BBTV Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 Most of you who are calling Stanford "elite" wouldn't be able to make it through a program there if your tuition and room / board were covered, and they provided twice-daily massages. A lot of people just don't understand the difference between a top school like an MIT, Stanford, UPenn, etc. and your local "admit everyone in the state" school (one of which I got my undergrad from, so I'm including my self in this.) It was only in my later years that I realized that while ultimately you are responsible for your own success, and it is possible to succeed no matter what path you choose, there is a reason that a higher percentage of graduates from these top schools are successful in what they do - and it's not necessarily because of mom and dad either.Complaining about elitism = jealousy.Now about the uniforms - a little black isn't always a bad thing. These are just a little too dull for me.That's all well and good. But as long as the concept of a "Gentleman's C" continues to exist among Ivy Class schools, etc., complaints about elitism will not be completely unfounded. And I'd still like to see a rough estimate of how many students were able to take advantage of that financial deal Stanford is offering.Stanford's "selectivity" unfortunately means that you likely would need a top class preperatory education in order to succeed there. How many low income families have access to such an education?I'm not necessarily complaining about it, but it is quite likely Stanford does suffer from it to an extent.I know many people who have attended Ivy league schools, CMU, or Stanford for graduate school despite having attended state colleges and public-high schools. Certainly a "connected" private education opens doors for people, but not attending "Trust Fund High" doesn't preclude one from working their way into a great situation. "The views expressed here are mine and do not reflect the official opinion of my employer or the organization through which the Internet was accessed." Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
rams80 Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 Most of you who are calling Stanford "elite" wouldn't be able to make it through a program there if your tuition and room / board were covered, and they provided twice-daily massages. A lot of people just don't understand the difference between a top school like an MIT, Stanford, UPenn, etc. and your local "admit everyone in the state" school (one of which I got my undergrad from, so I'm including my self in this.) It was only in my later years that I realized that while ultimately you are responsible for your own success, and it is possible to succeed no matter what path you choose, there is a reason that a higher percentage of graduates from these top schools are successful in what they do - and it's not necessarily because of mom and dad either.Complaining about elitism = jealousy.Now about the uniforms - a little black isn't always a bad thing. These are just a little too dull for me.That's all well and good. But as long as the concept of a "Gentleman's C" continues to exist among Ivy Class schools, etc., complaints about elitism will not be completely unfounded. And I'd still like to see a rough estimate of how many students were able to take advantage of that financial deal Stanford is offering.Stanford's "selectivity" unfortunately means that you likely would need a top class preperatory education in order to succeed there. How many low income families have access to such an education?I'm not necessarily complaining about it, but it is quite likely Stanford does suffer from it to an extent.I know many people who have attended Ivy league schools, CMU, or Stanford for graduate school despite having attended state colleges and public-high schools. Certainly a "connected" private education opens doors for people, but not attending "Trust Fund High" doesn't preclude one from working their way into a great situation.It's just much harder, and you have to know the opportunity is there, which may not necessarily be the case. Although you don't necessarily need to go to an Ivy either for some things. The Grad program I'm in is one of the 4 or 5 best in its field...and it's a big state school (Library Sciences @ Indiana) On 8/1/2010 at 4:01 PM, winters in buffalo said: You manage to balance agitation with just enough salient points to keep things interesting. Kind of a low-rent DG_Now. On 1/2/2011 at 9:07 PM, Sodboy13 said: Today, we are all otaku. "The city of Peoria was once the site of the largest distillery in the world and later became the site for mass production of penicillin. So it is safe to assume that present-day Peorians are descended from syphilitic boozehounds."-Stephen Colbert POTD: February 15, 2010, June 20, 2010 The Glorious Bloom State Penguins (NCFAF) 2014: 2-9, 2015: 7-5 (L Pineapple Bowl), 2016: 1-0 (NCFAB) 2014-15: 10-8, 2015-16: 14-5 (SMC Champs, L 1st Round February Frenzy) Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
