For those who were rejected….

Colleges and Universities A-Z Stanford University
21

<p>OK, upon his clarification, I think Kyle actually raised some good points about difficulty in following my meaning. I have made myself plain above. </p>

<p>StanfordMom - I don't think you even really mean this. If you do, please do think about what you're saying. I may whine about the admissions systems at many schools, but when it comes to it, Cal and Stanford are both great schools with lots of synergy at the higher levels, i.e. among professors. I know this personally from having spoken to my math professors. There are lots of students at Cal who're plain outright brilliant, and I'm sure the same at Stanford. Please try to take the mature view that professors and grad students take, which is for each to view the other school as a great partner for research. Please try NOT to sound like your typical whining undergrad at CAl saying Stanford sucks, or the typical one at STanford either.</p>

22

<p>Stanfordmom what do you mean "we" have a rivalry. i thought ur only affiliation with stanford is that ur the mother of someone who supposedly got in. hmm..............</p>

23

<p>"Once again, Cal comes nowhere close to Stanford. We have a rivalry because of our proximity, that's it. Please quit trying to inflate your ego by putting Cal and Stanford on the same plane... that's just ridiculous."</p>

<p>I think I know prof's at STANFORD who'd no longer speak to you for saying this. I won't bother responding to you if you're not going to make a constructive point.</p>

24

<p>what have u said about me? All u said is that urm status got me in, which is in part true.</p>

25

<p>u know i really hope u are some 19 year old stanford reject. god help the child who has a mother with such a low maturity level.</p>

26

<p>OK this is semi constructive...but anyway, my point was to focus less on rivalry. I didn't say to treat Cal and Stanford as rivals. I said there's a lot of synergy at the higher levels, among those with a mature attitude towards all this. </p>

<p>I don't know if you're just into prestige or something, but I'm against that kind of attitude. By your logic, Harvard is just better than Stanford or something? I don't believe that! Cal isn't just a public school...remember that the quality of faculty there is what makes a bunch of Cal's grad programs utterly top notch, and easily comparable to Stanford's. </p>

<p>I think it's EASIER to get into Cal. Doesn't mean the reason it's harder to get into Stanford is "better" and certainly doesn't mean the quality of students at one place doesn't compare with that of the other. Perhaps Cal has a wide variety of students (but I think, so does Stanford): from the less academic to the guys who came in winning huge awards for technical expertise in frosh. year, and started doing crazy work immediately upon entry, headed for a grad school of their choice. </p>

<p>Remember, the prof's at both schools probably care more about the grad students anyway. So their quality as minds in both schools might rest more on the quality of the grad program than anything else. And both grad programs are excellent.</p>

27

<p>What is your basis for saying this?</p>

<p>Cool down, research something about Stanford's and Berkeley's math graduate departments (actually TALK to the professors). Actually, even if you use a stupid source like US News, there'll be plenty of areas contradicting what you're saying. But better yet, why not get some real info? </p>

<p>I don't see why you'd ever make statements that you do, when I know STanford professors collaborate with Berkeley's department, and even your layman's popular source like US News doesn't support what you're saying about quality of grad programs. </p>

<p>Stanford may have a strong undergrad focus. Other schools are even more reputed for it. I'd hope students going to STanford, Cal, and other schools have better reasons than vague stuff like "undergrad focus." I..e, hopefully they actually visit schools and find something about the departments that works for them. If you're into overall prestige, talk to anyone who knows a thing or two about grad school, and you'll gather that "overall prestige." </p>

<p>There are closed-minded people like you at Cal too, who would say STanford sucks because Cal has way harder grading and rougher curves. I don't buy into that. If you're really a mom, you should also be above petty comparisons.</p>

28

<p>Incomplete there...."overall prestige" matters far less than quality of the department in the GIVEN SPECIAL AREA you want to study.</p>

29

<p>No extreme zeal for me! If you don't believe me, SERIOUSLY do your research, and you will. I spend countless hours thinking about and researching math grad schools, and definitely know a thing or two from having spoken with my professors. </p>

<p>If I were a Berkeley zealot, I'd not have said SO many positive things about STanford's faculty. I'd also not post on this thread, because there are enough diehard Stanford and Berkeley zealots out there. But I don't think there are enough with a balanced view. This is why I even bother posting.</p>

