I don’t know what happened during the visit to USC, but college students do some pretty stupid things.
I’m going to leave college names out of this, but can tell you that all of the following have taken place at elite colleges (and these stories are all about people I knew at my college, or people I personally know from other elite colleges – I can tell you that none of these occurred at Stanford or USC):
- Having 100 proof alcohol blasted down multiple people’s throat via a fire extinguisher at high pressure.
- Stealing a campus police car and attempting to drive it in the river.
- Filming a guy having sex with a girl through the guy’s window, and showing the film to 100 people at a big party (the guy knew about this, and the girl didn’t, as you probably can guess).
- While very, very drunk, two guys stole a small airplane and drove it 20 miles down a remote two-lane highway at 3AM before abandoning it.
- Stealing a town bus and driving it all over a good-sized city, picking up people, often old ladies, and providing them with personal rides to their destinations. They eventually returned the bus to the station. This was an annual occurrence at this school.
- Pushing a piano out the window.
- When a highly sought-after football player was being recruited, the host players and the recruit popped all the tires on a car that was parked on the edge of campus during his visit.
- Getting all athletic recruits good and drunk at a party was standard practice where I went to college (30 years ago … perhaps that has changed, but I doubt it), and this was at a non-scholarship school.
I don’t know what happened at the visit to USC, but all manner of deviant behavior goes on when you have a bunch of 18- to 22-year-olds without Mommy and Daddy there to watch them.
Are these acts reprehensible? Most of them are, anyway. And half of them took place at my hyper-elite school. The video star, whose performance took place just before graduation, had his degree withheld by the school and his med schools contacted (they retracted his acceptances) because of the described event and some unproven sexual harrassment and molestation allegations. The others were never caught (or were essentially allowed to escape). The video star eventually became a physician, unfortunately, somehow, and I have mercifully never seen him again. All of the others became respectable citizens after they grew up.
This is the kind of stuff that goes on at any campus, unfortunately (and my son better not do this kind of stuff). I wouldn’t judge USC by something that one small handful of students did, and we don’t even know what this event was, but I’m guessing that the worst of these events are on par with what occurred during the USC visit.
Unless you’re sending your kid to one of the service academies, events like these are going to take place, and you have to hope that you’ve raised your kid well enough to be sensible and to resist peer pressure.
Last edited by ArnoldZiffel; 04-06-2012 at 12:01 AM.
By comparison, USC had 46000 applicants and accepted 2650. Of those 2650, 100 were awarded trustee merit scholarships, or about 4%. 4% USC trustee merit vs. 6% Stanford admit.
That's not true. USC accepted 8,400 students, 9,400 including spring admits this year. The reason that USC gives out those merit scholarships is that, of the superstar students who apply to USC (far fewer such students apply there than to Stanford), nearly all of them choose to attend another school. Most of Stanford's class is made up of Trustee-caliber students. Looking at acceptance rates (6% vs. 4% trustee) tells you nothing - USC's applicant pool is on the whole weaker than Stanford's.
Quote:
I spent 3-6 hours 3/week for 8 weeks the past two summers at Stanford. Granted, summer is not regular session. I agree the atmosphere is a lovely office park setting and a very peaceful one. But, it did not feel like a vibrant campus. Students seemed self-absorbed, few made eye contact, it was just weird.
Any student who has been at Stanford during the school year and during the summer will tell you: they are nothing alike. The campus is not vibrant during the summer. During the school year, it is. This is the case at most schools. Stanford's campus is also filled with high-school students during the summer, so perhaps they're the ones who seem self-absorbed.
Quote:
But, what does it offer to the humanities undergraduate major in comparison?
Stanford is currently ranked #1 in the world for the humanities and arts. It's also ranked #1 in the world for social sciences. All of Stanford's departments in the humanities and social sciences are ranked in the top 5 by US News; the NRC rankings are similar. This isn't a new development - Stanford has long had top-5 departments in the humanities and social sciences, but people pay more attention to its STEM departments, which are also among the best. As THE notes:
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE
Stanford University knocks Harvard University off the top spot in the arts and humanities subject rankings. With Pulitzer prizewinners and MacArthur Fellows leading its liberal-arts programme, the relative newcomer (founded in 1891) has proved more than a match for its illustrious Ivy League rival.
Quote:
Originally Posted by THE
Stanford University, joint second with Harvard University in the overall top 200 rankings, takes top spot in the social sciences table.
The institution has a strong record of producing leading economists and boasts several living Nobel economics laureates among its world-class faculty.
These include 1992 winner Gary Becker from Stanford's famous Hoover Institution and his colleague Douglass North, who shared the Nobel the following year for his work on economic history and institutional change.
