Chicago vs. Columbia

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
1

<p>OK, I got into Columbia, Chicago, Georgetown SFS, Middlebury College, and Boston College Honors. My parents are not extremely wealthy (140k/year family, sister in college, as well), but they said that they would get me to whichever college I felt would be best for my education and career.</p>

<p>I am interested in economics and international relations. Columbia, Chicago, and Georgetown are all great schools for these two fields (although Chicago is more towards econ, Georgetown more toward IR, and Columbia somewhere right in the middle).</p>

<p>My general feeling is that my toughest choice is between Columbia and Chicago. I have no doubt I can handle the difficulty of work (although the workload at Chicago may be a little daunting, especially my freshman year).</p>

<p>Any input? I am flying in late April to visit all three schools for the Admitted Student programs, but I would like to have some sort of idea beforehand. Please give reasonable, warranted reasons for preferring one college over another. Your personal feelings (unless you're in the same predicament) are not exactly what I'm looking for.</p>

<p>Thanks a lot.</p>

2

<p>Might I ask if Columbia should be your first choice because it’s a Ivy school and waaaaaaay harder to get accepted?</p>

3

<p>I’m having the same problem, so any input from others would be helpful.</p>

4

<p>chicago is a weird school. seriously. it’s nerdy. it’s fun. it’s intellectual. if you’re not in to the whole really nerdy kind of thing, chicago may not be the place for you. IR is still very good. top 10 i believe. they’re also big on the econ part.</p>

<p>columbia i think is just more straightforward. certainly a rigourous institution. also in the heart of nyc, which could be both a pro and con, depending.</p>

5

<p>I have a good friend who got into Chicago and waitlisted at Columbia. Sure, I think columbia is typically harder to get into, but if Chicago is your thing, it’s pretty great as well. Have you visited there?</p>

6

<p>This is a really, really tough decision. I’m surprised I don’t see more of these Chicago vs. Columbia threads because these two schools are so similar in so many ways (similar size, similar core curriculums, similar urban locations, etc.). </p>

<p>I think in terms of academic strength and clout, these two schools are pretty much equal. Columbia may be better known and currently has a higher level of selectivity, but in terms of actual strength and opportunities for students after graduation, it’s pretty much a wash. </p>

<p>From what I know, there are some, shall I say, stylistic differences between the two schools. Columbia is certainly more trendy and NYC is a vastly different scene from the city of Chicago. Univ. of Chicago has more of an academic, less pre-professional vibe, and, from what I know, could be described as a more “intimate” experience than what Columbia offers. Friends of mine I know at Columbia talk about how everyone at the school is kind of “aloof” and there isn’t a lot of college cohesiveness. While Chicago isn’t stellar on this front, there is probably more of a close knit feel at U of C. </p>

<p>Definitely visit and see what you prefer. You can’t go wrong with either school, and it’s just a matter of preference. The one factor I would suggest you AVOID considering, however, is “prestige” or perceived prestige. This is the worst way to pick a school - and both schools offer plentiful opportunities and are well-regarded across all fields. Columbia’s “ivy status” or whatever doesn’t mean anything - you should go by what school honestly fits you better.</p>

7

<p>From what I’ve experienced of both schools (having spent time in both areas), everything Cue7 said is right on. Also, from what I hear, Columbia is less helpful/personal when you need help (both in college and later in terms of job hunting and that sort of thing). But that is something I just heard around… Either way, all I can say is (like Cue7 said) please don’t pick based on rank or reputation, because both of those can change (sure, not by a ton, but they will fluctuate from year to year). It’s hard to get rid of the Ivy League hype, but if you can see past it, I’m sure you’ll find the best fit. Good luck with everything!</p>

8

<p>What Cue7 says corresponds to the experience of people I know, too. A few more specific glosses on some of that:</p>

<p>Columbia and Chicago are both in urban locations in giant cities, but Chicago is way more isolated and in its own little world than Columbia. At Columbia, you can walk out of your dorm, into the subway, and be anywhere in the city in about the time it takes to get to a bus stop in Chicago. That’s good news and bad news – people spend much less time on campus at Columbia, but New York is really special. (Chicago is great, too, but it ain’t New York.)</p>

<p>Nothing says, “I’m elite, screw you!” like Columbia’s central campus area, which is designed like a fortress floating above the common people below. Chicago’s campus is all spread out and interwoven with Hyde Park. Columbia’s is concentrated and separate. And also probably a little safer, because there are a limited number of entrance points that can be patrolled effectively.</p>

<p>Maybe Tokyo and London are worse, but in this hemisphere there’s no place where you can spend money more freely than Manhattan. Social life at Columbia can get very expensive. Students who don’t have a lot of available cash can feel left out and lonely.</p>

<p>Columbia is somewhat “corier”. One of the benefits of a core curriculum is that all students can share a set of common references. At Columbia, that really works, because everyone really does the same things in their core classes, and takes them at the same times. Chicago has a limited-Chinese-menu core with a lot of overlap between the syllabi of the different courses, but it’s not quite true that there is a set of books that EVERYONE has studied together. On the other hand, there are a lot of people who choose Columbia because of its location and prestige without actually caring about the core, and I think a greater percentage of Chicago students have affirmatively chosen to go there because of the core. So, while both sets of students have a love-hate relationship with their cores, there seems to be more grumpiness at Columbia.</p>

