My kid has been thankfully admitted to all 3, and wants to major in molecular biology for future research (not med school, but yes grad school). Although he got great scholarships at all of them, UChicago is still the most expensive out of pocket for us. I know that it has the most “prestige” out of the 3, and obviously the best ranking. But, I keep seeing hints at problems with UChicago’s biology program. Does anyone have further insight into what/how bad the issue with bio is at UChicago? Is it bad enough that he’s better off at one of the other two schools? Thanks.
My kid’s a likely bio major and I did a fair amount of research on bio departments before she submitted apps (but Tulane and Northeastern weren’t among the schools I looked at – so no insight there). On the one hand, if the goal is a PhD program, UChicago is probably the best place of the three to start from. Basically, admission to PhD programs involves two things – research experience and recommendations. It helps if your recommenders are well-known and trusted. Universities that produce lots of PhDs who go into academia have robust networks in that regard. On-campus hospital also opens up lots of accessible research opportunities to undergrads. Also, the Metcalf program not only subsidizes but seeks out internships. So there’s a well-organized pipeline that helps kids write resumes, identify and apply for various internships, and makes them affordable to recipients. Competition is within UChicago and that’s especially helpful for first year students who may be less competitive applying for research opportunities offered nationwide.
On the other hand, re instruction – depends on what he wants from college (and whether he took AP Bio). UChicago gives you a weird choice between snail’s pace (no bio until Spring and then a not very challenging course – with the real work deferred until second year) and overdrive (Advanced Bio sequence). Your son will probably also be retaking Chemistry (offered in more flavors than Bio first year), may be retaking some Calc as well, and will certainly be taking a Core Humanities course. If he’s already pretty focused on molecular, then the Advanced Bio sequence might work for him. Between the Core and UChicago’s tendency to want undergrads to take intro STEM courses at UofC rather than rely on AP credits, it feels slower than some other schools. (Just to clarify, “retaking” first year Calc or Chem will not seem repetitious – it’ll be challenging and, in theory, will lay a more solid groundwork.) My comparisons were Princeton, UWashington, and Wisconsin, all of whom had different approaches to intro bio, but each of which looked to me like it would give Freshman bio majors more interesting first year coursework). So it might be worth having him think through coursework at each of the three schools.
Thank you so much for your really helpful reply! He’s taken 12 AP, all with 4s and 5s so far (including Bio with a 5, Chem, and Calc). He had also taken Honors Bio. He’s planning on taking credit for the “first” Bio course at UChicago (and they agreed). He plans to “retake” chem and calc for the reasons you stated. He had also already taken a Bio elective course at UChicago this past summer, and earned an A in UChicago college credit. We had been a little worried about the advanced bio program, but don’t want the snail’s pace either. Bio is something he’s excelled at, and to go slowly would be painful with 3 Bio courses under his belt. You make some great points about research opportunities. I’ve seen some people on other CC threads mention things like "don’t look at the bio curriculum if you aren’t a bio major, it’s a mess, it’s underfunded, lagging behind the rest of the programs, etc. Hoping some of those folks might expand as well. Thx again.
It’s less going slow than postponing, if that makes any sense. Kinda ironic for my kid because she was took the same basic advice/approach in HS (focus on AP Chem, Math, and Physics so you’ll have the background necessary to do real university-level bio) only to go through the same process again! If your son ends up deciding against Advanced Bio, another way to dive into bio earlier might be to try to get a job in a lab as a first year. FWIW, the upside of the delayed bio has been space to explore other majors/potential minors and to acquire relevant but not required skills this year.
Re comments about how the curriculum is a mess – I think that was more a heads-up regarding the badly written and confusing array of alternative departmental requirements posted on the UChicago website rather than commentary on the quality of the coursework itself. (Message was ask, don’t try to figure it out yourself.) And funding issues are more about the hospital and overall volume of research grants (compared to various “rivals”) rather than about support for undergraduate bio instruction.
OP: all 3 are great schools, but surely you are aware that UChicago’s molecular engineering facilities are great. I’ve not looked into it in detail, but it seems to me that your kid would do very well at UChicago. Certainly after the summer program your kid did, you have a very good idea about the school. But cost is a very real consideration, so I wish you and your kid well in making this decision!
