<p>Actually, I do not have experience with Chicago, and neither does my son. The Chicago grad my S talked to did take a lot of graduate level classes. But his comments worried S. My own feeling is that by the time S would have needed graduate classes, he would have become mature enough to argue his case, if that were necessary. S was also less enthusiastic about Chicago’s core than I am, so what I see as Chicago’s strength, he saw as a possible liability insofar as it might interfere with his wish to take certain kinds of classes.
But JHS’s take on the similarities between Chicago and Harvard students seems to me very accurate. And the comments about Harvard students–not all!–being confident and plugged in to the Establishment is, in my experience, quite accurate. I recall meeting a student who was then a sophomore or junior. He told me that after graduation, he intended to go back to his hometown in TX, to run for mayor as a first step to a life in politics. I had to blink at his self-confidence.
But I also have heard of students who doubt their ability to thrive at Harvard, who suffer from what is known as the “impostor syndrome” especially after encountering their first B or C in their life. They are stressed out and unhappy. They don’t want to be part of Fitzsimmons’ “happy bottom 25%.”</p>
<p>A nuance to watch out for at Chicago: There are at least three kinds of “grad level” classes. (1) Some upper-level undergraduate classes, especially in areas where Chicago is very strong (math, physics, economics, etc.) are easily the equivalent of graduate classes at universities that are not similarly deep in those fields. Obviously, it is not a problem for undergraduates to take these classes. (2) There are a number of classes, especially in the humanities, that are designated as graduate classes but are not essentially different from high-quality upper-level undergraduate classes, and that are primarily aimed at candidates for terminal master’s degrees, of which there are a fair number (although PhD students sometimes take them, too). Undergraduates can take these classes with very little resistance as long as they seem strong enough to hold their own. (3) Then there are “real” graduate classes for PhD students. As everywhere, undergraduates, even advanced ones, are not particularly welcome, especially to the ones that are already overcrowded (i.e., the ones everyone would like to take), and getting access depends, in part, on how skillfully the student handles the politics as well as on the student’s level of preparation.</p>
<p>marite, I meant “experience” in a broader, more informational sense, actually. (I know that your S did not attend.) JHS, the detailed info in your post 342 is helpful. Thanks.</p>
<p>epiphany:</p>
<p>I understand your meaning. I tried to say, though badly, that my S, had he been more self-confident at the time he was applying to schools, and known Chicago better (he had not visited) might have had a very different take on the school. JHS’s post is very helpful in that regard.</p>
<p>JHS,
Your descriptions of Harvard students are truly amazing.
I just had conversation with my S (sophomore next month and will be living in Winthop). I mentioned to him that “students have a sense – maybe too much of a sense – that the paths to power and success are clearly marked for them, and that they are part of a continuous stream of Harvardians setting foot to them”. Through his laugh, I certainly sense that he is proud of becoming one of the Harvardians.</p>
<p>Thought some of you might be interested in this study:</p>
<p>Ranked Percentage of Graduates Who Go on to Earn a Ph.D.
