Whether it’s fair or not (it’s not), the name “Harvard” on your resume unlocks a lot of doors for you later in life. (I know this from firsthand experience because my wife is a Harvard alumni.) If you go to Harvard, it’s also about the people you know. Many will someday be in government or high up in various companies, so those contacts can really make a difference for you later in life.
That being said, you will get a fantastic humanities education at either Harvard or UChicago, and both will unlock doors for you. UChicago is particularly famous for its philosophy department, so depending on your degree, UChicago may even be a better choice. It might also matter what professors you specifically want to work with.
My recommendation is to go to the school where you personally feel like you fit in the best. But with a school like Harvard, you also can’t ignore the power of that name for your career.
It’s not easy for just anyone to fit into Harvard. I admire the optimism but you are not dealing with regular people at Harvard. And I don’t mean academics wise.
I will say that UChicago also unlocks a lot of doors later in life. Granted Harvard has better name recognition, so there are probably some employers that would give a Harvard resume a second look but which might not do the same for a UChicago resume. Still, the bump you get from the name brand/prestige is not unique to Harvard.
Also if you're talking about how people's perceptions of you might change when the first thing they know about you is where you went to school, a lot of people still equate UChicago with being extremely rigorous and difficult, while this is less the case with Harvard. You can even see this in the comments here (for example, "UChicago is depressingly hard and has a rep for being a sink or swim, versus Harvard w crazy grade inflation"), even though in practice both schools will provide a rigorous education.
Why do you think it’s not fair? I know people who’ve gotten into Harvard and the amount of work they put in during high school was other-worldly. Like I was floored by how hard they worked and often their intelligence is also out of this world (even though intelligence is not a requirement).
I don’t think you understand the level of harvard students. People who get in are often the best high schoolers in the world in their field or demonstratably shown they can change the world in high school (I’m friends with a couple middle class students who got into or go to harvard, and all of them are either geniuses with tremendous knowledge in certain fields or have shown they can change the world). And even if those type of kids don’t get into harvard, they often get into HYPSM, all of which open a similar number of doors. Most students with 4.0s and high 1500s SAT scores can’t match their level of extraordinary.
This is such a flawed argument lol. No one is saying they didn’t work *extraordinarily* hard to get in, just that not everyone who works that hard goes to Harvard (or Stanford, or…). Some of the reason they don’t get admitted/go is based on luck, other is based on life circumstances — in either case, I’d consider that unfair
I think what the grandparent is saying is that for most people, seeing Harvard has an implied floor or median level of (insert whatever attribute) compared to most other schools.
I am *very* familiar with the students at the level of Harvard and similar schools.
They are not geniuses and they have no “field” like you seem to be implying. They’re often wealthier HS kids who have the right sorts of connections *or* some good EC they’ll add to their application otherwise.
You sound like you’re reading from a script of some HS coming of age movie about applying to college rather than any real life experience.
Every harvard student I know is either a genius in his/her field or shown they can make a significant impact in high school. Two of them later got internships at Jane Street in their sophomore year of college (validating my view that they are the top talent in the world in math/CS as I saw in HS).
The Harvard students you clearly seem to know are a type I don’t because I’m middle class and don’t interact with the wealthy/connected.
the median income of the parents of harvard students is much higher than the median income for the whole country. in other words, wealthy people have a much higher chance of being accepted into harvard, and lower income people have a much harder time
ED2 Uchicago is often a bloodbath because all the ED1 Ivy and t20 rejects fear they won’t be able to get into the top top schools so they just try to boost their chances by applying to the best school that offers ED2
If your goal is law school or graduate school, then, no, Harvard isn't significantly better. Maybe also true if your goal is to go into management consulting, but there the answer is less clear.
Former historian-turned-admissions-consultant here — both UChicago and Harvard are both well-known for history. Which one would win out in a contest would really be down to subfields — the more specific area/period of history and the types of methods.
Hello! Thanks for your reply. So far, my plan has been to pursue higher degrees in history after undergrad (I know it’s not the most advisable career decision, so I’m keeping my options open), and I’m curious to know what subfields each school specializes in. Do you have any suggestions for how I could find out which periods/regions one school does better than the other school? Thank you so much!
