<p>UChicago has better undegrad teaching than most of the ivies even. It has one of the best (if not the best) polysci departments in the country, as well as econ.</p>
<p>Though it does have less prestige to laymen, academics and people who have actually graduated from top institutions value it very highly.</p>
<p>Also, if you’re planning to go on to grad school, UChicago sends more students on to top grad schools like Harvard Law than even most of the Ivies. And if you go there, that’s all the prestige you need.</p>
<p>UChicago has a top grad program. It’s undergrad program is not better than any of the Ivies. UChicago supporters and alums are very delusional. Citing facts that either don’t exist or apply to something irrelevant (such as UChicago’s top grad programs and research departments) to support UChicago’s undergrad program, which fill this thread, is a classic sign of the inferiority complex. Wake up to the facts people.</p>
<p>Believe in your alma mater, and understand how well you do at your school matters a lot more than which school you attend at this level.</p>
<p>Well, teaching quality statistics do point to Chicago having a better undegrad program than many of the Ivies.</p>
<p>I remember a chart from a while ago which wasn’t school-specific, but for all top grad schools, which had Chicago easily in the top 10. I’ll try to dig it up.</p>
<p>Why do you engage in such sophmoric hair splitting? Your comments remind me of discussions in my youth: Which is better, Chevy or Ford? (depends on what you grew up with!).</p>
<p>While it is true that UofC has a reputation for requiring hard work and a reputation for grade deflation, there is no real evidence of such. In fact, in June 2007, 2/3 of the undergrads graduated with honors. </p>
<p>Using law school admissions, especially for an east coast school like Yale, is equally limited. You would need to know the number that applied, which we don’t know, in order to draw any conclusions. We do know that UofC is reputed to be less pre-professional than Ivies. That alone could account for the difference at Yale law.</p>
<p>Apparently you don’t attend UofC (otherwise you’d spell better “All the people I know who **attends **” and argue better ), so why not stick to what you do know?</p>
<p>Not one of these universities is “better” overall… as its has been stated on CC hundreds of times, all of these universities are peer universities. However, although they are equally good academically (and I would argue the top 20 universities are all equal academically), they have very different environments. It is up to you, not up to posters on CC, to determine which environment you like best and which one is “better” for you.</p>
<p>You know, Chicago does have its own highly regarded law school. The same one where the President and one of the Supreme Court justices taught (the smartest funniest one, right?) Presumably, it draws a few applicants away from other top schools (like Yale) that are hundreds of miles away.</p>
<p>I would never say that Chicago is “better” than Penn, Brown, etc. Or St. John’s College for that matter. There are just so many factors involved in the personal preference of one good school over another. Chicago does have its own distinct traditions, character, and approaches that are very appealing to some, but not to others.</p>
<p>Now it’s true that, historically, many kids admitted to Chicago are rejected by other top schools. Some of them might be considered a little “narrow” by those other schools. For instance, I never met a Chicago student who mentioned having been a team captain (an experience sometimes tallied and displayed in the class profiles of other schools). This may be changing; in the past 5 entering classes, about half the students have been “involved in” varsity sports, according to the Chicago admissions site. What exactly does “involved in” mean? For all I know they were on the bench compiling performance statistics on their taller, faster, more “rounded” teammates. Different strokes.</p>
), so why not stick to what you do know?</p>