<p>Son has been admitted to both. The more I read about these schools the more similarities I see. Both are intensely focused on the undergraduate experience, for example. </p>
<p>Anyone want to take a crack at comparing these great places? Things you like / dislike about either or both? Assume the financial part is equal for both.</p>
<p>Daughter was accepted at Swat and Chicago, chose Swat, and graduated last year. There is a profound difference between the two schools. Chicago exists for doctoral education; Swat has no doctoral education. As a result teaching assistants (TAs) play a key role at Chicago. As I stated back in 2011 (I have copied and pasted that old post here) when we visited Chicago, the two student guides kept talking about how wonderful their TAs were. I asked what percentage of classes had TAs and they said 80%. Then I asked the admissions person because I was really stunned at that number. He said that TAs are doctoral students who are selected through a competitive process and have to show an aptitude for undergraduate teaching (if they don’t they will be research assistants instead). The courses are not solely staffed by the TAs; rather, a TA functions a liaison between the professor and the students and helps the students. One class that my daughter visited had no TA; at the other class (biology), there were 12 students, a TA, and the professor. The professor talked for a few minutes but the class was led by the TA and the students interacted with him. His job was to “translate” the professor’s complex lecture. At Swarthmore, my daughter had direct access to the professors. They taught all the courses. They are experienced pedagogues, and almost all her teachers were fantastic at teaching. Further, the professors were in the buildings evenings and weekends as well as during the day and she could run down the hall and ask them questions. Even though the science labs have lab instructors, the professors are frequently in the labs with the students. Her organic chemistry professor came to Thursday and Sunday evening study sessions (recitations) and worked with the students directly. I think Chicago often saves its professors for the Ph.D. students; at Swarthmore, there aren’t any doctoral students competing for your professors’ attention. The professors’ sole focus are the undergraduates.</p>
<p>If you read the posts on the U of Chicago forums, the students out there say that all of their core courses are taught by professors (that is about 1/3 of the curriculum). And they have profs for many other courses in addition to that. D attended a couple of classes on campus, and both were taught by profs. I do think Chicago uses more adjuncts than Swat (but, for example, Barack Obama was a law school adjunct – so the quality could be pretty good just the same). When we toured last year, our tour guide ran into two different profs who knew her by name during the tour. So… she clearly had some direct relationship with them, and said great things about them. Chicago has also made a dramatic attempt to improve quality of undergrad life and experience (like access to research) for undergrads. They are a campus with tremendous resources (like the Argonne lab & Fermilab as possible research locations for physics undergrads). They have also really boosted their emphasis on their career center and things like pre-med counseling in the past couple of years, too. Times are a changin’ at U of Chicago.</p>
<p>My D has also been admitted to both for the fall as well, although Chicago came through much better for her on financial aid (about a $13,000/year difference with some merit and grant aid). D will be attending admitted student days for both before making up her mind. She is a bit of an introvert, so the small size and quieter campus at Swat may appeal more. But she will be looking hard at the broader range of opportunities that a larger university presents as well. And she has a soft spot for the idea of the Chicago scavenger hunt as well.</p>
<p>Both are considered uber-intellectual schools (“for the eggheads”, as my dad says). Seems like a good description from the grads I have known from both. But my D is a proud egghead, so this does not bother her. 
So there are some similarities in the type of student drawn to both.</p>
<p>My son did his undergrad work at Swarthmore and his Ph.D program at UChicago. He railed against the possibility of having T.A.'s teach him in undergrad, which was a strong factor in picking Swat. Following his graduation from Swat he went out to Chicago…and became a T.A. As a T.A., he ran a weekly discussion section for his assigned students, held office hours, and graded exams and papers.</p>
<p>When he was doing his Ph.D. coursework at Chicago, I asked him where the students were smarter, at Swarthmore or in his Ph.D program and he unhesitatingly replied, “At Swat.” He was in the Honors program at Swat, so that experience probably influenced his answer. This is to take nothing away from Chicago undergrad. Great education. Just a different atmosphere than Swarthmore.</p>
<p>libartsmom: I don’t think you “get” the Chicago model. The TAs DON’T teach the courses. They merely grade the papers. When I was at Chicago as an undergrad, I probably had TAs for 80% of my courses, and I can’t remember even one that would ever speak during class. In fact, the TAs are there so that the profs won’t have to grade your papers and hence focus less on their class material.</p>
<p>momof3sons: Students in undergrad being smarter than students in grad school is a general phenomenon. I remember as a Chicago undergrad that a lot of the Master’s/PhD students told me that they were intimidated by the undergrads. It makes sense, seeing as how the most elite students are smart enough to forego PhD programs nowadays. PhD programs are a waste of 4 years unless you’re really serious about being a professor/researcher and don’t mind the ridiculous politics of modern-day academia. Master’s programs are expensive, and often don’t add that much to a degree; not to mention that the most elite students are usually recruited straight out of college.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Well… this is not necessarily a plus. You can learn a lot from a professor’s comments and insights in notes on a paper you write, for example. I can see for multiple choice type tests… but other than that, I wish the prof would do their own grading (yes, I saw the article this week on a computer program that grades papers, no need for anyone to post a link). A prof who considers grading their student’s work a waste of time seems more interested in pushing information out, and not worrying about whether what is coming back shows understanding/insight/need for course correction in some way. But obviously that is the way research universities like U of C work, with the TA system. That said, I went to a large research university with a very good reputation, and had some very good TAs that I still remember many years later. They probably went on to become great professors. :)</p>