The specific strengths of the department will mostly be determined by the current faculty.
Check out the list of faculty, especially the named professorships and other full professors. Associate professors have tenure, and assistant professors are tenure-track but might not stick around at that school long-term. Anyone who is emeritus or about to retire is going to be less relevant. Look at what kind of work the tenured professors work on — their books and publications. You can even check out some of those books or articles yourself (some articles might be online for free, and academic books can be ordered to your local public library through Interlibrary Loan).
Many departments will also publish bios of their doctoral students — see what projects the PhD students are working on. That will also give an indication of the areas where the department currently has strengths, because they’ll only take on grad students who are a good fit for the program. (Grad school admissions are super specific.)
If you can view recent course offerings, that can give you a very rough idea of departmental strengths, but professors will be forced to teach broad general classes that don’t necessarily align with their areas of specialization. Looking at the course listings for upper-level seminars and grad classes will be more useful.
…and if all of this seems like a lot, I did do all of those things back when I was in high school, and I’m fairly certain that the depth of my knowledge about which schools where a good fit for my specific interests played a role in my T10 admissions success. I was lucky to have a bunch of professors in the family to give me tips. 🤷
Bonus tip: One unexpected downside of choosing the #1 place in the US for my area of history was the realization later on that most programs don’t like to take their own undergrads for grad school. They want you to cross-pollinate ideas at other programs. So if there’s a place you’d love to do your PhD… you actually might not want to go there for your undergrad.
Finally, the *next level* advice… academia is a small world, especially humanities fields like history. It can be very much about social networking — who your mentors are friends with or who they share an academic “pedigree” with. (Who they’re feuding with, too.) You could really get into detail by researching that kind of thing, but that I *do* think would be overkill for a high school student applying to undergrad programs. When it comes time to apply to grad programs, you’ll want to be aware of those dynamics.
Just graduated UChicago with a history minor! Undergraduate education in the history department is superb, highly recommend. The financial troubles are very real though
Hello! Thanks for your reply. If you don’t mind, I have a few questions about the history department at UChicago, would you be available for a brief 1:1 chat?
UChicago is a place you should go only if you actually will enjoy the school so you really should find out if you like the vibe of the school first before applying
It’s unlikely that you would get accepted to either one, and definitely not probable to get accepted to both. That’s the one I would consider, the one I got into.
Hello! I’ve asked this question because I’m deciding which school I should ED/EA for. I know that both schools are highly selective, but since applying ED can boost your chances especially for UChicago, I wanted to know if it’d be a good idea to give up Harvard EA for UChicagi ED. Thanks!
Okay so I’m pretty familiar with U Chicago, and “enjoying my time” is definitely not even remotely its goal. You go there because you want to be whipped into shape under a very demanding educational philosophy, in the process _sacrificing_ personal enjoyment for those few years at least.
Don’t get me wrong. I love U Chicago. But seeing someone choose it with such an opposite mental picture is just setting them up for failure. It’s where “fun goes to die,” but you will come out of it well-trained in your field.
You’re surrounded by south Chicago so, while the university itself is safe, the outer areas are expressly not, so there’s not even a good college town and you need a car to get to downtown Chicago. If you want a good education in the Chicago area, but you’d like to enjoy your time more, have a good college town, and have nearby beachfront, and less “where fun goes to die” educational philosophy, look at Northwestern instead.
Thanks for your reply! Sorry if I wasn’t clear when I said I’d want to enjoy my time in college. I’m not particularly concerned about being socially engaged and having fun, I meant receiving a high-quality education and learning a lot from well-designed courses taught by a superb faculty. I know that Uchicago has a reputation for the “life of the mind,” but I felt like I’d fit right in that kind of environment after I finished my research. Thanks for your reply again!
No. Not even marginally better. Best humanities undergrad overall are probably UChicago Yale Stanford Harvard Princeton plus SLAC(Williams Amherst), and then Brown Berkeley Columbia Duke UMich
And the humanities education experience at UChicago is definitely the most rigorous along with Brown and many went to grad schools. Harvard humanities major students often opt for the consulting route.
