Chicago and fit

<p>Oddly enough, my Why Chicago essay was about a coffeeshop I visited on campus. I loved the intellectual atmosphere and the constant questioning I found there. I hope the admissions office doesn't think I wrote about something random when I could have written about the Scavenger Hunt, my qualities, and other "more relevant" things.</p>

<p>My "Why Chicago" essay focused on why my mind would finally find a home there.</p>

<p>JHS--. I was trying to use Cornell in my own anecdote as a example of a school that's not often considered in line with the U of C, but could be, with some work, shaped into a school like the U of C. Part of the reason I feel comfortable using Cornell in a comparison is because I've visited many times (older brother is a happy, happy alum), have 50+ facebook friends who are current students, and have talked to many alumni, and it doesn't really seem to be a school that's catered to me, while Chicago has exactly what I want in a college. I think my brother feels the same way about Chicago in relation to Cornell.</p>

<p>Elohel @ the "facebook" qualifier for friends.</p>

<p>For those who are already @ UChicago - did you consider Reed? It's a lot smaller but seems to have a similar passion for learning.</p>

<p>Or maybe say it differently - what schools seem to offer a similar "vibe" to Chicago, and you get to define what "vibe" means?</p>

<p>DS looked at Reed in the search for other quirky, intellectual liberal arts schools strong in math. Visited over the summer when we were visiting friends. LOVED it.</p>

<p>I would have considered Reed seriously, but it was too far for my parents.</p>

<p>Schools that make my heart flutter when I read about them:
Reed
Rice
UC-Berkeley</p>

<p>Schools that I think I could be happy at pretty easily:
Carleton
Pomona
Haverford
Tufts</p>

<p>Schools that I also think I could be happy at, but I might not like quite as much:
Oberlin
Wesleyan
Vassar
Brown
Cornell (me and my 53 facebook friends)</p>

<p>Schools that I found as a college senior that had programs I liked and were in/near a city:
WashU
JHU
Northwestern
Penn (I was ehh about Penn as a high school senior, but I would probably want to reconsider it)
Harvard</p>

<p>Some food for thought:</p>

<p>Last year, a high school junior whom I knew pretty well came to visit, and I wined and dined her with pizza and strawberry lemonade from the Medici. We had a long talk, the result of which was her explaining to me that she thought Chicago was too academic for her. I agreed with her based on what I know about her.</p>

<p>Yesterday, I learned she was admitted to Stanford SCEA.</p>

<p>While I know some super-academics at every elite school, I guess it's interesting to note that Chicago seems to have an edge in terms of an academic emphasis that almost no other school seems to have. I don't know if that's pure marketing genius on the part of other schools, when in reality they are quite similar to Chicago (the kind of paradoxical, "We'll give you a wonderful education, but you won't work too hard for it") or if a school like Stanford really doesn't seem as "smart" as a school like Chicago. My super-academic friends are varying degrees of happy and unhappy at their various schools... I wonder if they would be happier at Chicago.</p>

<p>Ok I need some reassurance. I was accepted to Chicago and plan to attend, but the things that everyone is saying about the school are worrying me.</p>

<p>I don't LOVE learning. I am serious about college, and serious about getting a degree, and won't be the type of kid to skip class and play xbox. BUT, I do love bs-ing my way through class discussion because I hate reading assignments. I also get impatient waiting for the weekend because I get sick of school (not all of it, just classes I consider "pointless"). I am an intended math or physics major, but do not consider myself nerdy at all. I am an athlete and partier that just happens to really like the campus and city of Chicago.
Should I re-consider my college selection?</p>

<p>Also, is there a way to avoid literature classes in the core? I am so sick of analyzing poems and books about slave ancestry (Roots!!!).
And is there much flexibilty in the biology courses required?</p>

<p>I didn't consider Reed. It seemed too liberal for me. </p>

<p>Ah, Chicagoboy. I don't know what to say to you. First of all, you won't find many happy U of C students who don't love learning and have natural, intellectual curiosity. It's that more than anything else that's important, I think. It's not a love of doing work; it's what you find out while doing that work. I've never been called nerdy. I like to party; I applied mostly to urban schools; I was an athlete until an injury put me on the sidelines; I measure my weeks in terms of when I can next party and relax. I don't like doing my reading, and I procrastinate on my papers, and sometimes I skip class. I do fit in here, though, because despite all of those things I do like what I learn. I am interested in my readings even if I don't love actually doing the reading itself, if that makes sense. I feel satisfied by writing a really great thesis. I think a well-rounded education in the liberal arts is important, and the core is the real reason I'm at Chicago. </p>

