<p>Most of the schools I'm applying to uses the Common App, but not Brown or Chicago. I'm planning to apply to one of the two.
Which is more academically stimulating and has a better overall experience? Prestige?</p>
<p>Have you researched these 2 schools? Are you aware of how different they are? Chicago has a core curriculum, like Columbia-which means all students must take classes in Math, Science, Humanities, Civilization, etc. in addition to classes required by their major, in order to graduate. Every students graduating from Chicago has a very strong Liberal Arts foundation under their belts. Brown has an open curriculum- no required classes other than those required for a major. Chicago is known to be academically intense, in part due to all the required classes, while Brown has a more laid back atmosphere. These schools have a tendancy to attract very different students. Both are considered top universities, but Chicago has a tendancy not to attract students who apply solely because the college is considered "prestigious".</p>
<p>Who was a better president: Lincoln or Washington?</p>
<p>Who was a better musician: Dylan or Hendrix?</p>
<p>What's a better ice cream flavor: Dulce de Leche or chocolate?</p>
<p>What I'm trying to tell you is that your question has no simple answer (and really, no answer), and that it will inspire much debate among different groups of people, each convinced that he or she is right.</p>
<p>The answer is not really which is a better college, but rather, which is a better college for YOU. I like Abraham Lincoln more because I feel he was a better politician. I like Dylan more because he has lived long enough to leave a musical trail behind him. I like chocolate ice cream more because dulce de leche isn't a real ice cream flavor. I like Chicago more because I feel it's more in tune with my needs.</p>
<p>I'm going to disagree with mpm about students applying to Brown because it's "prestigious." I often consider Brown the bedridden sister of the Ivy League prestige-wise, first because it's a color and second because it doesn't seem to garner that much respect with its "easy" reputation. However, students can apply to schools for whatever reasons they want-- it's the students who get in and attend that actually count. The Brunonians I know are fun, motivated, intelligent people, and I have a feeling that Brown takes intellectualism very seriously when it considers applicants.</p>
<p>I really can't speak to what Brown is like as a school, though, as I don't attend. I can say, though, that it did not "fit" me-- open curriculum was not appealing to me, as I saw myself taking advantage of minimal requirements and depriving myself of what I consider to be a good education. If I were a Brown student, I imagine that I would never venture out of my comfort zone. That's not to say that Brunonians don't venture out of their comfort zone.... it's just to say that I don't imagine that I would had I gone there.</p>
<p>What I love about Chicago is that it is a universally challenging school, and that even though we might be slavedrivers in comparison to Brown, I feel right in this academically supercharged environment. The school is socially active enough to fit my needs, and I find that I meet new friends quite easily (not the case in high school). I also love being around students who are devoted to school and to learning, and love to talk about what they're learning quite casually. (Of course, we also love to get drunk, watch South Park, gallivant around the city, etc., but we can do all this and be nerdy in tandem).</p>
<p>The best thing for you to do is to research the schools more carefully, and decide which one is better for you.</p>
<p>I only inferred that Brown is considered "prestigious" because some people tend to think that "Ivy" = "prestige". I don't agree with that at all, and in fact feel sorry for students or parents who can't see past that label.</p>
<p>The main difference would be core vs. open curriculum. Choose which you'd prefer, as in that sense they're both polar opposites.</p>
<p>From a practical viewpoint, keep in mind that Brown admits fewer students than Chicago due to Chicago's low yield. I love Chicago dearly and didn't apply to Brown, but it's true. Selectivity won't affect your experience (the students are similar in strength), but it may be something to consider if you're looking to maximize options in April.</p>
<p>In addition to the obvious core/open difference, you might also consider if you'd prefer Chicago's quarter system or Brown's semester system. For example, the semester system is much more compatible with study abroad unless one goes for a year. Another difference is that Brown grades on the A/B/C/no credit scale, whereas Chicago grades on the +/- system. Brown allows students to take courses on a pass/fail basis. </p>
<p>Both of them can be as academically stimulating as you want them to be. I chose another school over Chicago (one that does not have an "intense" or "academically supercharged" reputation) and have received quite a good education. How many students have taken courses in Middle Egyptian, paleontology, 19th century American lit, oceanography, Greek philosophy, museology, organic chem, and politics & society? :p</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are you aware of how different they are?
