Is UCSB better than Stanford?

College Search & Selection
1

<p>5 Nobel Prize winners in 6 years? </p>

<p>Finn E. Kydland
Professor of Economics
2004 Nobel Prize in Economics</p>

<h2>"For contributions to dynamic macroeconomics: the time consistency of economic policy and the driving forces behind business cycles" </h2>

<p>David J. Gross
Director of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics
2004 Nobel Prize in Physics
"For the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction" </p>

<hr>

<p>Alan J. Heeger<br>
Professor of Physics and of Materials
2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry
"For the discovery and development of conductive polymers" </p>

<hr>

<p>Herbert Kroemer
Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
and of Materials
2000 Nobel Prize in Physics
"For developing semiconductor heterostructures
used in high-speed and opto-electronics"</p>

<hr>

<p>Walter Kohn
Founding director, Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics
Research Professor of Physics
1998 Nobel Prize in Chemistry
"For his development of the density-functional theory"</p>

2

<p>I guess some top professors want to live in Santa Barbara. A nice feather in the cap for UCSB.</p>

3

<p>"Sideway in Santa Barbara" was a lovely movie. Paul Giamatti, son of the
Yale President and Baseball commissioner went to Yale .</p>

4

<p>Nobel laureates don't teach students, UCSB & Stanford do, and those two are not comparable :)</p>

5

<p>UCSB is no Stanford but UCSB <em>is</em> one of the more underrated colleges, mostly due to its [mostly deserved] party school reputation. As a datum, UCSB is a member of the AAU...you don't apply, you get selected. UC is an anomaly in that it has either four or five members (can't remember about Davis) and most states have one, if any, public institutions. There are only somewhere around 100 AAU members to begin with.</p>

<p>Given its relatively modest selectivity, UCSB is a bargain academically...but you have to be willing to work to take advantage of that.</p>

6

<br>


<br>

<p>Wrong. They do teach</p>

<p>check below</p>

<p>PHYS 599, Winter 2005</p>

<hr>

<p>Title: Dissertation Preparation
Description: This course is reserved for writing the dissertation. Each staff member has a research course identified by a number code listed in the Schedule of Classes.<br>
Credits: 12
61945 A. Heeger
T B A</p>

7

<p>We have several friends of my daughter here who would like to promote this idea. Everyone, UCSB is better so choose it over Stanford. There girls, now you have a shot at Stanford!</p>

8

<p>Back in 1982, tuition was around 8000. Now it is outrageous.</p>

9

<p>UCSB: one of the Underrated colleges
Stanford: One of the Overrated Colleges</p>

<p>FYI</p>

<p>Stanford's marketing department has used deceptive tactics to imply that Stanford has produced successful people. Look beneath the superficialities, and you'll find that the overwhelming majority did not attend Stanford as an undergraduate, and sometimes, not even as a graduate student. </p>

<p>-Donald Knuth did not attend Stanford for his undergraduate degree; he went to Case Institute of Technology (Case Western Reserve). </p>

<p>-The founder of MIPS, John Hennessey, did not attend Stanford for his undergraduate degree. His alma mater is Villanova University. He got his graduate degrees at State University of New York, Stonybrook. Take a look at the Senior Management and the Board of Directors at MIPS (<a href="http://www.mips.com%5B/url%5D"&gt;www.mips.com&lt;/a&gt;). Not a single one received a degree from the undergraduate school of engineering at Stanford, even though MIPS is only 15 minutes away from the Stanford campus! </p>

<p>-The inventor of the mouse, Doug Engelbart, did not attend Stanford for his undergraduate degree. Engelbart picked up a degree in electrical engineering from Oregon State, and a Bachelor of Engineering and PhD from UC Berkeley. </p>

