had the “finance” mentality in their heads early on. These were the guys who knew how the finance culture worked, knew how to play the game, so to speak, and were willing and eager. They all went on to great post-grad opportunities (work at Blackstone or Goldman Sachs, business school at HBS or Wharton), but what really set them apart was their mentality. At least when I was at chicago, the school didn’t attract a ton of the “true future business” types. There were definitely some, but they were outliers. This contrasts, say, the atmosphere around a Princeton or Wharton, where sometimes when I walk around, I feel like I’m in the middle of a Brooks Brothers ad.

hyeonjlee · July 3, 2009, 2:52am

Cue7,

thanks for the clarification. Well, if I were to have any say, which I empathetically don’t, I would rather see my son become Paul Krugman than what’s-his-name-the-head-of-Goldman-Sachs. But, as it stands now, Wall Street is where he wants to be. Perhaps he will change his mind later… After all, he has a serious intellectual bent (he taught himself finance and economics by devouring most of the subject matter books at Barnes & Noble last two years: a lot of coffee consumed, but books were “free”), so there is HOPE :-)

unalove · July 3, 2009, 7:34am

I am no expert on the subject, but there is a way to have your cake and eat it too, I think. One of my best friends (not a Chicago student) knows how to “play the game” but is a deep intellectual. He sees himself doing Wall Street for a while before moving towards his own passions. I know a bunch of Chicago students who would either thrive-- or work with-- that kind of environment (and want to work in that kind of environment).

Is U of C still "Gritty"?

CONNECT WITH US