<p>Which of the following schools,in your opinion, has the best undergraduate experience(= teaching, research opportunities, peer effect, career shape-up, contact building, overall experience)?</p>
<p>MIT, Dartmouth, Stanford, CalTech, Princeton</p>
<p>Please state your reasons for the choices as well …</p>
<p>I always read around here on CC that Dartmouth and Princeton have a more undergraduate focus than other schools. I don’t know much about them so I’ll let the other posters respond.</p>
<p>If you fit into the type of student that would go to Caltech, I don’t think you could have a better experience anywhere other than here.</p>
<p>And what kind of student would that be??</p>
<p>And please don;t be biased towards your own college …</p>
<p>My own college is Carnegie Mellon. I’m a grad student here. Frankly, I’m glad Caltech rejected me for undergrad since I don’t think I would have fit in here as an undergrad.</p>
<p>Stanford: lots of faculty attention (100% full time professors, so teaching is strong), tons of research opportunities (one of the top research universities, millions of dollars allocated to undergrads, lots of professor contact, staff help, etc.), tons of career “shape-up” in Silicon Valley/the Bay Area/California/pretty much anywhere (Wall Street, ibanking, etc.), strong network, overall experience great (athletics, social life, proximity to city life, etc.–among the “happiest students” according to PR)</p>
<p>Not sure what you mean by “peer effect,” but the students at Stanford are bright/engaged/diverse.</p>
<p>Then MIT/Princeton, Dartmouth, Caltech.</p>
<p>Many people say Dartmouth is the “best” undergrad in the country … why is it low in your list … Thanks for the Stanford info btw!!!</p>
<p>It depends on the person. Someone who fits in at Dartmouth need not fit in at Caltech, if you get what I mean.</p>
<p>^ Exactly…all have their strengths…all are fantastic. Depends on what you’re looking for.</p>
<p>Personally, I like Princeton the best from that group. Princeton has the strong research reputation in the sciences and humanities along with a strong undergrad focus.</p>
<p>^ BUT eating clubs aren’t for everyone ;)</p>
<p>Yeah! Ans so every school has its minus points … can anybody state those? Minus Points of every school ---- I’ll start –</p>
<p>Drinking scene at Dartmouth!</p>
<p>It was really hard for me t turn down Dartmouth. Living in NYC I know tons of people who went to every ivy, Stanford, etc., and none are more in love with a school than Dartmouth alum. My problem was the school’s location, I’m a city person.</p>
<p>Some say you can judge by the % of alums who give $$. Dartmouth and Princeton rank highly on that front.</p>
<p>I have 2 sibs at Stanford and they love their school a lot.</p>
<p>To me, Caltech will only make a small minority happy, it would be torture to me.</p>
<p>Harvard consistently has the most discontent kids in surveys of top schools.</p>
<p>Well, I was saying which is the best for all of the criteria listed–Dartmouth, while great, isn’t as good as the others in all of those areas. So:</p>
<p>MIT: some say the teaching isn’t quite as good–in comparison to the others, it has the largest classes, with only about 60% of its courses under 20 and 14% over 50 (compared to Stanford’s 75% and 10%). The “overall experience” and “peer effect,” in my opinion, are focused on math/science (yes, I know MIT offers more than that), so most of your peers are hardcore math/science people + your experience will, supposedly, be like “drinking from a fire hose.” This isn’t to say MIT isn’t great, but that might not be for everyone (not that Stanford is, though).</p>
<p>Caltech: strong teaching and research opportunities (though there’s probably more research going at Stanford/MIT), overall experience may be less favorable than at other schools (lopsided gender ratio, tiny school, etc.).</p>
<p>Princeton: strong teaching and research, but it seems Stanford brings the better “overall experience”–it’s closer to city life than Princeton, it has stronger athletics that don’t cut into academics, it seems slightly more diverse, etc.</p>
<p>Dartmouth: great teaching, but research isn’t quite as strong as at the others. Same as Princeton regarding “overall experience.”</p>
<p>“Minus points” for Stanford is Palo Alto–not a college town at all, but then again, the “college town” is Stanford, California anyway. San Jose and San Francisco aren’t far, so you have access to city life too.</p>
<p>This is just my opinion, so don’t jump down my throat if you disagree. :)</p>
<p>Hey I wasn’t jumping down your throat!!! Well … I am getting more confused by the minute!! Please continue posting!!</p>
<p>If you apply to all those schools, the admissions committees likely will make your decision a LOT easier… ;)</p>
<p>LOL Nice one!!</p>
<p>adrivit, I knew you wouldn’t jump down my throat, but others would. =p</p>
<p>What are you confused about? I’ll try to help if I can.</p>
<p>I hate to whore my own school (which is essentially all I ever do on this website) but I think Rice is the best. At least we are the “coolest” school in America.</p>
<p>Princeton gets my biased vote.
There’s no way Stanford has more “city life than Princeton”. Princeton is as far away (1 hour) from New York and Philly as Stanford is from San Fransico.
Princeton emphasizes undergraduate on a whole different level from Stanford. How can you argue that Stanford pays as much attention to undergrad when the majority of its students are grads?
Stanford, however, does have better sports. Both schools are well rounded academically.
Dartmouth is also a good choice for undergrad focus, but it lacks very strong research programs.
It’s also clear how much Princeton alums love their school. Princeton has the best alumni giving rate of all major universities.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>As I already said, I’m talking about proximity–San Jose is just next door, and SF is only 37 miles away; Princeton is more than 50 miles from New York and 45 from Philly.</p>
<p>(Not to mention you have small cities like Palo Alto, Menlo Park, etc. nearby.)</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Please explain how, and give examples.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>You cannot discredit the attention a school gives to its undergrads simply because of the number of grad students. Berkeley has 2 undergrads for every grad student, so does that mean that Berkeley pays 4x as much attention to its undergrads as Stanford does? I don’t think so.</p>
<p>In addition, despite Princeton being very undergraduate-focused, it has a pretty prominent graduate division (Princeton, too, is a top school for grad as well as undergrad).</p>
<p>Let’s just look at some of the obvious facts:</p>
<p>Class sizes -
Princeton:
72% under 20
10% over 50</p>
<p>Stanford:
73% under 20
10% over 50</p>
<p>They’re about equal there.</p>
<p>% faculty full time -
Princeton: 93%
Stanford: 100%</p>
<p>Roughly the same.</p>
<p>Student:faculty ratio -
Princeton: 5:1
Stanford: 6:1</p>
<p>Roughly the same.</p>
<p>Each has a 98% retention rate, the same graduation rate, etc.</p>
<p>In addition, both were on the list for strongest undergraduate teaching that US News did a long time ago.</p>
<p>I don’t see how Stanford is any worse than Princeton in this respect. The reason I answered Stanford to the OP’s question is that, given the criteria he/she listed, Stanford seems to be the best *overall<a href=“%22teaching,%20research%20opportunities,%20peer%20effect,%20career%20shape-up,%20contact%20building,%20overall%20experience%22”>/I</a>. To say that Stanford is on a “whole different level” is a pretty bold claim–notice I made no such bold claims about Princeton or any of the other universities that the OP listed.</p>