I've gotten offers from Stanford, NAU, CU, and UNC. Where do I go?

No. Highly selective schools pride themselves on not having students take out loans. This claim helps increase the number of applications. That helps the other thing that they pride themselves on which is having the lowest acceptance rate possible.

From Yale's website:

Yale meets 100% of demonstrated financial need for all admitted students regardless of citizenship or immigration status. ... Yale does not expect students to take out loans. Instead, Yale financial aid awards includes a Yale Scholarship, a parent contribution, and a small student contribution.

I did a Master's degree at Stanford in engineering.

Most people who did PhDs that I knew took around 7 years. Math majors were faster. 5 years is definitely a very normal duration, if not speedy.

If you don't have to take out excessive loans, go to Stanford. Having a Stanford degree has opened a ridiculous number of doors for me. My undergrad degree from a state school taught me just as much, but people just think Stanford is the be all end all.

It's also a very, very nice place to live.

I can’t comment on their running programs. But I just graduated from UNC in August, and I can’t recommend that you go elsewhere strongly enough. Very disappointing academic experience. Everything wrong with college campuses is exemplified in Chapel Hill. If you want a glimpse into what it’s like there, combine stringent COVID measures + online learning + “Coddling of the American Mind” by Jonathan Haidt.

My neighbor played basketball for Stanford. He was not close to being the smartest kid in his HS class. He graduated with a 3.5 and said that id was much easier than high school.

SDSU Aztec wrote:

Breakfast In Bed wrote:

What exactly do you care about or look for from a college other than running? Do you have something in particular you want to study? Have a career in mind? If nothing else, is there particular weather you like or don't like?

I would guess he has those options only in his dreams. Even if he does, it would be ridiculous for him to ask for advice on LR. We can point out that Stanford is far superior academically to NAU and not too much more.

So this is just a troll post and the mods should just nuke this otherwise useless thread?

Breakfast In Bed wrote:

SDSU Aztec wrote:

I would guess he has those options only in his dreams. Even if he does, it would be ridiculous for him to ask for advice on LR. We can point out that Stanford is far superior academically to NAU and not too much more.

So this is just a troll post and the mods should just nuke this otherwise useless thread?

I didn't say that the thread should be deleted. What advice do you believe he could possibly receive here that would help him with his decision?

Okay, I didn't realize this thread would obtain so much attention.

For some background, I'm a high achieving student (not just runner). I have a 3.87 GPA and a 31 ACT. Of course these aren't phenomenal, but definitely a lot better compared to most of the kids in my school (it's a private school too). I'm planning on studying exercise physiology in college.

As for my running, I'm more of a 3200/5k runner. I don't want to give out specific times to keep my identity private. With that being said, I'm under 9:00 and 15:00.

I took my official visit to CU a few weeks ago and have eliminated it from the list. Went to UNC and loved it. Taking my officials to NAU and Stanford in the coming weeks.

Did CU offer you an athletic scholarship? Are your parents well off? If so, Stanford will be unaffordable. NAU will be nearly free because they put their money into distance.

If you want to run pro after college, go to NAU or CU. If you want to focus on a prestigious education, go to Stanford.

A couple things to keep in mind though:

1. Statistically, if you go to Stanford you're not as likely to reach your ceiling as a runner as you are at a program like NAU or CU.

2. Elite educations like Stanford are incredibly overrated. If you want some stats to back it up, look up "Malcolm Gladwell big fish small pond". Going by the numbers, you're better off with an education from CU than Stanford.

Scholar Expert wrote:

No. Highly selective schools pride themselves on not having students take out loans. This claim helps increase the number of applications. That helps the other thing that they pride themselves on which is having the lowest acceptance rate possible.

From Yale's website:

Yale meets 100% of demonstrated financial need for all admitted students regardless of citizenship or immigration status. ... Yale does not expect students to take out loans. Instead, Yale financial aid awards includes a Yale Scholarship, a parent contribution, and a small student contribution.

"...demonstrated financial need..."

The O.P. said their income is $125K so I don't think they qualify.

We could afford Stanford for our daughter and that's what my wife wants wants to do, but I'm strongly opposed to her going there. Why should we pay twice as much as it would cost to go to U.C.L.A. or Cal? Those are very good schools. LR posters make it seem like it's Ivy League or nothing, but my daughter is smart and personable and will have a good career. If I'm an employer, a degree from an expensive private school tells me the kid has wealthy parents.

