Stanford vs. Harvard

Colleges and Universities A-Z Stanford University
61

<p>I find it really funny how the thread evolved into a math/science/computer based one!</p>

<p>I really think that at this quality of academic caliber, what's most important is the environment at each school. All of those little individual factors which cause a student to succeed. The differences in the qualities of the departments in each respective university are honestly SO tiny that they become almost insignificant.</p>

<p>It is all those other factors which contribute to student happiness and "fit" which will ultimately cause success within the academic setting of each school and otherwise.</p>

62

<p>I think strength of the individual departments is very very important. Generally speaking, if you would want to be a good economist, you should go to a good economics department; If you want to be a good engineer, you would want to go to a good engineering school. I see nothing wrong wwith that.</p>

63

<p>There definitely isn't anything wrong with that, but one could argue that the differences in quality are very small when comparing Stanford v Harvard.</p>

64

<p>
[QUOTE]
The curve in this series is insane thanks to nutty pre-meds (which, freshman year, is like, half of your 2010 class).

[/QUOTE]

I agree viva as long as the major isn't engineering (where Stanford clearly beats Harvard)</p>

65

<p>The differences in departments DO matter according to some of my relatives (who are grad students). The more well known the faculty is in their field the more weight their rec letters count towards getting you into grad school.
From what i've heard a 3.8 and good GRE scores aren't gonna get you in anywhere by themselves.</p>

<p>(granted not everyone wants to worry about grad school yet but for those who do this may be helpful)</p>

66

<p>man, this argument has been going on for forever...</p>

<p>harvard is better...</p>

67

<p>
[quote]
I think strength of the individual departments is very very important. Generally speaking, if you would want to be a good economist, you should go to a good economics department; If you want to be a good engineer, you would want to go to a good engineering school. I see nothing wrong wwith that.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>The problem with that is that most people will end up in jobs that have little to do with their undergrad major. Let's face it. Most history majors will not become professional historians. Most poli-sci majors will not become professional political scientists. So who really cares if you were educated by a top-ranked department in your particular major, if you end up not pursuing a career in that major anyway? </p>

<p>CNN once estimated that the average American will change careers about 3 times in their lifetime. No, not change jobs or change employers, but change * entire careers *. Hence, it is likely that sometime in your life, you will end up in a career that has nothing to do with what you majored in as an undergrad.</p>

68

<p>
[quote]
The differences in departments DO matter according to some of my relatives (who are grad students). The more well known the faculty is in their field the more weight their rec letters count towards getting you into grad school.
From what i've heard a 3.8 and good GRE scores aren't gonna get you in anywhere by themselves.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>This applies mostly to people getting PhD's. Yet the fact is, the vast majority of people will never get a PhD. After all, most people will decide not to even go to a PhD program. And even of those that do, something like half of all incoming PhD students will not actually finish the PhD, because of attrition. </p>

<p>Furthermore, even if you do get a PhD, the truth is (sadly) a lot of them will end up in careers that have nothing to do with what they got their PhD in. For example, I have heard of people getting non-econ/business PhD's at top schools, and then end up becoming management consultants. I know a guy who got a PhD in Political Science, and then ended up becoming an IT guy (basically, maintaining computer networks and servers for companies).</p>

69

<p>
[quote]
I don't know that BBN invented a 'single-protocal' internet router. Mind telling us who invented this and give us a link? BBN might have claimed inventing other stuff, not many people buy their story though.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Well, let me ask you logically. How did the Arpanet even work, if routers had not been invented yet? </p>

<p>Yeager first started working on his 'router' in 1980. Yet the Arpanet had been up and running since 1969. So what happened in that decade-long span? How was the Arpanet even running during that time, if routers hadn't even been invented ? Are you claiming that the Arpanet was all bridged? </p>

<p>"You're credited with developing the first router while you were a staff researcher at Stanford. Tell us the tale.</p>

<p>This project started for me in January of 1980, "</p>

<p><a href="http://www.networkworld.com/supp/2006/anniversary/032706-routerman.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.networkworld.com/supp/2006/anniversary/032706-routerman.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>Since BBN was the contractor in charge of bringing the Arpanet online, what else could that have meant, except that they must have implemented routing? How else did they bring the Arpanet up? </p>

<p>
[quote]
I don't know much about the history of venture capital industry. Just one question for you: in history, Harvard people were able to provide money, MIT were able to invent lots of things, how come Silicon Valley is still better than Boston in technology

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Combination of a number of things, chiefly better weather and a more free-flowing business environment.</p>

<p>But that's not what we are talking about. We are comparing Stanford vs. Harvard, not Silicon Valley vs. Boston. After all, people are free to move, and many do. Plenty of Harvard grads move to Silicon Valley after graduation. </p>