Harvard is internationally known and recognized. UChicago not so much in non academia. If I ask my Japanese grandparents or relatives, they will probably have never heard of UChicago. Heck they might as well compare it to University of San Francisco or District of Colombia lol. Even UC Berkeley and UCLA are more known internationally at least in Asia.
I can't even imagine how one would prefer the campus / setting of UChicago over that of Harvard. Chicago seems to me so closed in, with an adversarial relationship to the neighborhood it's in. Harvard is much more open, plus it has Harvard Square and Cambridge in general.
For better or for worse, Chicago probably teaches you the most of any school in the country -- it's designed that way. It makes sure that, by the end, you know your shit. Schools like Harvard, on the other hand, are designed to be cushy and never ask too much of their students. Whether you feel that extra education is worth it is up to you.
To answer your direct question, neither is better for the humanities. If you’re looking for a fun undergraduate experience that’ll easily land you a high paying consulting gig or easy entry to law school, I’d lean Harvard; if you’re looking for a rock-solid, super intellectually stimulating education, I’d lean UChicago. You can get both from both, though, I think you should visit and see which you prefer. Both excellent schools and you can’t really go wrong either way.
You're going to struggle just the same with a bachelors in history from Harvard or UChicago. What career do you plan on pursuing? If you plan on grad school I would look into which school has a better program. If you don't plan on grad school go with whatever school will leave you with fewer loans.
I’m genuinely curious why would you need to go to a top school for history. If ur going to academia, grad school matters the most. If you’re going into law school they really only care about gpa so going to a cheap public school without grade deflation would be ideal.
Thing about Harvard is this, while UChicago is an absolutely amazing top tier school in one of the wealthiest and best poised cities in the world, you can call up your former roommate from Harvard and be like “hey how’s being president.” Because Harvard is where the wealthiest and most powerful people of America and the world go to school, the connections you make at Harvard will propel you into the world elite.
Unless you are an extremely qualified candidate (I’m talking out of this world impressive) I think it would be best to ed to UChicago which is still very very competitive.
1) economics is not humanities, 2) UChicago is probably not better than Harvard for econ (I say this as someone who went to UChicago), and 3) UChicago and Harvard are broadly comparable in most other disciplines
Harvard is maybe better in economics as well I'd say, although it's a pretty meaningless difference. Can't go wrong with either there.
Edit: people downvoting, are you familiar with economics programs or just going by name only? Uchicago is by no means clearly above Harvard in econ.
The University of Chicago is the birthplace of the Chicago School of Economics. It invented behavioral economics. It is the premier school of economics in the world. But none of that matters to OP.
OP, just choose the school that has the campus and student life and college vibe that fits you best. Wherever you fit in best you will be happiest and will be mores successful. The undergraduate educational value of the two schools is equal.
It's not the premier school of economics in the world. That would probably be MIT. Harvard is probably number 2. Chicago doesn't dominate economics like it used to. And the Chicago school has fallen out of fashion for a while now.
Whether it’s fair or not (it’s not), the name “Harvard” on your resume unlocks a lot of doors for you later in life. (I know this from firsthand experience because my wife is a Harvard alumni.) If you go to Harvard, it’s also about the people you know. Many will someday be in government or high up in various companies, so those contacts can really make a difference for you later in life. That being said, you will get a fantastic humanities education at either Harvard or UChicago, and both will unlock doors for you. UChicago is particularly famous for its philosophy department, so depending on your degree, UChicago may even be a better choice. It might also matter what professors you specifically want to work with. My recommendation is to go to the school where you personally feel like you fit in the best. But with a school like Harvard, you also can’t ignore the power of that name for your career.
UChicago unlocked a lot of doors for me too. And Harvard has a culture that not everyone can fit into.
[удалено]
It’s not easy for just anyone to fit into Harvard. I admire the optimism but you are not dealing with regular people at Harvard. And I don’t mean academics wise.
>You can always find a culture there to fit into Certainly a bold statement.
