<p>
[quote]
The poor superstars are very, very few in number, so Stanford isn't exactly "cleaning up," especially when you consider that there are many other top privates and publics that the students go to.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>If Stanford isn't "cleaning up" with respect to these poor superstars, then Berkeley REALLY isn't cleaning up with respect to them. </p>
<p>
[quote]
And those superstars would probably get the Regents' and Chancellor's scholarship at Berkeley, which is a "killer financial aid package." Simply because Berkeley isn't formally stating that it's financial aid packages are great (i.e. saying it will waive the family contribution for families with less than $45,000) doesn't mean that Berkeley isn't attracting a large number of superstar (or really great) poor students and getting them to matriculate.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Even if the packages were exactly the same such that a poor superstar would pay the same amount (that is, zero) at either school, that poor superstar STILL has strong reasons to prefer Stanford. Like I said before, if nothing else, that guy can then avoid stupid problems like impaction. Why risk ending up stuck in a major you don't really want if you can go to another school of equivalent (or better) quality where you don't have to take that risk? Other reasons would be the superior career services office (let's face it, Berkeley's career office isn't exactly the greatest in the world), the better networking, the better resources per capita, the relative lack of stupid weeder courses, etc.</p>
<p>What I would really like to do is for Berkeley to fix ALL of these problems, impaction especially. But given that they probably won't, then all I can say is that Berkeley can't just match Stanford's aid. It has to provide BETTER aid than Stanford does to make the experiences equivalent. </p>
<p>Just think of it this way. Given the choice of attending Berkeley or Stanford for the same price, what do you think most people would choose? Be honest with yourself now. As a further framing device, I seem to recall reading somewhere that indicate that current Stanford-Berkeley cross-admits choose Stanford by something like a 3:1 or 4:1 ratio, and that's without any price matching. Imagine what the ratio must be if all those cross-admits did receive matching prices. </p>
<p>
[quote]
Not to mention that the promotion of Stanford's policy is weak. It has been watered down by other privates' initiatives and Stanford simply isn't promoting it enough to the students it might apply to. For example, I met a student this past summer who was 1) a very excellent student, and 2) poor. He wasn't even considering Stanford (Berkeley and UCLA were his top choices).</p>
<p>What's most important here, though, is this. Berkeley still carries something that Stanford can never match: a public university status. In the general students' minds, public is invariably cheaper than private, as it's meant for the people, not the elite (which is the image attached to Stanford). So Stanford can tout its new policy all it wants for PR, but Berkeley will still have the "best public in the US" label. That is much, much more powerful that any promotion that Stanford can do.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>
[quote]
Being a public school (vs private) does do wonders for PR. The few, poor super-stars might end up picking Stanford. Middle class Super-stars will certainly find Berkeley a much better choice.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Now, here I agree that you guys have a point. But a point that is fading over time. After all, superstar students are precisely the sort of students who are most likely to know about the financial aid strategies used by the different schools. Sure, I agree that regular people probably don't know. But regular people aren't going to be able to get into Stanford anyway (or even into Berkeley for that matter). Furthermore, more and more people will inevitably find out about the Stanford strategy. Hence, it's a point that will fade over time.</p>
<p>Think of it this way. Again, allow me to bring up the PhD students. The vast majority of the top PhD students are not "deterred" by the pricey reputation of private schools because they know full well that they won't have to pay a dime anyway. They all know how the PhD funding process works, and they know there's little consistent difference between what they would get out of Berkeley vs. what they would get out of Stanford. {For example, one PhD applicant might find that Berkeley is offering him a better deal than Stanford is, and another PhD applicant might find the reverse, but there is no consistent pattern.} Anybody who can get into a PhD program at Berkeley or Stanford is obviously a top student, and it is part of the job of a top student to KNOW the funding that is available at the various schools. I have never heard of anybody saying that he is going to apply to the PhD programs at only the UC's because he can't "afford" to get his PhD at Stanford.</p>