<p>If you're trying to avoid the core already, Chicago's probably not for you. The thing I'm not sure about, though, is whether you're just turned off by a lackluster high school experience. Maybe you don't want to look at literature in college because your high school made the experience miserable, or maybe you just aren't interested in studying it for some other reason. I'm not sure. I will say that the Chicago humanities sequences are probably different from your high school English lit classes. In some ways people find hum similar to high school: often the classes aren't that challenging (though some professors are much more difficult than other professors--mine gave only one or two As); you're spending most of your time reading, discussing, analyzing, and writing; and even some of the texts may be familiar to you. I think you'll probably find the discussion different from what you've had in high school, but who knows? Maybe you'll dislike it the same way you don't like your high school lit classes. I loved hum, and I had a couple of good, tough hum professors. Most people like their hum classes reasonably well, even math/physics majors. Some intended math majors even decide to switch to a humanities major or end up taking lots of English electives. When you read the description of hum core sequences, do they interest you? </p>

<p>Remember, the core requires Humanities, Social Sciences, and Civilizations. It's interesting that your example of what you don't like (books about slave ancestry) involves all three of those. If you don't want to take any of those three aspects of the core, you will probably have an unhappy first two years here. That is, unless you're just turned off from bad high school classes, in which case you could end up liking these courses in college. What do you think? </p>

<p>Bio core is pretty basic: you take one basic biology course, and then you choose a topics course. You could also take AP 5 bio if you've done well in AP bio, take actual biology (as opposed to basic core bio), or test out of the first required bio class so that you'd just have to take a topics course. It's not a very flexible requirement, though.</p>

<p>I think that you should apply to a couple of more schools, if that's still reasonable for you at this time. Maybe Chicago is right for you and you'd be happy here, but you should have a backup in case it's not. You should visit and sit in on a good hum class (ask for suggestions for the best professor or section and arrange your schedule around that class) and a good sosc class if at all possible. You should talk to current students. You should look at the course catalog. Most of all, you should think about what you want to study in college and who you want to study beside. For now, though, I think you should keep your options open. There's no reason why you need to commit now when you're not sure.</p>

<p>I find it interesting that unalove didn't include MIT in the list of schools considered. My son applied to several schools, but UChicago and MIT seem to fit the best, at least to me; he's been accepted to both EA. What reasons would one choose to go to UChicago over MIT?</p>

<p>UChicago is better than MIT if you want excellence in a broader range of fields. Does your son want to take classes in the humanities? Or at least be surrounded by some humanities majors along with the math/science people? If so, maybe UChicago is better. If not, maybe he'd be better off at MIT.</p>

<p>(I realize that MIT has good departments in non-math/science areas, but you can't deny that their strong focus is on math/science.)</p>

<p>My son had similar considerations. He loved the MIT tour, it seemed like there were music groups practicing behind every door and the tour guides told terrific stories. What turned him toward Chicago, I think, was the core-- he wanted the humanities side of education be in balance with math/hard science. He felt that he wanted the "learn to think, question, analyze, build an argument" package that U of C offered. I'm sure the same balance and learning can be found at MIT but it seemed nicely packaged and in the common culture at Chicago. I think also Chicago seemed less intense and calmer to him, maybe a slower burn, if that makes any sense. When I mentioned that MIT would still be a grad school option he heaved a sigh of relief, maybe he'd get a second chance to apply later.
So really I think it comes down to visiting ( I'm sure you already have) and going for what seems right-- you can't lose. My son, as a first-year has research opportunities and support from the math and hard science faculty that astound me.</p>

<p>My son is clearly math/science-oriented, but his passion is music - performing, composing, learning new instruments (he plays nine). By reputation, music seems stronger at MIT, and he can cross-register for humanities classes at Harvard, School of Fine Arts, etc. On the other hand, he has friends at both schools, and the friend at UChicago just seems to have a more well-rounded lifestyle (?school-driven or personality-driven). I suspect living in Cambridge or Chicago would be similar experiences - but what do I know; we're in South Florida!</p>

<p>I'm worried. I think the reasons I am picking UChi are because it was my favorite campus and because it has such a huge reputation. Come on, these are qualified reasons for a stressed college applicant, aren't they?</p>

<p>
[quote]
I think the reasons I am picking UChi are because it was my favorite campus and because it has such a huge reputation.

