<p>Personally, I find it hard to take a side in the “how should Chicago model itself?” debate. My gut tells me that we should do everything we can to be as different as we can, but my head tells me that we spent a lot of time being weird and being different back in the days of President Hutchins and things didn’t quite work out that well for us then. Additionally, I think that the quality of the student body is going up (not only academically, but also personality-wise-- I feel like I see a lot more students that I like around campus, and a lot more zest and smiling faces than I did when I visited back in '01).</p>
<p>The emphasis put on USNWR rank might be a superficial means to a more important end: that is, making the U of C more desirable to the kinds of people who should come here. I remember reading in the Maroon last spring about how a girl who wanted to go to Chicago over another top school persuaded her parents to let her attend by showing them how we placed on the ranks. It reinforces that we’re a great school and worth the money, etc. Do I personally care how we place? Not in the least. But other people do.</p>
<p>I think the fundamental difference between our points of view is that you see the U of C as a peerless institution, while I see it as comparable in many ways to the Ivy League (both in terms of institutional quality and in terms of students attending). You, I gather, are a high school senior; I’ve been here a year and a third. I agree with you to the extent that the U of C has a different feel to it, as academics get a big emphasis here while other schools tend to cater to the “well-rounded” ideal, but at the end of the day I’m really not sure how different we are from other schools. Part of that uncertainty stems from the fact that I haven’t attended any other schools, so I’m not in the best position to make judgments about them.</p>