<p>Stanford was the seed of Silicon Valley and the high-tech industry.</p>
<p>Columbia is responsible for ???</p>
<p>^ JennieW prefers to think of Stanford as “a new rich guy with the help of high tech location” - a result of SV rather than the other way around.</p>
<p>Before the thread dies, I wanted to add that plenty of “prestige” surveys have been done before that disprove JennieW. Prestige among college administrators? From US News, Stanford’s [peer</a> assessment](<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/981523-usnews-2011-new-methodology-stanfords-strange-result.html]peer”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/981523-usnews-2011-new-methodology-stanfords-strange-result.html) score is 4.9, while Columbia’s is 4.6. Prestige among high school counselors? Stanford 4.9, Columbia 4.8. Prestige among the [general</a> public](<a href=“Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public”>Harvard Number One University in Eyes of Public)? Stanford is second only to Harvard there, with 11% of the total; Columbia, just 1% on par with schools like Georgetown and Purdue. How about prestige among college graduates? Gallup found Stanford and Harvard were about equal, with 27% and 29% of the vote respectively. Or what about prestige among high school seniors? For a few years now, Princeton Review has found in surveys of 12,000+ students that Stanford is continually the most popular “dream college.” Prestige among parents? Stanford typically comes in #1 or #2 most popular “dream college” there. Maybe you prefer an [international</a> survey](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/reputation-rankings.html]international”>http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/world-university-rankings/2010-2011/reputation-rankings.html)? Stanford’s in the top 5, Columbia in the top 25. Or perhaps a global measure of the [brand</a> power](<a href=“http://www.worldbrandlab.com/world/2009/top500_3.htm]brand”>2009年《世界品牌500强》排行榜-世界品牌实验室独家编制)? Stanford came in third for universities, behind Harvard and MIT, at #44; Columbia, #335. Or you can [url=<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/713531-rankings-undergraduate-universities-prestige.html]ask”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/713531-rankings-undergraduate-universities-prestige.html]ask</a> CC<a href=“notice%20that%20Columbia%20is%20always%20placed%20below%20Stanford”>/url</a>.</p>
<p>So pretty much any way you slice it, Stanford comes out far ahead of Columbia in prestige. Apparently all those Nobels aren’t enough to elevate Columbia above schools like Michigan State in the public’s eyes. ;)</p>
<p>edit: by the way the thread I linked to above regarding PA scores might help to answer the OP’s question. As you can see there, one poster caught an error in US News data, which penalized Stanford - it should have gotten a 98 in the PA+counselor scores (which is the same for MIT/Harvard), but instead was given a 93, equal to Columbia which had lower scores in both. A long debate ensued over this, and the issue is unclear, but if this is the case, it’d explain why Stanford fell behind Columbia - these peer scores make up 25% of the ranking, IIRC.</p>
<p>^^^^and if JennieW wants to look at Nobel Prize winners then she should look at Rhodes and Marshall Scholars, which are a better measure of what the winner accomplished during his/her undergraduate years at Stanford or Columbia.</p>
<p>Schools that Produced the Most Rhodes Scholars Since 2000</p>
<p>Harvard 38
Yale 26
Stanford 18
Westpoint 17
UChicago 15
Princeton 15
Duke 13
Naval Academy 12
MIT 11
Washington University (St. Louis) 8
Columbia 7
Brown 7
Air Force Academy 5
Dartmouth 5
Swarthmore 5
Georgetown 4
Wake Forest 4
Virginia 4
Cornell 3
Northwestern 3
Emory 3
Williams 3
Amherst 3
UCLA 3
Penn 2
Berkeley 2
Caltech 2
Johns Hopkins 2
Rice 2
Carnegie Mellon 2</p>
<hr>
<p>Marshall Scholars Since Founding of Award in 1954</p>
<p>238–Harvard </p>
<p>124—Princeton </p>
<p>107–Yale </p>
<p>83----Stanford </p>
<p>59----MIT</p>
<p>45----Brown</p>
<p>34----U.S. Military Academy
31----Cornell</p>
<p>28----Berkeley, Columbia
26----Dartmouth
25----U.S. Naval Academy
24----Duke
23----Tulane
22----Rice, U. of Illinois, U. of Texas
20----U. of Chicago</p>
<p>@sking2010</p>
<p>Quite correct; As a member of the Pac-10 conference, Stanford fields much better athletic teams than any of the schools in the Ivy League, which is mediocre as far as athletic conferences go. </p>
<p>Because, you know, the Ivy League is an athletic conference.</p>
