What is BAD about Stanford?

Colleges & Universities Stanford University
21

<p>Phantasmagoric, I’ll be the first to admit I’m not the most well informed on a school I don’t even go to, so my points may be a little off. I wanted people to know I was rejected before they read anything, so they would know that what I say may not be the most concrete. I’m really not trying to be bitter or angry, all I wanted to do is show another side.</p>

<p>But honestly, you refuted everything I said. Everything.</p>

<p>

That doesn’t really make up for the long distance. What I was trying to say is that SF isn’t as close and accessible as the viewbook portrays it. I remember that I read that a student aid they visited SF once or twice, but never really went off campus because they had no need to. There is something call the “Stanford Bubble” for a reason. Just because you may not follow it, doesn’t make it false for everyone.</p>

<p>

My source for that (remove the <em>, CC doesn’t appear to like this website):
<a href=“http://www.un”>http://www.un</a></em>igo.com/Explorer/Videos/Video.aspx?CollegeID=25&VideoId=5200</p>

<p>

My source: [The</a> New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices](<a href=“http://www.nytimes.com/imagepages/2006/09/17/weekinreview/20060917_LEONHARDT_CHART.html]The”>The New York Times > Week in Review > Image > Collegiate Matchups: Predicting Student Choices)
From the table you can see that Stanford loses 60% of the Yale cross-admits, and an overwhelming 73% to Harvard. 60% is not a tie, nor is 73% “barley” losing. Having almost 3 out of 4 cross admits choose Harvard over Stanford just shows how it is not the number one school most students portray it as.</p>

<p>

Have you not heard of the Stanford Slaughter? There’s nothing like a Berkeley Butchery or Caltech Carnage. Yes, this is true at other schools, but it’s evident at Stanford the most. Knocking down thousands upon thousands of equally qualified candidates makes me wonder how random Stanford is. At other schools, the more “points” you rack up (good scores, legacies etc.), the better your chance of getting in. At Stanford, it seems like once you cross a certain threshold, you get thrown into the lottery.
The following link has a better explanation on the inherent randomness:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/stanford-university/615741-i-got-into-stanford-3-4-gpa-possible-3.html#post1061622320[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/stanford-university/615741-i-got-into-stanford-3-4-gpa-possible-3.html#post1061622320&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>

As the Stanford Daily archives are down, the following is the Google Cache link to the article regarding the trees:
[Palm</a> tree rumors: axed - The Stanford Daily Online](<a href=“http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:SOEfdtbWOKoJ:daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/1/18/palmTreeRumorsAxed+stanford+daily+palm+trees&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us]Palm”>http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:SOEfdtbWOKoJ:daily.stanford.edu/article/2008/1/18/palmTreeRumorsAxed+stanford+daily+palm+trees&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)

For a school so concerned with the environment, they appear to eschew it when image comes into play. And if the palm trees are sitting in planters, could it be that they’re waiting to finish a building and then replant them? And if they have so many, why do they still ship them from Southern California?</p>

<p>Regarding all of the students being the same, a past alum said the following:

[Stanford</a> University: a review from a happy alum - Stanford University - Epinions.com](<a href=“Shopping Online at Shopping.com | Price Comparison Site”>Shopping Online at Shopping.com | Price Comparison Site)</p>

<p>

I didn’t say it wasn’t true other places, but it seems integral to Stanford. I can’t find my source, but I remember they said that Stanford isn’t like any other college experience. It’s not quite like high school, but it’s also not like grad school. It’s a mix of these that doesn’t lead to a normal undergrad experience. Most other colleges are not primarily graduate institutions, nor do they have the drama of high school. (Don’t believe me on the drama? Look at Stanford Juicy Campus page, where someone outs nearly every member of the gay community, and where they viciously attack some members of the community - horribly harsh if you ask me)</p>

<p>

If you read my post at the bottom of the page, I admit my mistake regarding drop deadlines and corrected it. And the milk and cookies comment was not totally meant tongue-in-cheek. You can read the whole article for yourself at [Go</a> bears - The Stanford Daily Online](<a href=“http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:RsPXUvz46k8J:daily.stanford.edu/article/2004/11/22/goBears+stanford+daily+go+bears&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us]Go”>http://74.125.47.132/search?q=cache:RsPXUvz46k8J:daily.stanford.edu/article/2004/11/22/goBears+stanford+daily+go+bears&hl=en&ct=clnk&cd=1&gl=us)
At the end, it states that all of these things are true, but Stanford is still a better place due in part to its invite-only status.</p>

