<p>The ratio of grad students to undergrads is the same at Stanford as Chicago (2:1). Yet Chicago offers much smaller classes in general and undergrads there are certainly not marginalized. These absolute numbers/ratios will tell you little about a particular campus’ undergrad experience.</p>
<p>Don’t get me wrong. Stanford is no liberal arts college. But Cornell lower level classes are some of the largest among any top tier school. Classroom sizes of 200, 300, and more are the norm there. Cornell’s administration is notorious for being poorly responsive to students. I have real trouble supporting an argument that Cornell is more “undergrad focused” than Stanford.</p>
<p>In many ways I’ve found Stanford, like Harvard, ultimately a very about-the-individual, not group, experience. Kumbaya does not play well at either. While socially at Stanford tons of stuff is always going on, kids there are very driven and more personally focused than at many peer schools. The gold ring is much more some very specific ambition rather than some global undergrad experience. For someone like the OP seeking to do her own thing and interact socially on a more selective basis, I’d pick Stanford without question. Seems a great fit.</p>
<p>Here is a perspective on Harvard that might apply as well to Stanford. It is a comment about a book entitled “Excellence Without a Soul”.</p>
<p>“Summary: Neglected Undergraduates
Comment: I am a graduate of Harvard College, '59, and Havard Law School, '65. I have read a number of books about Harvard, but have only read a portion of this one. I do plan to finish it. The author was dean of the college for several years and his book is based on his experience while there. He decries the lack of emphasis on teaching the undergraduate at Harvard and other comparable institutions, e.g., Yale, Princeton. For years I have felt the same way about the school, in that it tended to focus too much on the graduate programs. Nevertheless, I never felt in my days at Harvard that I did not profit immensely from the education it provided. There was very limited contact between the professors and the students, but I felt that the exposure to these men and their recommendations for further reading were invaluable. I attended a course taught by Arthur Schlesinger, Jr. and only spoke to him twice. On several occasions the students applauded at the end of his lecture, and he got a standing ovation at the end of the course. One exam I had written was forwarded to him by the instructor who had graded it, and he wrote a personal note on it. I had many other nationally recognized professors while there. I never felt the limited access and contact with those professors that I experienced had in any way diminished the value of my Harvard education.”</p>
<p>How significant are the differences in academic pressure/competition/stress among UCB, Stanford, and Cornell? (or hours spent on classes and homework)</p>