<p>"BTW, if they admitted students with all 2300+, they would have 25% yield."</p>
<p>For class 2011, 50% of the students were from outside California. That means each state had on average of less than 20 students going to Stanford. Do you think that they could not find those 20 people with 2300+?</p>
<p>I think the difference in scores and top 10% students between Stanford and HYP can be largely attributed to aggressive athletic recruiting. The priorities are slightly different between S and HYP, but they're all equally amazing places to learn. And yes, they are equals (although two of those four schools clearly offer a greater undergraduate focus).</p>
<p>
[quote]
Here’s the most-recent admissions data for men’s basketball players for Stanford and Duke, provided by the NCAA. (It covers players whose eligiblity clocks ended just a few years ago.)</p>
<p>*** Duke
average high school grade-point: 3.13
average SAT: 968</p>
<p>*** Stanford
average high school grade point: 3.46
average SAT: 1123</p>
<p>The difference between 1123 and 968 on the SATs? Dozens and dozens of top-tier recruits every year.</p>
<p>Basically, Duke basketball and Stanford basketball are nothing alike, despite the first-rate academic reputations of both institutions.</p>
<p>Duke’s resources, admissions, tradition and talent pool are much greater than Stanford’s. </p>
<p>Maybe Dawkins and Bowlsby understand that. Maybe they don’t
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I'm sure the numbers for basketball and football are about equal. Baseball would probably be a little higher. The less prominent the sport -- the higher the SAT requirement. </p>
<p>I still don't think that the average SAT score for all the athletes combined is any greater than a 1350.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The less prominent the sport -- the higher the SAT requirement.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Duke Lacrosse averages could not possibly be higher than baseball. omg.</p>
<p>Duke Lacrosse isn't quite known to be smart, but instead very dumb (Duke Lacrosse Scandal)</p>
<p>A good illustration of how Stanford and Berkeley value standardized tests less than East Coast schools comes from their law schools. </p>
<p>Stanford is tied for rank 2, universally seen as a tier above Columbia, NYU and the University of Chicago, and dominates cross-admits. However, Stanford's LSAT median is only 170, with a 3.86 median GPA, while Columbia has 172, 3.7, NYU has 171, 3.71 and U of C has 171, 3.64.</p>
<p>Berkeley is rank 6, and seen as a tier above Northwestern, Duke and Georgetown (and with a much lower acceptance rate). However, its median LSAT is only 167, with a 3.79 GPA while Northwestern is 170, 3.7, Duke is 169, 3.74 and Georgetown's day program is 169, 3.66. </p>
<p>Stanford's focus on sports in undergrad exacerbates the reduced valuation.</p>
<p>In my experience Stanford is far more concerned than HYPM about its yield and its stats on cross-admits. That is one reason for its very high percentage of students from California. Conversely, applicants from areas that have not been good in the past in terms of accepting Stanford's offers of admission. arent getting many offers. There's less competition, and more happy alumni when they focus on the west coast market.</p>
<p>
Yeah, it has a good reputation, but it's not on par with HYP. At least, not anymore than schools like Penn, Columbia, Brown, Duke and Dartmouth are.
[quote=kyledavid80] 2) They aren't trying to claim to be better for undergrad. Everyone knows it's as good as HYP for undergrad.
Who is everyone? USNews? Schools like Brown, Dartmouth and Duke are more undergrad focused than Stanford is.
Maybe, but if not scores, then what else? College students sure don't care about faculty prowess, departmental ratings and facility quality. These are all secondary factors in comparison other aspects of an education like undergraduate focus, strength of student body, grants to study abroad/do research/service learning and grad school/job placement. In these areas, Stanford is not better than Columbia or Duke or whatever. If a difference does exist, it is negligible in comparison to the difference between Harvard and any other school in the world.
[quote=kyledavid80] 4) Even if scores did measure quality of undergrad, such an incremental difference between the two really isn't enough to draw conclusions. It's pretty insignificant.
Agreed! Stanford and Dartmouth and Duke have very similar student bodies.
