<p>Agree with those that are saying this thread has devolved into something rather ugly (at least pointless).</p>
<p>On the upside, no matter which school you'll go to, you'll never end up having debates like this. And when you do meet someone from another top school (with the one POSSIBLE exception of Harvard-Yale, during the weekend of The Game), there's always a lot of mutual respect... and none of this squabbling.</p>
<p>Got into Stanford... Rejected from Harvard though :( </p>
<p>Dont know if i can afford Stanford though sooo im kinda stuck!!!!!!!</p>
<br>
<blockquote> <p>Agree with those that are saying this thread has devolved into something rather ugly (at least pointless)<< It is pointless. No matter where you go, undergraduate will not teach you much and the professors really don't care about MOST of you no matter what they say. You either need to learn a lot more on the job or in a graduate school. If you really like Harvard, go to Princeton, MIT, Caltech or Stanford (Yale if you can't get in those) for undergraduate and Harvard for graduate school. You will get the name brands and connections from two elite schools instead of one.</p> </blockquote>
<br>
<p>Putnam competition is only about math. Its results have been largely twisted by the Chinese students attending the shcools. Check the team members from those top schools, you will see that very clearly. </p>
<p>Chinese students have a leaning for Harvard, MIT, and Yale, because these are the schools better known there for many decades. This is related to both history and some historical figures of China.</p>
<p>You'd be making sense if last year's putnam fellow from harvard was not indian, and there weren't white people along with chinese making N1/honorable mention from all of the top five schools.</p>
<p>As someone who has been at both schools, and has taught at others of comparable quality, I want to just add a bit of realism to this recently revived thread.</p>
<p>Basically, for almost any purpose you could want, there is no real difference in quality between Harvard and Stanford at the undergrad level (for specific grad programs this is different, especially for those thinking of an academic career where there can be considerable differences in approaches). Almost no one over the age of 25 cares if you went to one or the other undergrad. And the very few who do are misinformed. I am speaking of course of the US. But it would apply to Latin America, Europe or Australia/New Zealand (all places I have spent time living in). You are indeed lucky to go to either Harvard or Stanford, or for that matter many other great schools of almost the same quality. </p>
<p>It is far more important to actually take advantage of one of these universities. Many students, fearing anything less than the best grade point for the professional school applications, miss out on the chance to fully sample the incredible classes in a variety of subjects. If you are in science, please also take humanities and social sciences; and vice versa. Go abroad for a semester; learn foreign languages; realize you are unlikely to be around such a rich learning environment again (even in grad school).</p>
<p>I think there is an incredible myopia right now about the importance of a few very elite universities and, especially, of Harvard as somehow qualitatively better than the others. NOT.</p>
<p>It didn't mean for estimating overall qualities of a few relevant shcools (especially Harvard, and MIT), and it was not about a race or races either. I didn't even take a look at the lists of Fellows. I am quite sure that the Chinese was just a significant force there.</p>
<p>China's high school students dominates International Math Olympiad since 1988. Out of 21 competitions, China finished in 6th place once, in 2nd places 5 times , and in 1st places 15 times. Generally, the Chinese students get more mathematical trainings than nearly all of their peers do in other countries. That was how it got those.</p>
<p>Some top Chinese math students' presentce in some schools can't be ignored in such a narrowed competition, especially in the three most recent years. </p>
<p>The competition was a mathematical one, and its participants are not good samples of overall student bodies.</p>
<p>Since you brought it up, let's take a look:</p>
<p>2007:</p>
<p>Rank
School
Team Members (in alphabetical order) </p>
<p>1
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Zachary Abel, Tiankai Liu, and Alison B. Miller</p>
<p>2
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Andrei Negut, Aaron C. Pixton, and Andrei B. Ungureanu</p>
<p>3
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Hansheng Diao, Eric C. Price, and Yufei Zhao</p>
<p>4
STANFORD UNIVERSITY
Serin Hong, Nathan K. Pflueger, and Kiat Chuan Tan</p>
<p>5
DUKE UNIVERSITY
Tirasan Khandhawit, Peng Shi, and Lingren Zhang</p>
<p>The Putnam Fellows--The Six Highest Ranking Individuals
Each receives an award of $2,500.</p>
<p>JASON C. BLAND
California Institute of Technology </p>
<p>BRIAN R. LAWRENCE
California Institute of Technology</p>
<p>AARON C. PIXTON
Princeton University</p>
<p>QINGCHUN REN
Massachusetts Institute of Technology</p>
<p>XUANCHENG SHAO
Massachusetts Institute of Technology</p>
<p>ARNAV TRIPATHY
Harvard University</p>
<p>***2006:</p>
<p>Rank
School
Team Members (in alphabetical order) </p>
<p>1
PRINCETON UNIVERSITY
Ana Caraiani, Andrei Negut, and Aaron C. Pixton</p>
<p>2
HARVARD UNIVERSITY
Tiankai Liu, Alison B. Miller, and Tong Zhang</p>
<p>3
MASSACHUSETTS INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY
Oleg Golberg, Daniel M. Kane, and Kuat T. Yessenov </p>
<p>4
UNIVERSTY OF TORONTO
Tianyi David Han, J</p>
<p>I'm a strict east coaster so I would go with Harvard any day. Plus Boston is an awesome city.</p>
<p>So much rain...</p>
<p>
[quote]
Stanford beats Harvard in biology, chemistry
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As a student here and according to a friend over at Palo Alto, I find that hard to believe....</p>