Here is the college catalog on all three tracks
http://collegecatalog.uchicago.edu/thecollege/economics/#Summary:%20Business%20Economics
One has to believe the university designed the course requirement with their intended markets in mind, and after consultation & advice from the players in the targeted markets (the market is pretty broad though). After all U Chicago is the expert in education, course design, decision trees and game theory and all of us here are paying up to $80K/year for their expertise.
Minimum requirement is a cutoff for access , not a cap that limits achievement of individuals. There is a self selection process in place - if you cant handle the course for whatever reason, drop it, switch to route/major that require less of it. Also the way U Chicago is selecting students at 6% admission rate, it’s pretty certain most students already have proficiency in Cal AB or BC.
.
One can even agree or disagree with how the school designs the major, sequence or prerequisite, but basing on personal preference/experience as standard bearing, and from there, suggesting things “lightweight”, “not real”, “dumb down” “deceptive” is a bit over the board.
@JBStillFlying I believe the error is yours. You have to get credit for the first two Calc classes if you are an Econ major to fulfill the Mathematical Sciences Core requirement.
“There is a self selection process in place - if you cant handle the course for whatever reason, drop it, switch to route/major that require less of it. Also the way U Chicago is selecting students at 6% admission rate, it’s pretty certain most students already have proficiency in Cal AB or BC.”
- Agree with all of that - and since everyone has to take the math placement exam, a good majority end up placed in Calc for first year anyway. At least, that's what used to happen. Also, as I mentioned upthread, anyone can actually supplement business economics with additional math, just like they can supplement LLS or - better yet - supplement another course of study with LLS courses.
“It seems philosophy major without the “meatier” math and eco theory is accepted norm. On the flip side, one would agree a philosopher with A in Real Analysis or even a Fields Medal is nice to have, but unnecessary for the major.”
- It may be technically unnecessary for the philosophy major, but for those math or C/S types who are majoring (or double majoring) in philosophy as an intellectual component to a potential career in, say, AI . . . Real Analysis can be a wonderful and even a necessary addition (in a practical sense) to your course of study. The beauty of a liberal arts major is the flexibility to supplement as you wish to. However, this example has nothing to do with whether Calculus should be added to the Bus. Econ. major. Philosophy MAY be dependent on mathematical concepts, depending on what angle of philosophy you are studying. Econ and its applications (including Finance) is ALWYS dependent. There is no getting around that fact.
@JBStillFlying I was wrong. It looks like they contradict themselves between the core descriptions and the major descriptions.
@Eeyore123 - Core math needn’t be calculus, although realistically it tends to be just that given the caliber of student who gets admitted. There are three tracks of calculus at UChicago and most of the first year class is in one of those tracks. The Chicago Maroon article indicated that you don’t have to take Calc. III for business econ (which is, indeed, a pre-req for regular-track economics) but assumed you would at least take Calc. I and Calc. II. However, that needn’t be the case, and the Bus. Econ. track points out that Calculus isn’t required (though it is strongly encouraged). This year, it appeared that math placements were firm - in other words, you couldn’t trade down once placed in your math course unless you were switching back from honors and/or really struggling. Perhaps they just feel that most first years will continue to be placed in calc. and the remaining who aren’t are very likely to be humanities or softer social science majors.
If someone wants to do Bus. Econ but skip part or all of the Calc. sequence, they have to be very careful in their selection of courses. For instance, two of the three options offered as part of the “Micro-methods” component actually do require Calculus. So there is a pathway without Calculus, but it’s a relatively limited one from what I can see. It would be helpful if they clarified that.
@JBStillFlying : You clearly have spent a lot of time studying UChicago and know a lot about its past and present. As a newbie parent to UChicago, I found a lot of the information and comments you have very informative. Really appreciate it and thank you for that.
It’s not I don’t value math. I am very happy to see my son is more math intuitive than me, who has a science degree from a CIT like place. It will be very helpful.
For what UChicago Business Eco wants to do “ to prepare graduates for business and industries”, the business ranges from fields like business law, leadership which really use little math, to some specialties which require much more than Calculus. Minimum requirement is set to encompass all business fields so that it does not preclude anyone who sees fields like business law or leadership as their destination. That’s why it says Calculus is not required, but highly recommended. As you said, the school designs it in such a way it provides a narrow path for those interested in no quant skills required business fields to get by without calculus. For most other business fields, Calculus is expected and most students know it and already have it and many plan to go higher than that anyway.
Yes, I hope academic advisers will clarify this as part of its advising process.
^ I think this makes sense for the most part. The awkwardness is that it’s offered in the context of an economics major. However, there is another context, and a backstory, which must be considered as well. Bus econ. was originally envisioned and proposed as a separate major altogether. Protests and the resulting curriculum committee pushback on this idea proved to be too much of an obstacle, so Dean Boyer tabled the ‘separate major’ idea and did a runaround on the curriculum committee by having it approved by the Econ department directly as a “track” of the Economics major, rather than as a separate major in and of itself. Majors are approved by the curriculum committee but alterations to a major are the responsibility and decision of the academic department. Obviously, Booth was cool with however this was to happen It was quite clever of them, really, to think up this “Plan B.” While the technical result is an economics major that doesn’t require the calculus sequence, my guess is that Economics will only be a temporary house for this “track” and that, in a few more years’ time, once the hue and cry about “preprofessional majors” has subsided, business economics will be approved as a viable separate major.
It’s a unique major that expects you, in most cases, to take a certain course or sequence, but somehow fails to convey that point! The college catalog needs to add wording that most pathways may not be open to someone who hasn’t completed Calc III. From what I can see, the main available pathway involves taking experimental methods. A decent subject for business but it might not be part of everyone’s plan, so it’s important for the student to understand that right away. Another point: other selective universities tend to expect some Calculus in their business programs, even for the softer subjects. While flexibility seems to be a key attribute for this major, requiring at least some of the 130’s sequence is in keeping with best practices elsewhere.
Any study of the “science” of managerial decision-making will be quite limited in scope and applicability without a better knowledge of the underlying math. Practical and applied doesn’t imply ignorant.
Things evolve over time and boundaries are breached and recreated as we speak.
There are many interdisciplinary subjects have been created, for example, the Eco track B - data science which is a combination of Stats and CS on top of some eco classes housed as a track inside eco major, not as a separate major, just like the business eco. I am sure there had been discussion whether CS or Stat or Eco was the most suitable place for it as well.
One can view track B is development of tools from the traditional eco, while Business Eco Track C is more along the line of applicable fields. In concept, they both are deviation from the traditional theoretical eco which has been historically an academia pursue.
^ Business economics will be a popular major with or without the calc. At last fall’s Aims of Education presentation, it was mentioned that the College curriculum is now linked to every professional school on campus via either a major or a minor offering. So there’s plenty of opportunity to undertake a professionalized course of study, if that’s your goal, while remaining within the context of a liberal arts education with all its benefits. It’s a good thing.
@jhchicago at #85, you are welcome! And thank you for your kind words.