<p>I’d like to add in my two cents here. I’m a Columbia 2016’er and even though I’m still starry-eyed about the whole college experience, I don’t doubt the fact that Stanford is more popular in the world. It’s California, technology, pretty students, and sunshine. It holds a much bigger place in the media, so OF COURSE it’s going to be more popular and more of a “dream school.” However, it upsets me that people are trying to make it seem more prestigious/better (not more popular) than Columbia according to Nobel laureates, Olympic athletes, and SAT scores. These schools are so much more than that. They each have their own specialties and they are both fantastic, Ivy or not.</p>
<p>Now you may call me biased for saying this, but I believe that Columbia deserves to be grouped in the top tier with HYPSM rather than viewed as inferior thanks to name recognition and subjective world rankings. It gives a quality education and has fostered some of the greatest minds, making it just as prestigious as HYPSM. A poster above questioned what Columbia has given us. Columbia is the birthplace of modern genetics, Columbia helped develop the atomic bomb and the laser, and Columbia has produced some of the most influential artists, being at the heart of the Harlem Renaissance and the origin of the Beat movement (Rodgers and Hammerstein, anyone? Langston Hughes? Kerouac?). It is the founder of the Pulitzer Prize. So please don’t be ignorant and devalue Columbia just because you don’t know about its history. Both schools have been pioneers in separate fields and have produced some fantastic minds, something which cannot be appropriately measured by awards and percentages. </p>
<p>One last note: from what I’ve seen (keep in mind that I haven’t even attended the school yet), people don’t resort to Columbia because they haven’t gotten into HYPSM. Nearly half of each class was admitted early decision, meaning that nearly half of each class definitely had Columbia as their first choice. And it seems to me that the other just-over-half of the class had Columbia as their first choice as well. I know of several people who chose Columbia over Princeton and Yale. Sure, there will be some who go to Columbia because they were rejected from HYPSM, but that’s a very small majority, and I’m sure that happens even at Stanford and other top schools to those who didn’t get into HYPM.</p>
<p>I understand if you disagree with me; however, I do hope that you all will look past these unimportant, biased rankings, particularly when two schools are only one spot away from each other. With the tiniest tweak in the ranking system, Stanford could easily surpass Columbia and even HYP. And if you’re still not happy, here’s an alternate list of rankings. Stanford comes in at #3 in the world, five places ahead of Columbia. Just goes to show how inconsistent rankings can be! [|ARWU</a> 2010](<a href=“http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp]|ARWU”>http://www.arwu.org/ARWU2010.jsp)</p>
<p>Bon: Well stated. I couldn’t agree with you more and my S goes to Stanford. However, they are both fantastic schools and neither should be put down. Like you stated at any time one could ‘rank’ higher than the other but as a whole they are both superb schools that anyone would be proud to be a part of…</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Columbia is a great school, but seroiusly, no where near HYPSM.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>you are a little off here</p>
<p>the majority of kids that applied for ED to Columbia did not have it as a first choice, but rather, felt that they had a small chance of getting into HYPSM and therefore made a play towards Columbia ED instead of getting shut out from the Ivy League.</p>
<p>the majority of RD admits that enrolled at Columbia are HYPSM rejects, plain and simple…</p>
<p>The Cross Admit Battle</p>
<p>Columbia v.</p>
<p>9%/91% - Harvard
15%/85% - Yale
22%/78% - Princeton
21%/79% - Stanford
20%/80% - MIT</p>
<p>Jamie, how am I “a little off here”? How in the world would you know that the majority of ED kids resorted to Columbia because they felt that they couldn’t get into HYPSM? Columbia admittance rates are just as low as the other Ivies even before the CommonApp boom. Have you surveyed all of the Columbia admits? Also, if Columbia was their one resort for staying in the Ivy League, why didn’t they apply to schools like UPenn and Cornell, both fantastic Ivies with slightly higher acceptance rates? Yes, the cross admit statistics are impressive; however, that still doesn’t say anything about the quality of the school and there are quite a few factors beyond prestige that go into those statistics.</p>
