<p>Daughter has been accepted to U. of Chicago, Macalester, Grinnell, Oberlin . . .</p>
<p>Just wondering what about comparative strengths and weaknesses between U. of C. vs these liberal arts colleges. She seems to be leaning toward a concentration in English, but also is interested in social sciences such as political science and sociology. Any perspectives welcome. Trying to keep money out of the analysis for now.</p>
<p>You could argue that U of C has many LAC attributes (i.e., small classes, high teacher student ratio, relatively small student body). Some of the differences are Chicago's core curriculum approach (many LACs don't require) and Chicago's opportunity for research (perhaps not relevant). Chicago's faculty is world famous also but has a reputation for rigorous acadmemic standards for undergrads.</p>
<p>DS was accepted to Grinnell, Carleton and Davidson and I was sure he was a small LAC person -- and he's at Chicago. When we went for admitted students week-end, several of the kids had it down to Carleton and Chicago. My son says now he would have been happy at any of them; what tipped the boat was that the only one of any of his colleges that he could visit when it was in session was Chicago. So I would say that of your dd has sort of a favorite and can probably only visit one this month, she should try that one on for size.</p>
<p>Grinnell is VERY isolated. My son says he now realizes that being in the city isn;t nearly as important as he thought it was -- altho he does enjoy it! -- and Grinnell would have been fine. But your dd may feel differently. n I could not get my now senior dd to apply to Grinnell because of the location, even though her brother raved about it, although she was seeking diversity and her counselor said it was one of the most diverse student populations in the country.</p>
<p>I agree. My daughter is a freshman at UChicago. And, in many ways, it offers the best of both worlds -- a relatively small student body (4000) with the resources of a large research university. The advantages of the latter include one of the largest university libraries in the country and a vaster array of courses and majors from which to choose. My daughter reports that class sizes are, as represented, usually 15 to 20 students (including in the core curriculum classes), and all (except labs) have been taught by either Associate or full Professors. The major difference between UChicago and the LACs is its urban setting. Most of the LACs are located in rural or suburban areas. UChicago is in Hyde Park, which is one of the best functioning racially integrated neighborhoods in the country. This is not to say that there is not crime in the area, but its crime statistics are much lower than Cambridge, west Philly, or New Haven. My daughter reports that it's easy to access downtown Chicago, and she does so weekly. Contrary to its reputation, UChicago does have a social life, albeit not a traditional Greek-driven, heavy drinking one, although alcohol is commonly imbibed and drugs are not unknown. They're students, after all.</p>
<p>My S is also 1 st year at Chicago and he enjoys it very much. I agree with many of er22 comments so I will not run on about all the wonderful things about Chicago. My S was surprised at how many students had applied to LAC's like Swarthmore and the others who ended up at Chicago. I think the core attracts them. I have been to the Oberlin campus several times and the impression one gets is a very liberal campus and student body. Very artsy feel. I believe there are quite a few music majors at Oberlin. Oberlin is much more rural but maybe 30 minutes from Cleveland. So you have different styles for different folks. I'm not as familiar with the others so I will leave it at that. Good luck.</p>
<p>I like all four of these options and went to one of them. </p>
<p>These schools share a lot of applicants, appealing to active, intellectual students. </p>
<p>I'm most interested in adding that I like LACs for students with broad interests. It's my unproven theory that a student can get a better academic experience outside their major at an LAC due to the smaller classes and student populations, and a stronger focus on teaching than found at some research universities. There is often more flex regarding prerequisites, too. </p>
<p>In this grouping Grinnell usually offers the most money, and if your D is not put off by rural Iowa I'd lean that way. If she was deadset on English I'd lean toward Oberlin. Macalester offers more off-campus opportunity, both cultural and academic (variety of internships; service learning etc.) so that should be tossed into the mix, too.</p>
<p>My son attended Chicago (I taught there as a visiting prof some years ago also), but he was accepted also at Carleton, Williams, Reed (my alma mater), and UMich.</p>
<p>The comment above about research isn't really apt, IMO. Students at any of the top LAC's will have every bit as much, and perhaps even more, opportunity for independent research as students at Chicago.</p>
<p>The main differences between Chicago and LAC's are pretty obvious ones. (1) There are as many students in the first-year class at Chicago as there are in some entire LAC's. Although the teaching and contacts with profs are pretty good at Chicago, it's a bit more impersonal a setting than most LAC's. (2) UChicago is in Chicago (a huge plus for some people, as it was for my son).</p>
<p>As for the overall quality of the education you would get, Chicago, Grinnell, Oberlin, Carleton are all outstanding. One disadvantage of Chicago compared with LAC's is that many of the sections of courses in, say, math or econ or whatever, will be taught by adjuncts and post-docs. For this reason, my son felt the quality of instruction was somewhat higher at London School of Economics (where he spent his junior year) than it was at Chicago.</p>
<p>As for the OP's questions about particular specialties, Chicago's sociology department is one of the top three in the country; its polisci department is in the top 10.</p>
<p>Chicago is for a very well balanced student who is capable of strength in all the required core areas. I do think it is run very much like a larger LAC with very small seminar/discussion classes. It has a much smaller population than most U's, with 4,000 students, it might be twice the size of the LAC's you mention, but there are good LAC's, like Wesleyan, that approach it in size. The students say that working with a Research prof in the grad school can be as simple as knocking on the door and asking.</p>
