University of Chicago Admit Rate and SAT relative to Ivy/Competitive Set

Colleges & Universities University of Chicago
321

@JBStillFlying - the mean grade at Yale (in 2011-12) was 3.58, and now, around 30% of the class has above a 3.8. (If the median was 3.58 in 2011, zoom forward 8-9 years, it’s probably in the mid 3.6 range.)

https://yaledailynews.com/blog/2017/09/13/grade-inflation-abounds-faculty-say/

Per what you said, it looks like the median GPA at Chicago is now a 3.6, with maybe 20-25% having above a 3.8.

That, to me, seems like comparable grade inflation between the two schools. Chicago may be a bit behind, but they seem close.

So, if the grading is comparable, why not have the awards be comparable as well?

322

@marlowe1 I’m not completely convinced that grade inflation/deflation is real at all. I don’t know how we can separate mean GPA from self-selection and student motivation. Perhaps UChicago’s eclectic, quirky and intellectually inquisitive students simply aren’t as preoccupied with getting A’s in every class as the precociously career-focused, calculating students at Yale or Harvard. Maybe the Brown students, free to avoid classes in which they’ve no interest at all, do a little better because they are more engaged in a curriculum over which they have almost complete control. If UC students don’t do as well grade-wise as they might have elsewhere, that’s on them. It’s not like UChicago’s reputation, deserved or not, would have been a surprise. They didn’t take the easy road, consequences be damned, and should be congratulated on that.

323

Or, maybe you get better students, they get better grades?

It is the old argument, is it the institution or the student? When top tier universities produce better grad school applicants, is it because the training they receive in their undergrad is superior or they were better raw material to begin with? If the average student is smarter today then they were 20 years ago, would you not expect them to be better students in college too?

Maybe a little of grade inflation, maybe a little of smarter students, maybe something else too.

I think we’ve beat this horse my friends, time to wear out a new one.

324

One’s old words always come back to haunt one. In the discussion and stats that came after that post I became at least provisionally persuaded that grade deflation no longer significantly exists at the U of C, thus undercutting the premise of the post and its conclusion that some form of correction ought logically to be made for U of C undergrad degrees in relation to grades from peer schools. On that we are now agreed, @jgladney . No correction is needed. And I have agreed all along that these numbers - whether consistent as between gpa and lsat, or splitters, or reverse splitters, or even super reverse splitters - are a very big deal in gaining admission, probably the biggest of all deals except at the uppermost tier of picky institutions, where they are simply taken for granted and something over and above them is required.

What still sticks in my craw is the rationale that some have given here: that law schools are doing this out of enslavement to the rankings game per the USNews methodology. Entertain for a moment the thought that in a given case a law school admissions committee could be genuinely convinced that Applicant A is superior to Applicant B, perhaps because A has taken more demanding and harder-marking courses than B, but picks B for no other reason than that B helps them more with USNews - that, I say, is lamentable in general and, if the law school is UChicago and if A is a Chicago undergrad, it’s a scandal and would be seen as such if documented in the contents of that hypothetical plain vanilla envelope. For that reason alone it had better not be happening, at least at Chicago Law.

325

@marlowe1 - yes, if Chicago Law knowingly took applicants who would have a lesser chance of success at the Law School, just because the GPA was higher, that would be an issue.

But at the tippy top, we’re not saying that happens. Rather, if it looks like if applicants have an equal chance of success at law school, and one has a higher GPA, the nod goes to the higher GPA. Why is that a scandal?

Btw, more egregious scandals happen all the time b/c of USN law rankings. See here: https://www.inquirer.com/philly/business/law/20151014_Villanova_law_school_paying_a_price_despite_doing_right.html

Law schools do seem enslaved by the rankings - but the tippy top schools have a little more wiggle room (since so many high-numbers candidates apply).

326

There may be a very simple reason for why Law Schools are giving a lot of weight to LSAT and GPA, which I have not seen addressed here. I know the current trend is to question the effectiveness of standardized tests in predicting future academic success in college, but from what I have read, it looks like a combination of GPA and standardized scores is better at predicting academic success at college than either one of these alone. So if you are concerned with recruiting the best class purely from an academic perspective, you would definitely look at these two factors closely.

And maybe they are even bigger predictor in Grad schools specially professional schools and maybe they directly correlate to the success at clearing the bar exams. Maybe both USNews and the law schools think are on the same page on this, hence both give those metrics a lot of importance because it generally predicts the strength of the incoming class and predicts the percentage of students who will easily clear the bar in their first attempt.

