<p>The thread is pretty self-explanatory. While they're fairly different schools, and I haven't visited either, I was wondering what other CCer's take was on the two.</p>
<p>If the thread already exists, forgive me for posting this again unnecessarily... kindly link me to the other?</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>There's your answer.</p>
<p>They're very, very different. My history teacher in high school has experience being in both campuses -- Princeton undergraduate, for one thing. She did not like Princeton at all, but seemed to have positive things to say about Stanford. </p>
<p>Though that's just one person, but just saying that you should probably be more specific about what you want to get out of college, goals, etc, before people can advise you. It depends heavily on the individual -- for some, one school just works way, way better.</p>
<p>Ever since Princeton ended its Early Decision program, it has been revealed to be nothing but a "paper tiger." Stanford (and Harvard and Yale) look forward to eating its lunch in cross-admit battles. To show how far Princeton has declined, its yield rate has now been surpassed by that of Penn.</p>
<p>^ I would question that, since many who apply to Princeton don't apply to Harvard and Yale because of the differences in environment. Princeton and Stanford appear to be common for co-applicants and then it breaks to an east-west coast thing, difference in environment type and fit (Palo Alto and Princeton are more similar than different as towns, except for the seasons and architecture), and the type of curriculum and academic opportunities presented. Princeton has more of a village feel, and Pal Alto more suburban, but both are quite a bit different than H and Y and some just don't like the H and Y feel or undergraduate focus or lack thereof.</p>
<p>Princeton is a little more self-selecting, in my opinion.</p>
<p>You can pinpoint the people who fit "The Princeton Mold" a little more easier than "The Harvard Mold" or whatever, in my opinion.</p>
<p>And I don't think Quakerville has surpassed its yield rate. Princeton's still 73%ish, no? And I'm sure it does mediocre head to head with Princeton.</p>
<p>if i were you i would pick princeton just for the reputation</p>
<p>Princeton's yield rate is nowhere near 73%. That's an artifact of the days when it had 1,000 students per class and selected half of its class ED. It had a yield of about 50% on its RD admissions then (which is very high, by the way -- only Harvard and Yale do meaningfully better). When it expanded its entering class, the yield declined somewhat to about 67% overall. Last year, without any early decision program, its yield was about 61%. Stanford (with nonbinding EA) was around 70%.</p>
<p>^
Ah. I blame the Princeton Review, then. </p>
<p>But that's fairly surprising.</p>
<p>
[quote]
You can pinpoint the people who fit "The Princeton Mold" a little more easier than "The Harvard Mold" or whatever, in my opinion.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm curious, having not applied to these schools (Princeton, Harvard) ever, or having researched anything but their math departments -- what is the "Princeton mold" as opposed to the "Harvard mold"?</p>
<p>if i were you i would pick princeton just for the reputation </p>
<p>Are you saying Stanford is not as prestigious as Princeton?
In my opinion I think Stanford is on par with Princeton or even more prestigious and people all around Asia know Stanford.
I think Princeton might have that kind of old-amazing feel while Stanford has that kind of new school feeling but really Stanford has done so much for the community in the past few years and that's going to give its reputation a huge boost.</p>
<p>It's just kind of a certain feel you get after experiencing the campus and the people and whatnot; it's just much easier to get a sense of what it is at Princeton than at Harvard, in my opinion.</p>
<p>There's nothing wrong with it either way.</p>
<p>If you'll allow me to make a sports reference, look at Duke and North Carolina in college basketball.</p>
<p>Both are excellent, excellent programs, but you just know that there are certain players who could have only played for Duke for a number of reasons that are kind of difficult to put into words. North Carolina is not quite as easy that way. Both still have some of the best players in the country, though.</p>
<p>In most Asian communities, I think Stanford has a slight edge actually. Why? The huge bias towards engineering in Asian communities, coupled with where Stanford engineering stands.</p>
<p>I think maybe in earlier times, Princeton and Harvard might have been a notch higher on the prestige level. Doesn't seem to be the case at all anymore.</p>
<p>Amadeuic -- I guess that explains why I don't know, I've never been to the Princeton or Harvard campuses. I always keep hearing how Princeton has a gorgeous campus though.</p>
<p>Everything about Princeton seems too prestine. I dunno how to explain it exactly. Like, for example, look at the names for a lot of things at Princeton. First there's "Princeton," then other things like "Blair Hall," "Evelyn College," etc. They all sound elegant, refined, royal, etc and this extends I feel into many other aspects of the university. The same thing I feel can be said of the campus. It's beautiful yes, but it feels too quaint, too quintissential. Like, picture walking into an antique porcelain shop or a museum. Everything is beautiful but you can't touch or disturb it in anyway, you just have to sit back and enjoy the beauty as a non-interacting observer.
