I am having a very difficult time deciding between UChicago and Brown for early decision. (I am interested in majoring in Philosophy with a minor in Political Science or English, by the way). I like UChicago’s core, as I want to take classes in nearly every discipline so the requirements aren’t a disadvantage for me. Yet I also like the liberty of Brown’s open curriculum, where I can really craft my education.
I am trying to avoid superficial schools (which, from my research, neither Brown nor Chicago is) and am looking for a genuinely inquisitive, “intellectual” climate. I am very, very liberal but hate political-correctness (which is what worries me about brown.) Ideally, I’d be at a school with a lot of debates/discussions among students and with professors who actually care about their undergrads.
Also, the binding commitment is not an issue for me – I would actually prefer to have it.
Any insight?
Brown has some misguided and overly PC students. Chicago has some misguided and overly PC students as well. To name just one example, I recently saw a classmate suggest that the class of 2020 sign a contract limiting our freedom of speech, votes, and personal opinions in order to influence university policy on a certain issue. Most of us rolled our eyes, and thankfully no inquisitive journalist got wind of the proposal, but it’s likely the media coverage of Brown - where the media did notice what was afoot - focuses on an equally small fringe group.
No university has a monopoly on common sense, or the absence thereof.
To be honest, I don’t think there’s much of a meaningful difference between Brown and Chicago with respect to the things you care about. Chicago does have an amazing culture of civilized debate, in which people actually listen to one another, acknowledge valid points, and modify their positions accordingly. Not that something like that does not occur at Brown; what’s different about Chicago is that it almost never doesn’t happen, whereas unfortunately in the rest of the academic world people do tend to shout at each other sometimes. I think it’s true that both the faculty and the student body at Chicago have a somewhat higher percentage of political conservatives compared to Brown, but it’s nothing like night and day.
My children would tell you, based on the experience of their friends, that there’s an anti-intellectual streak at Brown, and that the students who choose Brown over other colleges tend to lack respect for academics. Based on the experience of their friends, maybe there’s something to that, but their friends are hardly a representative sample. (Their friends were also smart, accomplished kids you would be thrilled to have as your classmates. Just like at Chicago.) No one disliked Brown; they just didn’t care much for classroom learning. At Chicago, the classroom is pretty much the center of everyone’s experience.
As a Brown student, through your course selections, you could probably come close to replicating what the Chicago core would teach you. What you would not be able to do is make it so that everyone else you met at college shared an extensive vocabulary, background knowledge, and analytical framework for discussing ideas.How much you care about that is up to you.
I have a son who graduated from brown last year, so his and his friends’ and college GF’s experience is recent. None of them experienced an anti-intellectual streak at Brown. In fact, they chose it because when visiting classes, they witnessed a vibrant exchange between professors and students, and they were not disappointed once enrolled. Another thing that they found appealing about brown is that unlike some other universities, such as JHU or Penn, it’s fairly well balanced between the humanities and sciences/engineering (and it also seems to attract lots of kids like my son who are science concentrators but also have a serious love of lit, history, and other humanities. So many of his friends had unlikely dual concentrations) and like uchicago, its vibe isn’t at all pre-professional. In fact, brown and uchicago were my son’s and his high school GF’s top 2 choices (she ended up at uchicago…wasn’t admitted to brown…and I think equally loved her experienced). His best friend chose uchicago immediately after being accepted EA and was also happy with his experience there.
While I think Chicago and brown are more alike than different in appealing to an intellectual student (but are obviously hugely different in the core vs open curriculums), I think the biggest difference between these universities that might account for some people misconstruing that brown kids don’t care much for classroom learning, is that there probably is a greater engagement at brown in extracurriculars than there may be at Chicago, although that may be changing now at Chicago with its different admissions tactics the last 5-6 years. Brown kids are super engaged outside of the classroom. But it seems that one huge benefit of the open curriculum is that kids are enrolled in classes because of their sheer interest, and it impacts the classroom discussion in a positive way. It also seems to attract a particular, independent type of student.
Here’s a brown professor’s perspective on his classrooms’ engagement and how he thinks the open curriculum impacts that experience:
https://m.youtube.com/watch?v=9aNp6bJCAhU
As an aside, Prof Miller co-wrote the textbook most commonly used in biology AP courses and college introductory courses:
https://vivo.brown.edu/display/kemiller
Finally, I don’t think you could go wrong attending either of these universities. I must have visited close to 40 schools between both my kids, and these two schools are among the few whose students and vibe impressed me most, and they also happen to be beautiful.
One thing to consider is the presence of a big city. I’m a Chicago student, and a big fan of going into the city with friends - everyone on campus is, really. Lots of people get boozy brunch with friends on Saturday, or go Kayaking on the Chicago River in spring, or eat lots of good food at the restaurants downtown, some even start clubbing in the city by first year. Don’t think that’s available at Brown, but Brown is closer to east coast cities like NY and Boston, obviously, but those are definitely less accessible than the University of Chicago is to Chicago.
