"Ivy" School Status Forum

[legends159]

Believe me, people at Harvard would have had a very clear idea of who Leland Stanford was. He founded Stanford in honor of his son (which is why the school's official name is Leland Stanford Junior University), who died in Europe of TB or something.

As Stanford is not an Ivy League, you are only awarded with a Junior Trophy upon graduation, as befitting of the official name:

LOL!!!

[Unemployed]

Stanford's endowment is fucking enormous; in fact, it's significantly larger than Princeton's and either very close to or larger than Yale's. Harvard's is the biggest by far. All endowments have taken a hit recently, but Stanford's has fared relatively well because so much of the school's money is tied to Silicon Valley tech (Google, Yahoo, HP all have very close ties to Stanford), which is faring better as an industry than most.

Princeton in 2008: $16.3B
Stanford in 2008: $17.2B
Yale in 2008: $22.9B
Harvard in 2008: $36.6B

Princeton in 2009: $12.6B
Stanford in 2009: $12.6B
Yale in 2009: $16.3B
Harvard in 2009: $25.7B

I don't think these endowment "estimates" are all that meaningful, but if you are going to troll, at least put in the minimal effort and look up the numbers.

[Mr. Pablo]

The Cornell trophy is the smallest. I'd go for UPenn at least

I looked it up, don't go for Cornell, you get this lame one:

--ImageRemoved--


And for all you Yale Gunners out there, this is what you have to look forward to:

If you drink of it you will never be unemployed. But if you leave the shadow of mommy and daddy after drinking, you will grow hideously old without access to your trust fund.

It used to be that attending an Ivy League school was noble and sophisticated; it really said something about the quality of breeding present in the attendee. Ever since they started letting in Catholics and women it just isn't what it used to be.

[Nom Sawyer]

Believe me, people at Harvard would have had a very clear idea of who Leland Stanford was. He founded Stanford in honor of his son (which is why the school's official name is Leland Stanford Junior University), who died in Europe of TB or something.

As Stanford is not an Ivy League, you are only awarded with a Junior Trophy upon graduation, as befitting of the official name:

LOL!!!

And on Graduation day the assembled Stanford Graduates, their futures bright and minds clear, will stand together and raise their trophies to the clear sky and proudly recite the Junior Lawyer pledge.

[crackberry]

Stanford's endowment is fucking enormous; in fact, it's significantly larger than Princeton's and either very close to or larger than Yale's. Harvard's is the biggest by far. All endowments have taken a hit recently, but Stanford's has fared relatively well because so much of the school's money is tied to Silicon Valley tech (Google, Yahoo, HP all have very close ties to Stanford), which is faring better as an industry than most.

Princeton in 2008: $16.3B
Stanford in 2008: $17.2B
Yale in 2008: $22.9B
Harvard in 2008: $36.6B

Princeton in 2009: $12.6B
Stanford in 2009: $12.6B
Yale in 2009: $16.3B
Harvard in 2009: $25.7B

I don't think these endowment "estimates" are all that meaningful, but if you are going to troll, at least put in the minimal effort and look up the numbers.

No, they aren't meaningful, and I wasn't exactly trolling. Someone made the comment that after HYP, endowments go down dramatically. Judging by the numbers you've apparently looked up, that is false. I was just stating the truth. Sure, I was wrong that Stanford's endowment is larger than Yale's and it has — like all the other schools — clearly taken a hit the last few years, but I did acknowledge that.

This is a bad excuse, but I will say that the estimates I had in my head were the 2008 figures, in which case the only part of my post that's wrong was the Yale/Stanford comparison.

[Borhas]

are those numbers before the stock market crash of '08?

[crackberry]

are those numbers before the stock market crash of '08?

The 2008 numbers are, the other numbers are post-crash.

[Unemployed]

Stanford's endowment is fucking enormous; in fact, it's significantly larger than Princeton's and either very close to or larger than Yale's. Harvard's is the biggest by far. All endowments have taken a hit recently, but Stanford's has fared relatively well because so much of the school's money is tied to Silicon Valley tech (Google, Yahoo, HP all have very close ties to Stanford), which is faring better as an industry than most.

Princeton in 2008: $16.3B
Stanford in 2008: $17.2B
Yale in 2008: $22.9B
Harvard in 2008: $36.6B

Princeton in 2009: $12.6B
Stanford in 2009: $12.6B
Yale in 2009: $16.3B
Harvard in 2009: $25.7B

I don't think these endowment "estimates" are all that meaningful, but if you are going to troll, at least put in the minimal effort and look up the numbers.

No, they aren't meaningful, and I wasn't exactly trolling. Someone made the comment that after HYP, endowments go down dramatically. Judging by the numbers you've apparently looked up, that is false. I was just stating the truth. Sure, I was wrong that Stanford's endowment is larger than Yale's and it has — like all the other schools — clearly taken a hit the last few years, but I did acknowledge that.

This is a bad excuse, but I will say that the estimates I had in my head were the 2008 figures, in which case the only part of my post that's wrong was the Yale/Stanford comparison.

