<p>Hey Guys,</p>
<p>A friend of mine has been accepted to Columbia, U Chicago, and Georgetown. He says hes interested in either Biology of some sort of PolSci or Econ as a major (totally undecided) and he was hoping someone could offer some advice. He's visited all three and the only thing he has decided is that the campus seems more appealing at U Chicago and Columbia.</p>
<p>Thanks for the help!</p>
<p>Whoa just found this post. These are the three schools that I like! Granted I wont be applying until next year... but what do you think the merits of these schools are? I'm interested in a double major in IR/poli-sci and classic studies.</p>
<p>The Columbia campus i snot appealing, IMHO. UChicago is very good at PoliSci and Bio, and has the best Econ department in the world. I would rule out Gtown if he doesn't like the campus as much, because I think the quality of education is significantly better at Chicago for Bio and Econ, at least, while they are all similar with PoliSci. Davnasca: pick Gtown if you are serious about IR: the SFS at Gtown is amazing, but I'm not sure you could double major in classics. Columbia vs. Chicago is sort of a tossup depending on the person, maybe location is a factor? UChicago might be a little more nerdy and intelletual, if that helps at all.</p>
<p>Hmmm Columbia and Gtown... the only two schools I applied to... aww the memories :-)</p>
<p>Well, Gtown somewhat speaks for itself when it comes to IR. The Walsh School of Foreign Service is indeed pretty incredible, no doubt. However, one of the things that made me a bit hesitant is that it doesn't really seem to have an academic character, instead, just a purely pre-professional atmosphere. Also, you'd have to be ok with going to the school with the most "i want to be president of the US"-type students / overall students in the world. </p>
<p>But, I think that the main difference probably lies in my first point. Chicago has always been famous for being an academically rigorous place, and notorious for graduating future academics. Gtown, on the other hand, has a much more professional outlook on things, especially considering SFS. They are both wonderful places, and I really think it just depends on what kind of atmosphere you are looking for.</p>
<p>In terms of Columbia, it is probably the most similar Ivy League school to the University of Chicago. They are both in major cities, both have an extensive core, and are reputable in virtually any academic field. Some of the differences between the schools, like Columbia having an engineering school but chicago not, won't really concern you. In that case, I'll have to agree with drummerdude and say that the difference really may come down to the city, the aesthetics of the campus, and in general, how you feel at each school. And after you visit then you choose to come to Chicago. lol</p>
<p>I'm not sure about Georgetown, like others here I guess.
With Columbia and Chicago, it's a close call just because the two schools are so similar. They both have an extensive core around small seminars, with more emphasis on social science at Chicago and more of a Great Books program at Columbia. Both are in major cities, although Columbia is a bit closer to the center of Manhattan while Chicago is campus-oriented I think. Nobel prize winners, etc, etc...
Perhaps one way of making the distinction is on the philosophy of the faculty. If your friend will be doing economics, then he will probably keep in mind that Chicago has an entire ideological school founded after them; while they are one of the most important intellectual powerhouses in the field, it would be reasonable to think that a Chicago education in economics will not be completely balanced, perhaps with more of an emphasis on the Chicago school. I think that at Columbia there may be a greater diversity of perspectives. However, this information is passed down from second-hand sources, so I'm not certain if that's true.</p>
<p>I suppose that a more tangible choice is the degree to which your friend would want an urban campus, the cost of daily living (at New York it would probably be right up there), and so on. Also, if your friend wants to double major, I think that would be easier to do at Columbia, and still easier at Georgetown, although I don't think that at Georgetown there is as intellectual an atmosphere as at Columbia and Chicago.</p>
<p>choices, choices..</p>
<p>I thought Columbia is ED? Isn't the friend obligated to attend Columbia?</p>
<p>The date on that post is 04/13/2006, so this is regular decision last year. Davnasca brought the post back up since s/he is interested in the same schools.</p>
<p>my cousin loved both schools, and basically applied ed to columbia and ea to chicago and got into columbia. I think the only thing that trumped columbia over chicago was new york city (which trumps any city in the world, i live here). He's now hoping to go to chicago for grad schoolin</p>
<p>No way that the Chicago school of Econ --> unbalanced viewpoints. "Schools" of thought are generally named after only 3 to 5 people who happen to teach at the school. Chicago probably has 20-30 Econ profs, I would not think that "Chicago School" thinking was a good description for all of them, probably not even a majority. Also: would Columbia really be "balanced" or would it just be wholeheartedly left wing? I think everyone needs to remember that the VASTLY overwhelming number of departments are going to be almost completely run by liberals. At some of these schools, Democratic professors outnumber Republicans worse than 35 to 1. Being indoctrinated with right wing economics is really the LAST form of bias you should be worried about.</p>
<p>liberal vs. conservative =/= democrat vs. republican</p>