<p>-The founders of Sun Microsystems did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degrees. Vinod Khosla went to the Indian Institute of Technology and picked up his masters at Carnegie Mellon, Bill Joy went to U. of Michigan and picked up a Master's at UC Berkeley ,Andy Bechtolsheim got his undergraduate training in Germany and got an MS from Carnegie-Mellon, and Scott McNealy went to Harvard. </p>

<p>-The founders of Silicon Graphics did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degree. Jim Clark attended a college in New Orleans, Louisiana, and picked up his PhD from the University of Utah. Marc Hannah went to U. of Illinois at Urbana Champaign. Charles Rhodes picked up his BS, MS, and PhD's from Purdue University. Kurt Akeley got his undergraduate degree from U. of Delaware. </p>

<p>-The founders of Cisco System did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degree. Len Bosack got his BSEE from U. of Pennsylvania. Sandra Lerner got her BA in Political Science from California State in Chico. </p>

<p>-The founders of Google did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degrees. Larry Page went to U. of Michigan. Sergey Brin's alma mater is U. of Maryland. </p>

<p>-The founder of defunct VA-Linux and the fully functional Sourceforge did not attend Stanford for his undergraduate degree. Larry Augustin went to U. of Notre Dame. </p>

<p>-The founders of Apple Computer did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degrees. Steve Jobs attended (and dropped out of) Reed College. Steve Wozniak received his BSEE from UC Berkeley. </p>

<p>-The co-inventor of the transistor, William Shockley, did not attend Stanford for his undergraduate degree. His alma mater is Caltech, and he got his PhD from MIT. </p>

<p>-The founders of EBay did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degrees. Pierre Omidyar went to Tufts and transferred to UC Berkeley. </p>

<p>-The founders of Microsoft did not attend Stanford for their undergraduate degrees. Bill Gates dropped out of Harvard.</p>

10

<p>Stanfordalum, this is an unusul bashing by an alum. Are you dissapointed with the outcome of your education there?</p>

11

<p>No. Stanford is an excellent school. But somewhat overrated. Students should know the reality as well.</p>

<br>


<br>

<p>I 've just mentioned the fact.</p>

12

<p>From StanfordAlum82's post:</p>

<p>PHYS 599, Winter 2005</p>

<hr>

<p>Title: Dissertation Preparation
Description: This course is reserved for writing the dissertation. Each staff member has a research course identified by a number code listed in the Schedule of Classes.
Credits: 12
61945 A. Heeger
T B A</p>

<p>I just wanted to point out that this is not a class and certainly not accessible to undergraduates. This is what advanced graduate students register for if Heeger is their dissertation advisor. Every professor who has graduate students working on their dissertations has a section of this "class". Graduate students register for this instead of an actual class because the most advanced graduate students spend too much time on research to be able to take classes too.</p>

13

<p>Disgruntled Stanford applicant headed to UCSB perhaps?</p>

14

<p>Nope. Stanford alumni parent. I recognize the posting style.</p>

15

<p>In the book Best 143 Business Schools by The Princeton Review, they have one section that states prominent alumni, and Stanford isn't too shabby. I'll put down the two I know, Phil Knight, chairman/CEO, Nike(former CEO now, stepped down about two weeks ago) and Charles Schwab, chairman/CEO, Charles Schwab & Co.</p>

16

<p>a recruiter once told me he didnt like ucsb b/c they party too much. i agree, they do party wayyy tooo much. that poor school has some serious negative connotations associated with it. and it doesnt seem to be getting any better. nobody really goes there to learn stuff, people go there to partayyy.</p>

17

<p>I have been to UCSB SEVERAL TIMES and I have MANY friends that go there. Trust me, the partying there is OUTRAGEOUS!!! But that's the social scene. Academically, it is a wonderful, challenging school and highly ranked in US News report. But if I had to choose between Stanford and UCSB...come...on it's a no brainer...I'd choose Stanford because of it's excellent rep. You just have to make a decision of what kind of environment u want to live in and what kind of peers you want. It's a personal decision.</p>

