Yale vs. Stanford vs. Columbia (and others)

<p>I'm deciding between Yale, Stanford, Columbia (Columbia College), Williams, Amherst, and Pomona. I've already ruled out Emory, Haverford, and Davidson due to financial aid considerations. </p>

<p>I am really not sure what to do here. Yale, Stanford, and Columbia were my top three choices going in, and I wasn't expecting to be accepted to one, let alone all three. Yale was my first choice, and I would've killed to go there a few months ago -- even a week ago -- but now this decision has become really difficult. </p>

<p>Some of my concerns -- I love Columbia's core, but I read most core classes are taught by grad students and non tenured professors, and for 70K a year, that seems kind of ridiculous. But the location (and campus) are amazing!</p>

<p>I'm not really interested in doing tech stuff, and I've heard that students who are humanities/social sciences based don't really fit in well at Stanford, as Stanford really excels in math/science/entrepreneurship. </p>

<p>I play in orchestra, and I intend to continue in college (I've already been contacted by representatives at Yale and Columbia -- didn't submit a music supplement to Stanford), and I've heard that the Yale Symphony is one of the best (if not the best) non conservatory orchestra in the country, and is really on a different level than the others. </p>

<p>I love the residential colleges at Yale, but I've heard the dorms are pretty awesome at Stanford. (Columbia is obviously not so great in this department, but they're in NYC so that seems like a reasonable sacrifice.) </p>

<p>Stanford has awesome sports teams, and I'd love to go to football games and etc., and I'm concerned that spirit won't really be present at Yale and Columbia (perhaps with the exception of the Harvard-Yale game). I also run cross country and was recruited by the liberal arts colleges, but not the larger universities, and I don't know yet if I can walk on. </p>

<p>I'm not sure yet exactly what I'll major in -- something along the lines of History, Art History, Econ, other social sciences, etc. </p>

<p>Does anyone have any recommendations for my predicament? Any additional information that might help me make my decision? I am leaning towards Yale/Columbia/Stanford because I think they will offer so many more opportunities to me, and I'd like to be in a more urban area, but I appreciate any perspectives on the advantages of liberal arts colleges. </p>

<p>Anyone???</p>

<p>what are the costs to you, including loans, of each school you want us to consider?</p>

<p>what will you major in?</p>

<p>With Arts and Humanities, the idea that those majors at Stanford don’t fit in is very incorrect.
I would pick either Yale or Stanford.</p>

<p>That is mostly correct about the Core classes at Columbia. Columbia hires several adjunct (part-time) professors and advanced graduate students (it’s actually a competitive fellowship for advanced graduate students, mostly in the humanities, to teach Literature Humanities, University Writing, or Contemporary Civilization). It all depends on the section you get, though; many sections ARE taught by tenured/tenure-track professors, and last year my husband took Lit Hum with a dean. I believe that the Music Hum, Art Hum, and Frontiers of Science classes are mostly taught by professors. But anyway, I’m not sure how much it matters…the Core is standardized, and the Lit Hum curriculum is going to be the same regardless of whether you take it with the dean of the college or an 8th-year philosophy graduate student. They’re also largely discussion-driven, so it’s really about the texts and what they say. Plus, Columbia has some of the most capable graduate students in the country, and there’s honestly not a whoooole lot of difference between an advanced graduate student and a brand new assistant professor. In fact, the advanced grad probably has more time for you.</p>

<p>I am always bemused by the extreme logical conclusion of mild stereotypes that happens on these boards. I’ve heard that Stanford is techie (because of its location near Silicon Valley, I presume) but never that humanities/social science students completely don’t fit in there. I’m willing to bet that humanities and social science majors make up the majority of undergrads, for example. (College Board seems to support that; only 34% of Stanford’s students major in the combined fields of engineering, computer science, biology, and the physical sciences.) Stanford has some top programs in several social science fields - their graduate psychology program is in the top 5, for example.</p>

<p>Columbia’s residence halls aren’t bad. I used to work in res life here and some of them are quite beautiful. I think there’s an acceptable threshold that you should cross when it comes to res halls and after that, they shouldn’t really be a consideration anymore. There’s also a diversity of places - for example, social first-years can choose to live in a four-person mini-suite in Carman or can choose to have a single in John Jay or Furnald. Furnald, in particular, is a really beautiful res hall and located right next to the student center. John Jay has the dining hall on the first floor, so you don’t have to go outside to eat. The upper-class halls are a mix of qualities and different living styles (doubles, corridor-style singles, suites. Housing selection is hilarious to watch from the outside, here. I have a friend who works in housing and he walks around during April like a zombie.) Besides, if you want to step out of your res halls and be in a major city…this is the place to be.</p>