Quote:
Originally Posted by docfreedaddy
I have heard and read the classes can be large at Stanford, especially in undergraduate required courses. By comparison, the Thematic Options honors program at USC is offered to those accepted in lieu of all required core courses.
75% of Stanford's classes have fewer than 15 students, and only 2% are over 120. USC can't compare to that. I'll add that when you calculate the "average experience" for students (larger classes affect more students, smaller classes affect few students), the difference between the two is even larger.
There's a reason that HYPSM don't have some subset of their students in an honors college-type program. It's because the undergraduate division itself is an "honors college," with elite students, small classes, and tons of opportunities in research and the like. Lower-ranked schools established honors colleges in order to attract more of these elite students. But it stratifies the student body and exalts a subset of them over the others. They don't have the resources to offer all these opportunities and small classes to their entire student body.
Last edited by phantasmagoric; 04-06-2012 at 12:08 AM.
A few moments ago, I reviewed Stanford's web page and USC's. The school web pages reflect the tone of the atmosphere I experienced and have heard from parents whose children attend. USC seems far more vibrant and rich. Were it not for the rankings, I would have expected USC to be the far superior school. You and everyone else can review the web pages and visit the schools. You might be quite surprised as well.
docfreedaddy, I think it's true that USC has made, and is continuing to make, great strides. It is harnessing its alumni network to create endowed chairs, facilities, etc. and is in the process of materially raising the caliber of the university. But truthfully, at this point in time--which is the relevant juncture for your daughter's decision--USC simply can't compare to Stanford, even if you confine your comparison to the small "honors" subset contingent at USC. In a couple of decades that may change, but that's not pertinent for your purposes.
With respect to the humanities here--it's already been pointed out that Stanford has absolutely world-class humanities departments, even though the (amazing) tech and engineering sides get all the media attention. I've taken many courses in the philosophy (both logic and ethics) and linguistics departments, and they have been, without exception, excellent in all respects.
If I were a parent I could definitely understand wanting to consider very carefully a full-tuition offer from a good school like USC. It's a big cost differential for sure. But I think that can also (understandably) create a tendency to try to equalize the opportunities in your mind, as a rationale for choosing the less-costly option. And there is nothing wrong with that choice, but it doesn't mean that the opportunities are in fact equal; it just means that you may accord different values to them than some others might.
BTW, I have been on campus in the summer as well, and it bears little resemblance to the atmosphere during the rest of the year. During the summer the campus is overrun with many programs that are really just money-makers for the university, and the level of academic intensity that characterizes Stanford during the regular terms is largely absent. This is common during the summer at Stanford's peer schools too.
Good luck to your daughter in her decision, and I hope she has a fine experience wherever she chooses to attend.
reviewed Stanford's web page and USC's. The school web pages reflect the tone of the atmosphere I experienced and have heard from parents whose children attend.
What do you mean by "web pages reflect the tone of the atmosphere"? In what way? Are you saying you're basing your judgment on the web page and second-hand hearsay from the parents of kids who attend, rather than on actual students' experiences (as shown here)?
Quote:
USC seems far more vibrant and rich.
Vibrant, no; but rich? That's the general perception about USC.
Quote:
You and everyone else can review the web pages and visit the schools. You might be quite surprised as well.
"You raise the expected, valid points regarding Stanford and in no way am I detracting from Stanford's reputation. Your comment regarding "a campus with students whom you KNOW are academically, athletically, and artistically gifted, the best of the best in the entire world" seems to strike a chord. My point in citing the relative statistics is simply admit rates are viewed as indications of exclusivity, which is not limited to Stanford or Harvard. Most trustes award students at USC have been admitted to one or more Ivy's or Stanford, but choose not to attend. What I can say is that something quite incredible is happening at USC presently that I would not believe without seeing it with my own eyes. The vibrancy and dynamism is infectious, the programs for the "best of the best" are engaging and innovative. I hope I do see the same level of vibrancy when i soon visit Stanford again and hopefully not students simply basking in the glory of seeing themselves the "best of the best". As an aside, being intellectually superior in intelligence does not equate to superiority in emotional intelligence. My daughter was accepted to Stanford and is extremely bright, likely the brightest in her private school. To her credit, however, her friends may be somewhat bright, but have superior personal qualities, including superior emotional intelligence. Maybe personal qualities, not quantified on SAT scores and GPA's, or excelling in a sport or art form, account for what I saw at USC, but not Stanford. Hopefully, I will be struck by the vibrancy and happiness exuding from Stanford undergrads on my upcoming visit."