18

<p>About the UCSB Physics Department </p>

<p>Department Ranking</p>

<p>The UCSB Physics Department is universally regarded to be one of the premier physics departments in the country. </p>

<p>We were ranked tenth in the country in the 1993 National Research Council study, up from nineteenth in 1982.</p>

<p>In a 1998 study by Science Watch, we were ranked first in the country in terms of research impact as measured by citations per paper.
(In the NRC study we were first in the country in citations/faculty.) </p>

<p>In a recent study by the National Science Foundation we were ninth among physics departments in terms of the number of citations in successful patent applications. Thus, we are recognized as one of the leading physics departments in the country with a very strong upward slope.</p>

<p>Faculty Awards</p>

<p>The strength of our Department is indicated by the many awards received by our faculty. These include the 1998 Nobel Prize for Chemistry, seven memberships in the National Academy of Sciences, the 1998 Julius Lilienfeld Prize, the 1997 National Academy of Sciences Award for initiatives in research, the Waterman Prize, the Balzan Prize, the Fritz London Award, two Oliver Buckley Prizes, the Ford Prize, the Max Planck Research Award, the Panofsky Prize, the Sakurai Prize and the Xanthopoulos Prize. Other honors have included two Packard Fellowships, six Sloan Foundation Fellowships, four Outstanding Junior Investigator Awards, and a Presidential Young Investigator Award.</p>

<ul>
<li></li>
</ul>

<p>David J. Gross
Director of the Kavli Institute for Theoretical Physics
2004 Nobel Prize in Physics
"For the discovery of asymptotic freedom in the theory of the strong interaction" </p>

<hr>

<p>Alan J. Heeger
Professor of Physics and of Materials
2000 Nobel Prize in Chemistry
"For the discovery and development of conductive polymers" </p>

<hr>

<p>Herbert Kroemer
Professor of Electrical and Computer Engineering
and of Materials
2000 Nobel Prize in Physics
"For developing semiconductor heterostructures
used in high-speed and opto-electronics"</p>

19

<p>I can't say that it is better than Stanford, since Stanford is more established. However, from what I have seen, UCSB is stigmatized with the party school connotation. Many who view partying as a bad thing thus place UCSB lower than it deserves. It is a highly ranked university. It is rising quickly in the ranking. However, all of these accomplishments are overshadowed with its imfamous name of the Univeristy of Casual Sex and Beer. But what is wrong with a little fun? It is not a matter of what the university is like (since if one puts a bunch of teens- tweenty year olds a lively social scene will develop regardless of where), but rather it is the capabilites of the individual in such an environment. Some can thrive with some partying. Some can't. Some need the partying to survive. Most of UCSB (including myself) is in this third group. We love to work hard and play hard!!! Many parents and students do not view UCSB students in this third group. They simply feel that any form of partying is automatically bad. For me, thus far, it provides an outlet. I earned my 4.45 GPA in high school and now 3.64 in college (so far), and every Fri. and Sat. I go out.
Sorry I'm ranting.</p>

20

<p>and this is the future (Market potential $300 Billion) </p>

<p>About CNSI</p>

<p>The University of California, Los Angeles and University of California, Santa Barbara have joined to build the California NanoSystems Institute (CNSI), which will facilitate a multidisciplinary approach to develop the information, biomedical, and manufacturing technologies that will dominate science and the economy in the 21st century. </p>

<p>Both science and the economy in the 21st century will require technological breakthroughs in the control of nanometer scale structure and functions, where the top-down approach of electronics manufacture converges with the bottom-up assembly of biology. At this moment, the scientific questions are being formulated, the required tools are being developed, and the possible applications of nanotechnologies and applications will be revolutionary. </p>

<p>The vision of the CNSI is to establish a coherent and distinctive organization that serves California and national purposes and that is embedded on the UCLA and UCSB campuses. The CNSI will be a world-class intellectual and physical environment that supports collaboration among California's university, industry and national laboratory scientists.</p>