<p>Are the profs at UChicago very approachable? Do many grad students teach classes?</p>
<p>S1 has found all his profs to be approachable. In three years he has had only a couple graduate student instructors (now a 4th year). He has found most of them not only approachable, but helpful and encouraging. I’m sure there are some curmudgeons, but he has yet to encounter one.</p>
<p>I can tell you one thing, most of the tenured professors (I believe this is based on stats released a few years ago) make about 170k per year. UChicago is one of the top paying universities, other than Yale, Harvard and Princeton. That being said…They’re paid to do their job, and they do it well. Can’t speak from personal experience -YET- , but I’ve heard only good things, and that’s one of the reasons why I love Chicago. The professors live right around in Hyde Park neighborhood, and supposedly they’re always out walking their dogs or what have you. So I’m sure they might even invite you home for dinner to talk about a paper or something (Seems to be the norm with college life, though I’d be a bit frightened if one of my highschool teachers asked me the same :p)</p>
<p>There are hundreds of professors at Chicago, and they all have unique personalities. Some are extremely approachable, others not so . . . just like everywhere else.</p>
<p>What’s more, “approachable” only scratches the surface. Some are perfectly approachable, but scary when you talk to them, because they are intense, hyper-intelligent, and perhaps lacking in humor. Some seem standoffish because they are shy. Some enjoy explaining basic concepts to undergraduates who don’t understand what they don’t understand yet, and others prefer to leave that to their grad students, and talk to the undergraduates only after they have a clue. Some occasionally go through periods when they are really busy, and they don’t want to talk to anyone then if it’s not absolutely necessary.</p>
<p>Grad student teaching: You may (or may not) get advanced grad students teaching sections of popular Hum or Sosc sequences, and of 160s and below math courses. Grad students will lead discussion sections and labs for lecture courses. Grad students will also offer seminars in areas they know well, usually related to their dissertations.</p>
<p>I agree with JHS. Also, remember that Chicago is a major research university, and perhaps more than any other university, the faculty is absolutely the crown jewel of the school because of the research they do. The faculty - especially the young faculty - is there first to conduct high level research.</p>
<p>So, with that being said, know that Chicago isn’t Williams or Dartmouth or some other LAC-y type place that has more of a “theme” of commitment to teaching undergrads. There are certainly professors who love teaching undergrads, but its by their own volition and not because of any sort of overarching ethos at the school. As JHS said, it then varies by the professor and his/her personality. There’s no general mantra from the school encouraging professors to act a certain way. </p>
<p>During my time at Chicago, the professors varied in their approachability. They all had to hold office hours, but you could tell which ones enjoyed meeting with students and which ones saw it as a needless exercise. All the professors and grad students I had, though, were more or less on the same page for this: conducting high level classes that were pretty engaging and thought provoking. Sure, there a couple exceptions to this, but most of the faculty I had were pretty committed to the Chicago mantra of providing academics at a high level. The approachability part, well, that just varied.</p>
<p>To sum up, think of what you want from your undergrad academic experience. I really, really wanted exposure to the top minds in different fields. That to me was more important than having coffee with a professor or nice conversation during office hours. Given the research orientation, opportunities, and pay provided by U of C, I simply couldn’t get that sort of exposure at a LAC-y type place such as a Williams or Dartmouth. The faculties at those schools, in comparison to Chicago, are, well, a bit more junior varsity. I wanted to learn from the guys that pioneered and lead fields like sociology and poli sci and biology and physics. There are maybe only a handful of schools that offer a faculty comparable to Chicago’s.</p>
<p>I’m going to take a modest issue with the notion that U of C is not committed to undergrad teaching. I would direct readers to Donald Levine’s wonderful book Powers of the Mind that chronicles U of C’s efforts in this area. Chicago has always been the leader and greatest innovator in providing the very best education to its undergrads, even when a reigning president from-time-to-time, would have liked to see them go. I believe that the concept of the undergraduate “major” was a Chicago invention. Chicago’s reputation is second to none in its historical and continuing commitment to undergraduate teaching. </p>