All Fields:
- Cal Tech
- Harvey Mudd
- Reed
- Swarthmore
- MIT
- Carleton
- Oberlin
- Bryn Mawr
- U Chicago
- Yale</p>
<p>Biological Sciences:
- Reed
- Cal Tech
- Swarthmore
- U Chicago
- Kalamazoo
- MIT
- Earlham
- Harvey Mudd
- U of Sciences, Philadelphia
- Grinnell</p>
<p>Chemistry:
- Harvey Mudd
- Reed
- Cal Tech
- Wabash
- Carleton
- Grinnell
- College of Wooster
- Kalamazoo
- Texas Lutheran
- Bowdoin</p>
<p>Humanities:
- St. John’s
- Reed
- Yale
- Bryn Mawr
- Swarthmore
- Amherst
- Carleton
- Oberlin
- Haverford
- Pomona</p>
<p>History:
- Yale
- Grace
- Reed
- Swarthmore
- Wesleyan
- Carleton
- Oberlin
- Grinnell
- Pomona
- U Chicago</p>
<p>Foreign Languages:
- Bryn Mawr
- Grinnell
- Reed
- Kalamazoo
- Amherst
- St John’s
- Bennington
- U of the South
- Yale
- Lawrence</p>
<p>Political Science:
- Swarthmore
- Haverford
- Reed
- Princeton
- U Chicago
- St John’s
- Tougaloo
- Oberlin
- US Coast Guard Academy
- Amherst</p>
<p>Physical Sciences:
- Harvey Mudd
- Cal Tech
- MIT
- Reed
- New Mexico Mining
- Carleton
- Wabash
- U Chicago
- Grinnell
- Rice</p>
<p>Math/Computer Sciences:
- Cal Tech
- Harvey Mudd
- MIT
- Reed
- Rice
- Princeton
- U Chicago
- Carnegie Mellon
- St John’s
- Pomona</p>
<p>Science/Engineering:
- Cal Tech
- Harvey Mudd
- MIT
- Reed
- Swarthmore
- Carleton
- U Chicago
- Rice
- Princeton
- Haverford</p>
<p>Physics:
- Cal Tech
- Harvey Mudd
- MIT
- Reed
- New Mexico Mining
- Carleton
- Wabash
- U Chicago
- Grinnell
- Rice</p>
<p>Social Sciences:
- Swarthmore
- Haverford
- Carleton
- U Chicago
- Reed
- Princeton
- Williams
- Oberlin
- Yale
- Pomona</p>
<p>Anthropology:
- Bryn Mawr
- Beloit
- Great Lakes
- Grinnell
- U Chicago
- Reed
- Goddard
- Pomona
- Sarah Lawrence
- College of the Atlantic</p>
<p>Area/Ethnic Studies:
- Hampshire
- Amherst
- Marlboro
- St John’s
- Harris-Stowe
- Wesleyan
- Reed
- Carleton
- Bryn Mawr
- Goucher</p>
<p>Linguistics:
- Shimer
- San Francisco Conservatory of Music
- St John’s
- Grinnell
- Wilson
- Swarthmore
- Reed
- Goddard
- U Hawaii-Hilo
- U Chicago</p>
<p>English Literature:
- St John’s
- Yale
- Amherst
- Bryn Mawr
- Swarthmore
- Bennington
- Simon’s Rock
- Oberlin
- Reed
- Williams</p>
<p>Medical Sciences:
- U Sciences, Philadelphia
- Albany C of Pharmacy
- Hampshire
- UC-SF
- Ohio Northern
- Stanford
- U Texas–Health Science Center
- Reed
- Mt Holyoke
- Wellesley</p>
<ul>
<li>Source: Weighted Baccalaureate Origins Study, Higher Education Data Sharing Consortium. (Origins of those granted Ph.D.'s from 1992-2001)
Listing of top 10 US institutions ranked by percentage of graduates who earn Ph.D.'s in selected disciplines.</li>
</ul>
<p>We are a long way from “unqualified” here!</p>
<p>That origins-of-PhD study is always great to look at. Especially because it suggests that among comprehensive research universities only Yale, Princeton, and Chicago consistently match the top LACs, and significantly outshine Harvard. To be fair, however, if you look at the absolute numbers rather than the percentages, you get a very different picture: the usual suspects, including the usual-suspect state universities. And the advantage of Yale, Princeton, and Chicago in this regard is largely due to their smaller class sizes (during the period studied, Chicago and Princeton had classes that were less than 2/3s the size of Harvard’s).</p>
<p>It’s also getting a bit long in the tooth, since essentially no one included in the study graduated from college in the past 10 years, and many graduated more than 20 years ago.</p>
<p>Anyone who wants to to study English Literature rather at Simon’s Rock rather than at Harvard with people like Stephen Greenblatt, Helen Vendler, Henry Louis Gates, Louis Menand, Jorie Graham, Marjorie Garber . . . well, you’re welcome to do that.</p>
<p>I agree JHS. ('Twas merely a footnote to your discussion. And, I couldn’t find anything more recent.)</p>
<p>It was not meant to be didactic. I am not so caught up in the “numbers” as in, perhaps, the implication of an “intellectual” environment.</p>
<p>People are welcome to draw their own conclusions, which is why I chose not to editorialize.</p>
<p>From time to time interesteddad posts updated versions of more-recently collected PhD origins data from the same sources. To find it, enter “ipeds nsf phd [discipline]” and “interesteddad” in the appropriate Advanced Search boxes.</p>