So do many other schools. What's your point? There's no evidence to suggest that Harvard prefers high scorers anymore than Stanford does. You definitely can't come to this conclusion just because Stanford has more application essays. All you need is 1 or 2 writing samples to see evidence of a candidate's personality, creativity, interests, passion, etc. Having 4-5 essays/short response sections is just superfluous IMO.</p>
<p>
But does the current generation of American undergrads care about the best facilities and faculties? That is the question my friend. The vast majority of American undergrads don't have serious academic ambitions; most will enter the job market immediately following graduation and the large portion of the rest will apply to the three pre-professional grad schools(law, business, medicine). Your statement would be more in life if there is a sizeable number of students who aimed to become serious researchers or PhDs. That is simply not the case in America though.</p>
<p>So if one's goal is just to get a good job after graduation, does it matter if one goes to Stanford over schools like Penn, Columbia, Dartmouth and Duke? Probably not. The only exception in this case is Harvard. It is in a league all by itself. It just blows every other school out of the water when it comes to job recruitment. There are some companies like The Blackstone Group that ONLY recruit Harvard undergrads. Besides the obvious Harvard exception, a high school senior is better served choosing based on fit and geographical residential preferences post graduation when choosing between schools like Yale, Stanford, Columbia, Princeton, Duke, Dartmouth, Penn, Brown, etc.</p>
<p>Mia305, you have no idea how many people from California apply to Stanford. Ok. I admit that I can't speak for every single high school in every single county of California...but trust me, Stanford doesn't exercise regional bias in favor of the west coast kids - they simply get an uberload of applicants from the west coast.</p>
<p>rd31, you are correct. Let me state it again...Stanford recruits athletes. Smart ones, but athletes nonetheless. This is one of the biggest reasons that Stanford's SAT averages are lower, and the reason why some schools and their supporters ***** and moan about Stanford not belonging with the three perennial exemplars of academic excellence...</p>
<p>Which, to me, is fine. I like playing and watching sports, and I wouldn't trade my Stanford experience for anything. It's one aspect of college experience that HYP currently lack.</p>
<p>btw, Bacchanalia, you are poorly informed. Go apologize to kyle and ask him nicely and he will give you a lesson on 1.) how to correctly argue and substantiate your position - i.e. breaking down argument point by point and making it look legit doesn't mean it's a good rebuttal 2.) current state of affairs regarding Stanford and its place in the world.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Duke’s resources, admissions, tradition and talent pool are much greater than Stanford’s.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>That's a joke, right?</p>
<p>Bacchanalia:</p>
<p>You really don't want to do this.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Yeah, it has a good reputation, but it's not on par with HYP. At least, not anymore than schools like Penn, Columbia, Brown, Duke and Dartmouth are.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Reputation and prestige are, in and of themselves, very ephemeral things. Some people will tell you that X is more prestigious than Y, whereas others will say vice versa.</p>
<p>The only truly national universities--ones that are prestigious in every circle, in every region of the country--are Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford. There's so little disputing this, and so little point in doing so. Ask any average Joe on the streets what the other Ivies are and I bet you he'd say Harvard, Yale, Princeton, and Stanford. He would most likely leave out the other Ivies and include Stanford, which isn't even an Ivy. I've seen it tons of times.</p>
<p>I have lived in two parts of the country and stayed in many others. In the West, Stanford has immense prestige. I just got back from a vacation in North Carolina--and guess what? It's as prestigious there as it is here. I asked others.</p>
<p>That you say that Stanford's prestige is no better than Penn's, Brown's, etc. really demonstrates your knowledge of this subject.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Who is everyone? USNews? Schools like Brown, Dartmouth and Duke are more undergrad focused than Stanford is.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>"Everyone" is a vague hyperbole meant to say, "Find me one person who doesn't think this."</p>
<p>"More undergrad-focused"? What a noobish stance. If it were so easy to measure undergrad quality, it wouldn't be such a contentious topic. US News doesn't know how to do it. Neither does anyone else.</p>
<p>I can tell you this: the resources that Stanford offers its undergrads are matched only by--surprise surprise--Harvard, Yale, and Princeton. Why? Because it has the money to. As soon as you can substantiate exactly how Stanford's undergrad is not on par with those you listed, I'll start to take your claims seriously.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Maybe, but if not scores, then what else?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>As I said, it's highly contentious. Nobody knows exactly what measures undergrad. The general conclusion is that it varies from person to person. I don't think certain things matter while others do. To each his own.</p>
<p>
[quote]
College students sure don't care about faculty prowess, departmental ratings and facility quality. These are all secondary factors in comparison other aspects of an education like undergraduate focus, strength of student body, grants to study abroad/do research/service learning and grad school/job placement.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Speak for yourself on that, because I for one cared about all that. I gave up Harvard, Yale, and Princeton because it was comparatively weak in my intended majors of study. This wasn't based on rankings. It was my own evaluations of the course offerings, the faculty's scholarly interests and their accomplishments in certain areas, and the like. And guess what? All the things you just listed are basically the same for HYPS. There are differences with other schools, but the point is: different strokes for different folks. Not everyone is going to care about what you just said. (Many don't care about research--which, by the way, tends to come hand-in-hand with less "undergrad-focused" schools; many don't care about studying abroad; and so on.)</p>
