Students review of Stanford has got me worried

<p>This Sakky guy is a complete joke. I was here 3 years ago to search for information about Stanford and Yale, because I had to choose between the two. (I am a senior at Stanford now)
And back then, he was doing exactly same thing, using exactly same words to bash Stanford. I haven't visited this site for 3 years, and it is quite entertaning that he has been doing the same thing.. What's up with you and Stanford? I'm really really curious.
Anyway, Stanford has its shortcomings, but I would definitely say 90% of what Sakky's saying is a complete false.</p>

<p>ummm... the freshman at stanford this past year had the opportunity of taking intro physics classes taught by Leonard Susskind, Stephen Shenker, and Savas Dimopoulos. they're pretty big names in the world of physics.</p>

<p>and in any case, any big name private university would have those problems, its definitely not exclusive to stanford.</p>

<p>
[quote]
This Sakky guy is a complete joke. I was here 3 years ago to search for information about Stanford and Yale, because I had to choose between the two. (I am a senior at Stanford now)

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Whatever you say. He's the same guy who says it's probably the best overall university in the world, and easily one of the best in the US. Sounds like a huge basher if you ask me, what with all his praise. </p>

<p>
[quote]
Anyway, Stanford has its shortcomings, but I would definitely say 90% of what Sakky's saying is a complete false.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Saying 90% is really meaningless. Which 90%?</p>

<p>
[QUOTE]
This Sakky guy is a complete joke.

[/QUOTE]

[QUOTE]
I haven't visited this site for 3 years, and it is quite entertaning that he has been doing the same thing.

[/QUOTE]

If I'm not mistaken Sakky never even posted in this thread and I've read many of his posts and he's never spoken bad about Stanford I wonder if we're talking about the same thing.</p>

<p>Um, that guy went to Stanford in the 1990s. I'm sure it's a very different experience today.</p>

<p>I visited Stanford and Berkeley, and LOVED Stanford. Not only was it gorgeous, but everyone was super friendly. I was clearly lost and trying to figure out the campus map, and some guy riding by on his bike circled back to help me. I felt very comfortable there. Then I went to check out Berkeley, and while it's also really pretty, I felt like I'd gone back to the 60s or something. Even people who worked there weren't helpful, and the students were in their own little world. I felt very UNcomfortable there. It had been one of my top choices because of the foreign study options, but I crossed it off the list altogether.</p>

<p>The only way to know if the school's right for you? GO VISIT. Talk to the students, check out the programs, talk to the career placement office. Not just admissions people. And definitely don't give much weight to what someone who clearly has an axe to grind has to say. I usually ignore those people because they're just looking to stir up trouble.</p>

<p>You can complain all you want about engineering education, but its important to remember a few things:
1) Most Caltech and MIT students agree that their engineering professors do everything by the textbook, and simply recite the book during lectures.<br>
2) As a scientist or engineer, there's only so far classes can take you. Ultimately, the ability to think individually and creatively is what makes you a good engineer, not the ability to regurgitate theory.
3) As such, the opportunity to perform sophisticated and independent research is likely the most important criterion a future scientist/engineer should look for in an undergraduate experience, and Stanford is indisputably the number one school in the country for involving undergrads in research.
4)Though many of the top science/engineering/business minds associated with Stanford were not undergrads here, undergraduate and graduate education is intimately related for those students doing research, and the effects of these future leaders are clearly felt. And though many of these techological leaders did their undergrad degrees elsewhere, if you compare any of their individual undergraduate institutions to stanford in producing these science superstars, it's not even close.
5) Some of the best math and science teachers I've ever had have been TA's.</p>

<p>First lie about HP, read this:</p>

<p>William Reddington Hewlett (May 20, 1913 – January 12, 2001) was an engineer and the co-founder, with David Packard, of the Hewlett-Packard Company (HP). He was born in Ann Arbor, Michigan but moved to Oak Brook, Illinois, when he was two. Less than one year later, he moved to San Francisco at 3 years old. He attended Lowell High School and was accepted at Stanford University as a favor to his late father, Albion Walter Hewlett, who had died of a brain tumor in 1925.</p>

<p>Hewlett received his Bachelor's degree from Stanford University in 1934, an MS degree in electrical engineering from MIT in 1936, and the degree of Electrical Engineer from Stanford in 1939. He was a member of the Kappa Sigma fraternity during his time at Stanford and MIT.</p>

<p>Second lie about Sun Microsystems. Read this:</p>

<p>After graduating from Stanford University in 1980, Vinod Khosla co-founded.[citation needed] electronic design automation company Daisy Systems. Then in 1982, Khosla co-founded Sun Microsystems (SUN is the acronym for the Stanford University Network), along with his Stanford classmates Scott McNealy, Andy Bechtolsheim, and UC Berkeley computer science graduate student Bill Joy. Khosla served as the first Chairman and CEO of Sun Microsystems from 1982 to 1984, when he left the company to become a venture capitalist.</p>

