University of Chicago

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:DC loved Chicago from the get go, is STEM focused, doesn’t mind the cold, and is thriving. There is a ton of work and the core is no joke. It would have been an “easier path” if they’d gone to a less demanding school, but they actually enjoy the classes/work and have found their people. The day to day experience is a great fit.

I wish it was closer (we are in the DMV). I don’t love the quarter system from a calendar/schedule perspective. It’s expensive and we got zero aid.

Very much our experience -- 1/2 STEM, 1/2 Humanities kid. First year. Tons of work but loves it.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The education is top notch and work ethic instilled translates well to employment.

Employment in everything but engineering, correct?

Apart from molecular engineering, UChicago doesn’t have engineering at all.

It's an econ school, why does it need engineering?

UChicago is great for humanities, social sciences, math, physics. Fully agree that there is no need for engineering.

One third majoring in econ by graduation.

It may be because Math/Physics/Stats/Engineering is so hard...it's the default

Uchicago economics is very very hard. It’s because economics has the best outcomes coming out of college. A physics degree is almost entirely useless if you aren’t spending most of your time in other courses.

I would think Physics at UChicago would set you up nicely for a quant job. I think they even have a large quant trading club and I see Physics/Math/Stats majors. Impressive club!

What’s the purpose of going all the way with a major as hard as physics to get a quant job? Just do math or economics and you’ll have a much easier time explaining why you even did the degree you did.

My kid is in physics at Chicago. It is no joke. So much work, concepts are difficult, and grades are low. But the reason she is in physics is because she loves the subject. It’s that simple.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The education is top notch and work ethic instilled translates well to employment.

Employment in everything but engineering, correct?

Apart from molecular engineering, UChicago doesn’t have engineering at all.

It's an econ school, why does it need engineering?

UChicago is great for humanities, social sciences, math, physics. Fully agree that there is no need for engineering.

One third majoring in econ by graduation.

It may be because Math/Physics/Stats/Engineering is so hard...it's the default

Uchicago economics is very very hard. It’s because economics has the best outcomes coming out of college. A physics degree is almost entirely useless if you aren’t spending most of your time in other courses.

I would think Physics at UChicago would set you up nicely for a quant job. I think they even have a large quant trading club and I see Physics/Math/Stats majors. Impressive club!

What’s the purpose of going all the way with a major as hard as physics to get a quant job? Just do math or economics and you’ll have a much easier time explaining why you even did the degree you did.

My kid is in physics at Chicago. It is no joke. So much work, concepts are difficult, and grades are low. But the reason she is in physics is because she loves the subject. It’s that simple.

I don’t disagree that that’s a good reason to do physics. I just think it’s a poor choice to pivot to quant when you could…just do what you actually like- physics!

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The education is top notch and work ethic instilled translates well to employment.

Employment in everything but engineering, correct?

Apart from molecular engineering, UChicago doesn’t have engineering at all.

It's an econ school, why does it need engineering?

UChicago is great for humanities, social sciences, math, physics. Fully agree that there is no need for engineering.

One third majoring in econ by graduation.

It may be because Math/Physics/Stats/Engineering is so hard...it's the default

Uchicago economics is very very hard. It’s because economics has the best outcomes coming out of college. A physics degree is almost entirely useless if you aren’t spending most of your time in other courses.

I would think Physics at UChicago would set you up nicely for a quant job. I think they even have a large quant trading club and I see Physics/Math/Stats majors. Impressive club!

You need to take a lot of outside courses for quant. Quant is not as simple as people here make it. You need to 1) actually know how to code for heavens sake 2) be able to compete with mathematical economics majors who have a lot more applicable knowledge base (and frankly easier courses with more time on their hands), and 3) you actually have to get passed the insane interview process. Quant is not some easy job you stumble into; students prep for months and there’s very few jobs.

Physics uses a particular branch of mathematics. Some of which is useful, but it makes much more sense to take a stats major.

There is no such thing as a mathematical economics major at UChicago. Quant firms are pretty major-agnostic. Learning about t-tests and what not actually isn't as huge of an advantage as you might think, as that stuff is rarely used by firms.

Stats majors don’t spend their time doing t tests? You seem a bit ignorant on what stats programs are up to these days.

[Anonymous]

The world's foremost expert in college admissions says that UChicago waitlists students and then calls them to get off the waitlist. He terms this ED3.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The thing I remember most about UChicago is that they had a dejected football scout at the summer camps prior to senior year. My son literally won the entire camp in a 1:1 lineman elimination challenge and he was the last one standing.