<p>Undergrad professors are separately appointed to the College by the Dean of the College. One can be a full professor and not have an appointment in the College (unlikely). The College has standing committees that continually assess and try and improve undergraduate teaching and all new appointments to the College typically attend teaching seminars. There is considerable effort put into how to teach as well as what to teach for both graduate assistants (TAs, etc.) and a center exists for this sole purpose, see for example: [CTL</a> | Faculty Resources](<a href=“http://teaching.uchicago.edu/faculty/facworkshops.html]CTL”>http://teaching.uchicago.edu/faculty/facworkshops.html) and <a href=“http://teaching.uchicago.edu/graduate/gradpreparing.html[/url]”>http://teaching.uchicago.edu/graduate/gradpreparing.html</a> . Approachability is one of the areas addressed, and its importance to undergraduate education.</p>
<p>I’ll just point out that even by looking at class sizes, Chicago is much more in line with an LAC than with a university, it just doesn’t bill itself that way. Some profs are more fuzzy wuzzy than others (and I find grad students more approachable than profs, if only because they are younger, easier to relate to, and in some unfortunate/awkward occasions, I’ve been at parties where former grad student teachers have attended…) but Chicago generally is not a very fuzzy wuzzy institution. That’s not saying you won’t get the support and advice that you need and that’s not saying that there aren’t many resources to turn to, but it’s saying that the University doesn’t coddle its undergraduates, nor does it make the coddling/community/fuzzywuzzyness a selling point.</p>
<p>(I was the prospective student who, when reading LAC viewbooks, thought, “If I have to hear about close interactions with professors one more time, I’m going to vomit.” That, and obligatory co-ed/green grass/historic building photo really got to me.)</p>
<p>Before I start going off on more tangents, I’ll just close by saying that there is a sort of community that springs up spontaneously in a classroom, it’s just not one that’s mandated or enforced. Grad students do teach, but if you really don’t want to have them teach classes you could probably maneuver your schedule so that you’d never have them. However, I think you’d be missing out on a lot of cool classes if you did that.</p>
<p>when you are a current student, evaluations.uchicago.edu becomes your friend.</p>
<p>Yah unalove really hits the nail on the head - Chicago is just NOT a “warm, cuddly, fuzzy wuzzy” college. It’s - rightly, I think - known for being a bit colder, bit more distant type of place. Kids don’t gather and bond around massive bonfires or binge drink while tubing down a river as a class (i.e. Dartmouth), or ski down a slope as a class to receive their degrees (i.e. Middlebury, I think). </p>
<p>For me, I really didn’t want a fuzzy wuzzy sorta college at all. I guess coming from my background with two parents who went through the european educational system, they saw all the coddling that goes on at certain LACs and whatnot, and were just puzzled by it. They didn’t understand why an entire institution would be devoted entirely to kids from 18-22 yrs old. It was just confusing to them. </p>
<p>Also, just as unalove said, the actual classes themselves operate at a really high level, and somehow, just seemed really pure. There was no coddling (much the opposite), and you were tested and proven based on the strength of your ideas. It was refreshing for me, but I wouldn’t describe most faculty at Chicago as “approachable.” Yes, they teach at a very high level, as idad demonstrated in his post, but there’s a difference between highly competent, effective teaching, and approachability. Chicago does nothing to inculcate the lovey dovey atmosphere you find at some LACs, and I really like that about the school.</p>
<p>Now I’m going to object mildly, because I think the last two posts maybe overstate things a little on the “cold” side. My kids’ experience: </p>
<p>Kid #1 is not someone who sits in faculty offices much. But during her time at Chicago she developed a meaningful relationship with at least one professor in her department. This professor definitely fit into the “scary” mode I described above, but it so happened that she is also the best high-school buddy of a family friend (neither the professor nor the student knew they had a friend in common until after they had met several times, though), and so we got feedback on the relationship from both parties. I don’t think my kid ever got over being a little intimidated, but we know that the professor felt quite warmly toward her, and was happy to help her out / advise her, etc. She also had a very close professional-and-social relationship with a grad student who was a TA in a class she took first year, and then served as the preceptor (or some such term) for her BA thesis. And she got a lot of help outside class time from her first-year math teacher (a grad student), who took personal responsibility for getting her over a rough patch that was mostly her fault. I know that she felt she had very satisfactory in-class relationships with almost all of the professors she took classes from in her department.</p>
