<p>With all due respect to the experts here, only you can tell what’s a good fit for you.</p>
<p>Do you want to get lectured by academic superstars maybe even nobel laurates, and dont mind that they will be focused largely on research so that the school can excel at every field (you could be using the books they wrote!)? Go to Chicago</p>
<p>Do you want classes that really emphasize discussion sometimes led by adjunct practicing professionals, and have the opportunity to take a class with a former global leader or two (Albright, Hagel, Lake, Aznar, Uribe, Madavo, etc.)? Go to Gtown</p>
<p>As a RECENT Georgetown graduate I can tell you the undergraduate experience is very much that of a liberal arts college with the caveat that your professor may have a ‘real job’ (at the Hill, some governement agency/dept, firm, nonprofit etc.) This is not just in IR. I had an econ prof that handled the food stamps program for the Congressional Budget Office, another that worked for the World Bank and I loved that about it, you get real world insight from many profs, not just the big name ones.</p>
<p>When you’re talking about comparable institutions fit is more important than slight differences in selectivity and that also includes non-academic considerations</p>
<p>selectivity aside, many people are harping on georgetown’s poli sci/IR but at least when i was going to college, chicago was better known for it. even if we give georgetown the benefit of the doubt on poli sci, chicago has better everything else for a lack of better words. i always saw georgetown as a pre-professional school that was outclassed by schools like upenn in its particular genre.</p>
<p>@ tk21769, appreciate the clarification didnt intend to misguide shadowzoid, had a misconception i suppose as I was trying to make the fit point, probably why I shouldnt be posting stuff im not sure about (neither should a bunch of other know it alls here who do it a lot more often than I do)</p>
<p>I think I was misunderstood. I want to go to Chicago. Hands down. I’m just contemplating applying to Georgetown too. If the selectivity is about the same, then I’ll get into Chicago is I get into Georgetown, in which case applying to Georgetown was pointless. If Chicago has a lower selectivity, then I won’t wast my time applying to Georgetown. If Georgetown has significant lower selectivity, then I will apply to it as a back up to Chicago.</p>
<p>A lot of schools have a core, while they sound cool, in reality they are a waste of credits. Just 18 year olds blowing hot air and trying to sound intelligent lol. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think we all understood you. But in general on CC when you place two school together as in A and B, people just use it as an excuse to discuss both schools on a comparative basis and push their opinions forward. So threads like School A vs School B thread regardless of the specifics would end up like this.</p>
<p>When schools reach a certain level of selectivity, predictability effectively goes out the window. There was a well-known Chicago prospective a few years back with a virtually spotless academic record, great essays, and the most zeal for Chicago I’ve ever seen. He was rejected outright and chose Stanford instead. I saw another poster get rejected by Cornell but be admitted to Harvard.</p>
<p>If you like them both, then apply to both. Be aware, however, that they are quite selective, and there is no guarantee that you will get into both or even one of them.</p>
<p>A lot of schools have “Chinese Menu” distribution requirements, which are not the same as an integrated core.</p>
<p>Yes, that’s a very apt description of many first year students. The interesting thing is how after a few quarters with good professors/mentors who have seen it all before, the tone (and the substance) changes. This is exactly why it is not a waste of credits. It is actually among the most valuable learning experiences one can have.</p>
<p>Cores are great ways of improving critical thinking skills I agree but they take some credits that could be used for example for learning more science or math hehe. Some cores are as large as 10 credit classes.</p>
<p>Actually, only a few colleges have a true Core (Chicago & Columbia come to mind); others have distribution or GE requirements, which may only be 6 courses outside your field or major.</p>
<p>Well, the means are climbing every year, but Chicago appears to be making an effort to curb its inflation. And, deflation remains an avenue of complaint taken by some Chicago students.</p>
<p>i don’t like to think necessarily in terms of gpa. what’s more important is how hard the students had to work in order to earn it. in these terms, i’m guessing that chicago surpasses its peers which i’m not saying is a good thing or a bad thing. just a chicago thing.</p>
<p>Based on what you’ve said UChicago seems like a bad fit, as does JHU. Definitely less “fun” top schools. You sound like you would like Brown, Dartmouth, Penn, Princeton, and Northwestern much more which are much more social top schools.</p>