<p>I am interested to hear various perspectives on these colleges, focusing on pre-med. </p>
<p>Dartmouth and Penn seem too dominated by fraternities. Columbia's Core Curriculum seems displeasing (it seems after a semester or two, most Columbians become disillusioned with it).
However, Dartmouth is supposedly better in teaching and Penn Med is a valuable resource. Columbia seems great if not for what I suspect are large classes or higher competition in the sciences, and the problematic Core.</p>
<p>I should also mention that I don’t mind being in either a rural or urban location. </p>
<p>Also, are research opportunities equal at all places?</p>
<p>research ops might be slightly better at Columbia/Penn, but all do very well premed.</p>
<p>Columbia students are not “competitive” in the sciences, but the science classes are challenging and the kids are ridiculously smart. Columbia does not have large classes by any measure. the student:faculty ratio at Columbia is better than D & Penn as is the proportion of classes under 20. It’s a big university, but a small focused liberal arts college, I wouldn’t worry about large classes or professor attention, research at Columbia (or Penn and Dartmouth for that matter).</p>
<p>Columbia. It has a great mix of everything you want, and a fantastic reputation.</p>
<p>Penn. At Penn previews the dean told us that around 94% of peelers go to med school straight after penn</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Less than 30% of Penn undergrads are members of fraternities/sororities, meaning that more than 7,000 of them are NOT. The social life at Penn is quite expansive and diverse, and offers something for everyone.</p>
<p>^ 45, key word is seem. ;)</p>
<p>^ True–pesky things like facts and data can be so inconvenient. :p</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>So would you say despite the fact they are challenging, pre-meds at Columbia do well in these classes? It seems there is a greater proportion of “ridiculously smart” science kids at Columbia than at Penn or Dartmouth, so I kind of worry how I might fare. I consider myself pretty good at the sciences, but I have had very little experience outside of my own high school to confirm this. Also, even if I am pretty good, wouldn’t I be more successful at somewhere like Dartmouth? Or are the differences negligible? </p>
<p>Also, could you say more about the Core, and how pre-meds “deal” with it? It’s probably not great that I’m disinclined towards it already, however I am open to hear how the Core might even be an asset for someone like me (if that is the case).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The ridiculously smart kids are pretty much non-existent in pre-med classes. Pre-med classes are basic college science for the most part. At Columbia, the smarts kids, start in intensive and advanced science classes and move on to grad level courses pretty quickly. There was a math major in my year who was TAing a grad level math class by his soph second semester, just a brilliant kid. It’s not the kids as much as the grading that matter and all 3 here are equally grade inflated. Not one way or another like Brown or Chicago.</p>
<p>The core is very doable, and it’s graded very well - definitely straightforward to consistently score A- and above in core classes. The core is a stimulating aspect of Columbia but not the most difficult part by any means.</p>
<p>That’s your opinion of the core. I have a friend who is doing his mechanical engineering at Fu. He said that the core is horrible</p>