<p>^^^^^Come on BonP</p>
<p>the cross admit statistics say it all</p>
<p>Columbia is just an incredible university, and you should be very proud that you will be a freshman there this coming fall, but Columbia is just not at the level of HYPSM and any attempt to include it would be just nonsense.</p>
<p>very simple</p>
<p>very simple indeed</p>
<p>by the way, about 20-25% of your classmates at Columbia University undergraduate will be part of this program, of which about 70% are part-time:</p>
<p><a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board;
<p>their stats are not included in Columbia undergraduate SAT, acceptance rates, GPA, top ten percent and yields, even though they take the same classes, with the same professors and cover the same material.</p>
<p>BonPamplemousse,</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Anyone can rationalize why a school is placed where it is in a ranking; I could just as easily say “Columbia only gets X applicants because of New York, Wall Street, and Broadway.” IIRC before Stanford became the most popular “dream college” according to PR, NYU was an oddity because it was #1 or #2 while the rest of the top 10 were the usual suspects (HYPSM, etc.). Most people assumed that it was because of New York City. Why was that university NYU and not Columbia?</p>
<p>And I don’t know what you’re talking about media. NYC is known to be the capital of media in the US.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Actually it was the Columbia supporters who brought up Nobels and SAT scores.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>But the same can be said of so many other universities that give a quality education and fostered great minds. That does not make them just as prestigious as HYPSM. I’m not placing more or less emphasis on prestige than anyone else - I’m not making a judgment at all about the importance of prestige: my last post was only in response to claims that run counter to (objective) reality. One can say that Columbia is the same quality as HYPSM, which is of course a debatable notion, but saying that it has as much prestige isn’t debatable, given the objective data that shows otherwise.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>And this is probably being charitable to Columbia.</p>
<p>^^^^well, I can tell you this, of the cross-admits between Stanford and Columbia, not more than 14 students decided to attend Columbia for the class of 2014 - compared to about 100 each for MIT, Princeton and Yale and about 220 students for Harvard.</p>
<p>Where are these cross-admit statistical numbers from? Do you have any reference to share?</p>
<p>^^^^^^^sure, no problem</p>
<p>it is from a published Stanford Senate Report</p>
<p><a href=“http://facultysenate.stanford.edu/2010_2011/minutes/10_07_10_SenD6388.pdf[/url]”>http://facultysenate.stanford.edu/2010_2011/minutes/10_07_10_SenD6388.pdf</a></p>
<p>Phanta, your PM box is full and is not taking any more PM’s</p>
<p>you might want to clear it a bit</p>
<p>Thanks. But I didn’t see these numbers:</p>
<p>The Cross Admit Battle</p>
<p>Columbia v.</p>
<p>9%/91% - Harvard
15%/85% - Yale
22%/78% - Princeton
21%/79% - Stanford
20%/80% - MIT</p>
<p>^^^^here you go:</p>
<p>[The</a> New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html]The”>The New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices)</p>
<p>Those numbers are horribly outdated Jamie. See here for instance:</p>
<p>[Duke</a> still step below top schools | The Chronicle](<a href=“http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-still-step-below-top-schools]Duke”>http://dukechronicle.com/article/duke-still-step-below-top-schools)</p>
<p>Duke now wins the vast majority of cross admits against Cornell, NU, and Georgetown compared to your source (a study with flawed methodology as the students surveyed never had those choices to begin with). I also know harvard wins around 8/10 with Yale. Still, it appears cross admits is a nebulous number. These schools do not share cross admit information with each other. They likely garner it from a self selecting pool of people who return the enrollment reply forms with other schools they were admitted to or their alternate destination.</p>
<p>^^^^Blah, so you tell me that the numbers I posted are “horribly” outdated and use a link equally outdated to prove your point?</p>
<p>ok</p>
<p>I see</p>
<p>
We don’t know about this. Indicated in the above Senator Minute Report that Stanford did talk to MIT.</p>
<p>
This should be insufficient to provide the info they presented in that report.</p>