STANFORD vs. CORNELL vs. HAVERFORD vs. USC (for PRE-MED)

Colleges and Universities A-Z Stanford University
1

<p>I've been accepted to these four schools and plan to major in Biology at one of them. I have been involved in research all four years of high school and know that I want to study something in life sciences. Additionally, I have been selected as a Hunter Rawlings III Presidential Research Scholar, which enables me to engage in my own research with a mentor and it provides me with A LOT of funding. </p>

<p>What school will offer me the best preparation for success in medical school? </p>

<p>Thank you in advance!</p>

2

<p>I think your best bet would be Stanford: more grade inflation, more advising, and more access to funding and research. Any funding that you can get at Cornell, you can easily get at Stanford, which spends more on undergraduate research each year than any other university. You’ll have intimate access to the medical school while still having access to the rest of the university, since it’s all on campus; at Cornell, the medical school is 4 hours away. As an undergrad at Stanford, you’ll be able to take some classes at the medical school (there’s even one that requires you to work on real cadavers), work with med school professors (many of whom have joint appointments outside the med school), and use med school facilities, which are state-of-the-art and usually very expensive. For example, I know of someone who was able to use the med school’s imaging facilities (MRI, EEG) to do his research, with the help of a professor of course; he was first author on a paper and got into Harvard’s MD/PhD program, which is way harder to get into than the MD program. You’ll also have access (with the supervision of a professor) to non-med facilities that med researchers use, like the synchrotron or the nanofabrication facilities.</p>

<p>[Core</a> Facilities - Research - Stanford University School of Medicine](<a href=“http://med.stanford.edu/research/core_facilities/]Core”>http://med.stanford.edu/research/core_facilities/)</p>

<p>Cornell can’t offer you such easy access (not to mention the larger classes, higher student:faculty ratio, and more grade deflation, which can keep you out of med school). Haverford doesn’t have the nearly the same research or funding. USC is a huge school with many of the same problems as Cornell, only worse. None of them have the funding of Stanford, which has a $1.2 billion research budget and a $4 billion operating budget. Compare to Cornell’s $764 million research budget, $267 million of which goes to the contract colleges, and $1.8 billion operating budget, less than half of Stanford’s (despite the fact that it has 33% more students than Stanford, and 2x the number of undergrads).</p>

3

<p>Phantasmagoric makes good points when looking at the overall universities, but whether one school has a billion or many hundred millions in research funding is rather irrelevant if YOU will have a designated mentor and specific pot of significant funding dedicated to you at Cornell because of the Rawlings Scholar award.</p>

<p>Grade deflation is something to consider as well but, to me, that’s the opportunity of a lifetime. Congrats on so many great options.</p>

4

<p>Congratulations on some excellent choices. </p>

<p>I’m personally familiar with Stanford and Haverford. Without a doubt Stanford has the large budgets; however, that in itself does not correlate to a benefit to you so you will look well beyond that. For example, the remarkable budget that Stanford has for its sports teams may not be all that relevant to you. Stanford throws plenty of money at academic programs as well. However, focus on your interests and assess whether these overlap with the money and programs/opportunities offered by the school. Separately, and of equal if not greater importance, is where are you going to find the mentor, the professor that will take you under his/her wing, go to bat for you, introduce you to programs/internships, and help get you into those. On this latter point, it’s not just your own academic prowess that gets you there, you need to look to your qualities to ensure that you will be recognized by the professor. You also will need to look at the professors themselves, are they at the institution for their personal gain and the students are an incidental part of that equation. If so, your personality, beyond the academics, will have to be one that goes out, shakes the bushes and hunts down the opportunity. </p>

<p>With that as a backdrop, I would suggest that you start with some self-reflection: What environment, both with respect to socially and academic interests, do you believe/feel you will excel in. Given the caliber of each school, your answer to this question will help you better assess which school will be better for you.</p>

<p>After that, you should look at what environment do you want. Do you want the large forum Saturday football game. Are you ok with the large forum lecture environment. </p>

<p>Both Stanford and Haverford are exceptional and you can’t go wrong with either. At this point, it boils down to style and where you believe you will thrive because of your interests, your personality, what you consider important, etc. For example, if you could only buy one car, and your choice was a 2 seat porsche or a 4 seat porsche sedan, you’re not going to go wrong with either, but your analysis will inevitably start with, given you’re personality and other characteristics, the one you choose will be the one that ultimately you believe you’ll enjoy the most. Good luck and remember, once you choose, no regrets or what ifs, throw yourself at the place you selected.</p>

5

<p>The point is that the larger research $ funds a greater variety of research to choose from, and it also pays for more research facilities.</p>

<p>You can get funding to do research in almost any field, given Stanford’s breadth. The UAR gives out large grants ($6,000) for projects or small grants ($1500) for conferences and such. It’s also relatively easy to get an on-campus internship over the summer in almost any department, funded by the VPUE, where the standard pay is $6,000 for 10 weeks of full-time research ($15/hour).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’m not sure whether that was included in the budget figure I gave above, but either way it’s very small compared to the overall operating budget.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I’ll add that about 75% of Stanford’s courses have fewer than 15 students, and only 2% are more than 120.</p>

