<p>And fell absolutely in love. Columbia was my dream school back in like 8th grade, but realism grounded me to a realistic dream school, and I fell in love with UChicago. Now that I'm done a largely successful junior year, my parents forced me to visit my old flame because they're prestige whores. I'm in love with Columbia, but I can't just cheat on UChicago. How are these schools alike and different? I love the core curriculum and urban setting of both, but I need more distinction. Help?</p>
<p>Columbia=UChicago in prestige, they’re almost the same exact schools except for being in different cities.</p>
<p>IMHO Columbia > Chicago.</p>
<p>The question you are presenting this community is something you have to take time and conduct your own due diligence in. Because only you are free to pick and choose with what you like and not like from each institution. I am sure Chicago has great opportunities, but Columbia is a world brand. At the end of the day, prestige counts more than you think it does, that is why your parents are “prestige whores.” But to be fair, you will have phenomenal job/graduate opportunities from either school.</p>
<p>Chicago has slightly more name-brand recognition on the world scale than Columbia does. The only people who don’t acknowledge this are those without international experience, along with those who are absorbed in the US News rankings.</p>
<p>Solely in the U.S., Columbia gets more recognition as an Ivy League school than Chicago does, although the difference is only significant among the general public. Among employers, there is little to no difference. If you want proof of this via a comparison of the two schools, why don’t you just look at mid-career salaries:</p>
<p>University of Chicago $100,000
Columbia University $99,700</p>
<p>(Source: [Top</a> US Colleges ? Graduate Salary Statistics](<a href=“http://www.payscale.com/best-colleges/top-us-colleges-graduate-salary-statistics.asp]Top”>http://www.payscale.com/best-colleges/top-us-colleges-graduate-salary-statistics.asp))</p>
<p>At the end of the day, go to the school that you love more (or the one into which you’re accepted). The difference in quality (and to employers, prestige) between the two institutions is negligible.</p>
<p>Oh gosh. After acceptances this spring I narrowed my choices down to UChicago and Columbia. I ended up picking Columbia, and while “no regrets” is sort of too strong a term (I still dearly love UChicago and am sad about having to miss out on it), I am beyond excited about Columbia. So I can tell you a little bit about the two, but keep in mind that I have never actually been a student at either, and I’m still in the wide-eyed wonder stage about Columbia and NYC, whereas a current student could probably give you a more realistic account.</p>
<p>But first: UChicago isn’t exactly a “realistic” dream school if by realistic you mean easier to get into. It is quite selective, and on top of that is far more self-selecting that a school like Columbia, which I think appeals to a broader range of people (at least as far as sending in the application is concerned). There are probably plenty of people at Columbia who didn’t get in to UChicago. I don’t mean to sound discouraging, because of course I don’t know anything about you as a student, but UChicago is really not anyone’s safety school.</p>
<p>UChicago’s Core is really more like an amped up set of distribution requirements. Students must pick courses from groups such as Humanities, Social Sciences, Civilization, Biological Sciences, Physical Sciences, etc. I don’t think there are any specific, required classes, although everyone studies across the same disciplines. Columbia’s Core Curriculum is for the most part a set of distinct classes that everyone takes, with a few distribution requirements in things such as global cultures and science. Both cores supposedly take up about 1/3 of your entire degree.</p>
<p>Picking Columbia was hard for me because in many ways I am the quintessential UChicago student. I meet every stereotype that the school is known for and admit it proudly. Other schools (such as Columbia!) can match or perhaps surpass the intensity and intellectual rigor that UChicago is known for, but to me UChicago holds its own in terms of cerebral, intellectual (okay, geeky) atmosphere. Some people see this stuff as gimmicky–I don’t. Maybe I’m wrong. I don’t know. The combination of the tangible academic rigor and the unique and quirky atmosphere combine to make a place that is amazing for some people and probably miserable for many others. I see Columbia as more generic. Which is fine–I suppose that a school that appeals to a wider range of people will be a good experience for me (can you tell that I’m still not totally convinced of this?). But it also means that I can find what I loved about UChicago at Columbia. It won’t be right in front of me, but it’s certainly there somewhere. I am not sure that that would work the other way around. People always talk about “fit” in college admissions and in college choice. I don’t really agree. I am certainly a better “fit” at UChicago, but I’m not really looking to go to the college where I would be the most comfortable. What would the point of that be?</p>
