uchicago vs mit for math/comp sci double

Colleges and Universities A-Z University of Chicago ✅
21

<p>I was going to make a comment on which he should pick until I realized the OP has not yet been accepted to MIT.</p>

<p>I say, apply first. Don’t be lazy - finish that app. a $200 application fee is nothing compared to the Option of studying CS in MIT.</p>

<p>And then if you get accepted, make a decision. But before then, the answer is: don’t be lazy and apply to MIT (even if the only reason is your parents are forcing you to; or is that the reason why you don’t want to apply? If so, I change my opinion and say, absolutely don’t apply because you wont be happy going to MIT if your parent’s are forcing you. Even if, like broccoli, MIT is good for you, you will hate it if its forced on you.)</p>

22

<p>Hey my question is completely different. I am also very interested in applying to uchig. So it would be really great and helpful if you could tell me your stats</p>

23

<p>As others have said before, both schools are great schools. I don’t know much about the comparison of the math departments but I know MIT has a better CS department as UChicago’s CS department is relatively new.</p>

<p>Secondly, apply to both schools if you are almost done with the MIT application. If you don’t get in, then you can cross it off your list, but if you do get in I suggest going through the following steps to decide:[ul]
[<em>] VISIT! Visiting is important because you need to be able to see yourself at one of the schools. Due to the fact that both of them are academically prestigious schools, what matters more than anything at this point is whether the environment fits your learning style.
[</em>] Talk to ppl who attended one of the schools and were admitted to both (had to make the same decision as you). They can possibly bring up factors that you never thought of.
[<em>] Take into account the academic differences. For example: Quarter v. Two terms, the outstanding core system at UChicago, the CS dept at MIT, etc.
[</em>] Then you gotta decide. Just know, whatever decision you come to it will be a good one. Both are amazing schools. One thing you should not do is regret your decision. Once you make your decision you can’t change it so don’t think back to that.
[/ul]
Good luck!</p>

24

<p>About the difficulty of double majoring here with the core - it is important to note that a BA in pure math at uchicago requires 4 comp sci/chem/physics classes. Additionally, students can take 12 classes a year (4 at a time) due to the quarter system, making a maximum of 48 classes, wile 42 are required to graduete. Assuming that you do not manage to place out of any of the 15 core classes (a 4/5 on some AP tests mostly in math and the sciences vindicate you from some core requirements), a degree with a double major in math and comp sci will take 39 courses. You may even throw in a minor in some random subject or just take random electives, graduate classes at booth, whatever.</p>

<p>[The</a> College Catalog 2012-2013 - University of Chicago Catalog](<a href=“http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/thecollege/]The”>http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/thecollege/)</p>

25

<p>Thanks again for the replies</p>

<p>I’m not totally against applying to MIT, nor am I allowing my laziness to get the best of me. I’ve just been to UChicago so many times, and have visited so many classes (courtesy of an older sibling) that I have fallen in love with the school and am strongly biased towards it. However, I am not so in love that I don’t realize the need to visit other schools (given that I am accepted) before I accept UChicago as the best of them all.</p>

<p>Another thing, I’ve also applied to Harvard and Princeton just to see whether or not I’d get in. How do these colleges compare education wise? I know all of these schools more or less offer the same exceptional education, but how do math/comp sci and even econ departments vary? </p>

<p>For the person who asked for my stats, here they are:</p>

<p>GPA: 4.2/4.0 weighted (cant remember non-weighted sorry!)
SAT: 2250 super, 2190 single (750 W, 780 M, 720 CR)
ACT: 34 (34 math, 33 english, 34 reading, 34 science, 32 combined eng/writing)
SAT 2’s: 800 Math 2, 700 Lit, 700 Physics
AP Scores: 5 on both micro/macro econ, 5 Calc BC, 4 US History, 4 World History, 5 Statistics, 5 Lang
Senior year Classes: Multivar Calc, AP Physics C, AP Comp Sci A, AP US Gov, AP Lit, AP Spanish, Poli Sci</p>

<p>Extracurriculars: NHS (president 12th grade, officer 11th grade, member 10th grade), Speech and Debate (all 4 years, some awards but nothing noteworthy), Attended VA Governor’s school for the Humanities, studied Economics textbooks by Gary Becker, Learned introductory college level mathematical analysis last summer with Michael Spivak’s Calculus textbook</p>