I would argue that admit rates tell only part of the story about a school's exclusivity. More important, I think are the yield rates -- of the students who are accepted, how many matriculate? A 2010 article in the Daily Trojan reveals that only 45% of Trustee Scholarship winners actually attend USC, and I don't think yield rates for the scholarship would change dramatically in two years. 5.5 percent of applicants selected as scholarship finalists|Daily Trojan
In contrast, 70% of students accepted to Stanford matriculate. "Something to consider," no? Perhaps that 55% of students who did not attend USC did not find the "vibrancy" that you saw... or perhaps they had offers from better schools. I don't doubt that most Trustee award winners are accepted to other Stanford-caliber schools, but the data suggests that even with the scholarship, they're still selecting Ivy League colleges and universities.
It's insulting, frankly, for you to suggest that Stanford students are merely basking in the glory of being the best of the best. Stanford students are on the whole very humble (and, as an aside, very vibrant and dynamic as well).
Your comment about emotional intelligence is a red herring, and I can assure you that there are more students with high EQ's at Stanford than USC.
As someone who has visited both schools during the actual school year, I can assure you that Stanford students are more vibrant and intellectually curious than USC students. There may be "honors" colleges at USC where students are intellectually curious, but like phantasmagoric said above, there's a reason why such programs don't exist at Stanford-caliber schools.
Frankly, as an alleged holder of a PhD, I find it suspect that you would take impressions on different schools based on a sample that is not even representative of the student body (Stanford's summer session) and from their websites (though I do admit that USC's main photo of Professor Castells's research looks more vibrant than the student with the robot on Stanford's webpage, if that's what you mean by "vibrant").
To be fair, cost may be an issue, but ceteris paribus, please don't think that USC is a better school than Stanford.
Hi davev61~
Judging from your OP, it sounds like $$ is not the final criteria for selecting a college, but rather one facet. Another facet may rest with the student body itself. Has your child had a chance to visit any one of these schools? If so, which one/s caused her face to light up with the prospect of attending? Her body language may tell you more than words.
My DD had a definite impression after visiting. Yours may also.
IF $$ is the final factor, then USC is clearly the winner. IF $$ is not, then there are clear differences between these colleges-USC,S,P,and C. Which one would "float her boat"?
~APOL-a Mum
Yes, visiting USC for two days of interviews with my daughter as a Finalist for the Trustee Merit Award has been the impetus for a surprising, even to me, consideration of USC vs. Stanford. The reason is not just the seeming happiness, vibrancy, articulateness and friendliness of the USC students, but the apparent reasons for it. USC seems to be devoting considerable resources to undergraduate education with tremendous individualized support and opportunity for students. They seem to well value their highest performing students, most of whom have had Ivy or similar acceptances. The extent this comes through to students and the positive effect on a student may be an intangible to consider. Is it a plus to be an especially highly regarded student receiving lavish bonus opportunities or just another brilliant undergraduate student?
Interesting, the gap in SAT's and GRE's with the "average" USC and Stanford students at all reported deciles is narrowing considerably. USC clearly notes they look for excellence and passion in non-academic areas. Perhaps they are attracting a different group of students from Stanford with differing personal qualities and attributes. Neither better nor worse, but different. As I indicated elsewhere intellectual intelligence is quite different than emotional intelligence, a quality not included in rankings.
Bottom line is I have unanswered questions about Stanford. I will be spending time on campus in the coming weeks and will meet with the son of a good friend who is a dorm advisor, along with some of his advisees. My daughter has a friend from her HS who is currently a freshman who she is contacting. We will both visit for admit weekend at the end of the month
Rankings certainly support the superiority of Stanford. In fact, Stanford holds extremely high US and world rankings. Looking at the factors rankings are based on, it does not seem they relate especially well to undergraduate education and are all based on a similar core including ratings by faculty at other schools, faculty salaries and faculty awards. These measures seem highly correlated. Judging from some of the posters who appear to be faculty, I suspect there is a network effect such that an Ivy or Stanford faculty may well be more prone to judge a currently similarly ranked school higher than a USC, in part a self-identification and "halo effect" from current rankings, rather than current programs. As an aside, this would be similar to BCS rankings where the "elite" BCS schools are more commonly being beaten in playoffs by non-BCS schools, causing much discussion of the ranking system.
I am simply looking at this from the perspective of removing pre-conceived notions and taking each school and what they are offering in this case as I find them. The input received from all on this site is extremely helpful. I want to emphasize I expect the visits to Stanford in the coming weeks and the admit program to provide very valuable information for a "head to head" (that's funny!) comparison. Thanks again.
