<p>for students interested in math, physics, CS, and econ?</p>
<p>What are the compelling non-academic reasons? Thanks for sharing your thoughts!</p>
<p>nice, you started "Choosing MIT over Stanford and Caltech" in the MIT forum...</p>
<p>Non-academic reasons? Campus, student vibe, proximity to San Francisco. But for me the primary reasons to choose Stanford would be academic--namely, very strong humanities programs. Caltech doesn't have that. MIT does have humanities classes but can't compete with Stanford.</p>
<p>At Stanford, you'll get to create social networks outside of just the science/tech-related fields you'll find yourself interested in. You'll become friends with future politicians, lawyers, writers, doctors, historians, businessmen, athletes. It's not just scientists and engineers. And people around you will have different passions and interests than you, which makes college life all the more exciting and interesting. If you went to MIT and Caltech, everyone would be working in the technology field, which makes for a relatively boring and static socioacademic environment IMO.</p>
<p>Also, Stanford's location in Silicon Valley and near San Francisco makes it the ideal place for all types of internship opportunities (though especially tech and science related ones).</p>
<p>Stanford is a suburban campus, which means campus life is centered ON the campus itself and not spread out in clumps over a city. Which is good, because you WILL be spending most of your time on campus (and Palo Alto has some of the best eateries in the Bay Area). Besides, if you want to get out and have some fun in a big city, San Francisco is always a hassle-free, 30-minute train ride away. And San Francisco > Boston or Los Angeles.</p>
<p>Stanford boasts an excellent athletic program, which means you'll be able to enjoy the experience of getting psyched for a football or basketball game and going and cheering for Stanford with all your friends (potentially dancing along with the Leland Stanford Junior Marching Band too :-) ). It's a really bonding, uplifting and exciting experience that you won't be able to enjoy as much at schools like Caltech and MIT.</p>
<p>And Stanford boasts amazing weather, practically all-year long, as well as a gorgeous, green and large campus.</p>
<p>It's no wonder Stanford has a reputation for one of the happiest student bodies in the nation.</p>
<p>I think you meant "businessmen and businesswomen" or "businesspeople" instead of just "businessmen" :)</p>
<p>My apologies.</p>
<p>I love Stanford, but Boston is way better than San Francisco ;-) .</p>
<p>I respectfully disagree.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Boston is way better than San Francisco
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I disrespectfully disagree! :)</p>
<p>pssh. Boston's like a million years old. We've got history. Y'all have earthquakes and major fires every couple of years. Plus we've got more colleges, plus Stanford's not even in San Francisco it's 45 minutes away, so there! haha...but I really like San Francisco. I just am in love with Boston.</p>
<p>pssh. Boston's like a million years old. We've got history. Y'all have earthquakes and major fires every couple of years. Plus we've got more colleges, plus Stanford's not even in San Francisco it's 45 minutes away, so there! haha...but I really like San Francisco. I just am in love with Boston.</p>
<p>I'm going to have to respond to that -- I've lived in California for 18 years and there has never been a "major fire" in any populated area, they happen in the forests where no one lives.</p>
<p>I have also never felt an earthquake in 18 (almost 19) years here... i'm always ****ed when we have one and I miss it. Seriously it's not that bad.</p>
<p>It's true San Fran is not close, but it's not far either... you can get there in 30 min or less. Plus the weather here is 10X better than boston and thats a fact</p>
<p>and barberconcerto: Does everyone have to be politically correct 24/7? lol</p>
<p>If you love Snow you really cannot beat Boston (compared to Stanford).</p>
<p>:)</p>
<p>Hrteeexz's positive analysis of Stanford is spot-on with one exception. The athletics are going to h*ll faster than a downhill racer. The football team had its worst season ever last year, both BB teams fell flat on their faces, the tennis teams and golf teams (among the best programs in college for the past 20 years) now suck. Baseball is struggling. Why? Because the influx of Ivy leaguers in administrative positions of power at Stanford have made a covert decision to turn Stanford into a West coast Ivy. No longer are athletes being cut a break on admissions although other privileged factions still are (legacies, faculty kids, donor scions, political connections) as well as students who excel at singular talents (debate, art, music, etc) But the admin looks down their aquiline noses at athletes. AND they are doing their best to eliminate the symbol of Stanford Past---the LSJU Marching Band.</p>
<p>I am an alumnus and my son goes there now, but I am very unhappy with the school. Stanford became Stanford by seeking its own way. Pursuing excellence in everything, not just academics. And having a damn good time while doing it. That's what California is all about; that's what Silicon Valley is all about. The point of no return is just around the corner.</p>
<p>Parenthetically, my D has been admitted to USC, which I view as the closest thing to what Stanford used to be. It's not quite there yet, but the momentum upward is impressive and it's only a matter oftime. Plus the Trojan Family is awesome.</p>
<p>
[quote]
If you went to MIT and Caltech, everyone would be working in the technology field, which makes for a relatively boring and static socioacademic environment IMO.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Well, that's a bit of a strong statement, don't you think? In the case of MIT, the 3rd most popular undergraduate major is Sloan management (behind EECS and biology) - and not all of the Sloanies specialize in the management of technology. There's also a cohort of economics, poli-sci, and architecture students. </p>
<p>And besides, even if you do get a technical degree from MIT, that doesn't mean that you'll actually be working as a scientist or engineer. It's become something of a running joke that the best engineering/science students at MIT will often times not take technical jobs or go to technical grad school, but will instead opt for management consulting or investment banking. You can get an engineering degree from MIT and never work a single day as an actual engineer. I know quite a few people who have done that. {Note, I am also certain that there are plenty of Stanford science/engineering students who will also jump to consulting/banking.} </p>
<p>But the point is, I think it's a bit too much of a sweeping statement to assert that 'everyone' at MIT would be working in the technology field. I can agree that many will. But certainly far from all.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Hrteeexz's positive analysis of Stanford is spot-on with one exception. The athletics are going to h*ll faster than a downhill racer. The football team had its worst season ever last year, both BB teams fell flat on their faces,
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hey, at least the Stanford men's basketball team made the NCAA tournament. There are LOTS of other teams who didn't even do that. In particular, there's a certain other school nearby whose students/alumni wish their bball team would have made the tournament and in which some students are floating the idea of firing the coach for garnering rather mediocre results in the last 10 years.</p>
<p>Haven't visited MIT in ages. Stanford felt wealthier to me than Caltech. Just a little too country-clubbish for my taste. Kids seemed very nice and aggressively well-rounded. I had the impression there was more double-majoring and unusual double-majoring (Our tour guide was doing international relations and biology and wanted to go to med school and do something in public health.) Stanford has a somewhat unusual academic calendar. Caltech kids on the other hand sometimes seem aggressively quirky. While there are all sorts of different types at Caltech, I still feel like there is a certain overarching Caltech type. I don't really feel that way about Stanford.</p>
<p>Awww...I love Caltech kids! My uncle used to work there, and one of my best friends goes there. But you're write about the quirky type. My friend (and all her friends at Caltech) are definitely quirky, finding enjoyment in all these science-y things. It's the perfect place for her, though, because it is like that. :) If that makes sense...</p>
<p>Oh I like Caltech kids too. In fact it felt perfect for ds, unfortunately they didn't accept him. Both my kids walked on to campus and said "These are my kind of people," even younger brother who hates science!</p>
<p>Oops! Sorry, I didn't mean to insinuate that you didn't. My fault. :) I was agreeing with the quirky personality thing. I've never actually been on campus since I was in fifth grade, so I haven't met students in their natural habitat (:p), but I remember thinking the campus was really pretty.</p>
<p>bump (10 char)</p>