<p>I was recently talking to a friend who lives outside of the states. When I told him I was going to UChicago, he asked me what it was like and what ivy league school would fall closest to Chicago's atmosphere and style. I told him UChicago was quite different from any ivy, but he pressed the question so I told him i'd get back to him.</p>
<p>My question to you all is what ivy-league school do you think is most similar to The University of Chicago? </p>
<p>My guess would be Columbia because they also have a rigorous core set of classes everyone must take. Also, I've heard Columbia's students are not that social and the atmosphere there is more academian that pre-professional.</p>
<p>Yah, Columbia. If anything though, Columbia probably has less of a close-knit campus than Chicago. I’ve heard it’s a pretty independent (and at times, lonely) place in Morningside Heights.</p>
<p>I think Brown is philosophically based off of much of the same intellectual exploration idea as Chicago is, although they go about that goal in obviously very different ways.</p>
<p>Daggerman - no way Chicago is similar to Penn - Penn is quite pre-professional, with a nursing school, engineering, wharton etc. all mixed in with the general liberal arts college. Also, penn is a lot bigger with 10k+ undergrads, and I really don’t think that it has a very “intellectual” vibe.</p>
<p>Brown might be a little closer because the undergrads at brown - by benefit of the open curriculum - have a lot of intellectual curiosity and generally love what they’re learning. The weaker reputation of the faculty, less recognition as being a college in the middle of a great research university, and LACK of a cohesive core really distinguish the two schools though.</p>
<p>i would say brown - although brown has pretty much the opposite of the core, both schools have the same sort of intellectual curiosity in the student body. although i don’t know enough about columbia to even attempt to make the comparison.</p>
<p>On paper, Columbia, even though their core seems to have less flexibility as to what classes to take. Chicago has flexibility within the area. When we visited Brown, the presenter, an AdCom who happened to be a Doctor from their medical school, said that even though there was no set core, by the end of the four years most students had ended up taking classes that constituted sort of a common core.</p>
<p>Cue7- haha I was clearly being facetious. By virtue of four people prior to me responding with Columbia, I was fairly certain consensus had already been established.</p>
<p>The problem with Brown though - and I don’t mean to deride Chicago in saying this - is that the student body tends to be very very carefree and laidback. Brown student may work very hard, but in an atmosphere of grade inflation and a curriculum that encourages curiosity, the student body overall just has a very different vibe than Chicago. Chicago is definitely a more serious, kinda gritty place. Many of the Brown students I met had this very bubbly, laidback, vivacious personality - and that’s just NOT how I would describe the U of C. Chicago is certainly not a laidback institution. Students are content and very intellectually curious, but it’s def not the same vibe.</p>
<p>I say it’s a pretty good mix of Brown and Columbia. Although I definitely wish there was more Brown in the atmosphere. I love the Brown intellectual/carefree vibe and I’m afraid I won’t find enough of it at UC. The academics are really strengthening though so maybe we can call it a bit of Princeton without the snootiness.</p>
<p>I too have heard Princeton has been improving their academics, not sure it matches Chicago’s yet, but (I have a friend who spent many years at both who contends Princeton has a long way to go, but that is the voice of but one person) culture wise, I’m not sure there is much of a match.</p>
<p>i got into both columbia and uchicago this year and i chose uchicago over columbia for some very blatant differences i found between the schools.</p>