UChicago Should Develop an Engineering Program

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Very limited careers for careers with an undergraduate biology or chemistry or life sciences degree etc. unless you want to apply to med school or work in a lab. So, it is not a selling point which is the point made by the OP which is valid.

Maybe if you go to a trash college

lol whatever you say

My good friend's kid went to UChicago and graduated last year. He & his friends were mostly science majors (Bio, Neuro, Molecular Engineering, Chemistry, etc.), and most went on to MBB or elite boutique consulting.

From the top 10-15 schools in the country, one's major becomes less important to recruiters because the quality of education is universally world-class.

This is nonsense. Also, When someone uses a phrase like “elite boutique consulting” u know they are stretching. Uchicago is not that. “Top 10-15” to which employer what job and what field. Give me a break

DP. Over a three year period, Chicago was 12th nationally for MBB undergrad placement, 3rd for MBAs, 2nd for undergrads in the Chicago offices, 1st for MBAs in the Chicago offices.

https://casecoach.com/b/what-type-of-candidates-make-it-to-mckinsey-bcg-and-bain-in-the-us/

None of these things are hard to find if you drop your inherent biases and make a tiny amount of effort.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:I think the general public thinks of the atom bomb during WWII and something vague about Chicago school of economics.

The one thing I don't understand is that UChicago purposefully invested in STEM through its Hyde Park labs.

I guess the biggest gripe is that in the most transformational era of CS engineering that it lags behind other schools.

Lots of “elite” schools lag in tech and engineering. Until the 90s or so these were regarded as fields that were beneath them. Mere trades. And they never caught up to a changing world and where the demand is these days.

Obviously Chicago, Harvard, Yale etc are great schools. But they are more niche these days since they’re not strong in engineering. Which is fine. There aren’t many colleges that are great in everything.

Niche? The leading field in the United States is not AI or tech or engineering. It’s healthcare. All of these colleges are leaders in medicine and life sciences research.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Data doesn't show that. Only 10% undergraduate major in those areas.

Strong, not popular. The advanced biology sequence is very strong and uses a lot of primary literature.

We are talking about research universities not liberal arts colleges. Chicago’s life sciences research is of a smaller scale compared to every other T20, especially T10 or T5. One of the advantages of research universities is the research opportunities for undergraduate. This is why they are not popular.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Data doesn't show that. Only 10% undergraduate major in those areas.

Strong, not popular. The advanced biology sequence is very strong and uses a lot of primary literature.

We are talking about research universities not liberal arts colleges. Chicago’s life sciences research is of a smaller scale compared to every other T20, especially T10 or T5. One of the advantages of research universities is the research opportunities for undergraduate. This is why they are not popular.

Enough spitballing. UChicago is ranked #12 in the US by the Times Higher Education for Life Sciences.

To post such nonsense should be banned here.

[Anonymous]

DP. Typical Chicago mom. When they have nothing substantive to say, they resort to bullying people and banning them. Then they point to some meaningless ranking as if that proves anything. What major breakthroughs has UChicago actually made while Harvard, MIT, and UC Berkeley are advancing CRISPR technology, and Penn helped make mRNA vaccines a reality?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Very limited careers for careers with an undergraduate biology or chemistry or life sciences degree etc. unless you want to apply to med school or work in a lab. So, it is not a selling point which is the point made by the OP which is valid.

Maybe if you go to a trash college

lol whatever you say

My good friend's kid went to UChicago and graduated last year. He & his friends were mostly science majors (Bio, Neuro, Molecular Engineering, Chemistry, etc.), and most went on to MBB or elite boutique consulting.

From the top 10-15 schools in the country, one's major becomes less important to recruiters because the quality of education is universally world-class.

This is nonsense. Also, When someone uses a phrase like “elite boutique consulting” u know they are stretching. Uchicago is not that. “Top 10-15” to which employer what job and what field. Give me a break

DP. Over a three year period, Chicago was 12th nationally for MBB undergrad placement, 3rd for MBAs, 2nd for undergrads in the Chicago offices, 1st for MBAs in the Chicago offices.

https://casecoach.com/b/what-type-of-candidates-make-it-to-mckinsey-bcg-and-bain-in-the-us/

None of these things are hard to find if you drop your inherent biases and make a tiny amount of effort.

The OP was talking about UChicago and Engineering Program or lack thereof. Why are you talking about MBAs?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Data doesn't show that. Only 10% undergraduate major in those areas.

Strong, not popular. The advanced biology sequence is very strong and uses a lot of primary literature.

We are talking about research universities not liberal arts colleges. Chicago’s life sciences research is of a smaller scale compared to every other T20, especially T10 or T5. One of the advantages of research universities is the research opportunities for undergraduate. This is why they are not popular.

Enough spitballing. UChicago is ranked #12 in the US by the Times Higher Education for Life Sciences.

To post such nonsense should be banned here.

You've lost the argument if you are now citing Times Higher Education to boast about life science rankings :roll when the OP and the thread is about UChicago and lack of Engineering program.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Typical Chicago mom. When they have nothing substantive to say, they resort to bullying people and banning them. Then they point to some meaningless ranking as if that proves anything. What major breakthroughs has UChicago actually made while Harvard, MIT, and UC Berkeley are advancing CRISPR technology, and Penn helped make mRNA vaccines a reality?

