Chicago Economics vs. Penn Economics

<p>I've been accepted to both colleges - Penn College of Arts and Sciences and Chicago's College. I chose to major in Economics at both, however I'm not sure which college to choose. I've heard so many good things about both colleges, but also some bad things about both. I hear that Chicago's Economics' Department is a powerhouse, but that at Chicago fun does not exist. At Penn, I know that Wharton classes may be available, but I don't know if even Wharton's business classes beat Chicago's Economics' Department.</p>

<p>But really, I don't know much about both colleges - Can you guys help me out? Where should I choose? Why should I choose it?</p>

<p>If you really, truly, want to study Econ, go to Chicago. Penn's Econ program is weak sauce (cue the flamewar), compared to Chicago, at least. Wharton's solid, but Penn CAS is not Wharton, and an econ major in the college isn't a Wharton degree, and business (even the Wharton variety) is not the same as economics. (Now, I've said before on these forums that I think a Wharton education is better than an econ degree, and that someone interested in economics should go to Wharton instead, but that's another thread). </p>

<p>The people I know at Chicago have plenty of fun. I also know plenty of people at Penn who have no fun. YMMV.</p>

<p>The Penn decisions come out on the 31st of March. Did you get a likely letter or how come you claim you got an acceptance? </p>

<p>Chicago Economics is probably better than Penn, but I'd choose Penn. I think it's just more fun and you can take classes at each of the colleges, so that's a big advantage. Chicago probably isn't as nerdy as it's reputation, but Penn is the most social Ivy (I heard) and certainly has great Economics and the advantage of having Wharton and the other colleges. Both are great places so you can't really go wrong, but I'd take Penn for the social aspect, the Wharton aspect and my general feeling :)</p>

<p>academically, i think you will find what school you want to go to will depend a LOT on your intended career path and type of study relating to economics. I believe Chicago is a lot of theoretical economics, finding new theories and the like to describe human behavior. At penn, the study is more practical for the job market.</p>

<p>i was accepted to penn ed this yr, so of course im gonna say u shuld go to PENN!!....and that u cant rlly compare "business classes" with economics classes.</p>

<p>So it's a fact Chicago is ranked #1 in Economics. Penn's Economics Department has consistently been in the top 10 for at least a decade. However, these rankings focus more on research and academics, and that ranking does not necessarily reflect the quality of the undergraduate Econ programs at both schools. I'd say but of them are great and can give you everything you need. Yes, at Penn you could take any Wharton class you want, but Wharton is not Economics (Business is not Economics), so it doesn't make a lot of sense when you say "I don't know if even Wharton's business classes beat Chicago's Economics' Department". In business, they certainly do. In economics, they do not.</p>

<p>Personally, I'd definitely choose Penn. Chicago's Econ Dept is stronger, but this does not necessarily mean that an undergraduate degree in Econ from Chicago is better than an undergraduate degree in Econ from Penn. In fact, if you're really really into Econ (i.e., you want to do grad school in Econ), then it may be a better choice not to go to Chicago for undergraduate. Plus, Penn is in the Ivy League, and ranked #5 in the nation in general undergraduate, so even in terms of prestige, general opportunities, and the overall undergraduate experience, I'd say Penn wins.</p>

<p>Yeah, if you want to do applied econ, go to Penn and reap the benefits of Wharton. If you want to be an academic, go to Chicago.</p>

<p>As far as economics go, Chicago's grad Economics program is in the Top 2, while Penn is in the 7-10 range, although not outside the Top 10. That is a really small gap, and at the undergraduate level it is even smaller. Also know that Penn's policy to let undergrads take classes in other schools, regardless of grad or undergrad course listing, gives one a taste of the advanced stuff. Penn is also more prestigious overall, so that may weigh in some.</p>

<p>What people have said regarding the differences in economics is true from what I've heard. Chicago is more theoretical, Penn more practical. It makes sense. Penn was founded to be the leader in practical education under Ben Franklin's own philosophy. It only makes sense that the difference in econ would largely be in orientation/presentation of the material.</p>

<p>As I am pretty familiar with Chicago (not surprising), I must say the geeky, no-fun reputation is true. Is it completely true and as bad as you've heard. No. It still is a school in the world's greatest city. Plenty to do. It's more of just the crowd the school attracts, which also stems to it being a primarily extremely academic institution. Penn is more laid back and the social life shows that. Students at both schools are comparably intelligent. The difference is personality and fit. So, the choice will largely be based upon that, as the difference in undergrad economics programs is negligible.</p>

<p>Penn definately.</p>