It’s silly to suggest that Brown doesn’t offer the benefits of a city. Providence obviously isn’t Chicago, but it’s not East Podunk either. It’s a decent-sized city, with restaurants, clubs, stores, somewhat corrupt politicians, ethnic neighborhoods, urban challenges, and, yes, a river. There are banks, investment companies, and law firms. It’s the state capital. There’s no Art Institute, CSO, or Steppenwolf, and the skyscrapers aren’t much to talk about, but they do have a statue of a giant bug on top of some warehouse.
Brown, unlike UChicago, is not far at all from the central part of the city – less than a mile down the hill. And along the way, you pass RISD, where you can meet kids whose hair color, wardrobe, piercings and other accessories remind you that there is more than one way to be creative and productive.
@RenaissanceMom : My comment about contempt for classroom learning was (a) appropriately hedged by saying my kids’ friends were not a representative sample, but also (b) amply confirmed by personal conversations I have had with some of them. I did not misconstrue statements like, “What you do in class is completely useless. It has no bearing on anything, and I will be really glad when I don’t have to pretend to care anymore.” This from someone whom I have known since he was 5 years old, who is extremely intelligent, and who has always been successful academically, including at Brown and, more recently, at a top professional school (after three years at a top-three consulting firm). Yes, he was very involved in one particular extracurricular at Brown, but it would be very unusual to hear something similar from his counterpart at the University of Chicago.
Based on years of reading about both schools, I would say the overall academic vibes at the schools are:
Brown: Laid back; intellectual, but relatively less hard work, less intense. You can work hard and get an A, or take it a bit easier and still get an A.
Chicago: Intellectual, intense, hard work. You will work very hard for an A.
There are pros and cons to both vibes. Having to work harder at Chicago probably means more stress while you are in school, but it’s likely beneficial down the road: it will prepare you to have to dig deep and persevere later in life.
If you enjoy working hard/studying hard, enjoy discussing academic concepts and love a tough challenge, you might be the type of person who can take full advantage of a UChicago education and perhaps even enjoy it.
If you’d rather take it easier, relatively speaking, while still having the ability to grind if you want to, Brown might make more sense in terms of academic vibe.
Another obvious deciding point is going to be the cities.
Last thing: I would avoid applying ED if you are uncertain about which of them is your #1 choice.
One tip: Run your numbers through Collegeboard’s financial aid calculator for UChicago and Brown. For me, Brown cost 30k more per year, so I decided not to apply. If there is a significant cost difference, it rarely makes sense to dish out a lot of money for one of these schools vs the other. You might be surprised at how much FA Chicago gives.
Ugh, be careful with your slogans. Chicago never was a “Great Books school of years past,” and by and large that’s a good thing. Notwithstanding some tugs in the Great Books direction during the Hutchins years, which the faculty generally resisted, the Chicago Core Curriculum has always represented a much more nuanced view than Great Books has of the trade-off between knowledge of a classical canon and understanding current scholarship.
At UChicago and elsewhere, people won’t (and shouldn’t) take broad generalizations like this seriously. I recently passed through the Cambridge area and I didn’t see students embarrassing themselves left, right, and center. Nothing leads me to believe things are any different at Yale or other schools.
On the other hand, maybe you read this press account of protesters at Chicago trying to occupy an admin building and bringing a list of demands? Every school has a small, vocal, and sometimes-vociferous minority supporting or opposing any issue you care to name.
http://www.nytimes.com/2016/06/09/us/university-of-chicago-protests-tyler-kissinger.html
I suspect many people seem PC when you bandy about words like “dippy” and “moronic.”
I’m a philosophy-polisci major at UChicago who’s planning on going to grad school, so I can talk about the strengths of the universities in your interests. UChicago undoubtedly has a stronger political science department across the board, including in political theory, which it’s top 3 in the world for. Brown and Chicago have fairly similar philosophy departments in general, though Brown is significantly stronger in political philosophy. I think you’re asking the right sorts of questions - if I was making the same choice as you, it would probably come down to the Core. I can say that the professors in both the philosophy and the political science departments, especially the younger ones, are fantastic teachers and care a lot about their students in my experience. The really famous ones (Mearsheimer, Nussbaum, etc) don’t interact as much with undergrads, but in general the profs are very accessible.
A big difference - Brown has notoriously bad grade inflation (possibly the worst in the country), while Chicago has notoriously bad grade deflation. Chicago’s rep is overblown and I think Brown’s likely is too, but it’s something to consider. Chicago students and faculty are also higher-quality than Brown’s in general due to its prestige and location.