I find your posts funny - you attended one of the best colleges in the world, and you have a spot in one of the best law schools in the country. Trolling isn't exactly the right word, but I often see you stepping into defend Stanford, which is so... gratuitous and unnecessary. Chill out dude!

[crackberry]

I find your posts funny - you attended one of the best colleges in the world, and you have a spot in one of the best law schools in the country. Trolling isn't exactly the right word, but I often see you stepping into defend Stanford, which is so... gratuitous and unnecessary. Chill out dude!

This is a sticky situation for me because clearly Stanford is a great school and everyone recognizes it. That said, especially on the East Coast (where I am originally from), people don't think it's in the same league as HYP. I am offended by that and feel the need to defend my alma mater when I think it is slighted.

I do, however, understand that my saying, "Stanford doesn't get the respect it deserves" (paraphrased) can come across as being conceited and ridiculous. I know people recognize Stanford as one of the best universities in the country (and the world). I just think a lot of people, for whatever reason, don't think of it as a peer to HYP (hence the HYP designation), which I frankly do not understand.

[Borhas]

are those numbers before the stock market crash of '08?

The 2008 numbers are, the other numbers are post-crash.

oh I didn't notice the other set... they all got cut down a size or two. Always good to see some of the fat trimmed... make room for some new blood!

[legends159]

I find your posts funny - you attended one of the best colleges in the world, and you have a spot in one of the best law schools in the country. Trolling isn't exactly the right word, but I often see you stepping into defend Stanford, which is so... gratuitous and unnecessary. Chill out dude!

This is a sticky situation for me because clearly Stanford is a great school and everyone recognizes it. That said, especially on the East Coast (where I am originally from), people don't think it's in the same league as HYP. I am offended by that and feel the need to defend my alma mater when I think it is slighted.

I do, however, understand that my saying, "Stanford doesn't get the respect it deserves" (paraphrased) can come across as being conceited and ridiculous. I know people recognize Stanford as one of the best universities in the country (and the world). I just think a lot of people, for whatever reason, don't think of it as a peer to HYP (hence the HYP designation), which I frankly do not understand.

Stanford UG may not be peer to HYP, but as a university it is.

[Borhas]

UG:

MIT>Cal Tech>US Military Academy (West Point)>Harvard=Amherst=Williams=Swarthmore>Yale>Princeton

[crackberry]

I find your posts funny - you attended one of the best colleges in the world, and you have a spot in one of the best law schools in the country. Trolling isn't exactly the right word, but I often see you stepping into defend Stanford, which is so... gratuitous and unnecessary. Chill out dude!

This is a sticky situation for me because clearly Stanford is a great school and everyone recognizes it. That said, especially on the East Coast (where I am originally from), people don't think it's in the same league as HYP. I am offended by that and feel the need to defend my alma mater when I think it is slighted.

I do, however, understand that my saying, "Stanford doesn't get the respect it deserves" (paraphrased) can come across as being conceited and ridiculous. I know people recognize Stanford as one of the best universities in the country (and the world). I just think a lot of people, for whatever reason, don't think of it as a peer to HYP (hence the HYP designation), which I frankly do not understand.

Stanford UG may not be peer to HYP, but as a university it is.

First, I know you go to SLS.

Second, this is the kind of post that induces my posts.

Stanford University is rivaled only by Harvard and Berkeley in the United States. Period. Stanford University is better overall than Yale University and Princeton University. There is no question about that. Princeton shouldn't even be in the discussion. Sure, it has some great PhD programs, but it doesn't have law, business or medical schools. That alone eliminates it from contention. Yale Law School is the best in the country, but Stanford has a way better business and slightly better medical school than Yale. Also, Stanford's PhD programs are - by and large - better than Yale's. Again, not really a comparison. Only Harvard and Berkeley can compete. Seriously.

And for UG, you are wrong. The reality is there is no real way to prove this point, but you're just wrong. Look at SAT (or ACT) scores, acceptance rate, whatever. Stanford is absolutely a peer to HYP for undergrad. Saying otherwise is ridiculous.

And if you said that merely to goad me, congratulations.

[Borhas]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

[crackberry]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

Yes, this is true, but for the big research universities, the quality of the overall university often dictates the quality of the UG. I'm not sure how they're related, but the best overall universities have the best UGs.

[im_blue]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

IMO no research university has faculty that truly cares about UG students, because their primary job is to produce research. That's what LACs are for.

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

Yes, this is true, but for the big research universities, the quality of the overall university often dictates the quality of the UG. I'm not sure how they're related, but the best overall universities have the best UGs.

Agreed, however there are glaring exceptions such as Brown and Dartmouth (horrible graduate/professional programs - many ranked in the 60s and 70s).

[crackberry]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

Yes, this is true, but for the big research universities, the quality of the overall university often dictates the quality of the UG. I'm not sure how they're related, but the best overall universities have the best UGs.

