sonic.v

okey...
someone maybe remember I posted Carleton VS CMC VS Chicago one month ago.
After these days' consideration, I think I would like to go to Carleton or Chicago, not CMC.
I got in Carleton, kinda waiting to hear from Chicago now. But even I got in, it looks a hard choice between these two great schools.
What do you think?
My major: Econ + Political Science
focus on international stuff~

ScholarsInk

Well, Chicago is just about the best place to study economics, so that's a definite UChicago plus. It is the only institution that still teaches price theory.

sonic.v

how about political science??

schismmanifesto

U Chicago has such an overwhelming advantage in terms of exposure, reputation, possibilities than Carleton. Carleton is an amazing school don't get me wrong but for Econ and Poly Sci there aren't many schools better in the world than U Chic

sonic.v

thx, as time goes by, I tend to love Chicago more and more...
but Chicago hasn't issued transfer decision yet...
getting so nervous rit now...

treeman

As an economist, I think I'm going to have to respectfully disagree with posters who argue that U of C is the place to be for ECON. It really depends on your focus. There are many, many paradigms and world views among economists, and most colleges and universities favor some schools of thought and eschew others. Chicago has a terrific reputation if you want to study their brand of economics. The sad truth is that most incoming students have no idea what economics is all about, and their approach mimics that of their teachers. If ignorance is bliss and all you want is prestige, or if you are one of the few incoming students who does have some perspective on economic theory and practice and you agree with the flavor of Chicago, then you can't do much better. However, and it is a big however, for the vast majority of undergraduates, learning the mechanics of economics is daunting, and what is most important is the quality of teaching. I would argue that the top LACs give undergrads just as much in terms of ECON preparation as do U of C, or Princeton or Stanford.

In this, I am not being a hypocrite. I was an undergrad ECON major at Princeton, and while I found the program of study to be technically rigorous, it was overall underwhelming. It wasn't until I entered grad school at Notre Dame that I truly appreciated the field, and began to realize how limiting my undergraduate experience had been. This is NOT an endorsement of ND. In fact, the department there has been under attack from their own administration, and they are moving away from the more heterodox approach that so excited me at the time. Rather, I'm trying to caution you that undergraduate studies should not be confused with graduate school. ECON 101 is just that, and the best school is the one with the most effective classroom teaching. As a caveat, my daughter applied to and was accepted at both Carleton College and the U of C. Although in many ways they are very different, both IMHO are terrific schools. And interestingly, Carleton (and Reed and Swarthmore) have had a higher percent of their recent (10 to 15 years) graduates earn Ph.D.s than any of the Ivies, the U of C, or Stanford. In the social sciences, which includes ECON, Carleton is ranked third in the nation in Ph.D. productivity. When you talk about reputation, I would be very careful not to assume that everyone has the same perspective. As a professional academic and economist, I tend to stereotype graduate programs, not undergrad. And many of my colleagues who are most impressive went to less selective colleges and universities, worked their tails off, got into good grad schools ....

Sorry, a little long. I loved U of C when I visited with my daughter. Good luck.

flyshow

and Carleton has Price Theory.

As far as an undergrad education goes, as treeman said, Chicago wont have an edge over Carleton -- if you are good, basically the profs are just waiting there for you to talk to them and learn. It is just impossible in Chicago, dont tell me that you do go for the office hours -- the focus is completely different.

The only true advantage of Chicago over Carleton is that, in terms of employment, your reputation wins hands down. And, if you are a child prodigy who wants to take mostly grad level classes during undergrad, then Chicago is better. Otherwise, LACs exist for undergrad only, and the top LACs do fulfill their purposes well.

flyshow

In terms of Poli Sci, three of Carleton's faculties are really top top notch. (not to say the rest are bad). One named Roy Grow, retiring in a year or two, he worked for CIA, and he was one of the most active agent during Vietnam war. Another named Montereo, amazingly knowledgable prof. And professor Cooper, whose specialty is political philosophy. Again, Chicago might have more famous profs, but if you can talk to these amazing profs here at Carleton whenever you want, I dont think you will gain a less valuable education than you would in Chicago, if you are truly motivated.

Anyway, since you are a Chinese, maybe reputation is more important for you. then go to Chicago. Education-wise, its really different yet of similar quality; some people go further at Carleton, while others go further at Chicago.