| Total Grad Surveys || 21 |
| Females || 7 |
| Males || 14 |
| Avg years at University || 2.0 |
| The University of Chicago is primarily a graduate school. Nonetheless, one has to wonder whether these graduate programs even deserve to exist. The degree was of absolutely no value, even in a Washington DC policy job. In principle, a PhD in political science should be relevant to policy. In practice, it was not. The value of the degree is negative: it led to my being denied opportunities that I would have had with a different degree (for instance, Law). I eventually repudiated the degree, and demanded that the University delete it from the records. |
| Dec 02 2010 || Political Science |
I am in the Master of Arts Program in the Humanities (MAPH), a one-year master's program at the University of Chicago. It is basically an interdisciplinary master's degree that many students use to prepare themselves for doctoral work and that other students use to change career paths.|
While the basic ideas surrounding the program are admirable and often work out in the end for successful graduates of the program, prospective students should be well aware of the particular quality of experience that he or she will get being a part of another department but also being a part of this particular program.
For example, I take mostly music classes, as I intend to pursue a PhD in the future in ethnomusicology; however, classes are often geared toward doctoral students who are "in it for the long haul" and not simply those who are taking classes in what could essentially be considered a willy-nilly manner, which is the basic method that MAPHers employ in choosing courses. Professors and colleagues will assume that you know everything that is going on, and you will be expected to conform to strict departmentally devised guidelines in your coursework.
Also, please note that professors and colleagues are probably not doing anything other than their academic work; this means that they will be disinterested in the fact that you work at a real, non-student job during the day; they will also be ambiguous toward the fact that you may live outside the confines of Hyde Park.
In short, I consider this program to be tailored almost exclusively to the trust fund set. If you are a member of this elite group, then it would be wise to consider this program as your next career move if you are so inclined. If you are one of the rest of us, then find something else.
| Nov 19 2008 || Other |
| The UofC doesn't care about its students' well-being. Research and Faculty awards take priority over everything, and over the past two decades the quality of incoming students, graduate funding, and campus safety have all dropped. |
Come here if you are wealthy, stuck-up, or otherwise inclined to suffer the better part of a decade to complete a meaningless PhD.
| Oct 09 2008 || Religion/Religious |
| Think that U of C is a way better place than Northwestern.|
They teach you to think. Unbelievable Economics and Finance Dept, but the Accounting was great too. While it has a reputation as being a "quant" school, it teaches you thought processes to go with the numbers. I have met a ton of international contacts through my school experience. They encourage you to network.
| Mar 20 2006 || Business - Management and Administration |
| Best business school in the world for finance. Kellogg's next Nobel prize will be their first. You will work very hard and the learning will be enourmous. You will rise above your peers on Wall Street. |
| Oct 15 2004 || Business - Management and Administration |
| columbia university is wonderful-just never ever apply to their genetics and development program. |
| Jun 09 2004 || Genetics |
I visited the University of Chicago before accepting my offer and still didn't really understand what I was getting myself into until I got here.|
This is one of the most unique environments I've ever experienced; everyone here, from undergrads to Ph.D. students working on their disserations, is well-read and well-spoken. More to the point, everyone is willing and very eager to engage in critical discussion on almost any topic imaginable. Indeed, it is the number one pastime. Panel discussions and lectures by prominent international scholars are a dime a dozen here, several a night if not more, and students flock to them to participate in critical dialogue and present their own perspectives. At the campus bar, you're much more likely to find graduate students drinking heavily and arguing loudly about the lastest publications in major journals (and dropping names and citations left and right) than you are to find them actually socializing or trying to find someone to take home.
If you are in sociology, you'll meet math and literature students in the dining halls that are prepared to offer you serious, challenging, and informed discussion about your research. If you are a math student, you'll find that the sociology and film students are prepared to do the same. The level of cross-discipline dialog is startling. It seems that most of the students at this school are simply exceptionally well-read and very interested in understanding a wide variety of phenomena, processes and histories from across all disciplines. It is, at first, shocking and intimidating: you don't expect such serious and insighful criticism from every direction, throughout the day and night, from every last person you encounter.
