<p>by analogy: asking what the “Best Automobile” is w/o regard to how that vehicle is to be used . . . all depends on the use fo the vehicle or - for students - what the “Fit” is</p>
<p>take Cal Poly SLO or Lehigh . . the former is a top 5 undergrad engineering school and the latter top 5 for aeronautical engineering . . . is Duke better than either of these? that does depend on . . .</p>
<p>but if all you are after is a discussion about what the Best Car is, independent of the needs of the driver, the intended uses and where it will used . . . well, that’s why fine car aficionadoes get drunk at car shows and have a great ol’ time . . . as long as you don’t take it seriously, it can be fun, if useless :-)</p>
<p>P.S. What is the Best school for studying psycho ceramics?</p>
<p>If “best” means in terms of overall faculty quality, resources, breadth and depth of top ranked academic programs, then Berkeley is #1 in the West and UT-Austin is best in the South. Duke is certainly more “prestigious” than UT-Austin, but UT has more top ranked academic departments across more disciplines (and is ranked higher in more academic departments overall than any school in the South) so by pure definition, that is better.</p>
<p>This weeked one of the Sharpe brothers asked the NFL Hall of Fame attendees how could he the best in the NFL if he was the second best in his own family. </p>
<p>Not sure how you go from Stanford vs Duke to Cal and Texas. Must be a question about current NFL quarterbacks? Aaron versus Vince versus Colt? </p>
<p>Football or academics, one should ask how could you be the best in the West if you are a distant second best in the Bay area? </p>
<p>Yeah I can’t think of much else either. Some people think Stanford’s campus feels like a country club, but IMO that’s only because it’s sunny and doesn’t have pretentious Gothic architecture standing over you.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Against Stanford, faculty quality is equal with slight edge to Stanford for many faculty award counts. Breadth and depth of top ranked academic programs goes to either, depending on the ranking set. Stanford has far more resources (and more than twice the budget).</p>
<p>Well, we would also have to carve out all the professional schools that Berkeley has that Stanford doesn’t (like journalism, public health, environmental design, natural resources, etc.).</p>
<p>Even without the medical school, Stanford still has a much larger budget.</p>
Those are small potatoes compared to medical research spending, wouldn’t you say?
What about the Hoover Institution? Is that included in Stanford’s budget?</p>
<p>
I doubt it. I’d need to see some proof. I’ll agree with larger endowment. Berkeley also gets state funding that Stanford doesn’t receive (although this portion is shrinking).</p>
<p>Actually, my comment was in reference to the faculty award counts.</p>
<p>I read that the budget for the med school is $1.3 billion. Since Stanford’s budget is $4.1 billion, that leaves $2.8 billion, still like a billion ahead of Berkeley. I’ll try to find a link for the med school operating budget.</p>
<p>I don’t know whether Hoover is included, but even if it is, why exclude it? Most of the people there are also faculty in departments/schools, like political science, international relations, business, etc. I’m sure we could find some semi-autonomous institute or center at Berkeley that could be excluded on that basis, too. edit: like ICSI, which is independent and has a lot of big-name people who are also faculty members at the university. edit2: according to [url=<a href=“http://www.stanforddaily.com/2009/09/22/hoover-slashes-budget/]this[/url”>http://www.stanforddaily.com/2009/09/22/hoover-slashes-budget/]this[/url</a>] Hoover’s budget is chump change anyway.</p>
LBNL is not included in the budget. But, “most of the people there are also faculty in departments/schools,” like physics, chemistry, engineering, etc. Like you said, “why exclude it”? So perhaps we should add that…and UCSF to get true apples to apples comparison. ;)</p>
<p>^ it just depends on where you draw the line with how “connected” it has to be before it could be included. Hoover is definitely higher on the connectedness continuum. If LBNL were to be included, why not include SRI International for Stanford? It has tons of affiliated faculty + was started and once owned by Stanford. For that matter, why not include the Palo Alto Research Center (PARC) which also has tons of current Stanford faculty?</p>
edit: like ICSI, which is independent and has a lot of big-name people who are also faculty members at the university. edit2: according to [url=<a href=“