<p>

This statement makes it clear what “a lot of other colleges” you refer to are, the other top few in the nation. And there may be no stigma in your experience since you’re surrounded by other Stanford students. If you were to go to a place without a lot of high achieving students, there may be a difference.</p>

<p>

The post above mine refutes your weather comment, saying this year has been exceptionally warm. Although I may have said it was rainier than it really is, it’s still not prefect 24/7/365.</p>

<p>

Sorry for the phrasing, by bike racks, I was referring to places to park a bike. Saying “it has lots and lots of infrastructure to do amazing things” just puts as much of a positive bias on the school as my negative spin did. How can you say I was overly harsh about the school when you’re overly positive? The topic wasn’t “What is good about Stanford,” as the OP wanted the bad parts. Stanford is not the end-all-be-all paradise, and I’m tired of everyone saying that.</p>

<p>

The Directors Cup is overall achievement, but excellence in any specific area. Stanford may have a bunch of teams at the top, but it’s not number one in any area. Who has won the Big Game 6 out of the 7 past years? Exactly.</p>

<p>

Yes, but that doesn’t make it any less true about Stanford. I was just using one personal example, there’s many more out there. There was another article in the Stanford Daily about a student who tried to graduate, but couldn’t, so they were stuck on campus not taking any classes for a semester. I’m trying to show that Stanford isn’t immune to these problems.</p>

<p>

Just because you have the Stanford name on your degree? Because of connections? It’s true that Google started at Stanford… Grad School! Connections came into play there, but that doesn’t appear to be true for undergrad. You would get the same undergrad education many other places, you just don’t get the name.</p>

<p>

It’s obvious that you believe all the ego-boosting crap they throw at you once you get there, and don’t know much about Stanford without your rose colored glasses. Stanford, although one of the finest universities (if not the finest) in the world, is not heaven. It’s just another school, with its own set of opportunities and problems. The forum is flooded with reasons why Stanford is amazing, but it only applies to the ~6% of students who get in. What about the other equally talented 94%? The ones who could have been there and the ones heartbroken over the decision have nothing to console them. Sorry, but I don’t want other people to have to go through what I did.</p>

22

<p>I think you are all overlooking the over-awesomeness factor. It’s a problem.</p>

23

<p>hahaha Beef Supreme</p>

24

<p>I’m not sure how to quote, but I’ll reply to your points as before:</p>

<ol>
<li><p>My point about SF is, yeah, sure, it’s not right off campus, but this 45-minute train ride really isn’t as bad as you make it seem. And if you want something closer, go to San Jose. Heck, you can go to plenty of cities nearby that have similar offerings.</p></li>
<li><p>Your source about there being “one kind of student” is really weak–you can’t really support that sort of thing. It just weakens your argument to say that there’s one type of student at Stanford.</p></li>
<li><p>That cross-admit table is old and flawed. If you look at other threads discussing it, it’s biased toward students in the northeast, has a bad sampling, and so on. On top of that, according to statistics that the admissions office released, Stanford tied with Yale 50-50 this past year, and barely lost to Harvard (and won against Princeton and MIT). You can search the meeting minutes in the Stanford review to see this.</p></li>
<li><p>How is that “evident at Stanford the most?” That makes no sense! Harvard and Yale both have lower admit rates than Stanford! Their admissions are more of a “slaughter” than Stanford’s… Only students rejected really seem to think that the process is random/unfair/a lottery. Really, it would make no sense if it were.</p></li>
<li><p>“For a school so concerned with the environment, they appear to eschew it when image comes into play.” That article is a year old. And Stanford isn’t purchasing lots of new palm trees anyway, since there’s no room for them (there are already 27,000 trees on campus anyway).</p></li>
<li><p>What about everyone being the same? That ego recalibration happens at Cal, too, if you can believe it. (Berkeley was one of my top choices, if I didn’t get into Stanford and some others, and I can say I heard students say all the time how much it was an eye-opening experience to go there, since there are always some students “better” than you. There’s a reason that it’s so “sink-or-swim” there!)</p></li>
<li><p>I’m pretty sure that Stanford isn’t doing anything weird to its undergrads to make its undergrad experience drastically different from others’. Of course, each undergrad has a different experience—if that weren’t the case, then we wouldn’t bother trying to get into schools like Stanford and Harvard.</p></li>
<li><p>I’ve read that article called “Go Bears” – the entire article is tongue-in-cheek. It’s obvious that it’s sarcastic.</p></li>
<li><p>“The post above mine refutes your weather comment, saying this year has been exceptionally warm.” And many other students say that this year has had exceptionally bad weather. Go figure.</p></li>
<li><p>I wouldn’t say I’m overly positive—I have my criticisms of Stanford—but complaining that the campus is too large doesn’t make any sense when every nook and cranny has a purpose. All space is used to run the school. You’re right that the person wants “the bad parts,” but you have so far not given any real bad parts.</p></li>
<li><p>“Stanford may have a bunch of teams at the top, but it’s not number one in any area.” It has many #1 sports, just look them up. And what does it matter whether it’s #1 or #2? I think we can agree that such fine distinctions are pretty useless, because either way, Stanford has a strong athletic scene. </p></li>
<li><p>“I’m trying to show that Stanford isn’t immune to these problems.” You don’t need to. You should be pointing out problems that Stanford has that other rival schools probably don’t—because pointing out problems that they all have isn’t helpful to the OP at all. Bureaucracy is pretty common.</p></li>
<li><p>“Connections came into play there, but that doesn’t appear to be true for undergrad.” Believe me, it does.</p></li>
<li><p>“It’s obvious that you believe all the ego-boosting crap they throw at you once you get there.” You haven’t shown once why any of my counterpoints is wrong. </p></li>
</ol>

