<p>for me, stanford no question. in terms of prestige for me, it goes harvard, then stanford, then yale, princeton, and MIT</p>
<p>Both are equally prestigious,but Columbia is in New York…</p>
<p>Stanford > Columbia</p>
<p>Stanford’s athletic teams used to known as the Indians. Isn’t it ironic that Columbus was actually looking for Indians when he made his voyages, lumbocia impeded though he was. Ewho would posit that he was actually trying to get into Stanford.</p>
<p>^Maybe, but I think the team name Stanford Indians was referring to actual Indians, not Native Americans. The mascot, if I recall correctly, was a Bollywood dancer.</p>
<p>
I am sure that he was trying to get into Columbia, or Lumbocia… because he could not get in Stanford.:)</p>
<p>This year, not so sure about Stanford REA, but there is nobody from Italy got in Yale through SCEA.</p>
<p>stanford remains more prestigious that columbia. however, it is important to note that this gap in prestige may very well be reducing and for good reason. </p>
<p>columbia has been around for a very long time (much longer than stanford). whats probably more interesting to discuss is why, in recent times stanford has eclipsed columbia and (all the non hyp ivies for that reason).</p>
<p>i think, this is because of the fact that in addition to exceptional engineering, business and law programs; stanford performed phenomenally during the time when US University ‘prestige’ was really being established in the mindset of people across the globe. </p>
<p>Furthermore, Columbia struggled a bit during the late 20th century. Probably because its fortunes really do vary like that of New York City. However, Columbia has had a great start to the 21st century. The administration has improved and is making great strides, a new campus is being built, the endowment and fund raising campaigns are doing well. And these things are resulting in things like rank 4 in USNews. </p>
<p>Whether people accept it or not, it will be hard to replace Harvard, Princeton, Yale as the Big Three in terms of prestige. MIT stil remains the greatest ‘tech’ school but not as holistic (realistically). Stanford is the premier ‘private’ school on the west coast but this singularity is also a major contributor to its prestige. Given Columbia’s potential, the fact that is the greatest school in New York City, and also that it was once on par with HYP and better in some regards (Columbia Law School at one point in time); in a matter of years I would see Columbia on the same level of prestige as Stanford.</p>
<p>Now weather Columbia is more popular than Stanford or not is a completely different question 
(i for one, having done summer school at Stanford but being a student at Columbia : loved California, but love NYC even more.!) :D</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This succinctly explains prestige, finally someone figured it out</p>
<p>As overall institutions, Columbia and Stanford aren’t too far away from one another. However, at the undergraduate level, Stanford is more prestigious and selective.</p>
<p>Nobody is “attacking” Columbia, which is a great school (as we all know). But the question was asked: Which is more prestigious, Columbia or Standford? It’s no slam at Columbia, but we all know the answer to that.</p>
<p>It’s that simple. It’s just the way it is.</p>
<p>^^
it can be really hard to sound the least bit convincing in your argument when you call stanford ‘standford’.
just serves to show that you know nothing more about the college than THE SOUND of its name; let alone how prestigious it is in comparison to other colleges</p>
<p>Selectivity alone does not determine prestige LDB. If that were the case, Brown, Caltech, Columbia and Dartmouth would actually be as prestigious as MIT and Stanford. They all have roughly identically talented and diverse student bodies, but MIT and Stanford seem to enjoy a slightly better, albeit negligible, reputational advantage.</p>
<p>The three factors that give Stanford a slight reptational edge over Columbia are some of the main criteria that determine prestige:</p>
<p>1) Faculty: Columbia’s faculty is amazing, Stanford’s is slightly better</p>
<p>2) Departmental excellence: Again, Columbia is amazing, but Stanford seems to edge Columbia in virtually every field of study except perhaps Medicine.</p>
<p>3) Endowment/Resources: Columbia is the 6th wealthiest university in the nation, with an endowment of $6.6 billion. Stanford is the third wealthiest university in the US with an endowment of $14 billion.</p>
<p>In all other ways, including selectivity, Columbia and Stanford are virtually identical.</p>
<p>Those are insignificant differences, which is why Stanford (or any university for that matter) is insignificantly more prestigious than Columbia. The difference in reputation is easily superceded by the difference in setting. When faced with those two modern pillars of education, choosing based on fit makes better sense.</p>