<p>In the end, I chose Columbia because of the Core. The experience of reading Ancient Greek literature at the same time as a thousand other Columbia College freshmen while living in the cultural center of the country(/world/universe) is the kind of intellectual thrill I couldn’t turn down (this is where that wide-eyed wonder comes into play…). Also, most of my academic interests are interdisciplinary and humanistic, so the Core really works out well for me.</p>
<p>Although I will say that our housing decisions are going on a week late, and I am getting crosser and crosser with Columbia University by the hour. grrrr.</p>
<p>Iteotwawki,</p>
<p>I didn’t mean to come off so cockily! My freshman self thought that Chicago was a substantially easier school to get into, but years of HS experience and endless, obsessive research on Chicago has taught me otherwise.</p>
<p>I am confident, as a holistic applicant, that I have as good a shot as anybody at either school, with the exception of hooks and such. I would love to get into either, and really hope I don’t get into both to face the no doubt immensely difficult decision you had to make. </p>
<p>Your advice, however, was perfect. Thank you a lot. I hope you get your preferred housing- the John Jay Gryffindor-esque hall particularly appealed to me. </p>
<p>Now the hard decision- where to apply early? :/</p>
<p>iteotwawki, great response! </p>
<p>I’m a Columbia student, and my University Writing professor (who went to UChicago) made a joke about the differences by saying: (paraphrasing) “at Columbia you see kids playing frisbie on the lawn, kicking hackeysacks, and soaking up the sun when the weather gets warm. At UChicago kids just sit around all day analyzing Heidegger.”</p>
<p>Of corse, she was joking. But the overall ethos of UChicago’s undergraduate population seems to be personified in her joke.</p>
<p>If you cannot decide between the two, apply to UChicago early. It’s non-binding. However, if you can see yourself at Columbia more, go binding ED. It gives you an edge you could use if you don’t have hooks, etc.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You really sleep well at night after posting this?</p>
<p>Haha Light Airen ROAR LION ROAR!</p>
<p>lol. I was in almost the exact position going into senior year. Decent chances at most schools, not amazing chances at UChicago or Columbia. I ended up picking Columbia for ED (although I still applied EA to UChicago… which was kinda bad, lol. Then I told them about Columbia like two days before I would’ve found out whether or not I would’ve gotten in. It’ll be a mystery forever!)</p>
<p>I ended up picking Columbia because</p>
<p>1) as far as I can tell, Columbia (currently) has better facilities and a more vibrant performing arts community (partially because of NYC location). However, at least in the area of facilities, Chicago will soon have the edge over CU (and let’s be honest, I could not have fully understood the horrors of Roone-Arledge Auditorium), and I think Tina Landau is still over their TAPS program (theater), and she’s awesome. This probably doesn’t matter to you, lol.</p>
<p>2) Not only did I like New York better than Chicago (not that huge a discrepancy), I liked Morningside Heights better than Hyde Park. Both areas are relatively nice areas that are close to both some super-ritzy areas (i.e., the Obamas’ house), and some not-so-ritzy areas. However, Morningside is father along in the whole gentrification process, and so it’s a little safer, to be honest. I feel comfortable walking down Broadway at all hours of the morning, even occasionally <i>mildly</i> inebriated, lol, and I don’t get the feeling that Hyde Park is the same way (I could be wrong though). Also, and more importantly, the transportation from Morningside to the rest of the city is SUPER easy, with a subway stop right by the gates, four awesome buses that stop right in front of the school, etc. I’m not sure about Hyde Park, but I don’t think it’s quite as quick/easy to get to the rest of Chicago.</p>
<p>3) I like the Columbia core a little more than the Chicago core. The Columbia core is more text-focused, more grouped around a set of core texts, whereas the Chicago core is more focused on, as someone else said, amped-up distribution requirements. Plus it’s fun to watch science majors forced to read Montaigne. And LitHum and CC for all the bs and people not reading (myself included) and whatever, have been extraordinarily productive for me. And who doesn’t love sitting around and talking about books with a bunch of people who are smarter than you (or at least it will feel that way) but will still listen to your opinion? Well… I mean, I lot of people, lol. But for a person like me, LitHum and CC were amazing. I’m actually going to miss them.</p>