So just because USNews and the Law schools give a lot of weight to the same factors, does not mean USNews is dictating the preference. It may just be that both agree that these metrics are important

Having said that, One other thing that could be hurting the 3.6 GPA could be “relative comparison”. If the recommendation letter from a faculty member at one school rates the 3.6 as “average” compared to his/her peers but the recommendation letter from another faculty member at a different school rates the 3.8 as “superior” compared to his/her peers that could make a difference, even though, if they came together in the same class, it is very possible that the 3.6 applicant could run circles around the 3.8 applicant.

This may happen if the the peer group against which the first applicant is being compared is exceptionally talented academically while the peer group against which the second applicant is being evaluated is talented but not at the same level. They may both be from good schools, but given the way the undergraduate college shapes their incoming classes, there might be small but significant differences in talent, specially if one school is more skewed towards “Holistic” admission and one is more skewed towards “academic” profiles. The latter school may end up with very pointy academically talented kids which may make it harder for any single student to stand out, compared to the the academically oriented student at the former school. For e.g, I do think that it is harder for a student at Caltech to stand out academically in his/her peer group compared to a student at Brown or Harvard because of how these schools pick their undergraduate classes. It may thus make sense if you are interested in law school to go to a school which recruits its undergrad class from a wide range of academic profiles, because it is more likely that professors at these schools will see the academically talented kids in different light compared to the other kids. (I will readily admit, this may be my personal bias)

A cursory look at SAT scores does seem to imply that Chicago may be getting kids who are more academically talented than say kids that go to Harvard (on average), not because there are’nt academically talented kids are Harvard, but because they may be a proportionally smaller percentage than at Chicago because of athletic and other holistic forms of recruiting at Harvard. So a pointy headed academically oriented kid will stand out to his/her profs at Harvard than this kid would at Chicago and may get stellar recommendations.

Both are being assessed “relative” to their local populations and that may make a big difference. The only standardized metric then is the LSAT and if they are about the same, the 3.8 with better recommendation letters may be given the edge, not because of the GPA but because of his/her relative position in class. Without seeing the recommendation letters, it would be hard to figure out that it was not the GPA but the recommendation letter that finally tilted the scale.

327

Application timing also matters. In LS admissions the early bird gets the worm, so to speak.

If Applicant A applies early, say in October, then they likely they receive an offer. If A applies in late Feb, as the class is starting to fill-up and when class medians start to take shape, A may end up on the WL.

328

While US News rankings are important to these law schools, a good amount of that weight is (or used to be) peer reviews. I’m not sure GPA is moving the needle much on overall rankings.

High median GPA’s are an output of the selection process, not an input to it. This flies a bit in the face of Blue’s advice as presented but perhaps not as intended. Law school is demanding and requires that the 1L class be as rigorously prepared as possible. Admission committees are going to prefer an engineer with a 3.7 over one with a 3.2 - all else equal - because the 3.7 reflects a stronger academic performance and perhaps a better portfolio of things like work ethic, focus, dedication, etc. They will know how much work it takes to earn a 3.7 in that field. Likewise, among two history majors, they may well choose the 3.9 over the 3.7 because they know that top grades in history mean showing up to participate in the seminar and writing well-researched papers. The 3.9 seems to have done a better job with those obligations.

In the end, it’s likely going to be about what you did with the educational opportunities available to you. A significant portion of a UChicago education consists of coursework outside the major. That’s also true elsewhere (such as at H or Y or a more open curriculum place like Brown). While it’s probably easier to show how UChicago offers a more rigorous education if the applicants from Brown all take nothing but lit and skip out on math and science, in reality candidates from both schools are likely to present relatively similarly in terms of course diversity and degree of demonstrated interest in their chosen fields of study. So academic performance comparisons then become relevant, and the easiest way to make those comparisons would be to look at grades.

And THAT, IMO, is why GPA is touted as being so important and why these highly selective law schools have such high medians for their incoming classes. It’s not that they are looking for high GPA per se. It’s that they seek those attributes that happen to be correlated with high GPA.

329

Agreed that GPA is correlated with those attributes law schools like to see. Also agree that, no matter the major or school, tippy top law schools seek students who have clearly separated from the pack. They seek scarcity.