[/quote]
Those are pretty weak reasons, especially when you consider the fact that you'd be committing yourself to the core. Don't worry about it too much though. Apply to other schools and think about what you want in the mean time. Think about studying the core. It will work out one way or another.</p>

<p>Is the Chicago core really that much different than the cores that you would find at other top universities? I've looked at PLENTY, and I think that if the school has a core in general, that it is not that much different. The main difference, I would say, is that the humanities piece has to be taken as a sequence, but hey, its only a year. I applied to Carnegie's and Cornell's engineering schools, but I've heard they give skimpy financial aid, which will be a factor in my decision. I also applied to yale and princeton, but getting into one of those is too much of a stretch to consider. If I need to apply anywhere else I am kind of stuck because the deadline to get things mailed for many is Jan. 1st, and school is out until then, so the guidance counselors would not be able to mail my materials in time.</p>

<p>Chicagoboy,
So what are the financial and academic safety(ies) on your list? Sounds like you went for big names and are now having second thoughts. Chicago's core is different than general distribution requirements at other colleges. There are some fine colleges that have deadlines of January 15th. You might consider adding one or two to your list -- and looking at whether you'd ENJOY being there and can afford to attend.</p>

<p>
[quote]
Is the Chicago core really that much different than the cores that you would find at other top universities?

[/quote]
It's significantly different. There are more courses; the courses are different; they don't count toward any other requirement; and you can't avoid them, though you can test out of math and some sciences. </p>

<p>For example, many schools require a freshman English course of some sort. But often you can test out of this with a 5 on an English AP test, or you can fulfill it with Writing for the Sciences or some similar course. If you take it, it's probably a straight forward introductory English or Composition course. The comparative requirement at the U of C would be 2 or 3 quarters of a class like Human Being & Citizen where you'll read Plato, Homer, St. Augustine, Dante, and a number of other classics, as well as some modern texts. You'll talk about questions like, "What makes an excellent human being? An excellent citizen?" </p>

<p>You can often meet distribution requirements at other schools without trying too hard. You'll sort of "run into" most of them throughout your time. You'll end up taking courses in your major that involve another culture, for example, whereas at Chicago you need to take specific Civilizations courses. You don't fulfill the Chicago core without purposefully doing it, and Chicago core courses can't count toward your major. Most of your first two years will be spent on the core, and you may have some core courses left after your first two years. It ends up being, including language, 18 courses (if I counted correctly). </p>

<p>The difference in philosophy is also significant, and I know that at Chicago this philosophy is present and apparent in many places throughout the University. </p>

<p>This is an excerpt from what Yale, obviously a great intellectual institution, says about their requirements (I wasn't referencing Yale's requirements above, by the way):

[quote]
To ensure that study is neither too narrowly focused nor too diffuse, Yale College stands behind the principle of distribution of studies as strongly as it supports the principle of concentration. It requires that study be characterized, particularly in the earlier years, by a reasonable diversity of subject matter and approach, and in the later years by concentration in one of the major programs or departments. In addition, the College requires that all students take courses in certain foundational skills—writing, quantitative reasoning, and foreign language. These skills hold the key to many things students will want to know and do in later study and later life. People who fail to develop them at an early stage are limiting their futures without knowing what opportunities they are eliminating.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This is what Chicago says about their core:

[quote]
Chicago’s longstanding commitment to a rigorous core of general education for first- and second-year students emphasizes the unique value of studying original texts and of formulating original problems based on the study of those texts. The objective of our faculty-taught general education courses—which constitute the major component of the first two years in the College—is not to transfer information, but to raise fundamental questions and to encourage those habits of mind and those critical, analytical, and writing skills that are most urgent to a well-informed member of civil society.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Chicago is really committed to the above philosophy, so they're pretty set in their requirements. Beyond hum, you'll also have to study the social sciences extensively. My sister is an anthropology major at another top school, and I read many of the same texts she studied in anthro classes in my required sosc sequence. There are many other philosophies and theories that she studied through secondary readings for anthropology, while I was required to read the original author or text for the core. There's also Civilizations, the Arts, Biological Sciences, Physical Sciences, Mathematics, and a general language competency requirement. So, the requirements are pretty extensive. You don't want to be thrown into the core without realizing what you're doing.</p>

<p>CountingDown: I forgot to mention University of Rochester. I could get one of the many scholarships (a 1540/2250 is much higher than the average SAT) there. Also, it is an academic safety. After receiving my acceptance to Chicago, however, I decided not to apply to any other academic safeties. Plus, I have a shoe-in I guess at CMU.</p>

<p>Corranged: I don't know what to say. I suppose if I went somewhere else that didn't force me to take these classes that I wouldn't take them. It's not that I hate these subjects, I just don't like being forced to read books and analyze them. I appreciate all the different areas of study, but I have always looked at literature and poetry as too open for interpretation, seeming as if any conclusion could be drawn from these different writings.</p>