i know this has been asked and asked and asked. but other than prestige, why would people rather go to stanford? they seem like equally outstanding schools and berkeley’s even cheaper and grants more AP credits
i realize my user name is very ironic =( hah
<p>Stanford has a better smaller atmosphere and a slightly better name - less classes taught by TA's. I dislike the huge 25000 person atmosphere at UC's. It bothers me.</p>
<p>Some advtanges that Stanford has over Berkeley:</p>
<p>1) smaller classes
2) easier time registering for classes
3) plenty of dorms
4) nicer campus (IMO)
5) hobos do not form a perimeter around the campus
6) better overall athletics
7) nicer grade curves
8) more research opportunities per student</p>
<p>Some advantages of Berkeley:</p>
<p>1) much much cheaper for instate applicants
2) more hardcore --> prepares you better for real world
3) more active in culture and politics</p>
<p>With all that said, I believe that only Berkeley's engineering and science is on an equal level as Stanford's.</p>
<p>Let's start with MUCH higher 4 year graduation rate. Ability to get classes you want and need. Much lower faculty/student ratio. Much higher endowement which means much more money for many more programs. Lower loans if you quailify for substantial financial aid, much more active job recruitment program. That's just the start.</p>
<p>Now if you're comparing graduate programs, that's where Cal shines.</p>
<p>It just comes down to more babying in Stanford. Berkeley may rough you up a bit, but if you're persistent, you should be able to find everything you need. I certainly prefer Berkeley's cultural environment, but I recognize that Stanford is in many ways the better choice for undergrad.</p>
<p>lol Because they are out of state</p>
<p>The same logic applies to people who go to UNC that wonder why anyone would ever go to Duke</p>
<p>"but other than prestige, why would people rather go to stanford?"</p>
<p>because they can afford it. but there are many kids who "settle" for berkeley or UCLA and give up other "better" schools because the in-state bargain is the best financial decision for their family.</p>
<p>"For the Class of 2008, the university admitted 2,486 students; 1,665 accepted the offer of admission and arrived at the university last month. Of the 821 students who declined admission and filled out a form that indicated where they were going instead, 28 percent said Harvard, 20 percent said Yale, 13 percent said MIT and 8 percent said Princeton. All other universities that were mentioned did not represent more than 2 percent, and no more than 1 percent indicated that they would attend a Pac-10 school, according to the figures provided by the admission office."</p>
<p>There were 8 or fewer acceptees out of 2486 who turned down Stanford for any given Pac-10 school, including Berkeley and UCLA.</p>
<p>Much of it depends on your preferred major, as well as your preferred lifestyle (or perhaps the level of tolerance one has). </p>
<p>For engineering, environmental science, English lit, Near Eastern Studies, & foreign languages, I recommend Berkeley. For bio, computer science, pre-med, Internat'l Relations, and geo-political History, I recommend Stanford. Those are just some examples, & it is not at all to say that the other U is weak in those areas. I'm going by positives, not negatives. I would just give the slight edge to those respective U's in those areas because of emphases & resources & teachers. Other people would not necessarily agree with me, but most U's have specific strengths, & few U's can be equally strong in every subject area.</p>
<p>Mostly, however, it does boil down to preferred campus culture & style. The repliers are correct in the time-advantages of privates vs. publics in any crowded State. It was not difficult to graduate in 4 yrs from a UC in my day. Now it can be a challenge. </p>
<p>If you go to a private, there is also a greater likelihood of ending up in many more smaller seminars than if you go to a public U with a huge undergrad population.</p>
<p>At Berkeley, international students are more visible/prominent than at S, so B. may "feel" more diverse, even though S has a high ethnic diversity content.</p>
<p>B. is more gritty/earthy in feel. S. has a more clean, college-town feel. </p>
<p>I experience B as more high-energy than S. That's not a value judgment, just an observation from spending time on both campuses. Some people much prefer one type of environment than another.</p>
<p>:-)</p>
<p>berkeley has that sense of "inferiority"</p>
<p>
[quote]
Berkeley may rough you up a bit, but if you're persistent, you should be able to find everything you need
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Aim78, I think you just hit the nail right on the head. I think this is the key difference between the undergraduate programs at Stanford and Berkeley.</p>
<p>Let me tell y'all a story. One of my best friends went to Berkeley, when he probably should have gone to Stanford. He didn't apply to Stanford, but I suspect he would have gotten in, for he came in as a Chancellor Scholar at Berkeley and he's a URM. Basically, he never applied to Stanford because he thought it was too expensive (his family is not well-off, and he didn't know how financial aid worked). So he came into Berkeley on basically a full ride because of his Chancellor Scholarship. Pretty good deal, right? The problem is he lacked intellectual and personal maturity. So within a year, he wound up on academic probation for poor performance, within 2 years, he had been expelled. Basically, he never went to class and never did anything. </p>
<p>So I think what aim78 said is quite telling. It is true that if you are persistent and mentally strong at Berkeley, you can get an excellent undergraduate education. But that's a very big 'if'. The fact is, a lot of incoming freshmen are not persistent or mentally strong. When put into the crucible of Berkeley, they flounder.</p>
