<p>All of the Big 10 schools have a good chemistry program.</p>
<p>Also, FYI: If you're going to major in chem, UC Berkeley is better than Stanford.</p>
<p>Berkeley professors discovered 17 elements (including Plutonium, Berkelium, Californium and Seaborgium). ;)</p>
<p>UCB, you mean synthesized, not discovered. Those elements do not occur naturally. Also, for an undergrad I really don't think the differences between Berkeley and Stanford are significant.</p>
<p>thank you so much for your input guys! after further research, I have decided to substitute in uwisconsin-madison for northeastern, since I have been doubting northeastern for a while (not much of a campus- one of my requirements). concerning Holy Cross, I should point out that one of my other requirements is a nonreligious school. As an atheist, I recognize that colleges wont discriminate against me, but after four years of catholic high school, I want to go somwhere nonsectarian.
I know it doesn't seem like it, but I have done research on all of the schools on my list. I have looked through their websites, read their pamphlets, visited most of their campuses, and (although I'm not sure this helps) looked through posts regarding them on CC. I took a notepad with me and wrote positives & negatives for each school when I visited it. I have specific reasons (although possibly minor) for applying to each one. I know it is indecisive of me to have such a large variety of schools ("feel"-wise) on my list. But honestly, I don't know what the "feel" of schools are beyond what I picked up from visiting them. I could go by the stereotype, but thats often incorrect from my point of view. For example, people told me that yale was ugly. I visited and thought it was the most beautiful campus I'd ever seen. Also, I have a set of requirements, e.g. I don't want to go to an LAC. I plan on revisiting any school that I get into- however, I don't have the time right now. I'd rather focus whatever free time I have on applications.
about the stanford/berkeley issue, I've always been under the impression that berkeley was more science-focused while stanford offered a more all-around approach to education. I could be wrong though.</p>
<p>
[quote]
you mean synthesized, not discovered. Those elements do not occur naturally.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Thanks for the "correction" Tokyo...</p>
<p>Your list is a good one, except that the weight of all those applications to high reaches will drag you down. Focus on your match and low reach schools, and think about an overall EA/rolling admissions strategy. If you are accepted early to a school, would that remove any others from your list? </p>
<p>At the very least, create a priority list of your high reaches so that you don't lose your sense of what matters most when the crunch hits. Having to prioritize should help you think through your choices. Try to get your definite list of high reaches to about five.</p>