<p>4) For culture, I realized that as much as I care about intellectual pursuits, as far as socializing goes, I’d rather spend most of my time talking about current events, pop culture, random events of the day, whatever, with smart, educated people, with a little bit of “let’s talk about Jane Austen!” mixed in, than spend a larger piece of my time talking with smart, educated people about Henry James with a smaller piece of the other stuff. I mean, I’ve never gone on an overnight visit or anything to UChicago, so for all I know, they’re the same as Columbia as far as the Jane Austen to Beyonce to Debt Ceiling ratio in conversation. But certainly the reputation of Columbia, and my experience here, is more in line with who I think I want to be.</p>
<p>Do you suggest I apply early to both, seeing as they’re my top schools?</p>
<p>Columbia has an ED program, so you cant apply to both early</p>
<p>Yes you can. But if you are accepted to Columbia then you have to withdraw your application (or your acceptance, if you get it) from UChicago and go to Columbia. I don’t think UChicago has rules about where else you can apply as long as you don’t break another institution’s rules, and Columbia’s rules are that you can’t apply early to another institution with binding early decision. So UChicago is fine under this, as it has non-restrictive early action.</p>
<p>
, this from someone at penn…figures. I guess then, UChi>Penn…</p>
<p>
complete nonsense…I suppose this person is associated with chicago because this isn’t true…</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong, Chicago is obviously a great school, I see it being a virtual twin of Columbia, but most people, if they have the opportunity, would choose Columbia. Personally, I never found the place where fun dies appealing, so I never applied. I thought Columbia offered the hardcore intellectual experience if desired (like Chicago), along with the chance to cheer on fantastic Div I sports teams and enjoy the opportunities presented in NYC.</p>
<p>anyway, in addition to other benefits of going to Columbia, you get to wear the following if you go with the Light Blue… ;-)</p>
<p>[Brooks</a> Brothers | Collegiate](<a href=“http://www.brooksbrothers.com/collegiate/collegiate.tem]Brooks”>http://www.brooksbrothers.com/collegiate/collegiate.tem)</p>
<p>[New</a> Balance H710 Ivy League Collection | FreshnessMag.com](<a href=“http://www.freshnessmag.com/2010/12/15/new-balance-h710-ivy-league-collection/]New”>http://www.freshnessmag.com/2010/12/15/new-balance-h710-ivy-league-collection/)</p>
<p>This is great. I guess I’ll apply to both early. If I get into either, decision made. If not, I cry myself dry and pick up an application at McDonalds.</p>
<p>While U-Chicago is a fine, fine school, on the international stage it is NOT Columbia, so don’t kid yourself. When it comes to world wide recognition, few are in the same league.</p>
<p>I just came back from visiting UChicago. For the four hours I was there, I prayed and crossed my fingers that they would mess something up…they didn’t. It was a perfect school. Chicago and Columbia are too similar. International prestige on a similar level (don’t deny it), a rigorous core, excellent city opportunities, heck, they both require a swimming test to graduate. Decisions suck.</p>
<p>[World’s</a> Best Universities: Top 400 - US News and World Report](<a href=“http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities/articles/2010/09/21/worlds-best-universities-top-400-]World’s”>http://www.usnews.com/education/worlds-best-universities/articles/2010/09/21/worlds-best-universities-top-400-)</p>
<p>UChicago is slightly superior to Columbia on the international level, it is also ahead of a few more Ivies and other top schools.</p>
<p>@shaheirunderdog - Congratulations on going to Penn! Our D elected not to apply, but we have friends who have attended and were pleased with their experiences.</p>
<p>The USNews World’s Best Universities rankings - like all rankings - are interesting, don’t you think? In this instance, as I’m sure you would have seen in comparing the two schools, Columbia betters or matches UChicago on every single indicator except the ‘International Faculty Score’ whereby UChi has a rating of 68 versus Columbia’s rating of 17. This indicator, according to the site’s methodologies sections, accounts for 5% of the total ranking. The basis for Columbia’s ‘International Faculty Score’ is unclear to me, as is the basis for defining an ‘International Faculty Score’ in the first place.</p>
<p>Given the paucity of information about these indicators, I wonder if it wouldn’t be better to exercise considerable caution in using them as a basis for asserting degrees of ‘superiority’?</p>
<p>@OP - We think UChi is an excellent school, but our D liked Columbia’s more structured Core and NYC, ergo Columbia it is, for her. If you want to talk yourself into one school or another based, among other things, on your perception of other people’s perceptions of prestige, I personally think that’s not the way to go about thinking how to attain the best possible education for you. In any event, good luck with your considerations.</p>