<p>I would like to get advise from you guys. Thanks.</p>
<p>Both are great for economics, but it is Chicago’s specialty. Chicago is smaller and likely offers more resources to undergrads. What would your out-of-pocket cost differences be and can you afford it without too much student loan debt? </p>
<p>Chicago’s undergrad economics is over-hyped. Their graduates are not placing better than Berkeley econ grads at top jobs and top grad business schools. Unless there is a specific reason for you to attend Chicago, Berkeley is the better choice. </p>
<p>Berkeley economics offers less-math (100A-100B-140) and more-math (101A-101B-141) versions of the intermediate economics and econometrics courses. Chicago economics is similar to the more-math version at Berkeley; both are more mathematical than the offerings at most schools’ economics departments. More math is generally better if your goal is PhD study in economics.</p>
<p>Chicago economics is world class. I’d say it is akin to the fame of Berkeley’s or Stanford’s computer engineering and I don’t think Berkeley’s renowned computer engineering program is over-hyped. It’s almost in a class of its own.</p>
<p>Have you visited both campuses yet? Berkeley has a strong economics department, but if you don’t mind the Chicago weather, smaller classes and the math heavy economics program, UChicago is worth considering with a presumption that financial is not an issue for you since Chicago is more expensive, all things being equal.</p>
<p>Good luck! You cannot do wrong with either program.</p>
<p>it is unnecessary for me to consider the cost.</p>
<p>It also depends on your political leanings. Chicago will teach you Classical, Chicago School of Economics, while Berkeley teaches mainly Keynesian. If you think you lean to the left, choose Berkeley, and if you’re more to the right, choose Chicago. There are also other Econ-related majors at Berkeley, including Environmental Econ, Political Econ, Applied Math with an Econ concentration, and Operations Research with a concentration in optimization in economic systems. </p>
<p>Thanks you guys, you give me some meaningful points.</p>
<p>Both Berkeley’s and Chicago’s web sites provide lots of detail about their course offerings each term:
<a href=“http://timeschedules.uchicago.edu/”>http://timeschedules.uchicago.edu/</a>
<a href=“http://schedule.berkeley.edu/srchsprg.html”>http://schedule.berkeley.edu/srchsprg.html</a></p>
<p>These listings show course enrollment sizes as well as the instructor names. You can look up the instructor names elsewhere on the college sites (or Google them) for information about their credentials.</p>
<p>Chicago’s economics department may indeed be somewhat over-hyped. That’s not to say that Berkeley’s is any better. It appears that at both schools (if I’m interpreting the course and faculty listings correctly - verify for yourself), many undergraduate econ classes are conducted by graduate students. Chicago has far fewer super-sized classes (only 1 with more than 100 students, compared to Berkeley’s 13, I think). Chicago’s go as high as 149 students; Berkeley’s as high as 690. At both, relatively few have less than 20 students. Econ is a high-demand major.</p>
<p>So if you choose either school thinking you’re about to be taught economics by world-class professors, you may sometimes think you’re experiencing a bait-and-switch. Not that all grad students are poor instructors … but if you want consistently small econ classes taught by professors who already hold PhDs, consider a LAC.</p>
<p>(Now, I’m only referring to undergraduate economics courses. A large part of Chicago’s undergraduate program is taken up by courses in its Core program, including social science Core courses. Those courses tend to be quite small, often with enrollments under 20 according to the listings). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>What LACs offer mathematically-oriented intermediate microeconomics and econometrics courses (like Chicago and Berkeley) that would be good preparation for PhD study in economics? Even if you prefer the course format of LACs, you still need to find one with the desired course content for your goals.</p>
<p>It does seem odd that it is hard to find LACs (even among the most selective ones) that have a math emphasis in their economics courses, given that they supposedly have a greater proportion of pre-PhD students than other schools. Yes, math emphasis in economics is rare to begin with (despite PhD-holding economics faculty presumably knowing the importance of math in economics), but seems even rarer at LACs than at RUs.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Check Swarthmore, which requires students to complete a course in single-var calculus (or place out) before taking intermediate microeconomics. Carleton requires calculus as a prerequisite to its intermediate econ core courses and offers a mathematically-oriented econometrics course (with calculus and statistics prerequisites).