<p>Pomona’s in an urban area.</p>

<p>*</p>

<p>On the advantages of SLACs - I think they are oft-repeated. Small class sizes, personal access to professors, a tight-knit class community. It’s hard to put across to a student, but I can see the contrasts between Columbia and my own mid-ranked SLAC. Columbia certainly has more resources - better libraries, better study spaces, better residence halls, and professors who are world-class researchers. But the fact of the matter is…professors at Columbia come here to be researchers. It’s not that some of them don’t enjoy working with students - many of them do. (Some of them truly DON’T, though.) But that’s not their key concern and their departments straight-up tell them that teaching doesn’t help them get tenure, their research does. Professors at big research universities often spend time trying to figure out how to get OUT of teaching classes. As a result, you’ll flip through the department and see all of these impressive, amazing professors who have done great things, but find out that they don’t actually teach any undergraduate courses. There’s a professor in my department who invented a method in my field, but he doesn’t teach undergrad courses. Another professor teaches a really interesting course, but he’s been on leave most of the 6 years I’ve been here.</p>

<p>And if you take any science or social science classes with labs, that professor is not teaching the lab. I am. Or a fellow grad - not even necessarily advanced! Like I said, most of us aren’t bad teachers, and we may actually want to be in the classroom more than the professor. But we are new, inexperienced teachers. And let’s say that you want some research experience for grad school. You find a lab on the bleeding edge of your field, discovering new things and doing great science. Well, you can join that lab, but chances are you aren’t working directly with the professor/PI of the lab group. You’re working with one of his graduate students or a post-doc. His signature will be in your recommendation letter, but he didn’t write it…his grad student did. Again, not necessarily a bad thing, since thousands of students get excellent educations at these top national universities and head to great, great graduate programs. Just…the thing.</p>

<p>The difference at a SLAC is that if you see a professor listed on the department’s webpage, that professor IS teaching classes for undergraduates and IS willing to take you into his lab to supervise you. You will develop a close relationship with that professor if you want, because there are no grad students and only the occasional postdoc (and even then, postdocs at teaching colleges are there to learn how to teach, not do research). He will be the one penning your recommendation letter. And honestly, it helps a lot in graduate school. I felt like I was very independent and self-sufficient, and knew how to relate to my adviser, because I had a very similar relationship in undergraduate school. I’d worked on a senior thesis in development with her, and a dissertation is really just a really big senior thesis.</p>

<p>My seminar classes in undergrad were pretty similar to my seminar classes in grad school, except the level of the material was just different. Because my classes were small (15-20 students), my professors assigned 15-20 page papers in pretty much every class - even on the introductory level! I wrote a 20 page paper for freshman sociology and freshman psych - so I was well-versed in the world of the seminar paper before coming to graduate school, and had gotten a LOT of feedback on my writing. Honestly, I feel like in many ways attending a SLAC is a microcosm of the grad school experience. But I also think it can help students who want to go straight to work, too, as you learn to relate to your advisers/professors like people in a similar way to how you will relate to your manager or boss. You view them as people rather than the shadowy figure who shows up, lectures, and leaves, and who has 1 office hour a week at a time that’s designed to make it difficult for you to bother them (or worse, “by appointment only.”)</p>

<p>Given your list, it seems that Columbia is the odd one out of the Unis. Big, grad-focused (2x as many undergrads), outward-looking campus (towards Manhattan and not the quad).</p>

<p>To me, it comes down to Y or S (east or west), and the LACs. Both Williams and Amherst can be party-hearty (aka work hard, play hard), while Pomona is in a distant 'burn of LA. Pomona is also adjacent to the other Claremont Colleges. (Could be a plus or minus, depending upon your perspective. But students do turn down S for Pomona.)</p>

<p>If you major in economics, note that Stanford and Columbia economics are math-intensive. Yale offers high-math and low-math options. Amherst economics is low-math, unless you take the advanced econometrics course. Williams and Pomona economics are low-math. (This is from checking the math prerequisites of economics courses in the course catalogs.)</p>

<p>Wow, that’s quite the list you have there! Can you attend any of the admitted student weekends? If you haven’t been to the campuses, that would be a good idea. I can tell you that there are plenty of humanities majors at Stanford. Seemed to me when I was there that Econ was one of the biggest majors actually. If Stanford was really only tech and engineering, they could change the name to the Stanford Institute of Technology, but you don’t have to worry about that!! As for orchestra, I do know Stanford has a brand new performance hall (<a href=“Bing Concert Hall | Stanford Live”>Bing Concert Hall | Stanford Live) and it is supposed to be amazing.</p>

<p>If you like Yale best, you should go there. It seems to match your preferences best. You still should give Stanford some serious consideration, though.</p>

<p>Stanford is awesome in the humanities/social sciences.</p>

<p>Not sure why you cooled a bit on Yale, but it seems like the clear choice unless you necessarily want a LAC.</p>

<p>Re: football…the Ivy League is pretty competitive amongst each other. You go to a Harvard-Yale game and it ill be packed. </p>

<p>An important point about name brand and resources from a Pomona student who turned down Stanford: <a href=“Stanford vs. Pomona - #13 by debakianmj - College Search & Selection - College Confidential Forums”>Stanford vs. Pomona - #13 by debakianmj - College Search & Selection - College Confidential Forums;