Agreed, however there are glaring exceptions such as Brown and Dartmouth (horrible graduate/professional programs - many ranked in the 60s and 70s).

Yeah, I guess my point was more this: the best overall universities all have damn good UGs (Harvard, Stanford, Berkeley, Michigan, etc.).

If someone can show me a great overall university with a mediocre UG, I'll be shocked. They are mutually exclusive IMO.

[Borhas]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

Yes, this is true, but for the big research universities, the quality of the overall university often dictates the quality of the UG. I'm not sure how they're related, but the best overall universities have the best UGs.

I guess, or you could just skip that correlative idea and go straight to comparing UG's.

The tiny liberal arts colleges like Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams etc seem to provide at least as good of an education to undergrads, because their schools are devoted purely to that end.

[crackberry]

You guys know it's dumb to compare overall universities right? Nobody gets a Phd in "overall university studies." How good your overall university is (whatever that means) has little net effect on your undergrad experience (+ resources - faculty that care about UG students).

Yes, this is true, but for the big research universities, the quality of the overall university often dictates the quality of the UG. I'm not sure how they're related, but the best overall universities have the best UGs.

I guess, or you could just skip that correlative idea and go straight to comparing UG's.

The tiny liberal arts colleges like Swarthmore, Amherst, Williams etc seem to provide at least as good of an education to undergrads, because their schools are devoted purely to that end.

I totally agree with that. In many ways, the elite LACs (I include Carleton, Pomona, Colorado College, Middlebury, etc. in addition to Amherst, Williams and Swarthmore in that category) provide a better UG experience than the big, elite research universities like HYPS. At the LACs, you have professors dedicated to teaching UGs rather than to research and teaching grad students. That wasn't really my point though.

[Borhas]

If someone can show me a great overall university with a mediocre UG, I'll be shocked. They are mutually exclusive IMO.

ehh that seems about right, the only one I can think of is George Washington, I'm not even sure if that counts

[groundkontrol]

I've studied at two Ivy League schools. I did undergrad at Cornell, graduate school at Columbia, and I'm pretty sure I'll be attending Penn for law school. The "Ivy League" is simply a sports conference consisting of eight schools all in the Northeast and all founded before 1865. They are Cornell, Columbia, Penn, Harvard, Yale, Princeton, Brown, and Dartmouth. Outside of sports however, these eight schools are some of the best in the country. They are consistently ranked in the top twenty for undergrad, have huge endowments, fantastic alumni networks, and renowned faculty. Admission is also highly competitive. Hope that helped.

[tomhobbes]

If someone can show me a great overall university with a mediocre UG, I'll be shocked. They are mutually exclusive IMO.

ehh that seems about right, the only one I can think of is George Washington, I'm not even sure if that counts

NYU, maybe?

[crackberry]

If someone can show me a great overall university with a mediocre UG, I'll be shocked. They are mutually exclusive IMO.

ehh that seems about right, the only one I can think of is George Washington, I'm not even sure if that counts

NYU, maybe?

Definitely more so than GW. Hard to know where to draw the line. NYU is probably the best example.

[AngryAvocado]

Stanford's endowment is fucking enormous; in fact, it's significantly larger than Princeton's and either very close to or larger than Yale's. Harvard's is the biggest by far. All endowments have taken a hit recently, but Stanford's has fared relatively well because so much of the school's money is tied to Silicon Valley tech (Google, Yahoo, HP all have very close ties to Stanford), which is faring better as an industry than most.

Princeton in 2008: $16.3B
Stanford in 2008: $17.2B
Yale in 2008: $22.9B
Harvard in 2008: $36.6B

Princeton in 2009: $12.6B
Stanford in 2009: $12.6B
Yale in 2009: $16.3B
Harvard in 2009: $25.7B

I don't think these endowment "estimates" are all that meaningful, but if you are going to troll, at least put in the minimal effort and look up the numbers.

No, they aren't meaningful, and I wasn't exactly trolling. Someone made the comment that after HYP, endowments go down dramatically. Judging by the numbers you've apparently looked up, that is false. I was just stating the truth. Sure, I was wrong that Stanford's endowment is larger than Yale's and it has — like all the other schools — clearly taken a hit the last few years, but I did acknowledge that.

This is a bad excuse, but I will say that the estimates I had in my head were the 2008 figures, in which case the only part of my post that's wrong was the Yale/Stanford comparison.

Just to clarify, I was referring solely to the Ivies when I said "After HYP, the endowments drop dramatically to levels comparable to their non-Ivy peers." I'm well aware of the fact that Stanford's endowment is competitive with YP, and the entire point of my post was that there are so many great schools that the Ivy distinction really isn't what it once was.

[Borhas]

If someone can show me a great overall university with a mediocre UG, I'll be shocked. They are mutually exclusive IMO.

ehh that seems about right, the only one I can think of is George Washington, I'm not even sure if that counts

NYU, maybe?

I can't think of a better example, and yet NYU's UG is much better than mediocre... so the hypothesis fails to be rejected