<p>So... Yale didn't work out... they can suck it.</p>
<p>Ok, I have to deliberate between these two amazing universities. Stanford and Harvard</p>
<p>Major: Journalism or Undecided... maybe some science
Background: So Cal since birth</p>
<p>Can anyone on this board give a candid explanation of their experience at Stanford? I would like to know of all the good and all the bad. What you expected and what actually happened.</p>
<p>May you also talk about some of the campus culture and some reasons for going to this amazing university?</p>
<p>I think this is a really broad topic for one poster to tackle. I will say what has happened at Stanford, in almost all respects, has exceeded my expectations. There are lots of reasons to come here. Reasons that are different from Harvard would be, in my opinion, Stanford’s campus culture (much more laid back, inviting, and more athletic opportunities- whether for watching or playing), its weather, its proximity to many different ecological environments, and its academics are top notch in almost all fields.</p>
<p>I know that these two schools are amazing academically and that prestige is essentially a null factor given that Stanford has been on the rise these last ~ 150 years.</p>
<p>However, I wonder if the undergraduate journalism/communications program at Stanford will limit me. I have heard that at places like Harvard and Medill that it’s a bigger deal.</p>
<p>Actually, pigs, lots of people do call Harvard “the Stanford of the East”, and only with the tip of their tongue in their cheeks. </p>
<p>They are both superb universities, needless to say. As a prospective undergraduate student, however, I think it behooves one to consider that Stanford is known for the excellence of both its undergraduate and graduate education. Harvard’s emphasis and priorities have long tipped pretty heavily toward graduate education, though they have been making concerted efforts to change both the reality and the perception in this regard.</p>
<p>Look at the charts. Give Stanford one more year, and it will pass Harvard, Note that the years were labeled incorrectly. It meant the past four years. Harvard’s admit rates were basically flat in the past two years.</p>
<p>Note Stanford’s high position on the list, and Harvard’s absence on the list. (Harvard’s history of prioritizing graduate education has been something of an achilles’ heel, but to its credit it is working on improving the quality and quantity of attention devoted to undergrads.)</p>
<p>in my opinion, the campus life at stanford is more enjoyable <em>for me</em>.
im not saying that will be true for everyone, but it appeals to me more. the culture of the campus allows more time for students to participate in other activities, go to social events, etc.
personally, i think the party scene at stanford is a little more lively, if that is what you want, but if it isnt what you want, you can certainly avoid it easily.</p>
<p>“Look at the charts. Give Stanford one more year, and it will pass Harvard,”</p>
<p>Be careful of the extrapolation of a trend. The same trend line says that in about three or four more years Stanford’s admission rate will hit zero.</p>
<p>I am always a little amazed at why people think the problem at these big-name schools is “prioritizing graduate education.” The duties towards undergraduates and graduate students are in general fundamentally different, except when undergraduates get into some specialized research early, assuming they get that into something specific early, in which case they just benefit from a lot of the same things as the graduate population does. What really is the specific complaint, I wonder – what is the real definition of “prioritizing graduate education” ?</p>
It could be close to zero, but never zero. This is a limit problem, not a high school algebra problem. You need Stanford’s math51 to understand it. :)</p>
<p>mathboy, the specific complaint over the years at Harvard has been about faculty members who seem to regard undergraduate teaching as an obligatory distraction from their research and grad-student mentoring. While no one would suggest that this attitude characterized all profs there, it has been a recurrent complaint among Harvard undergrads. (There have been recent concerted efforts to improve the situation, e.g., by having more small seminars for undergrads, but things like this take time to gain traction within a culture.) I agree that the missions of undergrad and grad educations are different; the issue has been that profs who undertake to teach undergrads (whether entirely by choice or otherwise) should do so enthusiastically, get to know their undergrads well, etc.</p>
<p>If you go to Harvard undergrad, you’ll have less of a chance to get into any of their grad schools than you will going to Stanford undergrad (?).</p>
<p>Harvard undergrad is an incredible opportunity… But so is Stanford. Had I been given the choice, I would choose Stanford in a heartbeat. From my experiences visiting both schools, Stanford was much more ‘fun and lively,’ while maintaining an intellectual atmosphere and a focus on the undergrad. Harvard had a certain ‘smugness’ about it I just didn’t like, and I’ve seldom seen any kind of significant research emerge from its undergrad. While it may be true that Harvard carries a stronger name, Harvard, Yale, Princeton Stanford… They’re pretty much all the same. They’re all in the same league, in the eyes of your peers or your future employers. Go to whichever school you feel is a better fit for YOU, whichever school has the programs you’re interested in or the professors you’d prefer to study under. I am sure that there are reasons you applied to both schools (apart from the prestige). Tally these reasons, weigh them, make a chart… And you’re good to go.</p>
<p>This is yet another misconception about Harvard.</p>
<p>From the Harvard Admissions Website FAQ: </p>
<p>“Our graduates enjoy an extraordinarily high rate of success receiving job offers and admission to graduate and professional schools. Resident tutors in each of the 12 Houses assist students applying to graduate schools and fellowship programs. In fact, Harvard is almost always the best-represented undergraduate institution at Harvard’s graduate schools.”</p>
<p>That may be correct. Hence the (?). But consider that the majority of Harvard undergraduate students are applying to one of Harvard’s graduate schools.</p>
<p>1) Harvard being the “best-represented undergraduate institution at Harvard’s graduate schools” can be attributed to a greater number of applicants from Harvard undergrad in comparison to those from peer institutions.</p>
<p>2) Because a great many students from Harvard’s graduating class choose to apply to Harvard’s grad schools, there is (presumably) much competition between them (and furthermore this is competition between the very best of the best). Many of Harvard’s undergrads may continue on to Harvard grad school, but many more will not. If you’re applying from one of Harvard’s peer institutions, for example Stanford, there are (presumably) less applicants from your school choosing to apply. Therefore there is less competition between you and your peers, and a greater chance of acceptance.</p>
<p>Now this assumes that the high school –> college model carries over into graduate school, so its accuracy is up for debate. But at least some of these aspects carry weight.</p>
oh well.</p>