[/quote]
That usually makes it more difficult to decide rather than easier.</p>
<p>My son visited both Brown and Chicago during his application process; Chicago 'clicked', Brown did not (although he feels it is a wonderful school). </p>
<p>You have, I assumed, visited Brown. If there is any way you can extract the plane fare to visit Chicago I strongly suggest it. </p>
<p>I do not believe it is such a bad idea to apply to different schools; your life is not set in stone at 17. The school at the top of your list this coming spring may not be the one that is at the top this fall.</p>
<p>I like Chicago more.....</p>
<p>As an alum of one and a new parent at the other, I can say that the one thing the two schools have in common despite their radically different curriculum philosophies is that you'll find independent-minded, quirky students at both places -- a common denominator no doubt reflected in the idiosyncratic applications they both require of their applicants (or used to). I think Brown used to be more like Chicago in its campus culture than it is now (when I was there they prided themselves on their negligible athletic status), and now it seems to attract, and seek, more compulsively multitasking, high-achieving, prestige-conscious students than it used to, but that's just an impression, not based on any real experience. If I were applying to colleges today, I would choose Chicago over Brown. </p>
<p>If you care about the physical environment, Chicago has a much more impressive campus. Although I became very fond of Brown's odd assortment of buildings, and of Providence (always the poor step-sister to Boston and New York), there's no question that the UChicago buildings, and Chicago itself, make you feel as though you are where things of real import are happening.</p>
<p>As far as "prestige" goes, I would guess that UChicago is more highly regarded than Brown in academia and business circles (depending of course on the specific field), while Brown will make much more of an impression to the average person on the street. </p>
<p>If the political climate is of concern to you, I would guess that Brown will err on the side of PCness and be more homogeneously and even intolerantly iiberal, while U.Chicago seems to pride itself on welcoming a diversity of political points of view.</p>
<p>But, of course, as previous posters have said, it's only you who can decide which is the right environment for you...</p>
<p>Thanks for all of your posts so far, especially unalove, warblersrule86, and pesto. I am aware of their differences as I have done considerable research on both. unalove, since you're at chicago, could me more about its grading system? also, because it runs on a quarter system, it is annoying to take finals 4 times a year?
Which has a stronger biology department?
ohio_mom, yes, you are correct in assuming that I have visited Brown and not Chicago. could you tell me what about Chicago made it "click" for him?</p>
<p>Finals are 3 times a year unless students stay in Chicago to take summer classes.</p>
<p>Chicago's options in biology are really wonderful. I don't know about Brown's, but I imagine if you poke around both department webpages, you'll get a sense of the departmental strengths:</p>
<p><a href="http://bscd.bsd.uchicago.edu/%5B/url%5D">http://bscd.bsd.uchicago.edu/</a>
<a href="http://med.brown.edu/bug/%5B/url%5D">http://med.brown.edu/bug/</a></p>
<p>Grading: Before I say anything, I should probably point out that the average GPA here is a 3.26. You might hear a lot of "Oh, UChicago, everybody fails out there" but when the average GPA is almost a B+ (3.3), one can reason that most students are doing fairly well.</p>
<p>UChicago is not a good school for somebody who feels like they need to get all A-range grades. Not only will you be in the distinct minority of students who give a whiff about grades, but you'll find yourself in a very unpleasant situation as far as work is concerned. The courses are, while not impossible, are difficult, and A-range grades are reserved for students who truly sail above and beyond. You should not expect to be superior in all of your classes.... not even if every school in the nation admitted you and you chose to come here. (I am thinking about somebody very specific who made a big deal of choosing Chicago over a host of other well-known schools and was devastated when a few B's started cropping up on her assignments).</p>
<p>A B-range grade, though, is not as difficult to attain. If you go to class, try your best, do the readings, meet with the prof if necessary, and are responsible (but not to the point of exhaustion), that B/B- is yours. I fall into the B/B- range in most of my classes (in my major classes, I'm more B+/A-), and I feel I am getting a great, challenging, invigorating learning experience all around without overly pressuring myself to do work. I have enough time in the day to get 8 hours of sleep a night, participate in various clubs, watch movies, party, go into the city, etc.</p>
<p>Academic calendar: The "quarter system" is actually a trimester system-- we don't really have summer classes, so we're taking finals three times a year.</p>