<p>Realizing it is not all there is to being smart, U of Chicago has a slightly higher SAT range than Swat (surprised me, I thought it would be the other way around). From 2011 Fiske book:</p>
<p>Swat CR - 680 - 780
Swat Math - 680-760</p>
<p>U of C CR - 690 - 780
U of C Math - 680 - 760</p>
<p>And I am guessing U of C has raised that range a bit more in the last two years given their recent surge in applications.</p>
<p>My D is genuinely on the fence between these two schools (and Harvey Mudd), so we will be giving this a lot more consideration in the next few weeks.</p>
<p>Thank you for the excellent posts. Please keep posting if anything else comes to mind. I guess the parents / students who are admitted
and in the process of deciding are like my son: the visits will be very important. </p>
<p>From the posts you start to get a feel for the slight differences in approach to undergraduate education. I (maybe several of us) would be interested in thoughts about other things such as how the students interact, how the career office serves students, what is the support structure for students besides the professor / TA, how good are the extra-curriculars?</p>
<p>I guess many of these questions can be explored on visits, but anyone with thoughts on these types of questions as well?</p>
<p>Again, thank you all for your time.</p>
<p>intparent,
Harvey Mudd certainly adds another variable to your daughter’s outstanding choices. I’ll bet the math SAT score range for admitted students is 800-800. 
I assume if she chose Mudd that she would absolutely be looking to take advantage of the 5 college consortium since Mudd is so focused in one area.</p>
<p>Has your daughter been able to investigate the Honors program at Swat which is quite unique? Does that intrigue her at all?</p>
<p>Posted this a year ago: “D had same choice and went with Swarthmore-better environment for a 17 yr old. 1st semester pass/fail was great. Already doing research with major professor as freshman-with fully funded internship this summer. No grad students to compete with and huge endowment to tap into. Very impressive honors program. She had many friends attending schools on the east coast so that probably influenced her also. Her classmate from high school is at UChi and loves it. Chicago is a great city, so you can’t go wrong. If grad school is in your plans, I’d probably go with Swarthmore-otherwise it’s a tossup.”</p>
<p>Now a year later, D loves it-no regrets. Another paid internship this summer and a great environment for her. Other D is in Chicago at Northwestern and loves Chicago. I went to an LAC and 2 Big Ten schools for grad and law. I would not give up the LAC experience for anything-that’s where my fondest memories came from.</p>
<p>momof3sons, she only knows what her tour guide and Simon (in the info session) had to say about the honors path. She (and I will be coming along for the Friday portion) will be at Ride the Tide, and I assume there will be more information there for her. The Mudd SAT ranges in Fiske 2011 are:</p>
<p>CR - 680 - 770
Math - 740 - 790</p>
<p>So they are not slackers, either. Yes, if she attends Mudd she would take some classes elsewhere in the consortium. Mudd also requires their students to do some kind of senior project in some non-technical area (like English, social studies, art, etc.). That is one things that appealed to D, that they are not just about the sciences, although their core is intensely focused there. But you can see from the CR range that their students are pretty talented in the non-math areas as well.</p>
<p>I do think Swat’s reputation as a small community of scholars is VERY appealing to D. We will see how the visits go… to be honest (and I know you have some affiliation with Swat), we were a little put off by some things when visiting. There is a certain reserve, almost a wall, around the community. Some of it is how visitors themselves are handled, some is the personality of people we met. I suspect it feels different once you have been “let inside” via acceptance. But each school has its advantages and disadvantages. It will be interesting to watch D weigh her choices!</p>
<p>intparent,
I remember that you had some concerns after your visit. That stuck out in my mind because it was in stark contrast with what our family has experienced. I have one child who graduated in '07 with an Honors major in a social science field and a current junior who is also in the Honors program as a science/humanities double major. By the way, if you had been on a tour which my current junior gave, you would have come away with a very positive experience, no doubt. I remember describing your tour to him and he was a bit horrified. Unfortunately, as at every school, not all the tour guides represent their schools in the best possible light. (I must have taken 40 tours amongst the application seasons of my 3 kids!)</p>
<p>A simple description of the unique Honors Program. About 1/3 of each graduating class chooses to participate in the Honors Program. It is a selective program, with individual departments deciding on what standards to enforce in admitting students to the program. The student takes 4 Honors seminars over the course of junior and senior year. These are very small double credit classes, usually capped at 12 students. At the end of senior year, Swarthmore brings in professors from around the country who are experts in the various fields that the Honors majors have studied, and it is these professors who write and grade the final exams for the Honors students and who conduct oral exams of the students. The oral exams have been characterized by students as conceptually akin to the defense of a Ph.D thesis. A student may find him/herself interacting with a professor who wrote the text the student most relied on.