<p>things to consider: I have a sibling attending Uchicago, Im not first gen college student, no other family attended chicago, ive been to uchicago and attended many classes numerous times and made that clear in my interview and in my essays, i submitted 3 recommendations, i told them i was accepted for an internship with john kerry for spring 2013</p>

<p>I know that I’ve got some advantages that solely apply to Chicago, which undoubtedly influenced my admission, but my teacher recs are fantastic (unfortunately not exaggerating here… my teachers told me what they wrote and its surprisingly off the charts amazing) and my essays are fairly above average (but then again, its not exactly fair for me to make that claim). Given these factors, I want to apply to MIT Harvard and Princeton and see how I do. haha chance me?</p>

26

<p>Harvard and Princeton are also very good at math and econ. Neither are known for CS though.</p>

27

<p>@ texaspg</p>

<p>I stand corrected. However, given that the overall rate is ~9%, this would make the regular decision rate about 7.5-8% given that the yield for early action would be high. This compares very favorably with the early action number of ~10%, given that athletic recruits and possibly legacies (?) are given admittance early. There is little to no difference between the early and regular rounds.</p>

<p>This applies to UChicago as well. Its early acceptance rate isnt almost twice as high early as the regular rate simply because it’s “twice as easy” to get in. The acceptance rate is deceptively high because of the fact that almost all athletes are admitted EA. MIT recruits a sizeable athlete population as well.</p>

<p>The difference between UChicago and MIT is probably around 3% acceptance, which doesn’t necessarily make it too much harder statistically for the applicant, seeing as how UChicago seems to be lowering its acceptance rate at about 3% per year.</p>

28

<p>He is a male. His admit rate is 7.16% if the applicant pool is same as last year. It will go up which means it will probably be under 7%.</p>

<p>Chicago and MIT pools are completely different. MIT applicants are overwhelmingly male and have a much lower admit rate than the overall rate.</p>

29

<p>This was quite a few years back, but I was able to get 2 degrees from MIT (EE and AA) in 4 years. It was a fair amount of work, but I think it was worth doing. One of things I liked about MIT was that you could take as many courses per semester as you thought you were capable of, and you had a lot of time (about 75% of the semester) to decide whether to drop a course with no consequences. As a result you could challenge yourself with a heavy courseload knowing that you could drop one if it got to be too much. You would need to check what the current policies are in this regard, but in my time is was very accommodating for dual degrees. </p>

<p>I have found that the job prospects for MIT graduates are top notch, however I suspect that the same is true these days for UChicago graduates. Comp. science is in pretty high demand right now, so I would think that you would find plenty of job opportunities with such a degree from either university.</p>

<p>My experience with UChicago is less than my experience with MIT, but my daughter was admitted EA this year and is strongly considering attending. We visited the school and I was very impressed. My impression is that UChicago and MIT have similar analytical approaches to education and attract some of the same types of students. While there are clearly some difference (i.e. engineering at MIT, strong social sciences at Chicago), I think either one would be a great choice.</p>

30

<p>What’s the point? OP’s 700 Physics score is low for MIT admission.</p>

31

<p>MIT is far more prestigious than UChicago in my opinion. I wouldn’t be surprised if 3/4 of the top math students are enrolled at MIT now. The remaining 1/4 will probably head off to Caltech/Harvard/Princeton/Stanford with the occasional standout going to Chicago/Cornell/Columbia/Duke.</p>

<p>The peer group you would be exposed to at MIT would be unparalleled and you would have better financial recruiting due to Sloan’s great undergraduate reputation.</p>

<p>Save Chicago for graduate math (maybe) and please get yourself the best possible STEM education out there-MIT.</p>

32

<p>I find that you have broken math schools into 3 tiers.
MIT (king of the hill)
Caltech/Harvard/Princeton/Stanford
Chicago/Cornell/Columbia/Duke</p>

<p>I find that funny because MIT itself puts MIT, UChicago, Princeton, Harvard and Berkeley in the same tier. </p>

<p>USN ranks MIT, with a 5.0, as the best math grad school. It has Princeton, Harvard, Stanford, and Berkeley (a little anachronistic IMO) tied for second with 4.9s, and has Chicago at 6th with a 4.8. Caltech comes in next with a 4.6, so I question your grouping Chicago with Cornell Columbia and Duke for math. (Also consider UChicago’s rankings are skewed because of its poor performance in applied maths)</p>

