Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:U Chicago is incredibly difficult in mathematics, economics and econometrics and physics. i can't speak to biology, but to say it is just a social sciences school is wrong.

I can't address whether it's good for premed, because my DC is mathematics, and his best friend is doing Physics. Proof-based math at Chicago is insanely difficult, starting with the 16000 series and IBL,and getting worse from there. Economic Analysis is also proof-based, as is Investments.

If you're going to assert something, at U Chicago you need to provide the rigorous evidence or you get torn apart- so I am waiting to hear the evidence.

What is the end goal of all this? Their outcome is consistently mediocre. If that's the boosters' end goal, why bother with all this, only to end up in the same place as as many solid 2nd and 3rd tier university grads? That's assuming they survived all the shootings in Chicago.

What is the "outcome" that is mediocre at UChicago? If you're talking salary, you're probably this same person harping on about ROI. If the I (investment) is the tuition, then the R (returns) is the education. Sure, salary is important, but you go to college for an education. If the I is tuition, and the R is an education, I'd say the R at UChicago is great. Some people just don't agree that college is about education--totally your call.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:U Chicago is incredibly difficult in mathematics, economics and econometrics and physics. i can't speak to biology, but to say it is just a social sciences school is wrong.

I can't address whether it's good for premed, because my DC is mathematics, and his best friend is doing Physics. Proof-based math at Chicago is insanely difficult, starting with the 16000 series and IBL,and getting worse from there. Economic Analysis is also proof-based, as is Investments.

If you're going to assert something, at U Chicago you need to provide the rigorous evidence or you get torn apart- so I am waiting to hear the evidence.

What is the end goal of all this? Their outcome is consistently mediocre. If that's the boosters' end goal, why bother with all this, only to end up in the same place as as many solid 2nd and 3rd tier university grads? That's assuming they survived all the shootings in Chicago.

Anonymous wrote:U Chicago is incredibly difficult in mathematics, economics and econometrics and physics. i can't speak to biology, but to say it is just a social sciences school is wrong.

I can't address whether it's good for premed, because my DC is mathematics, and his best friend is doing Physics. Proof-based math at Chicago is insanely difficult, starting with the 16000 series and IBL,and getting worse from there. Economic Analysis is also proof-based, as is Investments.

If you're going to assert something, at U Chicago you need to provide the rigorous evidence or you get torn apart- so I am waiting to hear the evidence.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP's kid is definitely not in humanities or in arts. She may think she's in medicine - but who knows. Most kids know by HS graduation whether s/he wants to be in STEMs or humanities. It's pretty clear OPs kid wants to do a STEM. For this, Chicago isn't it.

Such ignorance yet such confidence and arrogance in stating the patently ridiculous

It's a troll. I suspect it has been the same one.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:OP's kid is definitely not in humanities or in arts. She may think she's in medicine - but who knows. Most kids know by HS graduation whether s/he wants to be in STEMs or humanities. It's pretty clear OPs kid wants to do a STEM. For this, Chicago isn't it.

Such ignorance yet such confidence and arrogance in stating the patently ridiculous

Anonymous wrote:OP's kid is definitely not in humanities or in arts. She may think she's in medicine - but who knows. Most kids know by HS graduation whether s/he wants to be in STEMs or humanities. It's pretty clear OPs kid wants to do a STEM. For this, Chicago isn't it.

Anonymous wrote:OP's kid is definitely not in humanities or in arts. She may think she's in medicine - but who knows. Most kids know by HS graduation whether s/he wants to be in STEMs or humanities. It's pretty clear OPs kid wants to do a STEM. For this, Chicago isn't it.

Anonymous wrote:OP's kid is definitely not in humanities or in arts. She may think she's in medicine - but who knows. Most kids know by HS graduation whether s/he wants to be in STEMs or humanities. It's pretty clear OPs kid wants to do a STEM. For this, Chicago isn't it.

Anonymous wrote:Your child may think they want to go to med school or study science but she may change her major 100x before graduation. I know many kids who said they’d be premed and switched to something else. So you want to go to a college that will keep the most doors open.

Anonymous wrote:You don’t understand U Chicago if you think it’s all about ROI.
First and foremost, U Chicago is a university that wants to teach undergraduates how to listen, think critically and make and refute an argument, regardless of area of study. They value academic freedom and critical thinking and every student who graduates has gained this; by comparison, the other Ivy Plus have a lot of trouble with professors and DEI teams pushing ideology. U Chicago does not cancel or suppress thought the way we recently saw at Yale, MIT and Stanford. Totally embarrassing for those schools

In terms of the ROI point, apples to apples majors do very well. Chicago is a core recruiting school for IB and McKinsey and BCG, and the Econ majors do as well as the Ivies. A PP said 68% major in social sciences fields or arts... this probably drives the difference in ROI because these tend to lead to low paying careers or grad school. By contrast 70% of Harvard went into consulting or investment banking.