<p>I've been trying to decide between UChi and Tufts for a while now, until recently my parents told me Tufts just really is not affordable (they don't give merit based aid and as the 3rd college bound child of a middle class family their aid policies leaves me victim). After a lengthy financial discussion I am faced with a very tough choice.</p>
<p>UChicago, WashU, or the UW (Wisconsin)</p>
<p>UChicago is the most expensive prolly around $5-10k/year more than WashU. With me coming out with relatively the same personal debt ($20-25k). However my parents see this education as truly worth the investment.</p>
<p>WashU is slightly less money and a lot nicer with finaid. However both my brother and sister attended washu already. They had very different experiences one good one bad, and my parents have seen many students from my high school be unhappy there. They have a somewhat negative view on the school, education, and student body after seeing it for 8 years. But I've never gone and I'm sure my experience will be different too...</p>
<p>UW I would come out with no debt and still a somewhat reputable diploma. Yet the UW is about 2 miles from my house and I cant imagine going to school in madison for 4 more years. I didn't really want a big school and all that comes along with the UW when I set out. Yet in these economic times my parents really want me to consider the U.</p>
<p>So there. I want college to be fun and I have no doubt I will at each place. Mostly I want to get my money's worth out of such an expensive endeavor. I want a great education and I want a college that can open doors and create opportunities for hugh success. I am not sure what I will major in and I do not see what my job might be in the future. I just want to be extremely successful haha. Please let me know how you feel about these schools and their value?</p>
<p>P.s. colleges suck this year. Acceptance rates are gonna be crazy and now all us freshman are gonna have to pay for their poor endowment investments :(</p>
<p>I know it’s expensive, but there is no question, I think you should attend Chicago. I don’t know much about you–so I could easily be making a mistake by recommending it–but I do know that it is an amazing school. </p>
<p>I actually was just making the same decision last week. And thus I visited Wash U and Chicago. I liked Chicago alot more and for many more reasons than just one. </p>
<p>While there are a bunch of reasons, I’ll give you one example. I flat out found the academics at Chicago much better than at Wash U after sitting in on a class. There was barely a comparison. There are plenty of other reasons, but I’ll leave it at that. </p>
<p>But, the best advice would be to go where ever you will truly be happy =].</p>
<p>Wash U admitted a lot of people from my graduating class, I would say 12-14 or so, and 4 ended up attending. I visited them more than once while at UChicago. </p>
<p>For the pre-medical / engineering / applied sciences crowd the place seemed to work very well. No one was ecstatic about it, but not one seemed disappointed either. Most felt that they would have gotten the same type of education at peer schools (Northwestern, Cornell, Duke, etc.) Likewise for those in other fields that planned to go straight through to graduate studies. </p>
<p>However, when the economic bubble was revving up and offers were plenty amongst the choosier employers, Wash U seemed to just not make the cut on a uniform basis. As good as WUSTL is, it is still and up and coming school whose external recognition does not necessarily match its much deserved reputation amongst those in the know. Consequently, it is on the target school list for many big name employers, which in turn greatly diminishes ones chance of getting picked up by them. In contrast, the same schools mentioned above almost always are. Given how many UGs want jobs in finance, consulting, inside the beltway, and so on, this is definitely something worth considering. </p>
<p>Hand in hand with this is the white collar prestige issue. While neither school has lay prestige in the sense that Georgetown or Columbia does, UChicago is a favored son amongst the better educated / well heeled / cosmopolitan crowd. Alas, WUSTLs new kid on the block status again takes its toll. I know many an educated person who have either never heard of it (although this is becoming increasingly less common), or regard it as a decent regional institution in the same vein as Emory, Carnegie Mellon, or NYU. The older the crowd is the more likely this is to be the case, since 10 years ago WUSTL really was just that. Unfortunately, the older crowed also has a big say in you early career trajectory. </p>
<p>All-in-all, Chicago does benefit from being a well known quantity. You just have to carefully consider if this matters to you.</p>
<p>I’m pretty sure I’m gonna go to UChicago. I think the extra money spent will pay off in the long run for my education and future opportunities whatever they may be. I also think that UChi’s core actually benefits me as someone unsure of exactly what I may do giving me some extra time to explore and not fall behind the many with 10-year plans. Err at least that’s what I’m telling myself, let me know if that sounds right.</p>
<p>UChiAlum I was a little confused about your 3rd paragraph about WUSTL, recognition, and being seen as a “target school”? Could you explain what you mean.</p>
<p>Should have read… it is <em>not</em> on the “target school” list.</p>
<p>Basically, a lot of the organizations that are willing to hire bright, well rounded types (e.g. the Columbia history major with a bunch of EC’s) over those with concrete skills (the information technology and accounting double major from a local university) have highly organized recruiting for their entry level professional jobs. To be clear, because I certainly did not understand difference between “elite” and “average” employers as a high school senior, the “elite” companies who do the bright, well rounded approach are mainly management consulting firms, high finance entities (what the general public thinks of as Wall Street), and some very good public policy entities. Meanwhile, the “average” companies that stress hard skills gained through coursework and internships are your fortune 500 firms (and their small business corollaries) like Dell Computers, Coca-Cola, and United Airlines. </p>
<p>The former want you to attend information sessions, go through multiple rounds of interviews, and talk with other alumni already working with them, since effectively they are hiring raw intellectual and social talent. Consequently, the only easy way to be part of this process is if they send their recruiting team to your university. Alas, WUSTL – for a host of reasons, some rational, some not – tends to not end up on these lists. What makes such a scenario particularly bad is, unlike a state school where students often major in functional subjects like marketing, accounting, nursing, etc., WUSTL graduates a lot of people whose only real skills to be offered, without immediately going to graduate school, is their intellect and work ethos. While one might be inclined to write this off as a small problem affecting only a subset of the student body, the reality is the majority of elite college graduates are looking for just these kinds of jobs for two to three years before continuing their studies. At some of places, e.g. Dartmouth, it can be up to 70% of a graduating class. Ultimately, only you can decide if this matters to you. If you are premed or hell bent on getting a PhD en route to a career in academia, then it may not impact you at all.</p>
<p>“I flat out found the academics at Chicago much better than at Wash U after sitting in on a class”</p>
<p>I just want to point out that you cannot say one’s school’s academics are better than another’s by sitting in on one class at each. You’d have to sit in on maybe a hundred classes in order to be able to say such a statement. Nevertheless, Chicago is still an amazing school and you can’t go wrong with either choice.</p>