<p>I personally would go to either Yale, Williams, Amherst, or Pomona- because they have the true small liberal arts college experience, both residentially and academically. Yale gives a LAC feel through its residential colleges better than the other universities you got in do. Academically, there isn’t much of a difference between these schools, but culturally, they are very different- with Pomona the obvious difference from the other three due to location. </p>

<p>I will say that Yale turned me off a little bit because it had a sense of expected grandeur- if that makes any sense. Yale has a very historical and current reputation of excellence which pervades through the campus. Its buildings and architecture loom over the heads of passers-by and students alike, while all of Pomona’s buildings are small and cozy. It fosters motivation, but also intimidation. This is the feeling I got in a three day weekend, however, and it might be very different from what others get. Yale’s a complex institution. </p>

<p>There are differences between the small LACs and Yale though. The administration is more accessible and willing to listen to the undergraduates, the professors tend to care more, and you have an important role in shaping the campus and its reputation (you transcend the school’s established reputation moreso than say a Yalie would redefine their school’s reputation). And because the resources that you will take advantage of, the friendships you’ll build, and the academic experiences you gain are all pretty similar, there should be other factors to turn down a place.</p>

<p>Personally, I think the only schools that would really tempt me away from Pomona would be Yale and Princeton. I have a lot of friends at Yale and the things that they do are remarkable. I feel that it’s easy to fall behind at Pomona because people tend to hide their accomplishments, whereas Yalies are open about all that they’re up to and it definitely motivates me personally. </p>

<p>Okay – just wanted to thank all of you for the advice. I ultimately chose Yale. For anyone choosing in the future, here is some of my reasoning:</p>

<p>Columbia felt very sterile – I didn’t get the feeling that it was a “community.” And I think there are people who prefer that type of environment, but it just felt very different than Yale. At Yale, it seemed like everywhere students went, they saw people they knew. At Columbia, there were more unfamiliar faces. I also didn’t like the idea of taking a lot of classes from graduate students and lecturers – especially when Columbia is so expensive.</p>

<p>When I visited Stanford, I just felt very lukewarm about it. The campus is obviously gorgeous (and the area), but Yale felt much more historic; every time I walked into a classroom or dining hall, I was astounded by the architecture. The size was a bit big – I’m someone who wouldn’t make it to class on time, or would lose my bike somewhere, and Yale felt “just right.” People at Stanford also acted like “You got into Stanford! You HAVE to come here!” – and that kind of bugged me. Neither Yale nor Columbia felt like a “hard sell.” Stanford is also in a suburb, not a city, and I really liked the vibrancy that New Haven provides. I felt like if I went to Stanford, I’d be isolated from poverty from four years, and that wasn’t something I wanted. Also, I got the impression that students never leave campus - Palo Alto isn’t much of a college town, and they didn’t seem inclined to go to San Francisco.</p>

<p>Stanford has great sports – that was a HUGE draw… But Yale has the Harvard-Yale game, which seemed like fun too. Also since Stanford is on the quarter system, that’s only 3-4 home football games a year. And apparently hockey is big at Yale? I’m also excited to decide whether to support the Yankees or Red Sox… </p>

<p>I realized that I wanted to live in New England after I graduated, not in California. And I also wanted seasons and SNOW!</p>

<p>I also want to go to law school, HOPEFULLY Yale law, and Yale is a fantastic school for undergrad for kids who want to do law.</p>

<p>I think the final thing that stuck me was that at Bulldog Days, a lot of the events were planned by the students, whereas at Stanford, most were scheduled by the administrators. I liked that upperclassmen were so willing to get involved with the pre frosh – inviting them into debates, rehearsals, discussions, etc. There was so much to do each night of the program – whereas I felt myself becoming bored at Stanford’s Admit Weekend. I obviously know that Bulldog Days is “Yale on steroids,” but I still felt that it was ultimately the better choice for me. Leaving Stanford, I knew that I would probably love Yale if I went there (but maybe hate it), and I would definitely “like” Stanford. I decided it was worth the risk. </p>

<p>Also as a musician, the Yale Symphony Orchestra is fantastic. </p>

<p>I ultimately leaned away from the liberal arts colleges – I decided I wanted something more urban. And the students that I met at Yale were just – WOW! Plus, I think the residential colleges will provide much of what a liberal arts college provides – and Yale is the most like a liberal arts college of the National Universities (perhaps with the exception of Dartmouth). </p>

<p>Some regrets: Maybe I should’ve applied to Harvard and Princeton. I didn’t envision myself having any of the options I did – and honestly only applied to Yale because it was such a dream (if I could’ve gone there in December, I would’ve done it in an instant, no matter the cost). I don’t think I would’ve chosen either of them, but I wish I hadn’t been so harsh on my chances from the beginning – and if I’d let myself learn a little more, I might’ve fallen in love. </p>

<p>And I’m not totally certain that I made the right decision. All nine schools I was choosing between were fantastic, and I would’ve been happy to end up at any one of them. No matter where I went, I was pretty sure that I’d end up thinking it was the perfect place, after four years.</p>