It is a grueling experience, but one which is shared by 1/3 of the student body and generally described as exhilarating. The outside professors decide whether the student will be awarded Honors, High Honors, or Highest Honors.</p>
<p>I realize that I left out a little detail from my explanation of the Honors program. The student in the program chooses an Honors major and an Honors minor. For example, you might be an Honors major in Economics and an Honors minor in Spanish. You would take 3 Honors double-credit seminars in Economics and 1 in Spanish.</p>
<p>Back in the day, Honors was 4 in the major and two in the minor. Thus, at the end of senior year, we were tested on six seminars, comprising two years of work. For the longest time after graduating, I had a recurring “dream” that I hadn’t done any studying and had to take these tests in a month or so. I would go to my parents’ basement, where I actually left all my notebooks and, of course, they were nowhere to be found. Then I would awaken and breathe a sigh of relief. I haven’t had the “dream” in some time, so perhaps it’s finally out of my system? </p>
<p>In other words, those who take Swarthmore honors: “Abandon hope, all ye who enter here!!!”</p>
<p>Still it was a fantastic learning experience, really setting one up for life in the “real world” in terms of synthesizing material, expressing one’s ideas clearly and succinctly, then defending said ideas to a group of skeptical colleagues. The honor program at Swarthmore is the essence of why a liberal arts education is invaluable, and able to withstand changes in the world in which we live. It’s really not what you studied, but how you learned to learn and communicate. </p>
<p>For these reasons, I feel that an Honors education is second to none in this country, HYSP notwithstanding.</p>
<p>Any idea how many honors students fit in study abroad with the double credit seminars?</p>
<p>Great story SwatGrad.</p>
<p>mamabear-it’s quite doable. For example, one double credit seminar plus two “regular” 1 credit courses fall semester of junior year, study abroad spring semester of junior year, 2 double credit seminars first semester senior year and one second semester senior year along with 2 other single credit courses. It’s very possible.</p>
<p>Uchicago uchicago uchicago</p>
<p>For grad school, for grad school, for grad school :)</p>
<p>When I was a high school senior, I was also faced with choosing between Swarthmore and UChicago. I picked Swarthmore, mainly because I got a better financial aid package from there and had visited Swarthmore and liked it, and did not have a chance to visit UChicago. Back then I was also told to go to Swarthmore for undergrad and to UChicago for grad school. I’ve come to believe that this advice, while well-intentioned, is sadly misinformed. First of all, “U Chicago for grad school” doesn’t apply unless you actually have a shot of getting into U Chicago for grad school, and most high school students have no sense of how difficult it is just to get into a decent grad school, for many programs. And UChicago has many advantages over Swarthmore. UChicago, like Columbia and unlike Swarthmore, has a core curriculum that I wish I had taken classes under. Also I have little doubt that their math program is simply better than Swarthmore’s, though that might not matter to the OP. I didn’t realize until near the end of college, just how valuable it may be to be able to take graduate courses. That’s one advantage to going to a university with a graduate school, as opposed to a small college with only undergrads. Certainly these aren’t advantages for all college students; I’m just pointing out considerations that haven’t been brought up, but that I think should be brought up, because they’re in my opinion very important things to think about when choosing between the two colleges. </p>
<p>There is no doubt that the fact that Swarthmore has no graduate students did make me feel more valued, in a sense. Almost all the professors in the field I majored in got to know me very well, and I got the sense that they cared about my success through my entire time at Swat. But if I had to make the decision again it would not be a clear choice at all. Students trying to decide between these two schools should visit both places if possible and get a sense of whether they’d be able to stand four years there, because that’s what they’re essentially signing up for. Disregard trivial things like the average SAT scores of students at the two schools. Nobody is denying that both these schools are very selective. The two most important factors, I think, are academics and the student body. Ask lots of questions to students! Generally there are ways for high school students to get in touch with current college students (e.g. Facebook). At the end of the day, your college experience will probably be totally different from what you had imagined it would be, so I guess it’s most important to go with your gut feeling.</p>
<p>Something else to consider wrt UChicago’s core curriculum: Swarthmore has distribution requirements, but they are rather lax even compared to other LAC’s gen ed requirements. I am a science/social science double major and have taken very few courses in those divisions outside of my majors, preferring to focus my electives on various humanities subjects. I’ve enjoyed a lot of academic freedom to structure my learning in both depth and breadth, rather than having it structured for me by a core curriculum.</p>
<p>Also, I want to note that the advantage of taking graduate-level courses to help one’s grad school application is essentially exclusive to the field of mathematics. I don’t know of any humanities or social science field, except maybe econ (where I have very little domain knowledge), where this is true. It’s also not true for bio, chem, or computer science–probably not physics or engineering either–where demonstrated research ability is the most important factor. In linguistics and I believe in English, writing samples are extremely important.</p>