<p>“Penn and Chicago are both equally recognized brands - especially in the med/science worlds.”</p>
<p>When you talking about just medicine, they aren’t equal. </p>
<p>Oh, sorry. I was just giving my own personal opinion on why I loved Penn more when I was deciding on where to ED last summer (which obviously doesn’t matter anymore). I can’t really explain the “chaotic” part (lol I don’t even know if that’s the correct word to use); it’s just the vibe I got.</p>
<p>Rhg3rd, I think the poster meant the undergrad brands are equal in terms of recognition by med schools. Come now, if this wasn’t the case, how would undergrads from brown dartmouth Williams etc fare against students from hopkins, penn, columbia etc? </p>
<p>If we’re talking about med schools I agree - penn med is probably in the second band (along with wash u, duke, etc.) behind harvard and hopkins. Uchicago is probably a bit farther down than that. Medicine is actually one of chicagos weakest grad subjects. (By “weak” I mean a top 10-15 program, as opposed to law or biz or its other big draws, which tend to be top 5 or so.)</p>
<p>But for undergrad, the brands would be the same. I don’t think penn undergrad is viewed any differently from chicago undergrad. </p>
<p>JHS, perhaps I was responding to absentions’ comment narrowly, but here’s what s/he said:</p>
<p>“They both have a med school on campus, but Philly has a LOT of hospitals you could get opportunities at!”</p>
<p>So, I read that comment as “Philly = the city of Philadelphia” not just necessarily what’s near Penn. I then contrasted that to the “City of Chicago” - which has just as many, if not more, major hospitals than Philadelphia. </p>
<p>All this being said, I’m not sure that the sheer number and types of research opportunities are pertinent for undergrads. If it was, why would anyone ever choose Brown, Dartmouth, Amherst etc. over Penn or Michigan or Hopkins? I think the original question asks about the pre-med environment at each school, not the extensiveness of the STEM research plant (in which case Penn, Michigan, Hopkins, etc. have clear advantages over the other schools I’ve mentioned). </p>
<p>I think to have a good pre-med program, a school needs:</p>
<p>1.) smart, driven students (who will presumably do well on the MCAT),
2.) some level of grade inflation or “ease” in which students GPAs don’t suffer too much
3.) a research plant that passes some basic threshold (and all of Chicago, Brown, Dartmouth, Williams, Michigan, Penn, Hopkins, etc. pass that threshold, as seen by their med school placement rates)
4.) Good, sensible, and diligent pre-med advising</p>
<p>For a long time, UChicago had (to some extent) #1 and definitely #3, but certainly not #2 and #4. Now, the school more or less hits all four areas, as Penn has done for many years. When you can check all the above boxes (and I think you can for both Chicago and Penn, or Williams and Dartmouth and Hopkins), fit becomes more important than any other factor, including size and prominence of the research plant, or supposed school “acceptance” of pre-med as a pursuit. </p>
<p>It really should go without saying, but I agree with that completely. Or almost. The social acceptance thing goes to fit. And it helps, both for fit and for your core criterion #2, if the Organic Chemistry professors choose to feel successful when their students do well in the course and on the MCATs, as opposed to humiliating and maybe driving away students whose interest in organic chemistry does not extend beyond medical school admission requirements. I am not suggesting that anything like that happens at Chicago today . . . but I’m not so sure it didn’t sometimes happen in the not-too-distant past.</p>
<p>JHS,</p>
<p>Your comments about o-chem professors and their disdain for pre-meds in the past is certainly accurate. When I attended UChicago, the phd and scholarly pursuits were fetishized, and anything “pre-professional” was often belittled. This wasn’t though, contained to pre-meds. Those going into business, law, engineering, etc. were, to a certain extent, also marginalized on campus. </p>
<p>Especially over the past 5 years, there’s been a real shift in approach at UChicago, at least from what I can see. Nowadays, students interested in business can (and are actually encouraged) to take classes at the Booth school, there is specific advising for all sorts of professions (from health to journalism), and there’s even an engineering institute on campus. From what I know, there has also been administrative push back to create more grade inflation on campus. The quality of students (at least in terms of test scores) has increased noticeably in the past 5 years as well. </p>
<p>I hesitate to say that the College has reached some form of stasis, but it appears to have stabilized a bit over the past couple years. However much professors might grumble about having liberal arts students take classes/modules in Financial Accounting or MS Excel, these offerings are now available to UChicago College students. Further, whether faculty like it or not, grades have probably trended up over the past 5-7 years. Additionally, average MCAT scores (and LSAT scores) for the college seem to have increased too.</p>
<p>All of this points to a good pre-professional support structure for UChicago College students. That’s not to say that, in the recent past, there weren’t myriad issues, it’s more to say that the College has changed quite swiftly - more quickly and more noticeably than any other top school out there. There could still be some consternation surrounding pre-med students, but as acceptance for biz/law/engineering/etc. has grown quite quickly, I imagine such sentiment is fading fast - to the point where now, I’d have no problem saying Penn and Chicago offer comparable experiences for pre meds, and fit is the most important factor. (Note, I would NOT have said this as recently as two years ago.) </p>
<p>I know quite a few chemistry profs at an assortment of schools and have frequently heard comments along the
lines that they see it as their responsibility to weed out applicants for med school. They really think the med school expect and want this. And I heard a biology prof (not a UChicago prof) just last night make a similar remark. The attitude is in the culture of those fields and it probably does exist at UChicago–along with most of the other universities in the US. </p>
<p>Thank you for the input, everyone. I ended up choosing UChicago as I did some thinking and decided it was the better fit overall. Some current students I contacted also indicated pre-med was certainly feasible at Chicago. Hope it was the right decision, but I guess there’s no looking back now! </p>
<p>XAnonymous123:</p>
<p>Congratulations on your decision to attend Chicago! It’s a wonderful school, and I think you’ll be quite pleased with the experience - both in terms of the general education and the pre-med experience. </p>
<p>Also, enjoy your four years there - I imagine by the time you start your first year, there will be even more restaurants/venues to explore in Hyde Park, and the school will be in the midst of an ambitious fundraising campaign that will push the institution even farther forward.</p>
<p>Penn is a great school too, but it seems as if you fit best at Chicago. The education is second to none, and especially now, It’s a good time to be a Chicago student!</p>
<p>Future pre-meds be wary!! If you choose to attend a academically rigorous school like Uchicago, Penn, Princeton etc. please please please plan your classes well and work really hard so you graduate with a stellar 3.7+ GPA. </p>
<p>I’ve had too many good friends squeezed out of the med school process even with a top tier school on their transcript, decent MCATs and good recs + ecs. They ended up with some terrible post grad blues and regretted going to schools like Penn and Chicago over their state flagship 4+4 year guaranteed admission pre-med program.</p>
<p>The truth of a matter is that a 3.9 from a school with lesser academic competition (where you’re likely in the top 1% of the graduating class) is always going to look like you worked alot harder than a 3.5 at an ivy where your in the middle of the pack despite taking science classes requiring alot more time in the lab and alot more hours of homework relative to your non science peers.</p>