<p>I’d also like to call into question your definition of “top” students. If by “top” students you mean problem solvers, then I am with you (for most of the part). MIT rules the roost (by a bit) there, being kind to MIT…
But if you define “top” students as I do then Chicago’s math program is at least as good as Princeton’s etc., if not MIT’s. Chicago alumni have a strong presence in pure mathematics, and their faculty is among the best around. Not to mention that it boasts some of the hardest courses in the country (honors analysis) that supplement its already notoriously rigorous academics. </p>

<p>Try reading through the following threads:</p>

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/551878-math-uchicago.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/551878-math-uchicago.html&lt;/a&gt;
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/515738-math-majors-chicago.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/university-chicago/515738-math-majors-chicago.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>PS: my 2 cents is that MIT and UChicago are on par in mathematics (MIT gets the edge in applied maths and UChicago gets a minor edge in pure maths). However MIT has the better and far more prestigious CompSci degree (though UChicago’s is no slouch and has been doing well in competitions lately)</p>

33

<p>The MIT site ranks graduate programs in mathematics (or rather gives the top 6 schools from the 1993 NRC ranking). It seems clear to me that at the graduate level MIT and Chicago are roughly equivalent but I don’t think that implies they are roughly equivalent at the undergraduate level. The strength of entering freshmen at math is yet another dimension. MIT gets by the far most top high school math students as measured by competitions. MIT is also by far the most popular college for USA/Canada math camp (the most selective math camp other than MOP) people too. Given that you never define “top students” it’s impossible for others to evaluate your claims about Chicago having as many top students as Princeton or MIT. Another aspect to consider is that MIT’s curriculum is more friendly to math majors as the general education requirements at MIT will typically be less burdensome for math majors than Chicago’s. MIT also students to take unlimited classes per term too which is very nice and makes any argument about MIT’s classes easier pretty much moot.</p>

34

<p>“MIT is far more prestigious than UChicago in my opinion. I wouldn’t be surprised if 3/4 of the top math students are enrolled at MIT now. The remaining 1/4 will probably head off to Caltech/Harvard/Princeton/Stanford with the occasional standout going to Chicago/Cornell/Columbia/Duke.”</p>

<p>Duke for math? HAHA! How about Harvey Mudd? It’s about the same size as Caltech undergrad. Oh, wait! Yale is better than Cornell and Columbia in math.</p>

35

<p>@UMTYP student
I’m sorry if I came off a little strongly (and bitter) in my previous post. I have a great deal of respect for MIT. If I didn’t care so much about getting a good education in economics and the humanities along with mathematics, I would have definitely considered MIT as my first choice. (though MIT does have an incredible econ dept)</p>

<p>The truth is I was slightly taken aback when goldenboy clubbed Chicago with the likes of Columbia for mathematics. (not to mention, considered UChicago inferior to Princeton and even Caltech, considered Mudd and Yale not even worth a mention, and most of all considered MIT thrice as good as other math departments combined)
My post was by and large a response to that… </p>

<p>I didn’t rigorously define “top” students because I myself am unsure of how to do so. But I am certain that a student who does well in putnam or similar competitions in necessarily (or even probably) better than a student who did not. My definition would probably be more prospective than retrospective, and would have more to do with innate talent and passion for the subject, rather than problem solving preparation. </p>

<p>I would also not consider that kind of incoming raw talent, no matter how you define top as long as it includes passion and a good degree of talent, to be the single most important metric when measuring a schools maths dept. As long as you have excellent professors (as both schools do), a good class size and ability to interact with professor, an atmosphere that fosters intellectual inquiry, (as both do) and a well structured curriculum (you make a good point about MITs friendly curriculum, but the core is not without its benefits) you would get an excellent education. The argument for having strong peers (they would encourage a student) is rather moot as in either school, students could do with a little less studying, and both schools are wonderfully rigorous.</p>

<p>“It seems clear to me that at the graduate level MIT and Chicago are roughly equivalent but I don’t think that implies they are roughly equivalent at the undergraduate level. The strength of entering freshmen at math is yet another dimension.”</p>

<p>I agree with the latter statement and if I had a student who got into MIT and another who got into UChicago in front of me, I would probably assume that the MIT-bound student is more “accomplished”, but by the time that they’ve come out, I really don’t think they would be any less talented. Not to mention, grad school is far more important than undergrad, and both schools have phenomenal placements…</p>

<p>Once again, I’m extremely sorry if I came off as bitter or rude in my previous post. I think we’re on the same side here (unless you also think that MIT as several fold better than every other math school combined and that Chicago is several fold worse than even Princeton and the likes)</p>