<p>
[quote]
Agreed! Stanford and Dartmouth and Duke have very similar student bodies.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I wasn't saying any different. I would say that the student culture at each of these schools varies, simply because of the difference in selectivity, not measured only by SAT scores, as to be admitted depends much more on factors that are not quantifiable, like essays, ECs, awards, personal circumstances, etc.</p>
<p>
[quote]
What's your point? There's no evidence to suggest that Harvard prefers high scorers anymore than Stanford does.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Other than the fact that Harvard has higher average SAT scores? hahaha</p>
<p>
[quote]
You definitely can't come to this conclusion just because Stanford has more application essays.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I didn't.</p>
<p>
[quote]
All you need is 1 or 2 writing samples to see evidence of a candidate's personality, creativity, interests, passion, etc. Having 4-5 essays/short response sections is just superfluous IMO.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Oh, of course. That's why Stanford requires more essays--just so they can make their admissions staff work more, so they have to pay them more, so they have to process more documents which also costs money, etc. Really, where is your logic?</p>
<p>
[quote]
But does the current generation of American undergrads care about the best facilities and faculties?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Who cares about the whole generation? We're talking about the students at the top universities, not the whole fangled generation.</p>
<p>I for one care about the best facilities and faculties.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Your statement would be more in life if there is a sizeable number of students who aimed to become serious researchers or PhDs. That is simply not the case in America though.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Er, that's true at the top universities. And if you read real closely, you'd see Alexandre said, "top universities don't need to convince anybody of anything. They have the best resources, the best facilities and the best faculties."</p>
<p>
[quote]
The only exception in this case is Harvard. It is in a league all by itself.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Ah. Now I see clearly where you stand.</p>
<p>Wait, i really did not totally read what is happening on this thread but has it turned into Stanford vs Duke. </p>
<p>This is international and US perspective( i have lived in four countries). In three of those countries, no one knew what Duke was... and even if they did , they rarely regarded its academics highly. Stanford, on the other hand, had a solid 'Ivyish' reputation everywhere. While its prestige is not comparable to that of Harvard's, it easily wins out against Duke, IMO. </p>
<p>I have always said.. the difference between 'academics' between a top ranked and a college ranked maybe 15th may not be extremely huge. The same cannot be said for prestige. I agree with one of the above posters when he/she said that Harvard stands on a league of its own ..only with prestige though.</p>
<p>Bacchanalia</p>
<p>1) Tell me what the Blackstone group does.</p>
<p>2)Tell me why my friends at Wharton say they recruits there (perhaps more heavily than they do at H), and also why a kid at UC Berkeley in c/o 07' got a job there.
Career</a> Center - What Can I Do With a Major In...?</p>
<p>3) To quote Young Jeezy, Please stop "actin like you know mayne"</p>
<p>Bottom line- your post is misleading. BX does not only recruit at Harvard.</p>
<p>Bacchanalia:</p>
<p>Obviously you have a stage of mind from yestyear. Check Harvard's website you will find that more than 1/3 job seeking graduates this year do not have any offers and the ones with offers have an average of $45000.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Wait, i really did not totally read what is happening on this thread but has it turned into Stanford vs Duke.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I was wondering how that happened, too...</p>
<p>
[quote]
"Bottom line- your post is misleading."
[/quote]
</p>
<p>To quote Young Jeezy again: "That's riiiiiiiiiiiiiiiight"</p>
<p>Stanford>Duke, but they are still both excellent schoools. By the way, this is such a pointless post and as much as it pains me to say it go and consult U.S News. People will always have their opinions as will you, which does not make it right or wrong.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Stanford>Duke, but they are still both excellent schoools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Stanford>a ton of schools, but who the hell cares? Using USNEWS to create minute perceived rankings differences is bullcrap. Going to pretty much any top 25 school will get you a good education. Sure the atmospheres at Duke and Stanford are different, but will you really get a better education at Stanford? Probably not, and after all, this is what you go to school for.</p>
<p>Why is it that we always end up discussing Duke VS. another school?</p>
<p>No need to make this into a Stanford vs Duke contest. Who cares? Both are excellent with Stanford a near unanimous choice as among America's most elite and prestigious colleges and Duke likely a consensus choice. </p>
<p>Prestige-whores can argue away and you’ll never agree, but IMO the more important point about Stanford and Duke vs their most elite college competitors is the nature of the undergraduate experience that they offer. Stanford and Duke are the two premier colleges in the USA for top academics, excellent social life, and active and nationally relevant athletic life.</p>
<p>^exactly...</p>
<p>word up...</p>