30

<p>"There are closed-minded people like you at Cal too, who would say STanford sucks because Cal has way harder grading and rougher curves. I don't buy into that. If you're really a mom, you should also be above petty comparisons."</p>

<p>Doesn't this at least SUGGEST that I'm not a typical, diehard CAl fan? Lots of criticism I have about the school's inside. But to say one school is just BETTER is firstly too vague to be a constructive comment, and secondly simply not true in many areas.</p>

31

<p>I hope you're actually considering what I'm saying. If you want to disbelieve it, I hope you'll do so after doing some homework on it. </p>

<p>Thanks for reading.</p>

32

<p>I don't even know what Cal is so Stanford is better than it. I just Proved it as fact.</p>

33

<p>Steven, I think it just shows that you are highly ignorant. A person who doesn't even know what ESL is.</p>

34

<p>"See post #18 for quote"</p>

<p>Whoops. That was for mathboy.
I guess that takes away from the attempted cleverness of the post, huh.</p>

<p>And can we keep the rivalry to football, guys? The whole "Stanford is soooooo much better than Cal" thing kind of embarrasses me. They're both equally rigorous and respectable institutions. The only difference is that Stanford has the Tree, which can take on Oski any day. :P</p>

35

<p>Mathboy98, I see what your point is now, and I see that you are well-intentioned. I admit I don’t understand Stanford’s admissions, but “shady” to me has negative connotations.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This, I think I can judge from sitting in classes with them, communicating with them, and such.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Just adding this tidbit, but this sort of reasoning is common on CC, and more often than not, students see they knew less about the student than they thought.</p>

<p>I’m glad StanfordMom’s posts were deleted. She doesn’t represent Stanford students views at all.</p>

<p>FWIW, I’m a long-time Berkeley fan (as many on CC know--some even still think I go there!), and have long seen it as Stanford’s equal. Its professors are equally amazing, and its grad programs are just as good. The only difference I see is that Berkeley’s undergrad is understaffed, and it doesn’t have as much infrastructure for undergrads to shower them in opportunities. Not that Berkeley’s undergrad is “weak”--I’d say definitely among the best, top 1-2 in grad studies, and top 10 overall. (I very nearly went to Berkeley, but my heart belongs to Stanford. :))</p>

36

<p>"Mathboy98, I see what your point is now, and I see that you are well-intentioned. I admit I don’t understand Stanford’s admissions, but “shady” to me has negative connotations."</p>

<p>Thanks, I'm glad to have made myself clearer - I am not nearly as experienced as you and others in posting, and I think I was expecting quite a bit out of people reading my posts....I do think if ALL of them were read, it was kind of clear what I meant, but this is definitely a heavy expectation. I'll never use "shady" again when describing a school's admissions process, that's for sure -- took all my energy to clarify what I meant :) </p>

<p>I don't know...maybe I'm too old-fashioned (OK, I'm too young to be saying things like this..) but I always thought the best way to learn about a person as a student is by interacting with him/her in the classroom and other academic settings. I.e., I always felt this is a surer way to get to know the students than via these admissions essay sorts of questions - I could be missing something!</p>

<p>There are plenty of equivalents of StanfordMom at Cal, who'll say stuff like "In STanford, everyone gets an A, and at Cal, you actually have to work for it..." -- too bad it has to be like this =\, all mudslinging remarks considered, but that's part of the reason I bother posting, trying to keep it balanced. I won't even bother commenting on grad schools....both amazing places. It'd be awesome to end up at one of them (heck, I sometimes wonder if I'd rather go to Stanford, for variety). </p>

<p>It seems like you see what I mean quite well now - I'd like schools to be a bit clearer on what they're looking for if possible, and I get the feeling it just could be a lot clearer than it is now...but again, maybe I'm underestimating how hard it is to conduct the admissions process. </p>

<p>Oh, and just a little tidbit of my own - the reason I harped on the really really academic people getting "cheated" out of some schools is that there are a very few but to me important cases where I felt very bad that some guys very talented in math and science (far, far beyond standard high scorers, in my opinion) didn't get into Stanford OR Cal. Stanford, because of whatever reason, and Cal, I hypothesize because they didn't do Olympiads, didn't document things pristinely...didn't overload AP classes and get inflated GPA's. They were just smart and did well at math and science, and did lots of reading on the subjects on their own. I feel like if these guys went to a school like Cal or Stanford, they'd make terrific use of the faculty at their disposal. </p>