<p>Kid #2 IS the kind of person who will go to office hours. He got invited to the year-end barbecue for his department last spring, shortly after he declared his major, and realized that he already knew about half of the faculty and grad students there. He has regular e-mail correspondence with three or four faculty in his department, and with a senior professor in another department, whom he met on Parents Weekend his first year when he and I attended a model seminar the professor gave. My kid was totally turned on by the seminar, spent about 45 minutes after it talking to the professor, and then another hour in his office later that week. Those conversations (which have continued via e-mail) began the process by which my kid changed his idea of what he wanted to study. He also stayed in touch with his writing TA from first year, a Divinity School student, and with the TA from a language course. Through his job, he has a day-to-day relationship with a professor in a department he has never (and probably will never) take a course in. He has something approaching a fuzzy-wuzzy feeling about several of these teachers. (To be fair, there are some others whom he would be perfectly happy to see drop off the face of the Earth.)</p>
<p>In some departments, there can be lots and lots of faculty-student interaction. Other regular posters have first-hand experience here, but my sense is that math majors wind up knowing many of the math faculty pretty well, at least if they get involved in research. And in small departments like Art or TAPP, the students and faculty get very tight.</p>
<p>The point is not that Chicago is anything like Sesame Street, or even Haverford. But it’s not someplace with a wall between undergraduates and faculty. With a little bit of effort, you can have the relationship you want with most faculty members – really about the same as at any comparable university.</p>
<p>JHS - that’s a fair point. First off, I def think the relationship between undergrads and their TA teachers at Chicago can be quite different. During my time at Chicago, I had great relationships with TAs, and they approached the “warm, friendly” side of the spectrum more than my relationships with tenured professors.</p>
<p>Now, I don’t mean to say there’s a wall between students and professors. If students seek it out, they can have good, meaningful, and productive relationships with faculty members. Interestingly though, when I was at Chicago, pretty much anyone in any humanities/social science discipline had to write a thesis, and I believe it was highly recommended for some science disciplines. </p>
<p>Maybe this is wrong, but since I graduated, I believe this requirement was changed - it’s no longer a requirement for history, poli sci etc. The thesis, however, is the absolute best way to get to know a faculty member well, and I really don’t know why Chicago abolished this requirement. I assume that being a drain on a faculty member’s time was one reason for it. </p>
<p>On the other hand, look at a place like Princeton, where the thesis is required for all majors, and it leads to a lot more good student-faculty connections. Chicago pretty much used to be like this across many disciplines, and it’s weird they gave it the axe.</p>
<p>Again, as JHS noted, if you’re proactive, you can certainly form good relationships with professors. There are, from what I can see, no institutional mandates or ethos that promotes this. On the other hand, some of the mandates that would’ve promoted more interaction (i.e. thesis requirement with a professor advisor), have been lessened.</p>
<p>You come to Chicago because of the unparalleled caliber of the faculty and their tradition of superb teaching. Faculty and students don’t do anything close to holding hands and singing kumbaya though. TAs is a totally different story, but full fledged faculty… yah certainly students form good connections by being very proactive, but I don’t see much that promotes it.</p>
<p>(I’m assuming this is how it is at the majority of major research institutions - Harvard, Columbia, UPenn, etc. Chicago is probably no better or no worse on the approachability standpoint.)</p>
<p>Thesis requirements now vary from department to department. Some require every student to write one, some require it only for departmental honors, and others don’t even require it for that I believe. Lots of students write them. Interestingly, my daughter had very little engagement with her thesis advisor, but there were some specific reasons for that. </p>
<p>There IS most certainly an institutional ethos that promotes good relationships between undergraduates and the faculty. It’s the fact that both groups strongly buy in to the Chicago educational philosophy of intellectual rigor, critical thinking, and respectful debate. At least from what I have seen, the faculty respects the students, and sees them as for the most part engaged in the same intellectual enterprise that the faculty is. And vice versa. That’s a hell of a lot more important than a take-your-professor-to-lunch program.</p>
<p>One additional note: Any sense that the Chicago faculty is distant or unapproachable ought to be dispelled by the substantial involvement – most of it involuntary – they seem to have in Scav Hunt every year. Dancing in short-shorts, being serenaded in class, donning silly t-shirts, allowing their labs to be pillaged, and lending out their Nobel Prizes . . . all of it seems to happen with a fair amount of enthusiasm, or at least grumpy tolerance.</p>