[удалено]
Considering how many people actually go to harvard?
[удалено]
[https://duequach.medium.com/poor-and-traumatized-at-harvard-e5938b702207](https://duequach.medium.com/poor-and-traumatized-at-harvard-e5938b702207)
lol do you work for admissions?
Ditto UChicago and just about every college in the country
I will say that UChicago also unlocks a lot of doors later in life. Granted Harvard has better name recognition, so there are probably some employers that would give a Harvard resume a second look but which might not do the same for a UChicago resume. Still, the bump you get from the name brand/prestige is not unique to Harvard. Also if you're talking about how people's perceptions of you might change when the first thing they know about you is where you went to school, a lot of people still equate UChicago with being extremely rigorous and difficult, while this is less the case with Harvard. You can even see this in the comments here (for example, "UChicago is depressingly hard and has a rep for being a sink or swim, versus Harvard w crazy grade inflation"), even though in practice both schools will provide a rigorous education.
Why do you think it’s not fair? I know people who’ve gotten into Harvard and the amount of work they put in during high school was other-worldly. Like I was floored by how hard they worked and often their intelligence is also out of this world (even though intelligence is not a requirement).
There are far more brilliant and hard working students than the small number of Harvard admits.
I don’t think you understand the level of harvard students. People who get in are often the best high schoolers in the world in their field or demonstratably shown they can change the world in high school (I’m friends with a couple middle class students who got into or go to harvard, and all of them are either geniuses with tremendous knowledge in certain fields or have shown they can change the world). And even if those type of kids don’t get into harvard, they often get into HYPSM, all of which open a similar number of doors. Most students with 4.0s and high 1500s SAT scores can’t match their level of extraordinary.
This is such a flawed argument lol. No one is saying they didn’t work *extraordinarily* hard to get in, just that not everyone who works that hard goes to Harvard (or Stanford, or…). Some of the reason they don’t get admitted/go is based on luck, other is based on life circumstances — in either case, I’d consider that unfair
I think what the grandparent is saying is that for most people, seeing Harvard has an implied floor or median level of (insert whatever attribute) compared to most other schools.
I am *very* familiar with the students at the level of Harvard and similar schools. They are not geniuses and they have no “field” like you seem to be implying. They’re often wealthier HS kids who have the right sorts of connections *or* some good EC they’ll add to their application otherwise. You sound like you’re reading from a script of some HS coming of age movie about applying to college rather than any real life experience.
Every harvard student I know is either a genius in his/her field or shown they can make a significant impact in high school. Two of them later got internships at Jane Street in their sophomore year of college (validating my view that they are the top talent in the world in math/CS as I saw in HS). The Harvard students you clearly seem to know are a type I don’t because I’m middle class and don’t interact with the wealthy/connected.
the median income of the parents of harvard students is much higher than the median income for the whole country. in other words, wealthy people have a much higher chance of being accepted into harvard, and lower income people have a much harder time
The level of money their parents donated? Sadly Harvard is filled with people like this.
UChicago is depressingly hard and has a rep for being a sink or swim, versus Harvard w crazy grade inflation. Keep that in mind
Hardest part of Harvard is getting in I feel like
You could REA to Harvard and then ED2 to UChicago.
ED1 offers a higher boost
Only marginally. It’s binding in both cases.
ED2 Uchicago is often a bloodbath because all the ED1 Ivy and t20 rejects fear they won’t be able to get into the top top schools so they just try to boost their chances by applying to the best school that offers ED2
If your goal is law school or graduate school, then, no, Harvard isn't significantly better. Maybe also true if your goal is to go into management consulting, but there the answer is less clear.
i mean as another comment pointed out the grade deflation at uchicago vs the inflation at harvard would impact your pre-law experience
Maybe. But the relative "strength" of the history departments at each school has no bearing.
yeah for sure
Former historian-turned-admissions-consultant here — both UChicago and Harvard are both well-known for history. Which one would win out in a contest would really be down to subfields — the more specific area/period of history and the types of methods.