<p>I'll put it to you this way. Consider law schools. The top 3 law schools are generally held to be Yale, Harvard, and Stanford. Yet the fact is, relatively few of their newly minted lawyers actually stay to work in New Haven, Cambridge, or Palo Alto. New Yale and Harvard Law grads tend to move to New York. New Stanford Law grads tend to move to San Francisco, or sometimes Los Angeles. One might ask what is 'wrong' with New Haven, Cambridge, and Palo Alto such that their new stud law grads can't stay? Why is San Francisco/LA so much better than Palo Alto? Why is New York more inviting than New Haven? But I find that logic to be irrelevant. I think most people understand that you just go to a school to get the education, and then you will move to wherever you need to advance your career. It's just a temporary part of your life. </p>

<p>As I have demonstrated, the Silicon Valley VC community is teeming with Harvard grads, especially HBS MBA's. That's no different from how the New York law community is teeming with Harvard Law grads.</p>

70

<p>Does it really matter which is "better"? No matter what, you're gonna get a damn good education, as long as you take advantage of what it has to offer.</p>

<p>For the record, I don't think either is better than the other.</p>

<p>In other words, this topic and all ensuing debate are pointless.</p>

71

<p>Kyledavid80, if you think this topic and debate are pointless, then don't participate. But let other people who want to participate in the topic be allowed to do so.</p>

72

<p>Actually what would be interesting to see, and I never do, is which departments are better at one school or another. Or what the slant of different departments are. (Back when I went to Harvard for example, a good portion of the history dept was into Marxist interpretation while the Art History department was full of conservatives interested in connoisseurship.) I have no idea if they are still like that.</p>

73

<p>Kyle is just trying to help. And he's right - both educations are comparable, to the point where there is no consequential difference between the two. When it comes down to choosing between two schools like these, VISIT! =)</p>

<p>Oh yea.. if you're crazy enough to get to make this choice, you should be smart enough to choose on your own too..</p>

74

<p>
[quote]
Kyle is just trying to help

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I simply find it ironic that a guy would choose to post on a topic that, by his own admission, he thinks is pointless. If you really think a topic is pointless, then why would you waste your time participating in it in the first place?</p>

75

<p>Yea he's being stupid by putting the whole thing down. But I think he has the genuine point of both educations being comparable. But whatever lol.</p>

76

<p>sakky,</p>

<p>You missed datalook's point. That's why realtors always say "location, location, location". The techies from Comp.Sci/Engineer in Stanford and Berkerley are major driving forces of silicon valley.</p>

77

<p>
[quote]
You missed datalook's point. That's why realtors always say "location, location, location". The techies from Comp.Sci/Engineer in Stanford and Berkerley are major driving forces of silicon valley.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>No, I got his point. I understand that Silicon Valley is a better place to be an entrepreneur than Boston or any other place in the world. </p>

<p>But where the analysis breaks down is that recruiting is less about 'location' than it is about 'network'. In the case of real estate, a house in Palo Alto has no connection to a house in Cambridge, Mass, or a house in New Haven or anywhere else. But individuals are connected through their network, and people, unlike housing, can move. And the truth of the matter is, areas like Silicon Valley venture capital have been and still is largely run by Harvard graduates. It is therefore quite common for people to attend Harvard and then move to the Bay Area. I know people who are from the Bay Area who went to Harvard for school and then came right back after graduation. I don't find that particularly surprising. Most Yale grads don't stay in New Haven. Most Princeton grads don't stay in Princeton, NJ. I see nothing unusual about going to a school to get the education and the degree, and then move to where you really want to work.</p>

78

<p>"And the truth of the matter is, areas like Silicon Valley venture capital have been and still is largely run by Harvard graduates."</p>

<p>Sakky, your post is largely on-target IMO. Only two minor objections: (1) Although there are many successful venture capitalists in Silicon Valley who were Harvard undergrads or business students, the above quote is a big exaggeration. (2) In terms of where to settle, it's true that people can move anywhere they want. Having said that, there is a significant amount of intertia -- i.e. people are far more likely to stay where they've met friends, gotten job opportunities, met their spouse who is tied down by a job, etc. For those reasons among others, students in Boston are proportionately more likely to stay in Boston, students in NorCal are more likely to stay there, etc. Like you, I know many Harvard grads who moved to the Bay Area after graduation -- although many of them were originally from the Bay Area (as in the example you gave)...</p>

79

<p>Ahh, this thread is so biased.... but that's okay. =P</p>

<p>How about for Social Science majors? Stanford may be a hub for up-and-coming tech entrepreneurs, but I'm looking for internships in economics (business?), politics, journalism, etc...</p>

<p>Also, how's the advising and the culture at Stanford? I know Harvard has a reputation for leaving students to their own, and Yale has the culture of advising a lot... how's Stanford?</p>

80

<p>Although I have no personal experience in terms of politics and journalism, I can assure you that the SF Bay Area is a hub of these two things. Not only that, but you have the opportunity to work with politicians at the congressional and state level. Stanford also has an excellent Stanford in Washington program.</p>

<p>Econ? Stanford has a great econ program as well, so I've heard, but I don't really have any details on that. Perhaps you can check out each school's departmental websites for the subjects that you have mentioned. Compare and contrast from the primary source where there will (hopefully) be a considerably less biased view. :)</p>