UChicago v SMU v Villanova

College Search & Selection
1

<p>Alright, I know this is early as I don't even intend to decide upon a college until early Aprilish but here are my current accepted choices:</p>

<p>University of Chicago
Southern Methodist University (as a BBA Scholar)
Villanova University (entry into the Business School)</p>

<p>I intend to ultimately major in Finance whether it be as an undergraduate or as a graduate in business school. Without a doubt I want to go to the Chicago GSB for further education, but I am conflicted where I should start.</p>

<p>If I don't go directly to an undergraduate business route I would ultimately take Economics and Mathematics. </p>

<p>I have also applied to the University of Texas (at the Cockrell Business Honors Program), Tulane University), University of Virginia, UC Berkeley (to Haas), UCLA, and UCI (was guaranteed admission, hey why not). </p>

<p>I have talked to alumni of all schools, which doesn't help too much since they of course would promote their school as best as they can. People who haven't gone to any of these schools promote UChicago, while the same amount promote SMU.</p>

<p>So I am asking you, yes you to give me an opinion why. Of course I am not going to suddenly change my pick, I am just gathering more insight.</p>

<p>Much appreciated ~</p>

2

<p>I would say not SMU.
Villanova’s business school is very strong; but UChicago is stronger as an overall undergraduate program. If you plan to major in econ undergrad, go UChicago. If you would rather go right to business, I’d say Villanova. Also, attending UChicago undergrad could significantly help your chances when being accepted to their grad school.</p>

3

<p>There are various links on the Tulane threads about the strength of their finance program and how it has been internationally recognized. Take a look. If you can’t find the info, PM me. However, I agree with spaglish that Chicago is easily at the highest level academically of the schools you mention. 4 years is a long time and things change in terms of interests and/or plans. As much as I like Tulane, I have to recommend you go the school with the best fit overall. If for you that means the one with the smartest kids on average, Chicago is your choice. If you have other criteria that are important (and that is not silly btw, the best choice isn’t always the one with the most “prestige” or the highest stats) then pick the one where you will enjoy things the most.</p>

<p>Picking a school because of what you think you will major in is usually not the best way to go. You are likely to be happier over the 4 years by going to a school that really appeals to you overall, especially since all these school offer absolutely first-rate academics. Do very well at any of these schools and you will be able to go to any grad school you want.</p>

4

<p>First I would like to say that you might want to double check your Texas application and make sure you applied for McCombs as your first choice, because Cockrell is the engineering school. It is a very good engineering school, top 10, but McCombs is the one that offers finance.</p>

<p>For finance jobs, I would put them into tiers like this:</p>

<p>Tier 1:
UC Berkeley - US News bumped it to number 3 for finance this year for good reason. Berkeley undergrad business is king on the west coast, but sends grads wherever they want to go.
UT Austin - Last year it was demoted from 4th to 6th for finance, but the schools that passed it were UC Berkeley and the mighty MIT. You might be wondering how it was ranked higher than a school like MIT to begin with, but McCombs attracts very good professors as well as recruiters. Placement in high-finance is strong, even surprisingly so, and honors program students have better job offerings than a lot of MBA programs.</p>

<p>Tier 2:
University of Virginia - BusinessWeek ranks them #1. A lot of people scratch their heads at that, but it is definitely one of the best.
Chicago - Chicago is a very well-respected university. It’s economics program is arguably the best in the world, but the focus here is definitely on quality education and it simply isn’t as connected as the economics programs of the ivies.</p>

<p>Tier 3:
UCLA
Villanova</p>

<p>Tier 4:
Tulane
SMU
UCI</p>

5

<p>All I can say is that if you focus on rankings you might end up at a school you hate. Just make sure you like where you are going in term of overall size, class size, accessabilty of professors, campus life, and overall vibe. I have never seen a good student have a problem getting into grad school if they go to a highly regarded university, and all the ones are your list are well thought of.</p>

<p>Also I encourage you to research the programs in detail, not rely on someone that arbitrarily thinks a school is Tier 3 or Tier 4, or relies on USNWR to do it for them. Remember, a lot (most) of your undergrad will be spent taking courses outside of your major. Honestly, I am not pushing you towards Tulane, I just know more about them, and it strikes me as odd that a school that was ranked 10th in the world in finance by a highly respected financial magazine in London (now considered to have replaced New York as the financial capital of the world) could be a Tier 4 in finance. Is USNWR more reliable? Who knows, they rank everything and this magazine only focuses on finance and looked at schools from all over. These magazines are hardly scientific. Like I say, each school will detail programs within their finance offering that they think are special. Researching 5-8 of those is not that big a deal, and if you narrow it to 4 or 5, then you can really see what school fits you best.</p>