Chicago loves theory. Life sciences are too practical.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Very limited careers for careers with an undergraduate biology or chemistry or life sciences degree etc. unless you want to apply to med school or work in a lab. So, it is not a selling point which is the point made by the OP which is valid.

Maybe if you go to a trash college

lol whatever you say

My good friend's kid went to UChicago and graduated last year. He & his friends were mostly science majors (Bio, Neuro, Molecular Engineering, Chemistry, etc.), and most went on to MBB or elite boutique consulting.

From the top 10-15 schools in the country, one's major becomes less important to recruiters because the quality of education is universally world-class.

This is nonsense. Also, When someone uses a phrase like “elite boutique consulting” u know they are stretching. Uchicago is not that. “Top 10-15” to which employer what job and what field. Give me a break

DP. Over a three year period, Chicago was 12th nationally for MBB undergrad placement, 3rd for MBAs, 2nd for undergrads in the Chicago offices, 1st for MBAs in the Chicago offices.

https://casecoach.com/b/what-type-of-candidates-make-it-to-mckinsey-bcg-and-bain-in-the-us/

None of these things are hard to find if you drop your inherent biases and make a tiny amount of effort.

The OP was talking about UChicago and Engineering Program or lack thereof. Why are you talking about MBAs?

I was responding to a comment about consulting and MBB. Do you have any idea how to see previous comments that are being replied to and follow a thread?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Typical Chicago mom. When they have nothing substantive to say, they resort to bullying people and banning them. Then they point to some meaningless ranking as if that proves anything. What major breakthroughs has UChicago actually made while Harvard, MIT, and UC Berkeley are advancing CRISPR technology, and Penn helped make mRNA vaccines a reality?

If you got banned, it’s because an admin noticed your deranged posts, not because of your scapegoat “Chicago mom,” who seems to occupy a lot of your small headspace.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DP. Typical Chicago mom. When they have nothing substantive to say, they resort to bullying people and banning them. Then they point to some meaningless ranking as if that proves anything. What major breakthroughs has UChicago actually made while Harvard, MIT, and UC Berkeley are advancing CRISPR technology, and Penn helped make mRNA vaccines a reality?

1. Nobody is being bullied.
2. “Chicago mom” can’t ban you.
3. Major breakthroughs in life sciences at UChicago recently include: treatment of resistant tumors, the world’s first “quantum proteins,” mRNA-loaded nano particles to reverse diabetes, and more. This is public information.
4. I am not a mom nor associated with UChicago.
5. It’s embarrassing to let yourself get so enraged at a school. Salty? Jealous? Probably both.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Yale is moving in the right direction: New professors in the sciences said it is a particularly exciting time to work at Yale, as the University is expanding and strengthening its departments in the sciences. Computer science professor Dragomir Radev said his course “Natural Language Processing” this spring attracted 155 shoppers, prompting him to move to a room three times bigger than the original.

Radev, who previously taught at Columbia University and the University of Michigan, added that so far he has been impressed with the quality of undergraduate students and the conveniently small size of the campus.

Yale didn’t have NLP before? They’re really lagging in AI big time.

I think you need some help in natural language processing.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Yale is moving in the right direction: New professors in the sciences said it is a particularly exciting time to work at Yale, as the University is expanding and strengthening its departments in the sciences. Computer science professor Dragomir Radev said his course “Natural Language Processing” this spring attracted 155 shoppers, prompting him to move to a room three times bigger than the original.

Radev, who previously taught at Columbia University and the University of Michigan, added that so far he has been impressed with the quality of undergraduate students and the conveniently small size of the campus.

NLP is obsolete. GPT replaced it.

[Anonymous]

Considering Chicago has $6.2 billion in debt, it shouldn't be expanding into anything new. In fact, the opposite is true - programs are being cut and faculty are being laid off. https://provost.uchicago.edu/announcements/information-about-universitys-finances

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:No. What UChicago really needs is a strong bio, life sciences, and medical program, like the ones Hopkins, WashU, Vanderbilt, and Emory have.

If UChicago had even half of Hopkins’ biomedical strength, it would attract a lot more top students, just like Northwestern does.

They do have strong programs in those areas.

Very limited careers for careers with an undergraduate biology or chemistry or life sciences degree etc. unless you want to apply to med school or work in a lab. So, it is not a selling point which is the point made by the OP which is valid.

Maybe if you go to a trash college

lol whatever you say

My good friend's kid went to UChicago and graduated last year. He & his friends were mostly science majors (Bio, Neuro, Molecular Engineering, Chemistry, etc.), and most went on to MBB or elite boutique consulting.

From the top 10-15 schools in the country, one's major becomes less important to recruiters because the quality of education is universally world-class.

This is nonsense. Also, When someone uses a phrase like “elite boutique consulting” u know they are stretching. Uchicago is not that. “Top 10-15” to which employer what job and what field. Give me a break

The person you are responding to is someone that wants to sound smarter than they are. Majors count, even from Harvard.