You need to remember that the nit-picky comparisons made on CC border on the ridiculous (and usually are based on graduate school rather than undergrad).
People on here find a ranking comparing UChicago graduate biology to Harvard, MIT and Johns Hopkins graduate biology, and then start moaning: “Oh my god, UChicago is falling apart. It is only ranked somelthing like 10th in the nation in biology instead of top three. It’s tied with Columbia OMG how pathetic!!!1!1!!!” That is the sort of weirdness we deal with around here.
By any measure, UChicago biology is excellent. The facilities are brand new and spectacular, the programs are robust, the opportunities for undergraduates are amazing.
To the extent that rankings come into play, you should note that neither Northeastern or Tulane has a top 100 ranking in biology.
@Sam-I-Am and @ThankYouforHelp I appreciate the feedback. We were starting to second guess ourselves. Huge decision, and this is our first kid to go to college. Cost is a consideration, but so is quality of education and opportunity. Yes, the summer program is what sold my kid on applying to UChicago. I just wanted to make sure I wasn’t missing something big on the bio program. Thx!
My daughter (AB Biology, UChicago '16) was also interested in research and not pre-med. She came to UChicago with AP Bio and experience through a research internship at a med school as part of the Amer. Cancer Society’s high school research program. She did the AP5 Bio sequence her first year (now called Advanced Bio, I understand). At that time (2012-13), a different research prof would teach the sequence each year and base it upon his/her specific research, so it was very research-focused. Pre-meds were encouraged to take a different, broader bio class that would provide better background for the MCAT. I asked her if her HS AP class had prepared her well for it and she said they passed all that info within the first two weeks. I don’t know how the current Advanced Bio sequence compares to that, so a current student could better answer that question. She also found it relatively straightforward to secure paid research opportunities her first two summers and continued some of it during the academic year. One of these was a fellowship that was steered toward AP5 Bio first years, so that was a nice opportunity. She is currently editing a paper for her lab. The summer between her third and fourth years (2015) was spent as a counselor for the RIBS summer program, so she was on-campus all three summers. Other info: She found it relatively easy to get into the classes she wanted (got shut out of one) and was able to take some graduate level bio classes while a third and fourth year. She fulfilled her Civ requirements all during a quarter abroad through UChicago’s program. Her boyfriend did a BS in Biology, did research and was included in a published paper at his lab, volunteered at the hospital emergency room, and will attend med school in the fall. He told me that he felt very supported in his applications to med school, prep for interviews, etc.
@exacademic: I’m confused by some of your comments regarding “retaking classes” and “take courses at UofC rather than rely on AP credits (my edit)”. Students use their AP credits to move into more advanced classes. Chemistry and Calc. AP credits allowed my D to take these at a higher level. UChicago has 2-3 tracks of sciences and math, including some Honors courses, so she never felt like she was repeating anything. Again, perhaps this has changed since 2013-14?
Hope this helps, @myoldest.
@momzhood Extremely helpful information, and very encouraging. Thank you!
Maybe just a difference in terminology – AP enables students to place into honors-level courses, but they’re still treated as intro courses in terms of meeting requirements and fulfilling prerequisites even though the material is more difficult and doesn’t repeat what was done in AP. So, honors general Chem requires background in Calc and Physics that AP Chem didn’t. But taking it doesn’t get you into organic Chem any faster. And it satisfies the same Core requirement that two other less difficult Chem courses would satisfy and the same requirement for the major (Bio or Chem) that one of the other two would satisfy. AP (in conjunction with UChicago’s own accreditation exams) may also satisfy certain requirements for the Core and/or a major, but this is often discouraged at least wrt courses that are fairly central to the major (or a particular subfield). So my kid used AP to satisfy the Calc and Physics requirements of the Bio major but decided to do honors Chem.
Advanced Bio is something of an exception to these norms. It puts kids who take it a year ahead in doing the fundamentals sequence (which are often prerequisites for advanced/elective courses in the major). Because my kid’s a first year, I don’t know how much taking those basic courses second year rather than first will ultimately matter in terms of her timeline for choosing a subfield and being thesis-ready or her ability to double major or complete a minor if she wants to do that. She did get a summer research opportunity this year, so maybe it’ll be a non-issue. ((NB: My background is in humanities/social sciences, so I’m not used to all these sequences and prerequisites on top of Core requirements that must be satisfied with survey courses. I was able to jump into upper division/specialized courses in my areas of interest freshman year, so I may just be used to more choice earlier than STEM folks expect. I also didn’t have to worry about growing seasons or grant money for research, so I may overestimate the lead time required for certain kinds of projects)).