<p>This is a difficult question for me to answer, because the implication is that finals are stressful.... I don't really find finals week overly stressful. The school gives you a "reading period" (i.e. a long weekend to study) and there's enough time to get everything done, as long as you don't procrastinate too much.</p>
<p>The quarter system as a whole, though, is lovely. Fewer classes at any given time (3 or 4 instead of 4 or 5, unlike Dartmouth, where 3 is more common, 4 is more common here) and yet more classes over the course of a year. (3 times 4 is 12, 5 times 2 is 10). Also, the constant turnover really keeps me on my toes and prevents me from being bored with the class or my classmates, and breaks coincide at very convenient times (after finals). At some schools, spring break is in the middle of the semester, where profs assign hw over it and students have to come back to school, trying to remember what they promptly forgot. Here, though, spring break and winter break are the rewards for having completed finals.</p>
<p>Random fun fact: Chicago's new president, Robert Zimmer, used to be at Brown. At Brown, he instituted an online registration system (Banner) that is universally reviled and is against the Brown way of doing things. At Chicago, he spearheaded the changeover to common app. Both schools hate his guts, and both schools are pretty proud of their personalities as schools.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Both schools hate his guts
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I rather like President Zimmer. I do realize that I am in the very small minority here, so I keep it to myself, however. The move to the Common App really changed nothing about the application other than the fact that it's more convenient for some students (the essays are still the same). Most of the people who are against the change are either completely ignorant of this or are just too pretentious for their own good.</p>
<p>Chicago is ranked higher</p>
<p>"Academic calendar: The "quarter system" is actually a trimester system-- we don't really have summer classes, so we're taking finals three times a year."</p>
<p>unalove so no summer classes offered at all at Chicago?</p>
<p>Are the GPA averages for ivy league, or Ivy-like schools higher than 3.3? I've read numerous threads about grade deflation at Chicago. Do graduate schools take into account the 3.3 average and rigorous course load at Chicago? Just curious because I plan on applying to law school.</p>
<p>P.S. sorry for hijacking your thread ccri, but I had a quick question!</p>
<p>
[quote]
unalove so no summer classes offered at all at Chicago?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>There are summer classes, but your tuition doesn't cover them. In addition to that, it's pretty hard to get financial aid. Most of the advanced classes aren't offered during the summer, anyway.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Are the GPA averages for ivy league, or Ivy-like schools higher than 3.3?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think Harvard's average is in the 3.5 - 3.6 range, but I think Harvard's the worst among the Ivies for grade inflation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Do graduate schools take into account the 3.3 average and rigorous course load at Chicago? Just curious because I plan on applying to law school.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Graduate school is not law school. Graduate schools will take it into account, but I'm not sure about law schools. It's debated elsewhere on this forum, and it seems as if it's a rather unsure thing.</p>
<p>Brown and U Chicago are different in social and academic atmosphere. Both schools are highly regarded. Chicago leans more to the academic intellectual pursuing knowledge for its own sake. Brown students are likely to be more "well-rounded" and have practical ambitions about what they want to achieve in the real world. Chicago will push you harder. Brown will give you more autonomy. Brown is probably more social. Chicago might be lonelier if your are not outgoing.
If you are accepted at both places, visit overnight before making a final decision. Most people would be considerably happier at one of the two rather than the other--depends on who you are.</p>
<p>Sheed30, you're outdoing yourself in helpful comments! :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
[quote]
Which has a stronger biology department?
[/quote]
Well, that depends on what you want to do. Both are excellent in neuroscience and computational biology. Chicago excels in evolutionary biology and genetics. Brown excels in human biology and marine biology (formerly aquatic biology) and has links with the Marine Biological Laboratory in Woods Hole.</p>
<p>As a graduate student at the U of C, I found the trimester system problematic, because in order to produce the big paper required by every course you basically had to decide on your topic by the third or fourth week--at which point you hadn't yet covered much of the course material. It may be different for undergrads, or people in quantitative fields.</p>
<p>Interestingly, Brown and the U of C are both in my senior's top 4.</p>
<p>Oh, and another fun fact about Zimmer is that we were told that he wants people to stop calling it the U of C and start calling it the U of Chicago. Which to me is idiotic.</p>
<p>warblersrule86 Thank you so much.</p>