<p>The forum is flooded with praise, but there are plenty of problems at Stanford. You have failed to identify one of them—instead relying on tenuous arguments and hearsay. Really, unless you have actual data (i.e. you go to the school, or have good support), don’t bother trying to convince others of your (pretty obviously wrong) points.</p>

25

<p>Holy crap, killthefifi has done way too much research on this!
I hope you’re doing the same amount of research on other schools to fall in love with them haha
But I think killthefifi did a good job in answering the original question (which was “what is bad about stanford,” not “omg how stanford is amazing”), so I commend her/him for that. I also appreciate the fact that (s)he admitted her/his possible bias upfront, instead of hiding and being like some other CCers I’ve seen, who basically take on the position of, No no, I’m being totally objective b/c complete objectivity is possible!
That said, I’d like to point out that the bad-things list shows just how great of a university Stanford is. The worst things about it, from someone who has thought a great deal about it, are basically that it’s not in a city (personal choice) and that it’s too perfect (also a personal choice- do you want a bubble, or not?).
There are a lot of things that could go wrong w/ a university, and from this list, we can see that Stanford’s faults are contrived at best.
I did like the tongue-in-cheek-ness of killthefifi’s list though, which I think may have been missed. #7, 11, and 13 made me laugh in particular. “It’s immaculate,” haha
Good job though, and thanks for your list
PS- Yes. I am also biased.</p>

26

<p>“This is for lovers, running away!” Damn, this is a wonderful song!</p>

27

<ol>
<li><p>I’m not trying to say SF is really close to campus. Okay, so the train ride might not be that bad. That doesn’t make up for the fact that there’s a 45 minute ride. It might not be “that bad” for you, but the freshman who come expecting to go there over once a week may be disappointed.</p></li>
<li><p>“Your source about there being “one kind of student” is really weak–you can’t really support that sort of thing. It just weakens your argument to say that there’s one type of student at Stanford.”
And your source saying there’s no type of student at Stanford is?
It’s true that Stanford is diverse, it discriminates using Affirmative Action in the admissions process to ensure this. (God forbid they forgo asking the race question, and become more like Cal)
But my argument stands, Stanford students are all alike because they’re all at the top of their respective areas. You think they would survive the admissions process if there wasn’t something amazing about them? As a student, you may view everyone as so different, but as an outsider, it appears that they’re more similar than you give them credit for.</p></li>
<li><p>“statistics that the admissions office released” And you say my tables have a bias?
The minutes state “The percent of non-enrolling students choosing Harvard remained at 27%, rose to 18.2% for Princeton, but dropped to 12.5% for Yale” If Yale tied for the cross admits, at 80 v. 80, that means 116 took Princeton over Stanford, and 173 took Harvard. That’s really statically significant.</p></li>
<li><p>“Harvard and Yale both have lower admit rates than Stanford!” Harvard and Yale are not the only two other schools in the county! I was comparing Stanford to the thousands of other institutions out there, not just the two that edge it out. It may not seem random to you, because you got in, but tell that to the thousands upon thousands of equally qualified candidates.</p></li>
<li><p>“That article is a year old.” So? Just because It’s a year old doesn’t make it false. I don’t believe there has been any change in their policy in the past year, so the points the article brought up still hold true.</p></li>
<li><p>I didn’t say that ego-recalibration would not occur at Cal, just that it is a bad part about Stanford. It’s a bad part of Cal also! Are you saying that Stanford is less of an eye-opening experience?</p></li>
<li><p>Stanford doesn’t have to do anything to make the experience different, because the students do that for themselves. You state, “Of course, each undergrad has a different experience—if that weren’t the case, then we wouldn’t bother trying to get into schools like Stanford and Harvard.” So are you validating my point that the vast amounts of high achieving students distort the experience?</p></li>
<li><p>Even if the article is tongue-in-cheek, some of the points it brings up are valid.</p></li>
<li><p>“And many other students say that this year has had exceptionally bad weather. Go figure." So this is a hearsay battle. There has only been a handful of days with bad weather, and you say you can find someone who says it’s been better? Please.</p></li>
<li><p>“I have my criticisms of Stanford” Tell me, what are they? I don’t think you have criticized Stanford one bit on a thread with the topic being Stanford’s bad aspects.</p></li>
<li><p>“You should be pointing out problems that Stanford has that other rival schools probably don’t." And these are? All of Stanford’s close rival schools have pretty similar problems, and I was hoping that many of the other prospective admits wouldn’t start to drink the Stanford kool-aid too early.</p></li>
<li><p>“Believe me, it does.” Undergraduate connections account for so much? Or are you talking about the Stanford Alumni Association, where a lot of job offers come from? I was referring to getting to creating friendships with fellow students, a la Larry and Sergey from Google. The Stanford Alumni Association would come in handy, but so would the alumni associations from other institutions. From what I’ve read, it seems like the personal connections only become necessary in grad school - which Stanford truly excels in.</p></li>
<li><p>“You haven’t shown once why any of my counterpoints is wrong.” Yes, I have, and I’ve backed up my facts with sources and links. You half cited an article in return? As one of the few people on the Stanford thread not in love with the school, I was attempting to post something different, albeit still slightly biased.</p></li>
</ol>