At Reed, the required microeconomic and macroeconomic theory courses have a calculus prerequisite; a mathematically-oriented econometrics course is required for majors; an interdisciplinary mathematics-economics major is offered. Pomona requires all econ majors to complete at least one course in calculus; their mathematical economics plan has heavier math requirements; they offer a course in advanced econometrics with calculus and linear algebra prerequisites; their required microeconomic theory course has a calculus prereq.</p>
<p>These are just the first 4 LACs I checked.
I don’t know that mathematics is as heavily integrated into the econ curriculum at these (or other) LACs as it is at Chicago or Berkeley, though. At Chicago, it appears that math prereqs must be satisfied before getting very far at all into the economics major. </p>
<p>According to Siegfried 2006 (Baccalaureate Origins of PhD Economists), of the top 10 American institution-size normalized sources of eventual economics PhDs, for 1997-2003, 6 were LACs. Chicago ranked 15th; Berkeley did not appear in the top 25. Of the top 10 American program-size normalized sources of eventual economics PhDs, for 1997-2003, 7 were LACs. Neither Berkeley nor Chicago (nor any of the Ivies) appeared in the top 25.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>These are all lighter-math, equivalent to Berkeley’s lighter-math 100A and 140. What I was looking for are LACs where math like multivariable calculus and linear algebra are used in the intermediate microeconomics and econometrics courses, like Berkeley’s 101A and 141, or the courses at Chicago, Stanford, Harvard, and MIT.</p>
<p>Considering the emphasis of LACs on pre-PhD preparation, and the fact that their economics faculty, like economics faculty everywhere, should know the importance of math in economics from their own PhD study experiences, it is surprising that LACs tend to be lighter-math in their economics courses.</p>
<p>It is not surprising that Berkeley undergraduate economics is not a big PhD producer, since about four fifths of economics majors take the lighter-math version, presumably using economics as a substitute for majoring in business (which does exist, but is very competitive to enter). However, this does mean that about 120 (out of about 600) economics majors per year do choose the math-intensive courses.</p>
<p>I guess they don’t just cater to the prospective ph.D students. I think that anyone wanting to pursue a phD in Economics is better served in majoring in Math and minoring in Econ than the other way around. In any case, your point is valid @ucbalumnus – there should be a lot of math in the UG level - even if it is terminal since a lot of the jobs in tjhe field require these. Rice does offer a math econ track - though they are not a LAC</p>
<p>@ucbalumnus there’s a few at Pomona, like:
Econometrics, which requires Linear Algebra
Experimental Design and Analysis, which requires Econometrics
Advanced Econometrics</p>
<p>Just looking at Harvard, there are two tracks for intermediate level courses- math based and regular. Upper level courses which require intermediate level macro usually accept both of them. Pomona’s econ math requires multivariable, linear, econ stats, and an upper level math course (operations research, intro to analysis, math modeling, probablity, real analysis I, or differential equations), which doesn’t seem to be two different from what major requirements in Harvard requires (Calculus, Calculus, Series, and Differential Equations, Multivariable)</p>
<p>Go to Chicago.</p>
<p>Uchicago is associated with 12 Nobel Prize in Economics winners, while Berkeley is only associated with 5. (still a large number for 1 university). honestly you couldn’t go wrong at either one, but Uchicago is definitely the best.</p>
<p>Maybe Chicago is better than Berkeley for grad level economics. But for undergrad, I’m not sure. Can someone post of the whereabouts of Chicago econ grads? They don’t seem to crack at the top bulge bracket firms. They also aren’t that visible at the top grad econ schools. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Economics is a very popular major everywhere. Yet, few LACs have the size or resources to offer a very deep curriculum. The ones that have developed a deep and varied curriculum tend to be members of a consortium. In such cases, the undergraduate level is similar if not superior to the best research universities, especially in terms of instruction. </p>
<p>The Econ/Math 100 vs 101 and 140 vs 141 debate appears to be quite a futile debate for anyone who looks at his or her UG as a springboard to a PhD. One can successfully accumulate the necessary background at the LACs that have a decent to superior Econ department and extensive faculty. </p>
<p>Nostalgic offered you the example of Pomona. Throw in the combined resources of CMC and Mudd and I doubt that you will find many holes in the instruction of the aspiring econ major with a strong math background. </p>