<p>Since Columbia is in New York, there is a tendency for people to take themselves very seriously, and also for people in the surrounding community to take what happens there very seriously. Sometimes, that can get in the way of academic freedom and open discussion. Do some research on the careers of Rashid al-Khalidi and Nadia Abu-el-Haj. Each was a valued and popular faculty member at Chicago. Each was lured away by Columbia (in Abu-el-Haj’s case, Barnard, but same difference, since the departments are essentially unified in most fields), and each constantly finds him- or herself in the middle of some ongoing political theater there, as pro- and anti-Palestinian groups, students and nonstudents, use their classes and lectures to attach each other (and attack them often). Nothing remotely like that happens at Chicago. People value civil discourse a lot more, and political correctness somewhat less. That’s something very special about Chicago: there really is a culture of listening carefully to one another, taking nuanced positions, and responding to what people actually say rather than what you thought they were going to say.</p>

9

<p>One other point linking to what seventytwo said - always keep in mind, you’re comparing Columbia to the University of Chicago, not Columbia to George Washington U or Boston College or the like. While the “ivy status” (as poor as a factor in consideration as it is) could perhaps give Columbia an edge over those schools, Chicago is pretty much Columbia’s equal in terms of reputation, academic clout, etc. There may be a difference in exit opportunities when comparing Columbia and say, BC because of Columbia’s strong reputation. Chicago and Columbia, on the other hand, are really on the same playing field, and “ivy status” should not even come into play here.</p>

<p>(I don’t mean to deride GWU or BC, but I do think there is a discernible gap in quality between these two schools and Columbia, whereas I don’t think this is true for Columbia and Chicago.)</p>

10

<p>I hope people are still around to discuss this–i’ve been out of town for a couple weeks.</p>

<p>I’m leaving to visit schools late this week, and I will be at the admitted student weekends +1.5 days for classes and talking to students at both Chicago and Columbia. My ultimate decision will be made at the end of the trip.</p>

<p>I think it’s interesting, though, that Columbia alums were more willing to defend their school on the Columbia message board.</p>

<p>Has anyone experienced economics/international relations classes past the intro classes? I’m interested in any insights about class size/profs/curriculums. I realize that Chicago is part of the freshwater school of economics, but is this right-leaning political tendency echoed in any of the other departments? It’s not a big deal, I’m just curious.</p>

11

<p>i think chicago is definitely more intimate in terms of the learning experience. it is not pre-professional, but rather very intellectual. which personally, i like, but it really depends on the students. </p>

<p>i feel like the core at columbia is forced on students a bit, while the core at chicago is more of an opportunity, or at least that’s what if feels like. there’s alot more room to explore within the core at chicago than at columbia. columbia’s core is set in stone. there’s no variety within it. </p>

<p>i also did some research on the cores (i got into both chicago and columbia too) and chicago’s core has a much more world focus. it’s still mainly western, but not like columbia’s which is basically only a western literature/history core. even the admissions officer at columbia told me “we believe everyone should have a grounding in Western thought because that is the foundation of society today.” personally that didn’t stick with me well, because i’m fascinated by eastern/world thought also. </p>

<p>these schools are pretty much equal in every respect. but in terms of a really learning experience/growth i am personally choosing chicago. there was definitely more of a community on campus. columbia kids just get out into the city, which is great, but sometimes the sense of community is non existent. </p>

<p>personally after visiting/learning about alot of schools i think chicago takes the best of two schools in particular. columbia and brown. the best of columbia and the best of brown are at chicago in my opinion. i came to this conclusion after talking to an admissions officer at chicago yesterday. the passion for learning for the sake of learning, intellectual growth, diversity in thought and passions that are accepted and encouraged at chicago are like at brown. while the strong core has variety within it like brown’s open curriculum and not as rigid as columbia’s core. but i think the academics are equal to both of the schools. chicago also has the city factor like columbia. and sure you might think new york is better than chicago, but i can promise you Chicago is AMAZING. you’ll never run out of things to do there either. and they’re creating a bus next year directly linked to the university that will take kids into downtown in about 10 minutes every hour.</p>

12

<p>I agree with what a lot of people say. I’ve been accepted to both colleges, but I chose Chicago in a heartbeat. That’s because I’ve visited both of them and knew that I would be much happier at Chicago than Columbia.</p>

<p>As Cue7 said, I think Chicago is a very quirky place with lots of intellectually-minded students. The school values learning for learning’s sake much more than pre-professional mindset so many colleges show these days. Columbia, on the other hand, seemed much more pre-professional to me. (I know there are many who object to this…) Also, I was very put off by the fact that I had to choose between different colleges at Columbia. I still have no idea what I’m going to major in (interested in math, classics, economics, and engineering) and the admissions official told me that it’s very difficult to transfer from one college to another. </p>

<p>The campus was near perfect for me: close to the city, but not right in the middle of it. Personally, I don’t think I’d ever be able to live in Manhattan. Having lived in Boston for so long, I visit NYC quite often for vacations, etc, but after a few days the city just becomes a little too much for me. Chicago didn’t feel as big to me, but still had plenty of cultural experience to offer. Oh, and going to Columbia can get REALLY expensive. </p>

<p>I think it comes down to which style you prefer… Hope this helps at least a little bit</p>