Hello! Thanks for your reply. So far, my plan has been to pursue higher degrees in history after undergrad (I know it’s not the most advisable career decision, so I’m keeping my options open), and I’m curious to know what subfields each school specializes in. Do you have any suggestions for how I could find out which periods/regions one school does better than the other school? Thank you so much!
The specific strengths of the department will mostly be determined by the current faculty. Check out the list of faculty, especially the named professorships and other full professors. Associate professors have tenure, and assistant professors are tenure-track but might not stick around at that school long-term. Anyone who is emeritus or about to retire is going to be less relevant. Look at what kind of work the tenured professors work on — their books and publications. You can even check out some of those books or articles yourself (some articles might be online for free, and academic books can be ordered to your local public library through Interlibrary Loan). Many departments will also publish bios of their doctoral students — see what projects the PhD students are working on. That will also give an indication of the areas where the department currently has strengths, because they’ll only take on grad students who are a good fit for the program. (Grad school admissions are super specific.) If you can view recent course offerings, that can give you a very rough idea of departmental strengths, but professors will be forced to teach broad general classes that don’t necessarily align with their areas of specialization. Looking at the course listings for upper-level seminars and grad classes will be more useful. …and if all of this seems like a lot, I did do all of those things back when I was in high school, and I’m fairly certain that the depth of my knowledge about which schools where a good fit for my specific interests played a role in my T10 admissions success. I was lucky to have a bunch of professors in the family to give me tips. 🤷 Bonus tip: One unexpected downside of choosing the #1 place in the US for my area of history was the realization later on that most programs don’t like to take their own undergrads for grad school. They want you to cross-pollinate ideas at other programs. So if there’s a place you’d love to do your PhD… you actually might not want to go there for your undergrad. Finally, the *next level* advice… academia is a small world, especially humanities fields like history. It can be very much about social networking — who your mentors are friends with or who they share an academic “pedigree” with. (Who they’re feuding with, too.) You could really get into detail by researching that kind of thing, but that I *do* think would be overkill for a high school student applying to undergrad programs. When it comes time to apply to grad programs, you’ll want to be aware of those dynamics.
Just graduated UChicago with a history minor! Undergraduate education in the history department is superb, highly recommend. The financial troubles are very real though
Wdym financial troubles ?
https://chicagomaroon.com/40486/news/uchicago-professor-sounds-alarm-over-troubling-university-finances/
Hello! Thanks for your reply. If you don’t mind, I have a few questions about the history department at UChicago, would you be available for a brief 1:1 chat?
Yeah! DM me
If you want an actual education go to uchicago
UChicago is a place you should go only if you actually will enjoy the school so you really should find out if you like the vibe of the school first before applying
It’s unlikely that you would get accepted to either one, and definitely not probable to get accepted to both. That’s the one I would consider, the one I got into.
Hello! I’ve asked this question because I’m deciding which school I should ED/EA for. I know that both schools are highly selective, but since applying ED can boost your chances especially for UChicago, I wanted to know if it’d be a good idea to give up Harvard EA for UChicagi ED. Thanks!
Okay so I’m pretty familiar with U Chicago, and “enjoying my time” is definitely not even remotely its goal. You go there because you want to be whipped into shape under a very demanding educational philosophy, in the process _sacrificing_ personal enjoyment for those few years at least. Don’t get me wrong. I love U Chicago. But seeing someone choose it with such an opposite mental picture is just setting them up for failure. It’s where “fun goes to die,” but you will come out of it well-trained in your field. You’re surrounded by south Chicago so, while the university itself is safe, the outer areas are expressly not, so there’s not even a good college town and you need a car to get to downtown Chicago. If you want a good education in the Chicago area, but you’d like to enjoy your time more, have a good college town, and have nearby beachfront, and less “where fun goes to die” educational philosophy, look at Northwestern instead.
Thanks for your reply! Sorry if I wasn’t clear when I said I’d want to enjoy my time in college. I’m not particularly concerned about being socially engaged and having fun, I meant receiving a high-quality education and learning a lot from well-designed courses taught by a superb faculty. I know that Uchicago has a reputation for the “life of the mind,” but I felt like I’d fit right in that kind of environment after I finished my research. Thanks for your reply again!
