<p>i was recently admitted to chicago and am definitely interested in trying out econ once im at uchicago. how insane are the the math requirements for econ at uchi? is there a BA/BS distinction that ligthens up the math requirements or is the route extremely difficult regardless.</p>
<p>also, how flexible is the route to a major. are there a large number of required courses, or can you supplement a lot of different classes into certain required slots.</p>
<p>thanks.</p>
<p>You can read the requirements here: <a href="http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/%5B/url%5D">http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/</a>. Some majors have a large number of elective classes and others have very few. The math requirements for econ aren't too bad if you don't want them to be. You'd have to take the full calculus sequence (so 131-132-133 or 151-152-153 or 161-162-163) or place out of it. If you've done well in BC Calc, you'll likely be able to just take 153 depending on how you do on the AP and on the placement test. After that, you can take 195-196 which is a math for the social sciences sequence. If you're planning on going to graduate school for economics, you should study higher math and fulfill the math requirements by taking the highest level of calculus you can and then taking intro to analysis and analysis.</p>
<p>I just realized something. Some schools, like Wharton, have a crapload of money because successful business alums make huge amounts of money, and then make huge donations. Chicago has one of the most respected econ programs, and one of the best business schools in the country. I know Chicago has a nice endowment and all, but why isn't is getting more cash from these wealthy alums?</p>
<p>I don't know, but my guess would be because quite a few Chicago grads obtain Ph.D's in the science, not MBA's (and thus go into academics/research instead of business). </p>
<p>It could also be a prestige/pretension issue on Wharton's part, though. Who knows.</p>
<p>I think Jack is correct. Remember that the College used to be much smaller than it is now. People tend to give money to their undergrad school, so few graduates means fewer potential donors. Add to this the fact that historically U of C grads have gone to grad school, become professors, and stayed in academia on a much larger scale than graduates of most institutions, and the comparison begins to make more sense. Wharton grads go off and make lots of money; they don't go off to grad school to do research. Remember that Wharton is a funny school in general since the students are basically getting an MBA type degree as undergrads: as I said, most people give money to their undergraduate schools; Wharton has a much larger proportion of their population going into business or finance (and making money) than any other undergraduate college. Their graduates on a whole are probably making more money than grads of other schools because they (and I mean Wharton, not UPenn) are all majoring in traditional money-making subjects as opposed to Gender Studies or Sociology (no offense to people who major in these subjects... I realize they can go into iBanking or business, but they don't at the rate Wharton grads do).</p>
<p>Now, the University of Chicago and the students have changed a lot, and there are visible differences in the student population every year. I suspect that these things will shift once our generation is the one making the donations, as opposed to graduates of the tiny College back in the 70s.</p>
<p>in terms of math requirements, I am taking the first quarter of the econ core, and I can't get through it without multivariable calc, the envelope theorem, lagrange multipliers.... so, the math is very rigorous (we even have our own textbooks for these classes), yet most students here wouldn't have it any other way.</p>
<p>felipecocco and corranged, I assume that a lot freshmen think that they want to major in economics. Does UChicago try to manage or limit the number of students who major in it at all?</p>
<p>Not that I've seen. I mean, I'm sure there are students who take econ 200, find it too difficult or not what they imagined, drop it, and find a new major, but the University doesn't do anything active to control the number of econ majors. It seems to be a bit of a "default" major here, really. There are a number of students who come in with no idea about what to major in who decide to do econ, at least.</p>
<p>felipecocco, did you use AP credits to place out of any econ classes? I expect to get a 5 (or at least a 4) on the macro and micro, which would give me "3 quarters general elective credit," do you advise against using this credit to place out of intro econ courses? thanks</p>
<p>I disagree. Starting next year the university will require the introductory sequence in order for you to take intermediate micro. Also, this was the year in which they raised the Statistics requirment for the econ major. So, formally, no, but they are certainly progressively making it a more and more challenging major.</p>
<p>No, I did not use any AP courses, and actually, AP econ (either one) is the equivalent of our intro sequences (198-199), so it won't do you much good. The college only recognizes this ap for elective credit, so you'd still have to take the intro sequence here. However, Sanderson is a crowd favorite, and even if you've taken econ before I'd still think that taking it with him is well worthwhile.</p>
<p>Felipe, will they be requiring 198 and 199, are you saying? That's interesting.</p>
<p>thanks for the info felipe</p>
<p>Hey, Felipe,</p>
<p>Would you recommend one take Sanderson's microeconomics course prior to Econ 200? I was unable to get into his course for this quarter. Next fall, though, I could take MATH 195 and Econ 200 simultaneously, or is it more advisable to take Sanderson's course first if one has no or very limited experience in the field of economics?</p>
<p>Thanks!</p>
<p>How is job placement? or do students usually move onto graduate school?</p>
<p>Katharos, is you're looking for an econ major, don't you kind of have to start 200 in the fall if you're not taking it during the summer? I think 200 would be really difficult without a background. Maybe you could read some during the summer? For an easy paperback, econ 198 and 199 read a book called Naked Economics by Charles Wheelan which goes over all the major concepts from micro and macro, but it doesn't involve any of the graphs or charts you learn in the class.</p>
<p>Hey Katharos,</p>
<p>I think that with a bit of self-study over the summer, just to get acclimated with the whole econ business, would do you just fine and you'd be ready for econ 200. However, I overheard somewhere that starting next year econ 198 will be a prereq. for econ 200, so you may have to take in anyway.</p>
<p>Maybe they'd let you take them concurrently.</p>
<p>corranged and Felipe,</p>
<p>Hey, thanks a bunch for the info. I think I will try the self-study over the summer and sign up for Econ 200 in the fall if that is still an option. If that turns out too much for me or if 198 or 199 are required, then it will be that way.</p>
<p>I appreciate the information.</p>