<p>Despite this discussion being resurrected from the dead, I think this (along with all these other pi$$ing contests) are exercises in futility.</p>
<p>Does it matter if someone thinks one school is more prestigious? I see each school having its strengths and weaknesses. Stanford is the premier school on the West Coast and Columbia is the premier school in NYC. Also,
I disagree. I think to an extent Stanford has eclipsed Yale. I remember seeing Yale’s concern about this in a couple of YDN stories, which basically voiced their concern about this. Just do a search if you are curious. </p>
<p>The school that is responsible for handing out Pulitzer prizes, duponts, and hosting world leaders every year, and has educated the President, past two US attorneys general, governors of NY, etc. is certainly not short on prestige…</p>
<p>IMO it’s Stanford. They’re both great schools and even though Columbia is an ivy, it’s not as well known as Stanford.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Stanford indeed had lower admit rates than Yale had in the past two years, but I feel those two schools are more friends than enemies as compared with the other HYPSM. Stanford’s main target is Harvard. It already said that they could receive 32000-34000 applications by the deadline: this means the admit rate is about 6.7%-7.2%. We will know how Harvard does in next few weeks.</p>
<p>
It’s interesting Alex that you neglected to mention Duke and Penn whose student bodies are the most closely comparable to Stanford.
<a href=“http://www.nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf[/url]”>http://www.nationalmerit.org/annual_report.pdf</a>
UPenn: 125
Stanford: 110
Duke: 105
Dartmouth: 72
Columbia: 73
Caltech: 42</p>
<p>At any rate, Stanford’s admission process is extremely holistic and it could assemble a class with just perfect SAT scorers and valedictorians but it chooses not to for the sake of assembling a diverse, interesting and talented class. Columbia, Dartmouth, Duke and Penn basically almost have that luxury but they are not quite there yet.</p>
<p>I agree that the student bodies at Duke and Penn (as well as Chicago, Cornell, JHU and Northwestern) resemble those at Brown and Columbia. However, I was also including acceptance rates (admittedly a useless metric) in my reasoning. By that reckoning, Chicago, Cornell, Duke, Johns Hopkins, Northwestern and Penn have slightly higher acceptance rates. Either way, none of those universities are as prestigious as Stanford for the three reasons I mentioned in my post above. Selectivity plays a part in determining prestige, but not as large a part as faculty strength, departmental rankings and endowment/resources.</p>
<p>Um…I’m pretty sure Columbia has no problem admitting a talented, diverse, and interesting class. I don’t think they suffer from a lack of applicants possessing those qualities to any degree below Stanford’s applicant pool. </p>
<p>These schools are both so prestigious I can’t believe this is even a question. Stanford is the undisputed king of prestige on the West Coast, while Columbia holds the same title for NYC and along with a handful of other schools (you know which ones) for the East Coast. It is interesting to note that Stanford doesn’t really have the same level of local competition (Yale and Princeton are within two hours) that Columbia does. Despite this, Columbia holds its own and admits a class that is no less talented than Stanford’s. </p>
<p>If you’re considering these schools, you should be considering other things beside prestige. Things like, “do I want sunny suburban California, or urban New York?” You should be thinking about if you prefer to stay on the east coast or west coast. Do you want to work in Silicon Valley, or on Wall Street? If you are admitted to either of these institutions, prestige should be the least of your concerns. Fit and future goals should be.</p>
<p>
Columbia locked 45% of class of 2015 through ED two weeks ago, and its last year’s overall yield was under 58%, where Stanford’s was under 72%, with EA. It would be interesting to see if Columbia changes its ED to EA. Last year, Stanford won 66% cross-admits over Princeton, and tied 50% with Yale.</p>
<p>Yes this only goes to the point I made. Stanford is one of, if not the only, private research institution of its kind on the entire West Coast. It’s much easier to get 72% yield when you’re in that position. The better scenario would be to place 5-8 other highly competitive private research institutions with similar prestige and history within a 300-mile radius of Stanford and see what that does to its yield. </p>
<p>I can take a train from Philly to Boston and in about five hours, I will pass by Penn, Princeton, Columbia, Yale, Brown, Harvard and MIT. All on the same train line.</p>