<p>So look at the situation as it is today. The guy has been thrown out of Berkeley with a ruined academic record. So he can't really go back and graduate from Berkeley. Nor can he transfer to any other decent school, because no decent school wants to admit a transfer student who flunked out of his previous school. Any chance he had of ever attending a half-decent graduate school is gone. How could he ever get in when his academic record is full of F's? </p>
<p>So people might say that Stanford coddles and babies its undergrads. Yeah, but on the other hand, look at what happened to my friend at Berkeley. That coddling and babying would have been good for him. I'm fairly certain that if he gone to Stanford instead, he would have a degree right now. Sure he probably wouldn't have graduated with top grades, but, hey, at least he would have graduated. That's a whole lot better than what actually happened. Go to Stanford and get a degree (even if it is only because you got coddled and babied) vs. go to Berkeley and get expelled. I think it's obvious which one is better.</p>
<p>The point that sakky makes is just another example of the stereotype that these two schools have of each other. Namely, at stanfurd you don't have to work, and berkeley is totally sink or swim. That might be true for some people, but I don't really like the generalization. I'm sure people flunk out of stanfurd and I'm sure people breeze through Cal. It comes down to what type of student you are and what kind of atmosphere you work best in. As for the original question, people go to stanfurd instead of Cal because they can. Simple as that. Its like being invited to a private club and that's hard to turn down. Stanfurd has more prestige and you'll impress more people if you go there. I really don't think it has to do with academics. I don't think there's any real difference in the quality of most programs at both schools.</p>
<p>Why Acura when you can have Lexus?</p>
<p>insurance is higher on a lexus</p>
<p>Reliability ^_^</p>
<p>
[quote]
The point that sakky makes is just another example of the stereotype that these two schools have of each other. Namely, at stanfurd you don't have to work, and berkeley is totally sink or swim. That might be true for some people, but I don't really like the generalization. I'm sure people flunk out of stanfurd and I'm sure people breeze through Cal.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yeah, and some people smoke 3 packs a day and still live to be a hundred, whereas other people exercise every day and still die of a heart attack when they're 25. We have to look at the trends. The fact of the matter is, less people flunk out of Stanford than out of Berkeley. That doesn't mean zero, it means less. No school is perfect and no school guarantees you success. However, that doesn't mean that certain schools don't improve your chances of success. They don't guarantee success but they do improve your odds. </p>
<p>
[quote]
As for the original question, people go to stanfurd instead of Cal because they can. Simple as that. Its like being invited to a private club and that's hard to turn down. Stanfurd has more prestige and you'll impress more people if you go there. I really don't think it has to do with academics. I don't think there's any real difference in the quality of most programs at both schools.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I see this as no different from people choosing Berkeley over any of the other UC's. Why is it OK for people to choose Berkeley over the other UC's in the name of prestige, but not OK for people to choose Stanford over Berkeley because of prestige?</p>
<p>GentlemanandScholar seems to completely mischaracterize sakky's comments. I'll leave guessing at his motivation to the reader.</p>
<p>What sakky actually said is that a smaller college like stanford offers a more supportive environment with personal attention. Nowhere did he say "at stanfurd you don't have to work". People I know from stanford worked quite hard, in no small part because they are self-driven and want to do their best.</p>
<p>sakky's comments are 100% correct. Each school is better for a certain type of person, which echoes the other posters in the thread. If you're a self-driven person and can handle the anonymity of a larger school, are willing to take the steps to build a social circle and contact profs, schools like cal and ucla offer a great education at an attractive price to instate students.</p>
<p>On the other hand, some students do better in a more supportive environment. sakky's friend would have had a faculty advisor who would have noticed his grades and could have helped him or even suggested "stop out" in which stanford allows a student to take time off (no questions asked) and then guarantees return. The friend would have been in smaller classes where the prof might have suggested that a struggling student seek help. </p>
<p>An article on the differences between the 2 schools appeared in a local paper a few years ago; see "UC Berkeley's lack of services leaves many undergrads to sink or swim" at <a href="http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/06/MN176023.DTL%5B/url%5D">http://www.sfgate.com/cgi-bin/article.cgi?file=/c/a/2001/05/06/MN176023.DTL</a> here is a quote from the article
[quote]
it is largely up to the students - most of them 17 or 18 years old and living on their own for the first time - to find what they need. The savvy students get help. The weak don't survive. The grad rate for African Americans is just 57.9 percent, while it is 74.7 percent for Chicanos and Latinos. At schools such as Stanford and Yale minorities do not lag so far behind whites.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I agree that Sakky is correct and I also believe it is factually much harder to excel at Cal given the brutal curve and sheer number of undergrads.</p>
<p>It's easy to get to know your professors at Berkeley. Read their books, email them, take their seminars, go to office hours, etc.</p>
<p>i also believe berkeley's foreign language department is more well known than stanford's</p>