<p>Many people who chose Chicago over Harvard did so in part for a specific program, such as Mathematics or Economics. Others chose it for the core or the intellectual atmosphere. Some did it because of a merit scholarship at Chicago.</p>
<p>Some did it because C comes before H in the alphabet.</p>
<p>He's gone. -cheers-</p>
<p>Of the people I know who chose Chicago over Columbia, Penn, Williams, Yale, and Harvard, just among the samplings of my friends with whom I've discussed this, they did so because they felt they fit in better here. </p>
<p>They felt that more students at Chicago are more engaged academically than students at other schools; they felt taken care of by the profs they were going to meet through the core; they liked that they met students who were relaxed and zany, bonkers-smart; they liked that students had professional aspirations but didn't let those aspirations override their undergraduate experience.</p>
<p>Deep Springs College < 7% </p>
<p>SAT - Verbal Range (25-75%): 750-800
SAT - Math Range (25-75%): 700-800</p>
<h2>If those are the criteria...</h2>
<p>The funny thing is when kids in my high school heard how selective Deep Springs was, suddenly everyone wanted e to go there...even though working on a farm is part of the curriculum.</p>
<p>Looked up Deep Springs.. looks like a cult. I don't like it.</p>
<p>The graduates of Deep Springs tend to do extremely well upon graduation, Notsomuch. It's not like a cult at all, really. There is no supreme leader, for one thing, in a way that differs even from most traditional colleges.</p>
<p>Hey Lakers, did you ever answer the question of which college you're planning on going to? Let's hear how much better that school is than UChicago.</p>
<p>Im heading to Chicago over Yale for a masters in religion next year and I can tell you that, for grad school atleast, the quality of the program in your field matters alot. (Take a look, for example, at religious studies faculty at stanford. Largest contingent? Chicago. Look at Swarthmore--Chicago. Look at the Div school at Harvard. After Harvard its Chicago and Yale. So if you want to do stuff in Economics, Religious Studies, Anthropology, Sociology, and a number of other fields, Chicago is the best place to be.</p>
<p>I can also tell you that, as someone who has been through penn and princeton for some grad and undergrad work recently (long and annoying story involving a war with lebanon) I cannot wait to be at Chicago next year. Princeton is not quite as bad as Penn in this respect, but the latter in particular is very pre-professional and the intellectual life at both places is really quite lame compared to what I was able to glean from even a brief few day visit to Chicago recently. If you want to end up on wall street doing i-banking head to Princeton, Penn whatever (though actually chicago is very good for that too, hehe). If you want a the best world-class holistic education you can get then it seems like Chicago, with its core and faculty, is the best place to be.</p>
<p>Are you nuts?</p>
<p>I studied at Chicago, Harvard, and Stanford. </p>
<p>In my experience, Chicago has by far the smartest and most intellectual students of the three. Unfortunately, Chicago is the also most mono-chromatically academic university on the planet and that's not a good thing. My classes were almost all seminars, with professors (and not grad students) doing the teaching. Some classes had such tiny enrollments we met in the professor's office. I even had the pleasure of having a professor apologize to a dozen undergrads that the reason he was late to class late one day was that he'd just learned he'd won the Nobel. </p>
<p>Stanford has the weakest students. It has way too many jocks and wannabe jocks and frat boy types, and perhaps as a consequence, many undergrad courses are taught in ways more typical of Arizona State University than a world class university. But for its dazzling grad schools, Stanford would be much closer in spirit to USC, SMU, Vanderbilt, and Duke -- second-tier schools that attract upper-middle class students.</p>
<p>Harvard is in the middle. Lots of very smart students who if they're not careful, will graduate with second-rate educations. But if you make the effort to seek out the right classes and the right profs, Harvard will give you an education every bit as good as Chicago's (At Chicago, no matter what you do, you WILL get a first-rate education.) </p>
<p>But Harvard also has lots of kids who got in because of who their parents are. The school is crawling with quiet, low-key Old Money types and the sons and daughters of celebrities. It also has lots of hustlers from the boonies -- kids who managed to become the president, captain and editor of every club, team and publication in their hillbilly high schools. For every Harvard undergrad who overwhelms you with his/her brains, you'll meet two meatheads who leave you wondering just how they got admitted. (Did his dad offer to built Harvard a new international airport?) </p>
<p>Harvard's resources are mindboggling. Spend a week on campus and you will come away thinking that if Harvard ever got serious about higher education, it would blow away every other university in America.</p>
<p>I have spent my life coasting on what I learned at Chicago but I can't say it was always a lot of fun. I had the most fun at Harvard. Stanford's nice because the Bay Area is so stunningly beautiful.</p>
<p>may I ask what you did at each of those institutions?</p>
<p>I was in agreement with Auto until Duke was lumped with SMU. :rolleyes:</p>
<p>
That's what I concluded.</p>
<p>lakerskingdom, get over yourself: </p>
<p>Lakers,
I'm getting a headache trying to figure out how the "best and brightest" goes to more than one school. </p>
<p>All kids are different and will thrive in different environments. I venture to say this includes that one student who we all agree is the "best and brightest." I do have a very troubling thought though--that the "best and brightest" could fall into the junkheap of also-rans at a state school some year and HYP would each have to compete for the "better and brighter." But I guess the spin-artists could easily say that, although the kid who chose State U had by far the strongest test scores, grades, published research, DNA blueprint, etc., the fact that he or she chose State U proves that he or she lacks something else, something less quantifiable (judgment?) and was not the "best and brightest" after all.</p>
<p>"junkheap of also-rans at a state school"</p>
<p>Pretty offensive, Bennie.</p>
<p>I still want desperately to know where Lakers applied, or will apply -- at least I've the comfort of knowing that I won't run into him at Chicago :P</p>
<p>Ohio, I hope you do not seriously think I was serious. I meant only to offend Lakers and his arrogance.</p>
<p>Sorry, Bennie - I took it out of context - my apologies.</p>
<p>Not necessary, O-mom. Thinking what you did, you were right to call me out.</p>