Stanford's undergrad program. is it good?

<p>Wow, mathboy98, you seem to know everything about everything. You seem to be an expert on every facet of Stanford, yet you have never attended Stanford.</p>

<p>You claim to know how Stanford chooses its professors. Where did you gain this knowledge?</p>

<p>You claim that undergraduates would not be able to appreciate the level of work of a school’s faculty or graduate students. Where did you gain this knowledge? Do you speak for all undergraduates or just most undergraduates?</p>

<p>You claim that Stanford (and Caltech) are not the most “teaching-focused place”. Where did you obtain this information? My son is actually a student at Stanford and he would completely disagree with you about Stanford. I don’t know about Caltech.</p>

<p>You arrogantly lecture a poster on what is needed to do research at a graduate level as though you are an authority. Yet, you have never done research at a graduate level. How do you know what is needed to do graduate research? </p>

<p>These are examples of why I believe the CC discussion board should be viewed as mindless entertainment and nothing more. The problem is that some posters portray themselves as an authority on everything. Yet, their main source of information is reading other CC posts so you get nothing but recycled CC posts. No first hand information. There is always the risk of “garbage in- garbage out” posts. </p>

<p>Some of the discussion board may be from posters with true knowledge of what they speak, but it is difficult to tell who knows what they are talking about and posters who are simply doing nothing more than constantly recycling previous CC posts.</p>

<p>@ OP: If you are looking for a school that is undergraduate-focused, I would strongly suggest researching Rice University. In my opinion, it is undergraduate focused because it lacks many grad programs that other schools have, such as law, theology, government, and medicine and it is small. In terms of the academics, quality of life, happiness of students, activities, and architecture, I feel that Rice is a mini-version of Stanford. Rice and Stanford are quite similar, although Rice is a lot smaller than Stanford.</p>

<p>I still greatly respect Stanford, as it was my number one choice. You will definitely get a great education there. Although I don’t know how undergraduate focused Stanford is, I do know Rice is undergraduate-focused and you should look into applying to Rice.</p>

<p>Let’s try to calm down.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>We never know who anyone is on these boards and sometimes our posts get misinterpreted or deliberately misconstrued. But I have gained enough insights from people who are sincere and who want to help and who have something to contribute that I keep coming back. As for my own posts, I have experienced enough instances of people appreciating what I had to say that I keep posting. It’s good to always remember that we never know who someone is who is posting.</p>

<p>As for the original topic, I find it somewhat shocking that anyone would say that the undergraduate education at Stanford is anything less than first rate and I find it equally shocking that anyone would listen to them.</p>

<p>I NEVER SAID IT WASN’T FIRST RATE. STANFORD UNDERGRAD IS VERY GOOD. PEOPLE JUST MISINTERPRETED WHAT I MEANT. THIS IS WHAT I MEANT, WHICH IS WHAT I RESTATED ABOVE. I’m not an conceited jerk who thinks stanford’s too good for them. Of course I respect the school. It’s just that I badly worded the question. I even clarified above. </p>

<p>"To clear things up for any who misunderstood my question as arrogance. I know Stanford has a good undergrad program, but what I meant to ask was how is it compared to others. I should have worded my question differently. I meant to ask, what is the stanford undergrad program like compared to other schools? I’m sorry if I came off as arrogant jerk , but that was unintentional. "</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Yale is less focused on undergrads than Stanford?</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I didn’t mean you when I said this snowy435. You said that you heard that Stanford’s undergraduate program isn’t that good, I know that you didn’t say it. I’m saying I don’t know why anyone would have said that to you and I don’t know why you listened to them. I never thought you came across as arrogant. I’m sorry that my post sounded like it was slighting you, that isn’t what I intended.</p>

<p>thanks:) Pea. It’s just that others with their sarcasm made me feel like they misunderstood me.</p>

<p>Cardfan, I’m sorry you find my posts offensive, but that is your problem. I didn’t say anything wrong about the teaching-focus at Stanford or Caltech, just that there are places which are more pointedly teaching-focused schools. Professors at a research university, as opposed to a small LAC, tend to be chosen as researchers. That isn’t to say their teaching abilities aren’t taken into account at all, or that there are not fantastic teachers, or that there aren’t small classes. It’s not a secret, but it’s something I learned more clearly after attending a big research university, and having considered smaller schools too. What I state about research at the graduate level comes from the words of professors who are leading authorities in their field, and if you message me privately, I can give you some names.</p>

<p>And I clearly always prefaced my statements with “most” and never “all” so I have made absolutely no outlandish claims. I think it is very realistic, good advice, given to me from faculty that while an undergraduate can engage in very stimulating study, lots of time and transitioning is necessary for one to be able to think at the level of top faculty at a research university, and realistically benefit from them in a way that one couldn’t benefit from lesser known faculty. However, as I stated, top faculty can be great sources of good letters of recommendation, and it’s also great to watch them work from the sidelines. </p>

<p>I agree with Pea. It is shocking that anyone suggested that a well-known undergraduate program isn’t good, but most likely that was a mindless statement, derived from someone who has seen more teaching-focused schools, and doesn’t see the benefits of attending a bigger research school.</p>

<p>Snowy isn’t at fault, and nobody on this thread has said anything derogatory about any school from what I can tell, and I’ve seen some good advice given to the OP. No need to bash uniformly on all CC posters when many have given both me and others great insight.</p>

<p>@cardfan: I understand your sentiments, but you are taking out your anger on the wrong person. From the posts I’ve seen Mathboy is a sincere, non-authoritative-assuming poster.</p>

<p>If you really want true undergrad attention then I suggest you take what other people have said and go to an LAC school or schools with a small undergrad+grad student population (like Caltech and Rice university).</p>