36

<p>I thought your post was pretty reasonable. Certainly compared to many posts on CC it was rather mild! I definitely agree with the gist of your post although I maintain that the strength of the entering math majors matters at least a little bit though obviously much less than factors like faculty strength (where MIT and Chicago are pretty much equivalent) and course offering (the curriculums are structured pretty differently but it’s not clear which way is better).</p>

37

<p>I think the preconception about MIT math students are superior to Chicago math students may be a little outdated. With current MIT emphasis on affirmative action, and the 50/50 gender ratio, I’m guessing a number of talented male students are turned away (this is confirmed by anecdotal evidence). Some of these students are likely to end up at UChicago, because its math undergraduate program is quite known. It would be interesting to see how current math majors at MIT and Uchicago compare, but such stats are not likely to be published.</p>

38

<p>@ yolochka MIT’s gender ratio isn’t 50/50. I think it’s currently 55/45. The ratio among math majors is more like 70/30 though. Although there are not any perfect comparisons between MIT and Chicago math majors there are some imperfect ones. For the strength of the entering class, MIT dominates in number of high-scoring ARML students [last year 35 seniors* got scores of 7+ on ARML individuals. I was able to determine the college for 28 of them. 16 went to MIT and none went to Chicago as far as I could tell] and USAMO qualifiers. At the college level the Putnam is a decidedly imperfect measure of mathematical ability but MIT has by far the most high scorers of any college and Chicago has rather few. MIT students are also far more represented at the Duluth REU which is often considered the most prestigious. Of course all these measures and particularly the college ones have flaws but they do point to an advantage for MIT.</p>

<p>*Chicago ARML did not list grades for their students so I did not include them in the analysis.</p>

39

<p>UMTYMP student,
why don’t you look at the gender ratio for admitted students last year: it’s nearly 50-50. At the same time, the number of applications from girls was fewer than 1/3 than that from boys. This simply means that a lot of qualified boys were turned down for less qualified girls. This is their business if they want to maintain gender balance. I’m just stating the fact.
Next, many of those high ARML scorers who came to MIT probably ended up in other majors. We are trying to compare math ability of math majors I believe.
Also, I heard that Putnam is not valued too highly at UChicago, and not studied for as much as it is at MIT.
And finally, speaking of competitions like ARML, and possibly USAMO and Putnam, I am yet to see evidence that good performance on them correlates with the ability to do high level pure mathematics. I know personally a good number of mathematicians, some of them are world famous, and I’m pretty sure they wouldn’t get high scores on ARML.
Thus, so far I don’t have a definite answer as to where a young aspiring mathematician should study math in this country. I think the most important factor is having mentors available to nurture ability to do pure math. Where I’m from, talented kids start working with known mathematicians one on one from 15 years or even earlier. And math Olympiads are asking different types of questions. No wonder, my former compatriots are the majority among the Fields medalists.</p>

40

<p>Hey again :stuck_out_tongue:
Just wanted to mention a few things…

  1. MIT does extremely well in Putnam (second to Harvard). But they prepare for it, far more thoroughly than UChicago bothers doing…
    Note: Check [The</a> William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition](<a href=“http://users.etown.edu/d/doytchinovb/putnam/resource.html]The”>The William Lowell Putnam Mathematical Competition)
    MIT, Harvard and even the (somewhat) Putnam red-herrings, Duke and Waterloo, have their own pages on Putnam prep. Chicago doesn’t have anything near that…
  2. I don’t know much about ARML, but if your information is correct, then that’s quite an amazing statistic! But I still question its relevance…
  3. Once again, I can’t say I know much about Duluth REU, but I found this link on their home page:
    <a href=“http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/tanglewood.html[/url]”>http://www.d.umn.edu/~jgallian/tanglewood.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>I’d like to quote (caveat: its grad schools, but is impressive nonetheless):</p>

<p>"
Almost all participants eventually go to graduate school. Twenty-four participants have received Ph.D. degrees, and twenty-six are currently in graduate school. Below are listed the number of students that have gone to each school. </p>

<p>Harvard 13
Chicago 9
Berkeley 8
MIT 7
Princeton 4
"</p>

<p>I’d like to reiterate my stance. While initial strength of student pool is an often cited metric for measuring a departments strength, it is not necessarily an important one… I don’t think its even worth relying on it while making a decision (at least between UChicago and MIT). If you want the best STEM education there is, go to MIT. If you want an excellent humanities exposure, go to UChicago.</p>