<p>S has found that he knows a decent number of folks in math and CS already after one year. A lot of math students hang out in the lounge. As for approachable…S had emailed a prof before O-Week began about taking a particular course. Prof emailed him at 4:15 on a Friday afternoon, said, “come on by, let’s talk” and spent two hours chatting with S. S took two courses with this prof and would get emailed replies to questions at all hours of the night. He cannot say enough about the department advisors in both math and CS. Sure, some profs are intimidating – but in the real world, we all have to deal with various personalities. You learn to deal and create relationships.</p>
<p>S would describe Chicago as “tough love.” There are resources and opportunities for whatever support/fuzziness/research/office hours you want – but it is up to the student to take advantage of them. Noone will call to see why you haven’t been to class in two weeks or are tanking your p-sets. OTOH, if you get yourself to your advisor/student health/prof/TA, they are more than willing to help you.</p>
<p>Chicago has a tradition of teaching the next generation of academics – and they take that mission seriously. It was a big factor for S.</p>
<p>Does anyone have any insight on the approachability of the econ professors? I’m an entering first-year, so I’ll find this out for myself soon enough. But I just thought I’d ask while we’re on the topic. It seems that with such highbrow faculty in econ, they might not be as approachable as the professors in other smaller departments with smaller pedigrees.</p>
<p>Also, CountingDown, thanks for that information. It’s making me reconsider studying CS in some form.</p>
<p>As CD said, it is ABSOLUTELY up to the student! I’ve only gone to office hours three times in my three years here. That’s my choice.</p>
<p>And my “fuzzy wuzzy” point was more about what not to expect rather than what you might find. Like JHS mentioned, I have my own faculty fuzziness stories, but that fuzziness was not facilitated/mandated by Chicago the institution, but it was a fuzziness they imparted onto us from their own hearts, their own love of the subject matter, and their own choice to enter academia.</p>
<p>A few additional thoughts:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>One lovely Chicago tradition (of recent vintage) is Kuvia/Kunsomethingorother, a made-up winter festival that replaced what used to be a massive camping trip for first-years. For a couple weeks in January, people meet at 6:00 am to do martial arts / yoga type stuff and other enriching activities, outdoors, culminating with a polar bear swim in Lake Michigan on the last day. It was designed by faculty members, and a number of them participate alongside the students. (Of course, it’s completely voluntary, and completely nuts.) It is apparently a real feel-good thing with lots of friendly, informal contact.</p></li>
<li><p>Economics profs: I know little specific about the Chicago Economics professors, but I know stuff about famous professors in general and Economics professors in general. Ultra-famous professors tend to have to devote a lot of effort to fending off undergraduates who are quasi-stalkers – kids who actually know next to nothing about what the professors do or think, and haven’t put in the work to learn about it, and who project all sorts of things onto the professors that have little or nothing to do with anything but the students’ own psychological needs and fantasies. It gets wearing after awhile, and tends to make them a little standoffish.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>That’s the bad news. The good news is, they tend to like teaching. If you put in the work to get yourself up to a level where you can actually appreciate what they are doing, and you pay your dues a little, and hang around respectfully, and make yourself entertaining, you can generally get them to teach you stuff outside of class as well as in it. Trust me. In my younger years I was very good at that, and I had a great time as a result (plus getting some great opportunities and jobs out of it).</p>
<p>Graduate students are a key bridge, by the way. They are the ones who can get you from 0 to 60 so you can run with the big dogs.</p>
<p>Economics professors, especially famous ones, tend to have lots and lots of lucrative side deals going on – well-paid consultancies, book deals, advising the President’s advisors and then giving speeches about it, etc. So, frankly, they tend to be very busy, and they also tend to be somewhere other than their university at any given time. They don’t hang out much. Probably there are exceptions, but that’s what I have observed.</p>
<p>My wife actually knows one of the Chicago Nobelists fairly well, professionally. They are allies in policy initiatives that are at the core of what each does, and probably agree on about 90% of everything relevant. They have done a lot of work together over the past 3-4 years. I don’t think she would describe him as friendly or approachable.</p>
<p>There’s a pirate professor. He teaches math.
And their classics department rocks.</p>
<p>:D</p>
<p>I love UChicago.</p>