6

<p>Sorry I meant McCombs, name error. </p>

<p>@fallenchemist: Thank you. This is why I am having difficulty at the moment because where SMU is, Dallas is supposedly the fastest growth city in the country (in terms of attracting business) as well as the state of Texas in general. I understand it’s not a top tiered university, but the opportunity involved as well as an undergraduate for a BBA degree changes the playing field. </p>

<p>Any more opinions or insights are much appreciated.</p>

7

<p>Some links on Tulane’s Finance department:</p>

<p>Energy Trading Video from CNBC:
[Video</a> - CNBC.com](<a href=“http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=615836031&play=1]Video”>http://www.cnbc.com/id/15840232?video=615836031&play=1)</p>

<p>Tulane’s Finance Dept. ranked in Top 10 in World
[Tulane</a> University - Financial Times Names Tulane University Among World’s Top 10 Schools for Finance](<a href=“http://tulane.edu/news/releases/012808.cfm]Tulane”>http://tulane.edu/news/releases/012808.cfm)</p>

<p>[FT.com</a> / UK - A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN: THE TOP TEN SCHOOLS IN SELECTED CATEGORIES](<a href=“A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN: THE TOP TEN SCHOOLS IN SELECTED CATEGORIES”>A LEAGUE OF THEIR OWN: THE TOP TEN SCHOOLS IN SELECTED CATEGORIES)</p>

<p>Tulane’s Equity Research Program
[Freeman</a> School @ Tulane](<a href=“http://www.freeman.tulane.edu/burkenroad/whatis.php]Freeman”>About Burkenroad Reports - Freeman School | Tulane)</p>

<p>Tulane’s Darwin Fenner Program
[Freeman</a> School @ Tulane](<a href=“http://www.freeman.tulane.edu/fenner/]Freeman”>http://www.freeman.tulane.edu/fenner/)</p>

<p>Tulane ranked 4th best in entrepreneur studies
[Top</a> 25 Graduate Entrepreneurial Colleges for 2009 - Entrepreneur.com](<a href=“Top colleges and business schools for entrepreneurs.”>Top colleges and business schools for entrepreneurs.)</p>

<p>SMU-wise, I can tell you that the school’s reputation far exceeds any ranking it has ever gotten. I wouldn’t worry about going to SMU if that’s where you want to attend. It’s always been well thought of and I’ve heard is a great undergrad experience. </p>

<p>UChicago-wise, regardless of whether you want to go into Economics OR Finance, it is by far the best school. The professors there write the text books and develop the math that is taught everywhere else in the country.</p>

<p>Tulane-wise, I won’t comment too much since I posted above but I will say this. I have both a bachelors and masters in finance from TU and can tell you that it is WAY more respected in Finance than it is any other discipline. So forget any US News rankings (that rank the university as a whole) for judging the prestige of its finance (note not economics) program. Actually, if you care about prestige a ton, just go to UChicago. You could always intern on the CBOE.</p>

<p>All of the other schools you mentioned are respected. If you care about mostly about prestige and the possibility of your degree opening doors for you based on the name, UChicago will do that more than the rest. I’m not sure that’s the best advice for picking a college for most people. You should enjoy your college years and go where you want to go. Best of Luck!</p>

8

<p>Is cost no object?</p>

<p>If not, then Chicago or Berkeley. One for an intense smaller school, one for an intense larger school.</p>

<p>Business schools do not care if you major in Business, and in fact probably prefer that you not. They care how smart you are, particularly quantitative smarts, and the quality of your 2-6 years of real life employment experience. If you really want to position yourself maximally for an MBA, major in Physics or Math… or ANY major that motivates you to excel.</p>

<p>Tulane sounds like an great option… I was unaware of its prowess in Finance. Assuming recruiters and B-schools are less ignorant than me, it is enticing. Be careful though… if you ultimately don’t like Finance, you’d lose some of the pull it apparently has into great jobs after graduation that would help with your B-school apps.</p>

<p>Re SMU and UT: Yes, they are in Texas. It sounds like you find the job growth there attractive. However, really smart and motivated people… the kind that can get into Chicago and Berkeley and Tulane, won’t have a problem finding a great job in Texas at some point. Most people headed for highly ranked B-schools end up working not anywhere near their University, so even if you work in Texas after your BA/BS, you’ll leave for B-school and your first job won’t likely be in Texas anyway.</p>