<p>“there are plenty of problems at Stanford.” You always say this, but you fail to state one of them. Could it be that one that you state would already be on my list? </p>

<p>“You have failed to identify one of them—instead relying on tenuous arguments and hearsay.”
I think I’ve identified nearly every single problem Stanford could possibly have, and I still have a pretty small list. I’ve also supported my points with facts, not only hearsay.</p>

<p>“Really, unless you have actual data (i.e. you go to the school, or have good support), don’t bother trying to convince others of your (pretty obviously wrong) points.”
If I went to the school, I would still be relying on hearsay, but it’s only from my own point of view, and the point of view that Stanford tried to coerce me to have. I’ve cited specific examples in all of my points, some from other students/alum. Your points of view consist of solely your own experiences, failing to take others’ views into consideration. As a student, are you supporting your facts with data? Or do you think your musings are automatically better since you’re a Stanford student? I’ve cited more concrete data as a non-student than you have as a student.</p>

<p>I would say that some of my points are shared by a large number of people, and although you may not agree with them, they still hold true.</p>

28

<p>Sure, Stanford has more grad students than it does undergrads. But, then again, so does Harvard, Yale, Columbia, Northwestern, Johns Hopkins, University of Chicago, Duke, Wash U, MIT, Caltech and plenty of others (I was gonna include UPenn, but it’s actually evenly split, 10,000 for 10,000). So Stanford isn’t really all that different from a very large percentage of it’s peers, a good portion of which have far “worse” ratios than stanford.
And yes, the graduate population is large, but I’ve noticed with universities that no matter how many grad students there are, the heart of the university always seems to belong to the undergrads. I mean, grad students are old, and graduate schools are pretty autonomous in general and are more like separate institutions that just use the university’s name rather than being a major presence in every day life. </p>

<p>Also, you can’t blame Stanford for its admissions being a slaughter. They have no choice in the matter. Over 30,000 people applied this year and their class size is only 1600. It’s not stanford’s fault it’s so popular and the adcoms are doing the best they can to deal with this. </p>

<p>Lastly, I actually like the big campus and the bubble feel. So it’s not a unanimously bad thing. It’s better IMO than colleges with dinky little 200 acre campuses. </p>

<p>As others have said, most of the things you find flawed with stanford are inherent in many other institutions as well. So can you think of anything that is a problem at Stanford and not really anywhere else?</p>

29

<p>

True, but you just can’t write off the grad schools as just using the name. There’s much more to any university than the undergraduate education. It may be the focus for you, because you’re an undergrad student! If you were a grad student, the story may be different.</p>

<p>

You can’t blame them for rejecting so many people, but you can blame them for some things. You can blame them for the recent decision to not expand the undergraduate class. You can blame them for rejecting a few of THE TOP students in the nation. (I’m not just talking about 2400 SAT, I’m talking about the best USAMO kids for example, or those who have made a jaw-dropping impact in their community)</p>