@exacademic - Okay, now I understand your comments. Thanks for the additional info. My D took orgo her second year; I don’t remember what chem she took first year. WRT to research, if I remember her experience correctly, the process to secure grant money for research was pretty straightforward.
@myoldest - I sent you a PM.
@momzhood Thank you for the PM. I replied, and really appreciate it.
This might have been mentioned already but if your son is considering, say, a PhD program down the road, then UChicago is going to dominate for a couple of reasons. One is that it’s one of the top university colleges that originate PhD’s (right behind Harvard and Princeton, IIRC). Two, he is more assured of finding an influential faculty member to write him a rec. letter. PhD programs typically are quite small and selective because grad students are at least partially funded - so that letter is crucial. It needs to come from someone who is prominent and well-respected in the field. Given UChicago’s academic reputation, this will be less of a challenge than elsewhere (I say this w/o knowing anything of the biological sciences at Tulane or NEU). Northeastern is “new on the scene” for higher rankings and I’m not sure how well-regarded it is yet among the academics (who are a snobby lot). Tulane obviously a fine school. Your son will need to find a balance of “prestige” (correlated with academic reputation, obviously) and affordability, assuming the fit is good at all three.
Good luck to him!
@JBStillFlying The sense I already had, and what all of you have kindly confirmed overall, is that the reputation is worth it for someone who really wants to go into research. We’ve been leaning strongly toward UChicago, and I really wanted to be sure I wasn’t missing anything. Thank you!
@JBStillFlying Actually, neither Harvard nor Princeton is a top originator for PhDs on a per capita basis. The only national universities that are in the top 10 as feeders for PhDs are MIT, Caltech and UChicago. All of the rest of the top PhD feeder schools are LACs.
http://www.thecollegesolution.com/the-colleges-where-phds-get-their-start/
@ThankYouforHelp - going off this study https://www.pomona.edu/sites/default/files/bacorigins_2003-2012.pdf
MIT, CalTech not comparable. LAC’s different category for two reasons: 1) Chicago is a university college not an LAC, and 2) OP not considering an LAC.
My personal opinion on AP classes is take all the credit that is offered. If you achieved a 5 you have mastered the subject to the level required by the college. The college and all of there experience will let you know what is required for credit in a particular class (whether that is a 4 or 5 on the AP test). Also this frees up your schedule to take other classes that you might be interested in.
For the record, Tulane has excellent offerings in all of the biological sciences. There is an entire department of cellular and molecular biology (http://www2.tulane.edu/sse/cell/) and a whole department of ecology and evolutionary biology (http://www2.tulane.edu/sse/eebio/) and Tulane prides itself on affording copious opportunities for research and collaboration between undergraduates and faculty. It is a major selling point of the school. And also consider the admonition of Malcolm Gladwell in “David and Goliath” about the real and substantial benefits of being the big fish in a somewhat smaller pond. The cautionary tale that Gladwell recounts is of a student who passed on the U of Maryland for Brown University and wound up doing herself an unfortunate disservice. (See, https://www.theatlantic.com/magazine/archive/2013/10/the-underdogs-guru/309458/). This is not at all meant to be discouraging. My only intention is to give you a different angle from which to approach this decision. Best of luck to you!
@NJDad68 Yes. Your points are well taken, and actually a part of my concern. Thanks for your input. I appreciate it, and we’re weighing a lot of these factors. Big fish is definitely one of them. Tulane’s student/faculty ratio is excellent, and is one of the things that attracted us to them. They also have a couple of amped-up programs, like the School of Public Health and Tropical Medicine.
@CU123 I agree. U Chicago told us that they STRONGLY prefer that students take their STEM classes, even if the kid got a 5 on the AP exam. They said that graduate schools really want to see those courses, like chem, calc, etc., taken at the University level. They were okay with jumping the first course in Bio via AP since it’s his major, but basically only want him to use his humanities APs for credit, even with 5s on exams.