<p>Third lie about google. Read this:</p>

<p>Sergey Brin, the co-founder of Google, Inc, moved to Stanford to acquire a Ph.D in computer science after graduating from University of Maryland. There he met Larry Page, whom he quickly befriended. They crammed their dormitory room with inexpensive computers and applied Brin’s data mining system to build a superior search engine. The program became popular at Stanford and they suspended their Ph.D studies to start up Google in a rented garage.</p>

<p>Fouth lie about cisco system. Read this:</p>

<p>Leonard Bosack is co-founder of Cisco Systems. In 1979, Bosack left DEC for Stanford University, where he obtained a master’s degree in computer science in 1981. There, he met and married graduate student Sandra Lerner in 1980. Cisco Systems founders Len Bosack and his then-wife, Sandra Lerner, are credited with making major design enhancements to one of the technologies that makes the Internet possible—the router. Bosack, Lerner, and the Stanford colleagues who helped them did not invent the first router. That credit goes to William Yeager, a Stanford Medical School engineer, who wrote the software to drive a specialized computer controlled by an Internetwork Operating System (IOS). Bosack and his group took the original router code, enhanced the design, and capitalized on it, creating the first commercially successful router.</p>

<p>Fifth lie about yahoo. Read this:</p>

<p>Yerry Yang is the co-founder, former CEO, and (Chief Yahoo) of Yahoo! Inc. Yang graduated from Sierramont Middle School, and Piedmont Hills High School, then went on to receive his B.S. and M.S. degrees in electrical engineering from Stanford University, where he was a member of Phi Kappa Psi fraternity.</p>

<p>Sixth lie about Silicon Graphics. Read this:</p>

<p>Dr. James H. Clark (born March 23, 1944) is a prolific entrepreneur and former computer scientist. He founded several notable Silicon Valley technology companies, including Silicon Graphics, Inc., Netscape Communications Corporation, myCFO and Healtheon. Clark worked at NYIT's Computer Graphics Lab, served as an assistant professor at the University of California, Santa Cruz from 1974 to 1978, and then as an associate professor of electrical engineering at Stanford University from 1979 to 1982. In 1982, Jim Clark and Abbey Silverstone along with several Stanford graduate students formed Silicon Graphics, Inc. The earliest Silicon Graphics graphical workstations were mainly terminals, but soon newer models were stand-alone graphical UNIX workstations with very fast graphics rendering hardware.</p>

<p>Very nice.</p>

<p>Seventh lie about Hoover Institution. Read this:</p>

<p>The Hoover Institution is a public policy think tank and library founded in 1919 by U.S. president to be, Herbert Hoover, an early alumnus of Stanford. The Hoover Institution is a unit of Stanford University, and is located on the campus.</p>

<p>Eigth but not the last lie about undergraduate education! Read this:</p>

<p><<princeton review="">> 2010 'College Hopes & Worries Survey'</princeton></p>

<p>The schools most named by students as their "Dream Colleges" were:</p>

<p>Stanford University
Harvard College
New York University
Princeton University
Brown University
Yale University
University of California--Los Angeles
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
University of Southern California
Cornell University</p>

<p>The schools most named by parents as their "Dream Colleges" were:</p>

<p>Stanford University
Princeton University
Harvard College
Massachusetts Institute of Technology
Yale University
University of California--Los Angeles
University of Notre Dame
Brown University
University of Southern California
New York University</p>

<p>I didn't pick Stanford because it sounded too gimmicky, lacks tradition, lacks a niche.</p>

<p>Think of pop culture. When smart math geeks, crazy scientists are referenced, it's MIT.
When the rich lawyer is referenced, it's Harvard or Yale
When fantasy land/snobs are referenced, it's Princeton. </p>

<p>...When California is referenced, it's Stanford?</p>

<p>A movie writer could send his math prodigy to Stanford, but why do that when there is MIT?</p>

<p>If that is your opinion, iCalculus, why do you keep coming back to this forum?</p>

<p>It showed up in "hot threads," I clicked on it, and have to give my 2 cents.
I never said Stanford was a bad school.</p>

<p>when I think of happy, Stanford comes to mind. </p>

<p>Stanford doesn't need a stereotypical niche because that's what makes it so well-liked by the student body. it has a place for everyone and everything.</p>

<p>i wouldn't say its gimmicky myself, but its doesnt lack tradition just cuz it doesnt have a history of elitism and isnt 300 years old.</p>

<p>Ambassador Susan Rice said "Having gotten around a bit over the last few years, I am more convinced than ever that this is the best university on the face of the planet".</p>

<p>I talked to several HR personnel and business leaders, and every one of them said that they would consider a Stanford graduate over any of its peer institutions because people come out with a balanced education and the ability to actually use their education in life. they havent lived in a bubble for 4 years and have more than just a diploma.
this is just my anecdotal info, but feel free to have your own opinion.</p>

<p>Two cents? I guess there's still a lot of inflation wherever you are. Honestly, your criteria are so breathtakingly inane (pop culture? fantasy land/snobs?) that no one could possibly take them, or you, seriously.</p>