He had a 3.5 and a 1300 and the Chicago coach just said, sorry amigo, I can’t recruit you on those numbers.

We had already received some mailings from U Chicago including a big postcard with our kid’s name on it. We posted it on the fridge for a while and wrote with a sharpie, “SORRY AMIGO !!!!” As a joke.

He went to Williams instead

I guess Williams has pretty low standards for athletes. Two not very smart athletic siblings from my high school went. A 3.5 will not get you into most top schools.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:DC loved Chicago from the get go, is STEM focused, doesn’t mind the cold, and is thriving. There is a ton of work and the core is no joke. It would have been an “easier path” if they’d gone to a less demanding school, but they actually enjoy the classes/work and have found their people. The day to day experience is a great fit.

I wish it was closer (we are in the DMV). I don’t love the quarter system from a calendar/schedule perspective. It’s expensive and we got zero aid.

Very much our experience -- 1/2 STEM, 1/2 Humanities kid. First year. Tons of work but loves it.

1/2 Stem, 1/2 humanities becomes all STEM - as you shall see. There is no such thing as 1/2 humanities, except as an application marketing ploy.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The education is top notch and work ethic instilled translates well to employment.

Employment in everything but engineering, correct?

Apart from molecular engineering, UChicago doesn’t have engineering at all.

It's an econ school, why does it need engineering?

UChicago is great for humanities, social sciences, math, physics. Fully agree that there is no need for engineering.

One third majoring in econ by graduation.

It may be because Math/Physics/Stats/Engineering is so hard...it's the default

Uchicago economics is very very hard. It’s because economics has the best outcomes coming out of college. A physics degree is almost entirely useless if you aren’t spending most of your time in other courses.

I would think Physics at UChicago would set you up nicely for a quant job. I think they even have a large quant trading club and I see Physics/Math/Stats majors. Impressive club!

What’s the purpose of going all the way with a major as hard as physics to get a quant job? Just do math or economics and you’ll have a much easier time explaining why you even did the degree you did.

My kid is in physics at Chicago. It is no joke. So much work, concepts are difficult, and grades are low. But the reason she is in physics is because she loves the subject. It’s that simple.

PP, my kid is seriously considering doing physics at Uchicago. How is the teaching quality? Large classes? Graduate students as teachers? Are the professors accessible? Students are cut throat grinders?

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:If you are USAMO, quant job is pretty much a shoe-in.

Or you can do Putnam.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:The world's foremost expert in college admissions says that UChicago waitlists students and then calls them to get off the waitlist. He terms this ED3.

I have seen this happen in my DC's private school. To get off the waitlist at UC, you have to sign the binding ED document.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:The thing I remember most about UChicago is that they had a dejected football scout at the summer camps prior to senior year. My son literally won the entire camp in a 1:1 lineman elimination challenge and he was the last one standing.

He had a 3.5 and a 1300 and the Chicago coach just said, sorry amigo, I can’t recruit you on those numbers.

We had already received some mailings from U Chicago including a big postcard with our kid’s name on it. We posted it on the fridge for a while and wrote with a sharpie, “SORRY AMIGO !!!!” As a joke.

He went to Williams instead

I guess Williams has pretty low standards for athletes. Two not very smart athletic siblings from my high school went. A 3.5 will not get you into most top schools.

Embarrassing that they would lower their standards so much just to attract a DIII football player. Not like the school is making money off it like a real DI program. Makes no sense.

[Anonymous]

Someone said the ED acceptance rate is 80%? They don't publish the stats so I'm not sure if it is accurate.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Someone said the ED acceptance rate is 80%? They don't publish the stats so I'm not sure if it is accurate.

Of course, it’s not accurate. The ED0 acceptance rate is around 30 percent, and it goes down from there (for ED1 and ED2).

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone said the ED acceptance rate is 80%? They don't publish the stats so I'm not sure if it is accurate.

Of course, it’s not accurate. The ED0 acceptance rate is around 30 percent, and it goes down from there (for ED1 and ED2).

Cite? I can't find this information.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Someone said the ED acceptance rate is 80%? They don't publish the stats so I'm not sure if it is accurate.

Of course, it’s not accurate. The ED0 acceptance rate is around 30 percent, and it goes down from there (for ED1 and ED2).

There's no way ED0 is only 30% acceptance rate. ED1 is probably around 30%, although there are a few private schools where any kid with reasonable grades is basically guaranteed an ED acceptance (Horace Mann, Harvard Westlake, Philips Exeter).