<p>edit to add: UCLA is not tier 3.<br>
Firstly, it’s MBA program has been ranked anywhere from #7 to #14 in each of the past 30 years, with Finance generally ranked as its strongest specialty, usually within the top 6-7 among MBA programs.<br>
Seconly, there is no undergrad Finance major at UCLA, and in fact there is no Business major. About 20 years ago they created the Business Economics major, which tends to be quantitative but is not the same as Finance. Since UCLA has no Business school, it doesn’t show up in the rankings. If there were a ranking for Business Economics programs, it would likely be Top 15 or so.</p>

9

<p>To the OP: you’re getting some horrifically bad advice (from both UT and TU ■■■■■■), so let me help you out here.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Any ranking that treats UT (McCombs) and MIT (Sloan) as equivalents is highly suspect. MIT Sloan (and Wharton) have the strongest quantitative undergraduate business students in the country. Any ranking that rates UT over UVa or U Chicago is equally suspect. While it’s true that Chicago is not as “connected” as the ivies, this is due mainly to Chicago students’ preference of academia over industry, not their ability or reputation. Only a UT cheerleader would suggest that UT is more “connected” than U Chicago.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>“Honestly” is often a prelude to a less than honest statement. You’re clearly pushing Tulane in two posts in this thread alone and who know where else…</p>

<p>FWIW, I have relatives in England and have visited them on occasion. Even among the educated elite in London, the only American schools they have ever heard of are HYPSM, Columbia and NYU (due mainly to their NYC locations) and Penn (due mainly to Wharton). No Londoners think that their city has replaced NYC as the financial capital of the world. As for Tulane’s reputation in London, do you seriously think that, say, Barclays knows or cares about Tulane, let alone recruits there??</p>

<p>At the end of the day, if cost is not an issue, the OP should go to Chicago. If he or she is a California resident, then give Berkeley (Haas) serious consideration as well.</p>

<p>An economics and/or mathematics major at Chicago will carry you very far. What many people don’t understand is that i-banking and consulting firms couldn’t care less whether or not you studied business as an undergraduate; they only care about your quantitative skills. In this light, a math (or physics or engineering) major will be recruited over an undergraduate business major. All things being equal, an economics degree from Chicago will be as, if not more valuable than any undergraduate business degree (save from Wharton or MIT Sloan).</p>

<p>EDIT: I almost cross-posted with DunninLA and may have inadvertently repeated some of his or her ideas.</p>

10

<p>Dunnin, I was NOT trying to say UCLA is a tier 3 university, I was merely comparing the schools based on how their business students do in recruiting. It was a way of ranking them. I suspect Fallen might also have missed that.</p>

<p>The “highly suspect” rankings I referenced were US News’ rankings of finance programs at undergraduate business schools. This ranking is done exclusively on the ability of the school to attract top finance professors and send students to top finance jobs and UVa came in 8th in this regard. As hard as this may be for you to accept, UT sends about the same percentage of students into consulting as UVa (around 20% from both). I would gladly compare UT’s investment banking placement with UVa’s but UVa does not publish any data on investment banking without commercial banking. However, companies like, say, Barclays recruit at UT alongside companies like Goldman, JP Morgan and McKinsey.</p>

<p>I’m not going to hide that I think most people, including yourself, overlook or underestimate the strength of UT’s undergraduate schools in general, but I’m not going to support them without good reason, either. I do think that UVa and Chicago are excellent schools as well, so if it makes you feel any better, the gap between tier 1 and 2 is small.</p>

11

<p>

</p>

<p>Compare the admissions stats of UT vs. MIT/Chicago/UVa and you should get a better idea of how i-banking and consulting firms perceive the respective schools.</p>

<p>But don’t just take my word for it:</p>

<p>

</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/investment-banking/459445-best-undergraduate-college-investment-banking-hedge-funding.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/investment-banking/459445-best-undergraduate-college-investment-banking-hedge-funding.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I wonder what tier Tulane belongs to…</p>

12

<p>Prodigal, I’ll clarify what Fallen was saying and what I provided a link to with regards to ‘London’ and Tulane. Financial Times, a British publication and the largest European competitor of the Wall St. Journal, was the one who did the Top 10 finance ranking. </p>

<p>The point wasn’t that the average or even above average person education or wealth-wise in Britain had heard of Tulane, a school with a total student (grad + undergrad) population of just 11,000 and located down in Southern Louisiana. </p>