For the student who wants a pure, intense, intellectual experience, there can be no better place. Beware, however: there is no respite here. There is no room for nonsense or half-formed thoughts and opinions; any friends that you make will be happy to show you just how sloppy your thinking is, if you should let yourself slip, much less faculty members... they're helpful and friendly, but have no problem telling you when your work is half-baked or your ideas full of holes.
All in all, I would say that I have had an interesting and eye-opening experience, but I will also be glad when I am done, because once I have left the campus, I will finally be able to let my intellectual guard down for the first time in a long time.
For the serious student only!
| May 05 2004 || Sociology |
| For studying religion, this is the best place to go. You will be astounded by the brilliance of the faculty and students. Popular Wednesday lunches every week where you can eat and chat with faculty. No one TAs, but there is work study to earn cash. This neighborhood is not safe. Read the local crime reports. Your first year reading sometimes exceeds 800-1000 pages a week. Ton of flexibility in the program. You are encouraged, if not required to blaze new trails. You don't have to know everything when you get here, but be ready to work! |
| Mar 30 2004 || Religion/Religious |
UoC has been an amazing experience. I'd never dispute with anyone that the work is demanding, but the teaching is great, and the wide range of classes available is outstsnding, especially compared to other programmes I've been in / visited. The most well-known professors are often the most approachable and willing to accept criticism; they seem genuinely interested in students' work and even happy to lend their own materials. |
I've heard people question the safety of the campus, given that it borders a 'rough' neighbourhood; I came here from a rural setting, in a country with a ridiculously low crime rate and I feel totally safe here- as long as I don't do anything stupid.
Socially, yeah, getting to town is a bit of a hassle, but I'm not paying all this money to be going out every weeknight anyway, and Chicago's a blast when we do got out (about twice a week, average, so it's not that socially inept).
All-in-all, this has been the best money I ever spent. Being here, working with top professors, and students who are passionate about their subjects has definitely made me more passionate about my own work. I'd highly recommend this place to grad students (Personally, I'm not equipped to comment on undergrads).
| Mar 23 2004 || Political Science |
UC is an excellent program.|
PROS-accessible, brilliant faculty; nice colleagues; TA load is very reasonable; undergrads are talented; research organization is logical; you know everyone and they know you.
CONS-faculty are arrogant; Chicago winter sucks; some groups are poor and students TA often; small-research choices are limited,except in theory; finding a date is impossible.
Come to UC if you: don't want to commit suicide (Harvard), not be weeded out after TAing is done (Berkeley), live comfortably (not Stanford), work with normal people (not CalTech), enjoy life (not MIT), and you know who you want to work for.
| Jan 06 2004 || Chemistry |
The University of Chicago is one of the world center of academic research. Here graduate students get the chance to study or conduct research with Nobel prize winners. Since 1990, 6 University of Chicago faculty have won Nobel prize in economics. They are Ronald Coase (1990), Merton Miller (1991), Gary Becker (1992), Robert Fogel (1993), Robert Lucus (1995), James Heckman (2000). Chicago produced more Nobel prize winners in economics than the combination of Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Yale abd Princeton.|
Students are supersmart and work extremely hard. The 1st year students are very competitive since many students fail the prelim (Ph.D. candidacy exam). Once one pass the prelim, it becomes relatively easier. But still, most students put into 70 hours or more in their studies a week. The hardest part in writing the dissertation, which can take anywhere between 2 years to 4 years. Once you get a Ph.D. from Chicago, one usually find good academic positions or industry positions. Top students from Chicago usually become assistant professors at Harvard, MIT, Stanford, Princeton, Yale, Berkeley, Penn, Northwestern etc. Others generally go to Wall Street, consulting firms or government such as World Bank, Federal Reserve etc.
University of Chicago is the world's best place to study economics and conducting economic research.
| Oct 31 2001 || Economics |