@1NJParent:
I certainly would not think UChicago has a higher workload than MIT or Cal Tech. The discussion - or perhaps debate - is over whether it has less, or is less rigorous, or less time-consuming.
MIT has a fine distribution requirement that reminds me of many others I’ve seen at other excellent schools. Students need to take 3-8 HASS courses inclusive of distribution and concentration. That is indeed, one per semester, on average, as recommended. There are something like 600 courses available to fulfill this requirement so the breadth is huge. There are two writing intensive requirements in the distribution and another two in the major; other than that, the only other requirement is that you take at least one humanities, one arts and one social science. So, given all that, what is the minimum number of close (ie interpretive) reading and writing-intensive courses you can get away with? Well, the answer is probably something like four which is really about 10%-12.5% of the total courses needed for grad. And how is that? Well, you can combine your humanities with a communication requirement and take arts practica and econ for the remaining distribution requirements - as just one example. There are probably a seemingly endless number of options. That’s what happens when you have 600 intro courses to choose from. You can select things that won’t tax you with hundreds of pages of reading this week or yet another five-page essay that requires another trip to the writing tutor.
Now, the reality, of course, is that MIT students often take more writing than the minimum, just like UChicago students will often take more than 20% of their courses in analytical writing - and will often take more than the six Math and lab science requirements. The typical student at either institution will do more than the “minimum” because they are engaged and interested.
MIT does what works for their students, and the outcomes speak for themselves. UChicago has a different purpose by offering a liberal rather than technical education, so requiring a relatively heavy dose of writing - even from their STEM majors - is in keeping with that particular goal. One is not more or less rigorous than the other - they are different from, not “better” or “worse” than, one another.
It’s not unusual at UChicago for those taking Calc and Gen Chem together (a fairly typical combination) to avoid taking Core Hum and Sosc concurrently because that would be a killer. Of course my non-STEM kids and many others take Core Hum and Sosc together but opt for a kinder gentler physical science sequence than Gen Chem (nearly everyone takes Calc). The point being that everyone gravitates to what they believe they can do best (or with the most enjoyment). At MIT, for instance, they are recommended to take one writing intensive in the fall of freshman year, and another HASS course in the spring. That sounds about right for a STEM major just starting out. MIT kids will want to do their Calc, Physics and either Chem or Bio in the fall, most likely.
I’d be surprised if both schools didn’t have comparable “training” in terms of presentation-skill-building integrated into the general and specific curriculum, introduction of technical/methodological writing, etc. Analytical writing is a skill that is quite particular to the subject across all disciplines, STEM and non-STEM alike.