<p>

Everyone has their own likes and dislikes, I just provided this as a possible downside.</p>

<p>

No, because so many universities share common problems. Princeton and Stanford are both relatively far from major cities. Berkeley and Stanford students have to fight one another for Silicon Valley internships. Harvard and Stanford have to reject so many qualified candidates. It’s not each problem that is unique to Stanford, it’s the combination that creates a relatively problem-free environment. </p>

<p>Some fight me on every point I bring up, but what are the problems that Stanford has? In my original post, while I was bringing up possible problems, I still eulogized Stanford. It’s still one of the best (arguably the best) educational institutions in the world, can’t some just admit that it still has some marginal drawbacks?</p>

30

<p>

</p>

<p>Mr. Fifi, did you feel any of the things you are saying now at any point up until the time you wrote this?</p>

31

<p>

</p>

<p>They were in the back of my mind.
And I’m not saying that Stanford is a bad school! I’ve said this over and over.
It’s an amazing place. It truly is, and I still want to go to grad school there.
Why do I like Berkeley so much? Because it’s the most connected to Stanford.
But I’m sorry, Stanford still has a couple of paltry problems!
Even if I got in, I would still complain about these things.</p>

<p>And as a recent acceptee, I bet you’re trying to find reasons to fall in love with Stanford.
There’s thousands out there, just not in this one thread.</p>

32

<p>I think we should leave fifi alone b/c the original question IS asking what’s bad about Stanford, and fifi was basically the only person who dared to answer this on a stanford board.
OP, I guess what this thread is telling you at the moment, is that there really is nothing bad about Stanford b/c even a long list can be comprehensively refuted. You may want to ask this on a different college forum (Berkeley?) b/c we all love Stanford here haha</p>

33

<p>I’m not going to bother with your still petty points–I think I’ve presented a much clearer view of Stanford’s problems, and it’s obvious I can’t break through your bitterness. (Remember when I said to search threads about Stanford’s negatives? That’s where you should look.) You got rejected; get over it and stop trying to bring the school down on points that are not even weaknesses.</p>

34

<p>I’ve known quite a number of Stanford students, and worked with many in my occupational and volunteer work. They are all very nice, thoughtful and hard-working. All of them.</p>

<p>From the mouths of quite a few Stanford grads, some have told me that the Stanford student body is overwhelmingly upper-middle class and wealthy. Of course I was speaking with the ones from the other side of the track, and they’ve mentioned that it took them some time to get used to their privileged classmates and their habits. Most often, they mentioned the fancy cars, the unlimited-ATM withdrawals, the frequent vacations to far-off locales and the overall lifestyle.</p>

<p>I should mention that those in the financial minority to whom I’ve spoken are first-generation Americans, mostly Hispanic and Southeast Asian. To Stanford’s credit, they seem to be opening the door to more of the underprivileged with every successive class.</p>

35

<p>For what it’s worth, I have heard the old saying:</p>

<p>9 out of 10 California girls are hot. The other one goes to Stanford.</p>

36

<p>phantasmagoric, Half of my points were still praise for the school! I don’t get where you’re saying I’m trying to bring Stanford down. So I’m making it into a really great place to go rather than a complete paradise? That’s totally bringing it down.
I apologize if any possible flaw (regardless of how minor it is, or even if it’s a compliment) in Stanford might be a blow to your ego.</p>

<p>And the topic of the thread is the bad parts of the school, and most people have yet to name one. I’m trying to stay on topic. (And BTW, this thread is also on the Berkeley forum now, just to get a different perspective)</p>

37

<p>If you are male, the bad quality of females would certainly qualify as a negative. It sounds superficial now, but once you are actually IN college it does make a difference. </p>

<p>That said, out of the HYPSM schools only Y and P have decent chicks.</p>

38

<p>

</p>

<p>That so, Casanova? If the girls here are so heinously bad looking, I’m sure you’ve gotten with the select few who are hot right? By the way, what do you think the girls say about the guys at Stanford? I guarantee you it’s not that they’re all so hot and how they all feel like all the guys are way out of their league. What were you expecting in college anyway? For girls just to throw themselves at you? To be hooking up with a different chick every night?</p>

<p>I’m even a guy…but the complete and utter lack of self awareness in that post got me ranting like I’m Betty Friedan.</p>

39

<p>Come on docketgold, the guy was only complaining the same way practically every Berkeley student complains :wink: [where I go]. Though, I do want to add that “bad quality” might be subjective for both the males and females. After all, there are likely several interesting, intelligent people at both these schools.</p>

40

<p>Wow mathboy you go to BERKELEY???</p>