<p>The point was that the publication, which is very respected in financial circles, regarded Tulane among the best in the discipline of Finance. No one was claiming anything beyond that. It wasn’t a statement of which schools TU might be ‘better than’ but a statement that its finance department and program are strong. I’m not sure what your issue with Tulane is. As an FYI, I’ve worked for a bull bracket IB and now for a private fund. UChicago and Haas are clearly the better schools in my opinion (for finance) but I wouldn’t discount the others mentioned.</p>

13

<p>

</p>

<p>I understand. But this is hardly a sufficient reason to choose a college, especially since a Chicago or Berkeley degree is more desirable and flexible, not to mention the OP isn’t even sure whether he or she wants to pursue a BBA or an MBA.</p>

<p>And as I said earlier, a degree in math trumps a degree in finance…</p>

14

<p>If it helps you guys, either way I am adding Mathematics as a double-major or a minor depending on the circumstance of what school I ultimately attend.</p>

15

<p>Prodi, I agree that it isn’t a great reason to choose a school. I was, more than anything else, assuring the OP that schools like Tulane, SMU, and others (if that is where the OP chooses for reasons outside of prestige), are fine and still well received in business circles, even if not on the level of a UChicago. </p>

<p>I think Mathematics will probably be the same (or close to it) regardless of what school you chose simply due to the nature of the discipline. Unique programs are going to be more readily available for disciplines like finance, journalism, engineering and so on than something like math. I would make sure to visit the schools. Also contemplate year round climate, ect. </p>

<p>Can you deal with Chicago winters?<br>
Is being in New Orleans going to be too much of a distraction?
Are college football, baseball, ect. important to you?
Are you too conservative for UC Berkeley?
Are you too liberal for SMU (not that it’s THAT convservative)?
Do you want to play extracurricular sports (rugby, football, soccer, ect.)
These are the type questions you might want to ask yourself.</p>

16

<p>

</p>

<p>This is a smart move. But then you need to consider the strength of the mathematics departments of the various schools you may ultimately attend…</p>

17

<p>To someone quite well informed about colleges but not specifically about business as a major (me), this comparison seems almost astonishing. The education in general at the University of Chicago is reputed to be amazing-- ivy or better quality-- and I don’t think I would pass that up because I was pretty sure I wanted to be a business major and had heard good things about a lesser school’s business program. Don’t pass up the University of Chicago lightly. Get the book they have that describes the core and their curriculum, try to visit a class and maybe stay overnight. Good luck.</p>

18

<p>Undergraduate business schools almost always are highly pre-professional oriented. Students (at UT McCombs at least) tend to see school in terms of recruiting, grades, and social life. You actually have to take classes that um, teach you how to write memos, resumes, and the like. There is less emphasis on non grade related academic and intellectual pursuits. If you like the pre-professional mindset, then a good business school could be the right choice for you. I wasn’t too fond of this, so I’m looking to go elsewhere, but you might like it. </p>

<p>If you don’t like the above-mentioned mindset, and prefer a more intellectually focused and less pre-professional mindset, you should consider Chicago, from what I’ve heard about the school. Probably would be harder academically I’d imagine, as I doubt you would take fluff classes such as “Management” or “Professional Communication Skills”, and would probably be doing more rigorous quantitative economics work. </p>

<p>If you want to relax and party it up college, watch some athletic (and mostly dumb) guys hit each other, and still get a good job, a lot of the school’s you applied to are pretty good for that! </p>

<p>Recruiting at top-flight finance programs is excellent, though it’s taken quite a hit with the recession. </p>

<p>Again, majoring in Finance is not a requisite for job’s in that industry. Math and Econ, especially from a top institution, could open far more doors, as many posters above me noted. </p>

<p>Don’t know what your finances are like, but I imagine you would get a fair amount of merit money from some of the places you applied to.</p>

<p>Question is, do you want to go to college to learn or to get a job?</p>

19

<p>Thanks prodigalson, for completely leaving out important quotes of mine like

</p>

<p>Add to that the fact that you think you can read my mind regarding my “honestly” prelude, and you should pretty thoroughly be ashamed of yourself. I simply presented factual citations regarding the Tulane program because the others are generally pretty well known and those facts often get overlooked. Nothing more, nothing less. Someone claimed Tulane was tier 4 in finance, whatever tier 4 means, and I presented one respected source that obviously begged to differ. Do you really have a problem with that? Try presenting your opinions without running down others. It usually works much better.</p>

20

<p>

</p>

<p>Kind of both. I don’t want to simply learn without the prospects of a better job in the future but I don’t want to simply go to get a job without learning.</p>