swilson160 Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 As others get tired of this thread, I soldier on...I see your "easing of the financial burden" and raise you an admission rate of 11%The more people they admit, the lower the standards for admission must get. The high standards for admission are a large part of what sets Stanford and similar schools apart from other schools--after all, one of the main values of a degree from a particular school is that it shows you were able to get into a school of that caliber. So to admit more students just because you can doesn't make sense. You start accepting everyone and you become just another Washington State.Also, better schools get more applicants because people recognize the value of a degree from such schools as opposed to a WSU--so they necessarily have to accept a lower percentage of applicants.[Feel free to insert your favorite school's rival in place of Washington State in the above paragraphs. I'm a Husky, baby!]So how is that not being elitist? If you have such high, exclusive standards, most, if not all, folks who are not among "the elite" will fail to get in.Admission is based primarily on performance, scores, recommendations, and a student's body of work. True, some students have an advantage because a relative went there, but that's life; who you know plays a role in education and afterwards. But when your primary criteria are the same for everyone and based not on wealth or class but on what a student has done and what a student has shown they are capable of, that's not elitist. You can be elite without being elitist.And....according to that website a little more than 22,000 applied to Stanford for admission into the class of 2010. I'm pretty sure there are state schools that have more applicants than that.The raw number of applicants isn't what is important, it is the number of applicants in proportion to the number of admissions based upon the standards for admission. Of course state schools get a higher number of applicants--most admit more students and their standards are lower, so more students qualify for admission. A lower percentage of admissions shows that more people who are qualified (or think they are qualified) for admission apply. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Sodboy13 Posted August 28, 2008 Share Posted August 28, 2008 The Grad program I'm in is one of the 4 or 5 best in its field...and it's a big state school (Library Sciences @ Indiana)Holy . I know two of your classmates. On 1/25/2013 at 1:53 PM, 'Atom said: For all the bird de lis haters I think the bird de lis isnt supposed to be a pelican and a fleur de lis I think its just a fleur de lis with a pelicans head. Thats what it looks like to me. Also the flair around the tip of the beak is just flair that fleur de lis have sometimes source I am from NOLA. PotD: 10/19/07, 08/25/08, 07/22/10, 08/13/10, 04/15/11, 05/19/11, 01/02/12, and 01/05/12. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jimsimo Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Stanford looked great last night. Thank goodness they got rid of the unnecessary black trim and went back to the style they were known for.Somewhere, Jim Plunkett and John Elway are smiling. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
statebully Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Stanford looked great last night. Thank goodness they got rid of the unnecessary black trim and went back to the style they were known for.Somewhere, Jim Plunkett and John Elway are smiling.I too thought that Stanford's new look was an upgrade last night. I didn't think it was too simple because they went back to some of the traditional style from its past. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
goaztecs Posted August 29, 2008 Share Posted August 29, 2008 Stanford did the right thing and dropped the black from their uniforms. Watching this game last night and both teams looked good with Stanford and Oregon State going with simple jerseys. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
darkhaha Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Why no TV numbers, though? Without them the jersey is way too plain, in my opinion. At least it's not as bad as NC State's new set, which has no stripes on the pants or jersey AND no TV numbers. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
oldschoolvikings Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 Agree... it was a nice looking game all around, but TV numbers would make this uni go from good to very good IMO. http://dstewartpaint.blogspot.com/ Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
walkerws Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 I think Stanford had a boring uniform that was better than what they had but nothing to be crazy about. That said, it's ok. I like teams to have their own identity in their uniform and this one just doesn't. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
guest23 Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 their new jersey is exactly the same as alabama's now...crimson/cardinal with white numbers front and back only...nothing distinct at all. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
TFoA Posted August 30, 2008 Share Posted August 30, 2008 their new jersey is exactly the same as alabama's now...crimson/cardinal with white numbers front and back only...nothing distinct at all.Exactly. Give Stanford a red helmet and they're Alabama on the west coast. That's why it's a downgrade in my mind. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.