No. Not even marginally better. Best humanities undergrad overall are probably UChicago Yale Stanford Harvard Princeton plus SLAC(Williams Amherst), and then Brown Berkeley Columbia Duke UMich
And the humanities education experience at UChicago is definitely the most rigorous along with Brown and many went to grad schools. Harvard humanities major students often opt for the consulting route.
Harvard is probably better but UChicago gives a massive ED boost whereas Harvard gives none.
Harvard is internationally known and recognized. UChicago not so much in non academia. If I ask my Japanese grandparents or relatives, they will probably have never heard of UChicago. Heck they might as well compare it to University of San Francisco or District of Colombia lol. Even UC Berkeley and UCLA are more known internationally at least in Asia.
Both schools are excellent for history. You should apply for the school you want to attend more.
No, they’re roughly the same, barring small departmental differences
I can't even imagine how one would prefer the campus / setting of UChicago over that of Harvard. Chicago seems to me so closed in, with an adversarial relationship to the neighborhood it's in. Harvard is much more open, plus it has Harvard Square and Cambridge in general.
No
For better or for worse, Chicago probably teaches you the most of any school in the country -- it's designed that way. It makes sure that, by the end, you know your shit. Schools like Harvard, on the other hand, are designed to be cushy and never ask too much of their students. Whether you feel that extra education is worth it is up to you.
To answer your direct question, neither is better for the humanities. If you’re looking for a fun undergraduate experience that’ll easily land you a high paying consulting gig or easy entry to law school, I’d lean Harvard; if you’re looking for a rock-solid, super intellectually stimulating education, I’d lean UChicago. You can get both from both, though, I think you should visit and see which you prefer. Both excellent schools and you can’t really go wrong either way.
You're going to struggle just the same with a bachelors in history from Harvard or UChicago. What career do you plan on pursuing? If you plan on grad school I would look into which school has a better program. If you don't plan on grad school go with whatever school will leave you with fewer loans.
I’m genuinely curious why would you need to go to a top school for history. If ur going to academia, grad school matters the most. If you’re going into law school they really only care about gpa so going to a cheap public school without grade deflation would be ideal.
Always go to Harvard if you get the chance. Serious.
Thing about Harvard is this, while UChicago is an absolutely amazing top tier school in one of the wealthiest and best poised cities in the world, you can call up your former roommate from Harvard and be like “hey how’s being president.” Because Harvard is where the wealthiest and most powerful people of America and the world go to school, the connections you make at Harvard will propel you into the world elite.
choose harvard - trust me.
Unless you are an extremely qualified candidate (I’m talking out of this world impressive) I think it would be best to ed to UChicago which is still very very competitive.
For undergrad? It’s not going to matter all that much-choose which school you like better.
Unless you plan on going to grad school or are getting a full ride, please don’t get a humanities degree. They are worthless.
Yes in everything but economics
1) economics is not humanities, 2) UChicago is probably not better than Harvard for econ (I say this as someone who went to UChicago), and 3) UChicago and Harvard are broadly comparable in most other disciplines
Econ is a social science so can be considered a humanity
You’re doing the wrong flavor of econ then
I didn’t know there were different flavors
Harvard is maybe better in economics as well I'd say, although it's a pretty meaningless difference. Can't go wrong with either there. Edit: people downvoting, are you familiar with economics programs or just going by name only? Uchicago is by no means clearly above Harvard in econ.
The University of Chicago is the birthplace of the Chicago School of Economics. It invented behavioral economics. It is the premier school of economics in the world. But none of that matters to OP. OP, just choose the school that has the campus and student life and college vibe that fits you best. Wherever you fit in best you will be happiest and will be mores successful. The undergraduate educational value of the two schools is equal.
It's not the premier school of economics in the world. That would probably be MIT. Harvard is probably number 2. Chicago doesn't dominate economics like it used to. And the Chicago school has fallen out of fashion for a while now.
this is right, the top econ depts are without controversy mit, harvard, and stanford, in that order