So if there are lots of Brown applicants to choose from, applying with a median GPA doesn’t help as much as applying with a top 10% GPA. Same goes for engineering majors from MIT or math majors from Chicago. Across the board, tippy top law schools like the candidates who have separated from the pack.

And, no matter where you go, separating from the pack (being, say, in the top 10% or so?) is hard to do. But, it’s hard to get into HLS and YLS.

We’ve talked about law schools a lot. How is grade inflation going on the science end? Should we expect med school placement to improve? Those numbers look underwhelming, from what I can see.

330

^ Recently, I compared the premed course requirements/recommendations at UChicago to those at Harvard. I found them to be very different although I’m no expert. I offer them here for general comment (see below).

My view is that UChicago seems to have a higher curricular bar. This could be impacting the number who apply to med school at their GPA. I found the Harvard publication to be very helpful and comprehensive; while I hope Chicago has something similar, I haven’t found it online.

https://careeradvancement.uchicago.edu/files/docs/pre-health-course-information.pdf

https://ocs.fas.harvard.edu/files/ocs/files/premed-academic-publication.pdf

331

U Chicago did a number on you Cue7. I think we need another 200 posts on how U Chicago grads have impaired medical school opportunities now the law school admissions have been addressed.

332

To the contrary, @River65 - the outcome of the law debate is quite positive, no? It looks like chicago now has grade inflation and high lsat scores, so why wouldn’t chicago’s placement be good? That seems like a nice outcome.

Maybe med admissions have followed suit?

It’s funny - the outcome of this thread has been quite positive, I think.

333

Med school is a significantly different admissions process than LS as med is much more holistic. EC’s matter. Recs matter. State residence matters (at most publics). For some, foreign language fluency can be a plus.

In a survey of med school deans years ago about the factors contributing to an offering an interview to applicants – and you have to interview before receiving an acceptance – the reason that topped the list was MCAT score.

Shouldn’t be much difference as the premed requirements have been standardized for decades. Specific differences can be a class or two: Calc, Stats, Biochem, Adv. Bio/physio. Sociology and Psychology are not required for Admissions, but those topics are tested on the mcat, so taking those courses can help one prepare for the test. Social science, ethics and philosophy questions also show up on the mcat, but again, those courses not required.

In any event, colleges with a Core should be well prepared, and in particular Chicago as it selects for students who have high test taking abilities.

334

^ I think it’s the timing and the recommendations that set UC apart from Harvard. Could be wrong - read it quickly as I said. Someone with more knowledge is welcome to peruse and correct. Reading the Harvard document I got the distinct feeling that they don’t push for early preparation. UC is different - if planning for pre-med you need to fill those pre-reqs right away beginning fall of first year. I think they just expect a higher course load of science. But again, could be wrong.

335

forgot to add that unlike LS admissions, prestige counts in med schools (there are a lot fewer med schools than law schools and the classes are smaller). Thus, a 3.8 from Williams will receive a lot more love than a 3.8 from say, Rhodes College.

It’s just a nuance on whether one is on the 3-year or 4-year plan, i…e, apply to med school as a senior or during/after a gap year. The four-year plan also enables one to participate in study abroad. With a Core, Chicago students need to do a little more upfront coursework planning if they want to take the mcat Junior year and apply senior year.

OTOH, gap years are becoming more common for med schools, and all professional schools seem to appreciate them. As an example, nearly 80% of matriculants to Harvard Law are at least one year out of undergrad. If a Chicago premed planned on a gap year, they’d have much greater course flexibility in the first two years.

336

^ Blue, regarding the gap year, does that then allow you to take the MCAT after grad and so you can push the pre-med prep into fourth year (ie years 2 - 4 not 1 -3)?

337

^^absolutely doable, but I’d guess teh norm is still MCAT junior year and apply summer of senior year.

338

Cue, with all these negatives as you see them, would you advice students at UChicago right now to transfer out? That would make for a lively thread

339

@FStratford - why would I advocate transfering out? 2020 chicago adopted lots of initatives and trends that converge the school with its peers. An ivy league mix of students, ivy league resources/supports, grade inflation, business econ option, etc.

I can safely say this: there’s never been a worse time to transfer out from chicago.

Fstratford, hasn’t the info on this thread been positive?

340

Accentuate the positive, Cue, by all means; and eliminate the negative, brother; but never ever mess with Mr. Ivy Wannabe.