<p>
[quote]
The long answer is that it depends on what you are studying, and whom you are studying it with. I know nothing about African Studies, other than that Fratkin and Mosley are heavyweights.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It seems here like you are saying better professors teach harder classes. The hardest class I'm in right now (English lit) is difficult only because the professor (who is horrible) tests us on objective information (usually names of minor characters) which is hard to remember and very boring to study. A much better professor might base the grade on literary analysis, which would actually be easier for me to do.</p>
<p>My interests are African Studies, Ecology, and PolySci. I don't mean to ask whether Smith has prominent people -I know it does. I mean to ask whether Smith has as high standards for its students as does UChicago -these are two very different things. In my first year at Smith, I took upper-level classes and did not think they were terribly challenging. Smith probably offers more courses I am interested in than does UChicago, I had just been thinking UChicago classes might be more challenging/would prepare me better for further study than Smith classes. I know UChicago sends more students to prominent law schools and grad schools than Smith, I just don't know how many more. And while I know Smith started, I have reason to believe I could come a bit late and be ok.</p>
<p>The best part about Chicago was (and I assume is) the core in the first two years. Students tend to work their butts harder in those, in my (limited) experience. And so, yes, I do think in the first two years, in the main, and with many, many exceptions, Chicago is more demanding. At Smith, I get the sense that in the first year there are quite a few students who (as elsewhere where there are either just distributional requirements, or none at all) flail around with no clear direction. But I know there are also students (like my d.) who have clear directions (she is a music and Italian double major, hoping to go JYA next year) and who also work their butts off, as do all the engineering majors. (For whatever reason, and I don't think it is because of better teaching, or better students - neither of which I think is the case -, but likely because of better advising, Smith has produced more Fulbright scholars in the past several years than Chicago, and I think more than Carleton and Swarthmore combined.)</p>
<p>But the reason I taught at all at UChicago was that I was a TA (Social Thought), and that wouldn't happen at Swarthmore or Carleton or Smith.</p>
<p>These are all great schools. They are also what you make of them.</p>
<p>(I still say love the one you're with - you'll get a great education at UChicago.)</p>
<p>Well, this is really hard for me right now, so I apologize. I am in love with my friends at Smith, I was quite content in my social life there, and I don't really enjoy the city of Chicago. If I go to Chicago and am not any more satisfied academically than I was at Smith, I will be truly depressed. I decided to transfer under the assumption academics would be more demanding/better elsewhere. Now I REALLY REALLY want to know if this is true ASAP. What is up with the grad school acceptances, for instance? I know they are quite good from UChicago, and I believe they are not quite so good from Smith with the exception of a few areas. Also I know Smith is less selective and thus in general does not have students who are as well-prepared for college (I believe).</p>
<p>
[quote]
I have extensively discussed this matter with my professors, and the consensus is that 'school shopping' (as theyrefer to it), arouses disapproval from graduate school admissions officers. Unless your explanation is of medical import, attending more than two schools will be deleterious. This is corroborated by the interviews my professors had for their graduate school admissions: my philosophy professor was persistently questioned even for his single transfer during his interview.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sorta in a similar situation. I went to Colgate University for two years but I went on two med leaves for personal reasons and I only completed one semester. I'm in my second year at a CC and I'm going to have to transfer anyway to get my undergrad degree. Will law school or grad school (not sure which one yet) adcoms not look to favorably on why I had to transfer?</p>
<p>Maybe tippy-top law schools such as Stanford, Yale, Harvard, Berkeley, etc. would look down on your record, but my father went to law school and at least his opinion is that with good grades and excellent LSAT scores, you can go to a decent law school no matter how many undergraduate institutions you attended. I think grad school (depending on your area of study) is even more flexible than that. I think for me, this conclusion is good enough. Sometimes great lawyers come out of middle-of-the-road law schools, just like some brilliant people never graduate college. If you've lived an imperfect life, the important part is to learn and grow with experiences -you may find you have some insights that people who took a more conventional path through life do not have. I think people who accomplish things tend to be people who make the best of their circumstances and follow their passions. Just my personal way of finding peace of mind on the issue, though.</p>
<p>I have still a bit of time before I apply to law school. Right now, I'm primarily focusing on getting back into a four year college so by the time I apply, I think this "red flag" should be accounted for. The school just wasn't a good fit. I was a 17 year old who made a bad choice and I would hope that adcoms are wise enough to see that. If not, then honestly, I shouldn't want to go that law school anyway. Ultimately, it doesn't matter though as I believe that I'll go wherever Allah wants me to be. Thanks for the advice.</p>