2 ms·

What if by limiting enrollment it meant many of those friends hadn't been able to go there? Because that's what we're talking about: trading off a (possibly) be

What if by limiting enrollment it meant many of those friends hadn't been able to go there? Because that's what we're talking about: trading off a (possibly) better experience for a smaller student body with providing more opportunities for a larger number of people.

TedShiller 5y ago
Having a very selective school in the Bay Area is a good thing, better than one that just keeps growing in size. You can't be super selective and huge. Hence Stanford vs Berkeley.
- poopypoopington 5y ago
  Berkeley is super selective and huge mate.
  - TedShiller 5y ago
    > super selective and huge Why don't we give Nobel Prizes to everyone, since you said we can be super selective and huge?
  - babesh 5y ago
    It depends on your definition of huge. Berkeley is a graduate school masquerading as an undergraduate school. When I went, the undergraduate population was roughly 10k whereas the graduate population was roughly 20k. The undergraduate school is factors smaller than the largest undergraduate schools. EDIT: Largest undergraduate schools are around 60k! Even UofT Austin is around 40k. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-list-college/articles/colleges-with-the-most-undergraduates https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-lis... EDIT2: The prestige comes from 1) famous grads 2) the professors who are supported by the graduate students. The undergrads gain from the reflected prestige.
    - TedShiller 5y ago
      I've known people who chose Berkeley over Stanford. It's a personal choice and there is no right answer for the lucky few that gain admission to both. However, this is considered a fairly unusual decision. People are attracted to the higher selectiveness and the smaller size. Personally, I would prefer it if people weren't like that. But it's the way it is.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]

2 ms·

What if by limiting enrollment it meant many of those friends hadn't been able to go there? Because that's what we're talking about: trading off a (possibly) be

by thesausageking 5y ago

TedShiller 5y ago
Having a very selective school in the Bay Area is a good thing, better than one that just keeps growing in size. You can't be super selective and huge. Hence Stanford vs Berkeley.
- poopypoopington 5y ago
  Berkeley is super selective and huge mate.
  - TedShiller 5y ago
    > super selective and huge Why don't we give Nobel Prizes to everyone, since you said we can be super selective and huge?
  - babesh 5y ago
    It depends on your definition of huge. Berkeley is a graduate school masquerading as an undergraduate school. When I went, the undergraduate population was roughly 10k whereas the graduate population was roughly 20k. The undergraduate school is factors smaller than the largest undergraduate schools. EDIT: Largest undergraduate schools are around 60k! Even UofT Austin is around 40k. https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-list-college/articles/colleges-with-the-most-undergraduates https://www.usnews.com/education/best-colleges/the-short-lis... EDIT2: The prestige comes from 1) famous grads 2) the professors who are supported by the graduate students. The undergrads gain from the reflected prestige.
    - TedShiller 5y ago
      I've known people who chose Berkeley over Stanford. It's a personal choice and there is no right answer for the lucky few that gain admission to both. However, this is considered a fairly unusual decision. People are attracted to the higher selectiveness and the smaller size. Personally, I would prefer it if people weren't like that. But it's the way it is.
      - deleted 5y ago
        [deleted]