<p>Because Brown and Chicago both do not use the Common App, I was hoping to apply to one of the two. I am aware of Brown’s open curriculum vs. Chicago’s core and their different calendars and grading systems. But I still need to know more about the student bodies of the schools. I live in RI and love Thayer and Brown’s environment. </p>
<p>My gut feeling is leaning towards Chicago, but then after reading lots of literature on both schools, reason tells me that Brown might be a better fit. I plan on majoring in biology or bme. Current students and prospies, could you tell me which one I should choose?</p>
<p>These are two very different schools and it is very interesting to see how many students apply to both every year. ( I was one of them! )</p>
<p>If you are familiar with the Open Curriculum (featured discussion) and Chicago's Core, then the other main differences that you will experience will be in atmosphere, student body and location.</p>
<p>I found Chicago students to be more uptight and stressed out than those from any of the other universities that I visited (with the exception of Harvard). I found them to be very defensive all the time about the reason why they chose to go to Chicago, or while talking about the core, etc. It was almost like they felt they had to justify all the time why they were Chicago students. The campus is beautiful however the surroundings are not very safe even though it has gotten better in the last few years. They also have a big problem with grade deflation which may be of significance while applying to med or law shool. I personally know a couple of people from my high school that are sophomores there now and have had to change their grad school plans as a result. They are not happy campers, I'll tell you that.</p>
<p>The quality of the academics is unquestionable and the strong undergrad focus is unquestionable as well. As far as the city, Chicago is my favorite city in the world.</p>
<p>On the other hand, Brown students are more laid back, artsy, just as intellectual as Chicago students, and certainly happier. Providence is very quaint. If you live in RI , I am sure you know Brown well. I fell in love with Brown after I visited and I come from a very different part of the country. </p>
<p>I would encourage you to visit the university for a few days and talk to several people (not just the ones that you are matched up with for your visit). If you do that, you will get the vibe and the real feel of the student body. I was really turned off.</p>
<p>For BME, Brown has shown enormous dedication to increasing it's support for specialized research. UChicago has strong academics but as a previous
poster said I find Brown students to be more tuned in to the "now" of the
moment.</p>
<p>Neither schools are top choices for me but I seem to like Brown over
UChicago for BME.</p>
<p>Both university locales are comparable.</p>
<p>WOnder if deflation is a problem at Brown as well....?</p>
<p>Arwen, I was thinking of majoring in BME too! is Hopkins your number one choice then? and since Chicago doesn't have BME, are you just applying as a bio major?</p>
<p>ccri CALTECHs CHem Engineering with
Molecular Biology Option or Princeton's Chem Engg with Molecular Biology
and Integrated Sciences track both provide nice choices for UG BME.
Duke is the other one with plenty of research opportunities at the UG level.</p>
<p>JHU Dorm situation did not make me comfortable.</p>
<p>When Princeton was considering its grade deflation initiative, it collected data on its peer institutions- the Ivies, plus Stanford, MIT, and Chicago. For all of these colleges, the percent of undergraduate grades that were A's ranged from 44 to 55%. To much fanfare, Princeton proposed to move lower within, but to remain within, this range.</p>
<p>What that indicates to me (I don't have standard deviation to help me out here, but rather the rumors of harsh grading) is that a good portion of students are doing well-- A-range grades well. To have all A's here is unusual and difficult (depending on courseload and major), but to have some throughout one's undergraduate career is not at all uncommon.</p>
<p>Again, though, I'm not sure why relative non-inflation would be a deterrent. I'm not at school to get all A's-- I'm here to work hard and learn, and if there are a few low grades peppered in there, so be it.</p>
<p>My personal take on this: When you have very high achieving high school students, who worked for years to keep 4.0s and to reach almost perfect SAT scores, their expectations maybe somewhat "conditioned" to maintain similar grades while in college. Most students attending ivies and peer schools fall in that category.</p>
<p>Grade deflation maybe quiet stressful for some people and it is certainly a deterrent to some others planning careers in medicine and law. Fortunately, graduate schools do look at the intensity and reputation of the university, so that would balance the "deflation" some.</p>
<p>afan, I think that if rumors of Chicago grade deflation are greatly exaggerated, may be in part UChicago students own fault. There are multiple threads where they have been very "proud" to provide some statistics as "no one graduating with a 4.0 in over 12 years" "no one ever getting a A in a particular class" and so on. You go figure! However, the fact that they have much lower average GPAs than other schools is an unquestionable fact.</p>
<p>The 4.0 one is not true about Chicago (there's a mythbusters-y article about it, I'll find a link to it later), but it's nice to tell stories.</p>
<p>I've said before that Chicago is not the right school for somebody who really likes getting good grades. My GPA is currently below that 3.26, and I'm having the time of my life socially and intellectually.</p>