<p>I'm always amazed that when ppl quote the size of a uni-doc they always leave out the existence of about 4-5 thousand other students on campus attending the graduate schools. These students often use the same libraries, dining halls and student union facilities as the undergrads (I know because I was a grad student once myself) and to pretend they don't is a little like ignoring an 800 lb elephant in your living room.</p>
<p>johnwesley,</p>
<p>maybe your experience was different from mine, but I find the professional school students rarely venture out of their domains. At Chicago, that means three facilities on the periphery of the campus, for the Med, Law, and GSB. Science grad students are pretty well chained to their departments, and rarely venture out. Perhaps those rare social science and humanities students who are on campus take up some undergrad space. So, 800 pound elepant? more like house cat sunning in the window.</p>
<p>Most Chicago alums would say that a big plus for the place was to get real live contact with grad students and prof school students as an undergrad. It is a qualitatively different experience than one gets at an LAC. Yes, many LACs have more opportunities for involvement in faculty research, but that experience is not necessarily better. It will not be the same.</p>
<p>For example, my D, a first year, working in a bio lab, spent quite a few hours this past week editing a grant submission for a postdoc in the same lab. You won't get an experience like that at an LAC. Better or worse? Can't say - depends on the kid and so forth.</p>
<p>From everything I've heard, U/Chicago is very much an undergrad-friendly institution where not all the "oxygen" in its manifold forms is sucked up by the grad students. </p>
<p>I think any of the schools cited by the OP are excellent choices but Chicago is one of the very few universities that I might choose over an LAC. I only regret that Smith is not on the OP's list. :)</p>
<p>Personally, I would go stir-crazy at Grinnell but that's only my particular personality quirk...it's a fine school.</p>
<p>When my daughter was looking, I was at first pushing U of C hard. But due to some things that happened to her in high school she was dead set against Chicago's core curriculum. She was stridently opposed to being dictated to about what courses she had to take, at least not to that extent. So I guess one's feeling about the required curriculum might be one deciding point; it was for her, even at the application stage.</p>
<p>There was a guide book we looked at, "Inside the Top Colleges", that surveyed student attitudes, and of the 20 or so top colleges surveyed Chicago was among the highest in "would not attend here if I had it to do over again", and "Behavior of Classmates is Cutthroat". This surprised me, but after I saw it my enthusiasm about pushing the place so hard was dampened quite a bit.</p>
<p>However, based on the Chicago grads I've known over the years, they certainly put out a good product. And I've never heard anything negative from any of these alums that I know; quite the contrary.</p>
<p>My daughter in the end chose Oberlin, and she likes it there. Macalester didn't offer her chosen foreign language at an advanced level. She thought Grinnell was too small for her tastes, among other concerns, and didn't apply.</p>
<p>I don't have the numbers, but I recall that Oberlin is among the larger LACs. It's English, Politics and Sociology departments are all considered to be strong departments there (according to Rugg's Guide). They have a lot of good teachers in the Politics department, so I'm told.</p>
<p>If it were me, I'd probably investigate the issues cited in that book a bit more, but if I was satisfied I'd pick Chicago. Reasons: I really admire the people I've met who went there, and I also like the city of Chicago itself. My daughter really wanted a city school, but in the end had to compromise after considering her other priorities.</p>
<p>The good news is that these are all good choices.</p>
<p>TheDad, LOL. Different folks react so differently to a particular environment. D spent some of her time at Grinnell laughing about what other's see as it's remoteness or an environment that would drive them stir-crazy. D looked at the same environment and saw an insulated vibrant campus, a cute little downtown with a couple of hang-outs, a Wal-mart (appears to be the college student's supplier of choice), a bank or two, a medical facility, and well-maintained residences showing pride and care. Within an hour or so students could be at a large state U or to a very nice mall or other city type activities in Des Moines. </p>
<p>She laughed out loud as we rolled into Grinnell, past the new motels and restaurants and I asked her why she was laughing. She said "we have none of this. We have to drive 25-30 miles to find most of these things at home.These folks don't know what isolated and rural means. They would need new adjectives for our place." Obviously she felt that the town and it's available resources were just fine.</p>
<p>In fact as that trip gets further digested she has said that what she wants is a Grinnell type LAC in a Grinnell type location - an LAC exactly like Grinnell with a a shift of a few degrees to the middle politically and socially.</p>
<p>curmudgeon,</p>
<p>my D's original roommate was from southwestern Kansas, a small town of a thousand or so. Her mother told us their nearest restaurant was 40 miles away. BTW, it was a McDonalds.</p>
<p>newmassdad, I can relate. We have a post office .Two convenience stores (both with gasoline). A garage or two. A chicken place, small strip center, a mobile home med clinic, and and...that's about it. LOL. Hey, it's what she has as a hook-"feral child"-whattya think?</p>
<p>Curmudgeon, you and your D are welcome to visit us. We will provide entrance visas, native guides, and diplomatic immunity.</p>
<p>One of the salient points when my D first visited Smith was whether Northampton (pop. 30,000 or so) was too small. Given its nature, it did, but some towns of 50,000 would have flunked.</p>
<p>(signed) The Other End of the Spectrum</p>
<p>P.S. I just got back from four days in your state. The wild flowers were purty and no one opened fire on us once. In these parts, "a small strip center" might be taken to mean something completely different, I dunno.</p>
<p>I just noticed that the OP has not posted again. Did we regulars scare off another newcomer?</p>
<p>NMD, it could be that the OP only plans to check in every few days, unlike some of us that check in every few hours.</p>
<p>TD:</p>
<p>"every few hours" is how you missed the faculty meeting at College Confidentalia and were volunteered for serious Dean duty....IMO, U need to be on all da' time, unless of course, Da' Prez is out on the back 40 chasin' rattlers in his top-siders.</p>
<p>I haven't had time to even start that thread - arghhh.</p>