If medical school is in the future, two considerations:
1. Med school at Stanford is 90K/year, so saving 200K may be a good idea, even if you can afford Stanford undergrad.
2. Because medical school admission is almost completely number-driven, she may be able to get a higher GPA at USC.
Yes, visiting USC for two days of interviews with my daughter as a Finalist for the Trustee Merit Award has been the impetus for a surprising, even to me, consideration of USC vs. Stanford. The reason is not just the seeming happiness, vibrancy, articulateness and friendliness of the USC students, but the apparent reasons for it. USC seems to be devoting considerable resources to undergraduate education with tremendous individualized support and opportunity for students. They seem to well value their highest performing students, most of whom have had Ivy or similar acceptances. The extent this comes through to students and the positive effect on a student may be an intangible to consider. Is it a plus to be an especially highly regarded student receiving lavish bonus opportunities or just another brilliant undergraduate student?
Interesting, the gap in SAT's and GRE's with the "average" USC and Stanford students at all reported deciles is narrowing considerably. USC clearly notes they look for excellence and passion in non-academic areas. Perhaps they are attracting a different group of students from Stanford with differing personal qualities and attributes. Neither better nor worse, but different. As I indicated elsewhere intellectual intelligence is quite different than emotional intelligence, a quality not included in rankings.
Bottom line is I have unanswered questions about Stanford. I will be spending time on campus in the coming weeks and will meet with the son of a good friend who is a dorm advisor, along with some of his advisees. My daughter has a friend from her HS who is currently a freshman who she is contacting. We will both visit for admit weekend at the end of the month
Rankings certainly support the superiority of Stanford. In fact, Stanford holds extremely high US and world rankings. Looking at the factors rankings are based on, it does not seem they relate especially well to undergraduate education and are all based on a similar core including ratings by faculty at other schools, faculty salaries and faculty awards. These measures seem highly correlated. Judging from some of the posters who appear to be faculty, I suspect there is a network effect such that an Ivy or Stanford faculty may well be more prone to judge a currently similarly ranked school higher than a USC, in part a self-identification and "halo effect" from current rankings, rather than current programs. As an aside, this would be similar to BCS rankings where the "elite" BCS schools are more commonly being beaten in playoffs by non-BCS schools, causing much discussion of the ranking system.
I am simply looking at this from the perspective of removing pre-conceived notions and taking each school and what they are offering in this case as I find them. The input received from all on this site is extremely helpful. I want to emphasize I expect the visits to Stanford in the coming weeks and the admit program to provide very valuable information for a "head to head" (that's funny!) comparison. Thanks again.
Hello OP and Congratulations to your daughter on having such hard won options. I recall having a similar set of choices for both my kids. There were scholarships to be had for merit not need based (we find ourselves at the borderline of need but that is another thread). It made for April being a long month. Ultimately we sat down with each kid and went over the scenarios of how much each cost, how much we as parents could/would contribute and how much the kid was expected to contribute via jobs during school and summers depending on their choices. One kid is science, the other is humanities. One kid has med school in front of them now and the other is still in school with a future waiting to unfold. Both chose Stanford. The science kid worked hard, loved the school- yes vibrant, engaging, wonderful Stanford and graduated per our financial agreement without debt. She paid more personally for her percentage of the agreement then most pay for say those expensive California state school's 4 year tuition.
The other kid also chose Stanford and as I said, that story is still in progress. I can say the latter kid feels like it is an Academic candy store. Thrilled with classes, profs and the whole Stanford feel. So, if it's a matter of the money being there regardless then come up with different plans, lay them out and let the student decide what type of future they wish to take on.
If she's going to be a premed, she should just go to USC w/ full tuition. She's going to have to pay hundreds of thousands for med school later on --- save money now while you can, otherwise she'll be stacked with loans and debt. Plus, for med school, she needs to have a high GPA (doesn't matter what school she goes to, med schools don't care about this and simply want high numbers) --- USC will be easier than Stanford, Columbia, and Princeton (which have grade deflation, especially for Biology) to get a high GPA as a premed.
That makes sense for pre-med. She is a gifted writer (per her mentors). Her focus is journalism and literature. She was named an Annenderg Scholar in USC's school of Journalism, trustee award (full tuition) and invited to apply to the Thematic options Honors program and can double major at USC. We are both less familiar, thus far, with Stanford's similar program offerings. The description on Stanford's web page for their Freshman humanities program are oddly relatively limited and under construction. We both will be spending much more time at Stanford in the coming weeks.
You can get a great education at USC -- and at most other top universities. Often it's more about the individual student and how much s/he puts into the experience and takes good courses and gets involved in the campus intellectual life. The difference is that Stanford, Columbia, etc. have a better academic reputation and there's the luxury -- elite college -- aspect of it. In terms of the quality of education, I don't think there would be significant difference. In terms of the academic reputation, the difference is not worth $200K for me, and I would send my child to USC. But ultimately you have to decide whether you want to pay all that money to say your child went to a very fancy school.