<p>Take an example - my brilliant math professor, a superstar in his field, himself didn't like math competitions or the typical outlets available at the high school level. And it's really really really really hard to do highly abstract, pure math research in COLLEGE for the best undergrads, let alone in high school. Just a thought - how to get these people better recognized.</p>

<p>I felt that the easiest thing these guys could do is to take some more random AP classes since they're pretty smart, get good GPA's, and this likely would get them into Cal.</p>

<p>Anyway, thanks for bearing with my posts and getting to the heart of my message!</p>

37

<p>
[quote]
There are plenty of equivalents of StanfordMom at Cal, who'll say stuff like "In STanford, everyone gets an A, and at Cal, you actually have to work for it..." -- too bad it has to be like this =

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Agreed, there are going to be people like that at Stanford or Cal. In fact, I still hold that at Cal, you'd be hard-pressed to find students who actually think Stanford is inferior, but it wouldn't be as difficult to find students at Stanford who think that Cal is inferior.</p>

<p>
[quote]
It'd be awesome to end up at one of them (heck, I sometimes wonder if I'd rather go to Stanford, for variety).

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I'd actually long planned to go to Stanford for undergrad and (hopefully) to Berkeley for grad, though now I have no idea where I'll end up. (I'll probably be applying to computer science PhD programs, which are especially difficulty to get into at Stanford and Cal, among other places.)</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'd like schools to be a bit clearer on what they're looking for if possible

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I agree with this--one reason I've lauded the UC system is for its mostly clear admissions, i.e. it releases a whole ton of statistics (by ethnic group, by GPA, etc.) for the public to see. Stanford et al are much, much more vague about it. </p>

<p>IMO, Stanford should drop affirmative action and legacy preference (after all, legacies will get in at higher rates anyway, given that their parents are successful people educated at a top school), and instead focus on the contexts of the students. But, that's a debate for another day. ;)</p>

38

<p>"In fact, I still hold that at Cal, you'd be hard-pressed to find students who actually think Stanford is inferior, but it wouldn't be as difficult to find students at Stanford who think that Cal is inferior."</p>

<p>Well I think it's probably more common for STanford/Ivies to have the elitist complex, yes =]. But I think among the technical majors which are fairly competitive, for instance Cal EECS, a good number of majors will claim that while Stanford was harder to get into as a school, Cal's program grades way harder, and it's a cake walk elsewhere....which is of course heavily untrue. Well, grade deflation likely is a heavier problem here, but whether it serves a good purpose is unclear, and it certainly isn't a cakewalk at any top engineering school.</p>

<p>Yeah g'luck with those CS Ph.D. programs! I hear math and CS Ph.D.'s are both rather intense to get into.</p>

39

<p>The only difference I see is that Berkeley’s undergrad is understaffed, and it doesn’t have as much infrastructure for undergrads to shower them in opportunities.</p>

<p>I think this can mostly be attributed to the fact that Berkeley's undergrad school is huge and it's endowment is much smaller than Stanford's. Berkeley is great, but it's understandable that it struggles a bit relative to Stanford in that it's undergraduate student body is 4 times as large but they have an endowment only about 1/6th Stanford's.</p>

<p>Maybe if it raised more money or tried to cut down on students? The former seems more feasible, the latter would just be cruel considering how admissions to top colleges is becoming increasingly competitive.</p>

<p>But overall, Cal would be an awesome place to go to school and it can def. compete with the ivies + stanford. People just don't realize this because it's a public school and is "easier" to get into.</p>

40

<p>My own view is that Berkeley is a good place to go MOST if you're aiming for, say, grad school. It's a great research school, and has amazing faculty, on par with Stanford's in a bunch of areas, and I'd say beating out several Ivies in some departments. </p>

<p>But, I have no idea if I'd be happy at Cal if I were, say, premed or something. The rampant competition and grade-slaughter that characterizes part of Cal just isn't desirable to me.</p>