<p>But I think you should ask your "gut" why it moved for Chicago in the first place. Explore it.</p>
<p>If you can't make heads or tails of it, I would definately apply to Chicago, mainly because 1. I think it's a great school, and 2. If you live near Brown already, you might want to pack your bags and leave by the time your done with highschool. </p>
<p>After all, there's something very satisfying about taking a leap out of your doorstep, and into the refreshingly new, uncharted territory of a different city with an amazing university to match.</p>
<p>GoingToSpaceBRB, that's a good point. The proximity of Brown was one of the main reasons I had been hesitant about it in the first place. And from what I hear and see, Providence definitely cannot compare with Chicago.</p>
<p>Some points to roll over in your head: Recently, Chicago won a bid to be the host of the olympics. Of course, it's much bigger than Providence, but it's not too big. It's not like New York City in that over-crowded/Wall-street sort of way (I like NYC, but it's way rough at times) but it still offers all the opportunities of a big city with major firms, the board of trade, world-class hospitals etc. </p>
<p>It'll take years to explore Chicago, but it won't take long to really find something you like there. That being said, it's a pretty expensive place to purchase goods, but that's like every other town that has a university in it. </p>
<p>I'm only pitching Chicago because I was in a very similar situation to you, ccri. I got accepted to UofC and Brown, but lived about a half hour away from the Chicago. </p>
<p>I mean, you'll be happy at both. Providence has it's own unique flavor, and it's obviously more apt as a college-specific town (just because it's smaller), but with Chicago you get much more to play with, and so you can make it what you want, in that you'll definately find what you need.</p>
<p>Of course, I'm not trying to steer you away from Brown. I think Brown's a fantastic school. But if you were to compare the cities, Chicago would definately win out, if you're looking for a bigger city. Of course, with how hard UofC is, you might not be able to spend as much time exploring as you would like, while at Brown, even though it's very difficult, you'll still have enough time to really get to know Providence (since it is so much smaller). I guess that's something to really keep in consideration.</p>
<p>To me, the location of the school is very important. I could not picture myself living in Durhamn nor in New Haven. Having said that, there are some striking differences between Brown and UCHicago which play a major part on whether you are a "fit" or not. You could be very unhappy living in Chicago, if you find out that you do not have much in common socially or attitude wise with the students at the univ. </p>
<p>Brown and Chicago are two schools so dramatically different that I think making a decision based on the "city" is kind of ridiculous. Brown and Northwestern have a lot more in common. It would make more sense to think of those two taking into consideration the "fit"</p>
<p>OP, You may also like to keep in mind that your impression of schools and where you see yourself may make perfect sense to you, but no sense at all to the next person. When I was considering schools, Chicago was on the top of my list for various reasons.... reasons, incidentally, that Brown often maximizes in admissions literature (ie. a strong educational philosophy, learning for the sake of learning, de-emphasis on grades, etc.) However, for various reasons that probably wouldn't make sense to an outsider, Brown never made it onto my list. Neither did Columbia, which is very similar on paper to Chicago. Were those bad calls by me? Maybe. If I were to apply over again, I would probably look at Brown and Columbia more carefully, but I would still choose Chicago over them.</p>
<p>My second choice school at the time was actually Northwestern. NU maybe wasn't the best second-choice school, now that I am a college student and have a more developed sense of what I want out of a college experience, but I liked NU a lot, first for its academics, second for its students, and third for its location. (I bring all this up to challenge the idea that Chicago and Northwestern are mutually exclusive and that Northwestern is similar to Brown in a way that Chicago is not similar to Brown).</p>
<p>Anyway, you'll probably be amused to know that one of my Chicago friends was between three schools that he was admitted to... Brown, St. John's, and the U. of C. Brown has no distribution requirements. St. John's has no electives. Chicago's got its core. However, he found all three wonderful schools on their own merits and saw himself fitting in at all three, even if they seemed antithetical on paper.</p>
<p>unalove, I have had an important degree of exposure to all three schools: Brown, Northwestern and UChicago. Northwestern and Brown have more in common between the two than either of them with UChicago. </p>
<p>Any top school can be said to have a strong educational philosophy, learning for the sake of learning, strong academics, good reputation, etc. What makes it a "fit" for someone? Well, it is that certain "je ne sais quois". It is the overall gut feeling that you get when you see the student body, atmosphere, go to some classess etc, (with the other factors being similar)</p>
<p>I think that the main thing that Brown and UChicago have in common is that they are both very "subjectively perceived" to have better reputations and are more "elitist" on their own ways than Northwestern. Brown is an ivy; UChicago students are "uncommon" and Northwestern ....?? Well, Northwestern is just ...Northwestern. Another great school.</p>