Furthermore, this sense that I'm trying to describe to you guys is carried out in many other ways by the university as well, and this is just in a bunch of random ways. Like how they don't have any professional schools or how they don't accept transfer applications, the eating clubs, the fact that everyone has to do a senior thesis, etc. I suppose "elitist" sort of describes it, but not really exactly because Harvard/Yale have also been accused of being elitist but I got a much different vibe at their respective campuses (I have been to all 3 of HYP). I dunno, it's like Princeton tries too hard to be perfect. It's like "we won't have transfers because it taints the pureness of our student body" or "we don't have professional schools because training for specific professions is too bourgeoisie for us. We're too refined and classy for anything other than "pure degrees."
So overall, when I visited Princeton, everything was telling me that I <em>should</em> love the place, that it's the ideal college environment that everyone should adore (I still feel like I should like Princeton. I go online sometimes and look at the campus, read up on the school and it seems great, but not really). And I think that's why I couldn't like it. It was because of this sort of "elitist" sense I got. Now, as I've said before, "elitist" doesn't exactly characterize the feeling I got of the place. It just tried too hard to be perfect, ornate, polished, etc and it had the opposite effect on me. Another analogy is like the stepford wives. They all seem perfect but underneath you just get that feeling that something is just not right.</p>
<p>^dude, that is EXACTLY how i felt when i visited princeton. it was just ...too... neat. and not the "cool" neat haha. </p>
<p>but yeah visit both schools. they are SO unbelievably different.</p>
<p>Hm, interesting post Hippo. Sounds like the kind of place I would still consider for graduate school, though. I had different reasons for not applying for the undergraduate programs. </p>
<p>There are, I guess, people built to be at Princeton. This is probably why my history teacher from high school hated Princeton as an undergraduate. She very much is not the kind of person I see in the picture you painted.</p>
<p>I actually think Princeton and Stanford are something of a pair. They are both quintessentially suburban campuses, spacious and pretty, and completely separate from anything that isn't "campus". I like the looks of Princeton much more than those of Stanford. Stanford feels too much like a golf course to me: the buildings are mainly physically far apart, with sweeping lawns leading up to them. Everything is color-coordinated and landscape-architected, designed to be appreciated from a distance. Princeton has more nooks and crannies, and more sensless variety, and sensational flower gardens that don't pretend to be anything other than decorations to make you feel happy. The other difference is that at Princeton the town is across the street, and at Stanford the town is half a mile away through an artificial eucalyptus forest, and behind the campus there are barren, gorgeous foothills with grazing cattle, a huge satellite dish, and a hidden linear accelerator.</p>
<p>I'm not certain that only some types of people are "built to be at Princeton". In my generation, I have a number of Princeton friends, all of whom loved it. Most are square-jawed preppies in the classic Princeton stereotype who were in Ivy or Tiger, but one is a completely funny-looking, walleyed left-wing activist who wouldn't have entered an eating club with a police escort, and whose family were completely non-wealthy immigrants. Nevertheless, I think it's true that there's less feeling of a dominant type at Stanford (although compared to rival Cal it has always had way more than its share of the California version of the square-jawed preppies).</p>
<p>I was mostly looking for environmental, "overall feel" comparisons, which a lot of you answered in this way - so thank you. It really is helpful. </p>
<p>When it comes to academics, I am considering majoring in physics but with either a medical or business application (so taking classes that would gear in either direction). I can't decide if I want to go to med school and thus fulfill the pre-med requirements or rather to apply physics to an economic/finance perspective. </p>
<p>As to what kind of person I am, I like a lot of action, always having things happening, the whole big-city ordeal. While both Princeton and Stanford don't have college towns, they're close in proximity (relatively) to NYC and San Fran. While I have a real soft-spot for old new england architecture, I am highly influenced by the weather. I think that's something I have to visit and figure out. </p>
<p>For those who have visited (many of you have already commented, thanks), is it stereotypical that Princeton students are stuffy/snobby and Stanford kids are laid back? Of course not everyone fits into this stereotype, but I wonder about the norm I guess. </p>
<p>Any comments on those things would be very appreciated :)</p>
<p>^stanford intro. Watch the other videos as well</p>
<p>^Princeton intro. Watch the other videos as well</p>
<p>Students at Stanford say they are laid-back but hardworking while students at Princeton say many are very serious and uptight. You decide.</p>
<p>^Lol ScaredAsHell, you linked to Stanford twice.</p>