6

<p>The student is already guaranteed a large sum of research money (I’m assuming that means more than $6,000) at Cornell, which has a wider array of research fields to choose from than Stanford or Haverford even if it has more students and a few hundred mill less for research overall. Remember that Cornell’s also undertaken a $4.75 billion fund raising campaign that’s ahead of schedule, so those numbers will be changing soon anyway.</p>

<p>I’m just not seeing the logic of having that person jump through all those hurdles you suggest in the hopes of landing both a willing research mentor (rare for an undergrad anywhere) and some percentage of the funding through a competitive process. All that and more is already guaranteed him/her by simply going to another school.</p>

7

<p>

</p>

<p>Assuming?</p>

<p>It’s not like you can only get a $6,000 grant once. Most students who do research do it for more than one summer/during the year. I got it twice over the summer (both summers I had more than one offer as well), once for a project in the school year, and a small grant for conference travel (in total offered nearly $30,000). I’m not some prodigy.</p>

<p>And by “wider array of research fields,” you mean the contract colleges which have studies in agriculture and hotel management, right? :rolleyes: There’s a reason Stanford and every other top private school don’t offer those fields of study. They’re also irrelevant to the OP. By “greater variety of research,” I meant not only the breadth of study of fields, but the breadth within those fields, and depth within those. Cornell does not match Stanford in this respect.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Maybe that’s rare at Cornell, which has 2x the # undergrads as Stanford, but it’s not rare at Stanford at all. This “competitive process” at Stanford isn’t very competitive - it’s selective in that not everyone who applies automatically get it, but it’s not hard to get it.</p>

<p>I’m not seeing the logic of going to a school for premed in the hopes of getting medical experience when the med school is 4 hours away. That’s guaranteed for him/her by going to Stanford.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You’re also guaranteed large classes, isolation, terrible weather, worse housing, and less funding on the whole (esp. for things like student groups, new facilities, new dorms, etc.).</p>

<p>Sorry applejack, but after your last rampage on the Stanford forum, I have little patience for your Cornell fanboyism.</p>

8

<p>This isn’t fanboyism. If the OP were offered such a deal from another school I’d say go for it in a heartbeat. Only reason I chimed in was to counter your fanboy fanaticism from leading him/her astray. Advising a high school senior with a built in research mentor and large pot of money at a school ranked in the top 15 globally to throw it away and apply over and over for little pots of money in the hopes of winning some of it is a fool’s errand.</p>

<p>You seem to think it’s beneath other schools to teach people to do things where they get their hands dirty, but are you aware that Stanford has a whole school devoted to environmental studies, communications, biology, and business just like Cornell’s contract colleges? Are you aware that Yale and Harvard have forestry programs? Are you even aware that Cornell (and subsequently Stanford) was created to meld practical skills with liberal arts? </p>

<p>But, you know, I guess developing innovations and providing food to 7 billion and growing people or manage global hospitality businesses is for … lesser people? I honestly don’t get why you think you’re better than those people.</p>

<p>There’s no question that head-to-head Stanford comes out on top generally speaking. Fear not - your sense of superiority by association remains in tact. Yet you seem unwilling to ever see specific circumstances - be it a campus in New York City or a student with an awesome scholarship opportunity - where the slightly lesser prestigious school might prove to be the vastly better decision. </p>

<p>You were disproven in the past thread but perpetually moved the goalposts so you would never have to admit defeat to superior intellects from such a lowly institution. :slight_smile: Just know that it’s still okay to admit when your argument doesn’t stack up to other arguments. In all honesty, such modesty will only help you as you make your way in the world. No need to respond. I’m not going to endure your spin and twisting to salvage a point. The student has seen both sides and can decide at this point.</p>

9

<p>

</p>

<p>Yeah, tell that to the student body at Stanford as they walk away with grants in hand far in excess of what Cornell can afford. ;)</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Ag schools exist in public schools. Then there’s hotel management, labor relations, and human ecology. There’s a reason that top privates don’t teach these. In fact, U Nebraska-Lincoln was booted from the AAU because its research focuses too much on agriculture, where the research grants are not competitively distributed, but with a formula. Top universities consider agriculture “unprestigious.”</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Now you’re just grasping at straws and attacking. I said nothing about myself, only about the universities.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>There you go again, assuming that everyone’s out to get you and think you’re less intelligent. I’ve never implied that; that’s your insecurity speaking. And you’re still wrong about that past discussion, as was proven by the many articles and corroborated by [url=<a href=“http://www.stanforddaily.com/2012/01/30/stanford-officials-reflect-on-nyc-negotiations/]this[/url”>Stanford officials reflect on NYC proposal]this[/url</a>]. Game over, applejack ;)</p>