We know who you are Colin. Schools already made you offers despite never having been on campus? Seriously? Please stay over on the West Coast. Stanford sounds like just the place for you

Real Dealer wrote:

It is just embarrassing to most Americans to spend their entire twenties in school while most are contributing to society.

Contributing to society? Lol most jobs these days are more of a drain than a contribution to society.

Flagpole wrote:

holterskolter2 wrote:

I know lots of PhDs in hard sciences. None of them were actually going in to campus for more than 4 years, but almost all of them took 5 or 6 years to actually be awarded their degree, because of repeated edits and updates to their dissertation. They all were off working a "real job" during that extra year or two.

Not all Ph.D.s are the same. One from Stanford in Immunology is superior to many from other places. My wife didn't need to have a "real job", because she received a very decent stipend (and no tuition of course) the whole time she was getting her degree from Stanford. She then got a Master's Degree in Public Policy from the University of Michigan and worked as a Policy Analyst for the NIH.

Tony Fauci was her immediate boss...that was her first "real job" post college and graduate degrees.

Tony Fauci? Did she consult on sending NIH money to the Wuhan lab for "gain-of function" research?

UNC - most conservative/christian of the 4.

jonesy22 wrote:

Flagpole wrote:

Not all Ph.D.s are the same. One from Stanford in Immunology is superior to many from other places. My wife didn't need to have a "real job", because she received a very decent stipend (and no tuition of course) the whole time she was getting her degree from Stanford. She then got a Master's Degree in Public Policy from the University of Michigan and worked as a Policy Analyst for the NIH.

Tony Fauci was her immediate boss...that was her first "real job" post college and graduate degrees.

Tony Fauci? Did she consult on sending NIH money to the Wuhan lab for "gain-of function" research?

What you state there about Tony Fauci (Dr. Anthony Fauci to you as you do not know him personally), is untrue.

arunnerinwa wrote:

I did a Master's degree at Stanford in engineering.

Most people who did PhDs that I knew took around 7 years. Math majors were faster. 5 years is definitely a very normal duration, if not speedy.

If you don't have to take out excessive loans, go to Stanford. Having a Stanford degree has opened a ridiculous number of doors for me. My undergrad degree from a state school taught me just as much, but people just think Stanford is the be all end all.

It's also a very, very nice place to live.

Yep to all of that.

After getting her two graduate degrees from Stanford and then The University of Michigan and then working for 3 years, we had our first kid, and she decided to stay at home with her and then continued to after our second one. She ended up being a stay-at-home Mom for 15 years. She then decided to become a college professor. Those jobs don't grow on trees. Her excellent education and experience working for the NIH got her a job immediately, and she has been approached unsolicited for tons of other jobs in and out of college education since she went back to work.

Assuming this post is by a real person, I would say it depends on what you value. I'm starting my fifth year of grad school at Stanford. It's a very unique place. There's definitely an attitude that everyone here is the most talented ever. And while there are students that are on another level of intellect here, there are also plenty that have over-inflated egos and think their expertise applies to things far outside of their specific field.

Also, it's crazy to even have to consider this, but you may also want to try to guess when the pandemic will be considered under control. Stanford will be among the last schools in the country to return to normal, and Covid restrictions were quite miserable here and over the top during the 2020-2021 academic year. For example, the wrestling team was practicing outdoors to try to prevent the spread of covid. Non-athletes were isolated if they were on campus. It was also a little unnerving to see how quick they were to drop 11 varsity sports last year with 0 prior hint that they would do that. Hopefully, there's trust among athletes now that their sport won't be unexpectedly cut.

In normal times though, yeah Stanford will set you up well career-wise. That's just one of the benefits of going here. Seems like a lot of students get internships in the summers; normally, those aren't necessarily easy to come by for college students.

If you value running most, NAU needs some serious attention. That area of Arizona is beautiful, looks to be tons of trails, you'd be around several current pro runners, and you're likely to be in the conversation for XC championships every year. There aren't too many pro runners in the Bay Area that I'm aware of; granted, a few of the current runners on Stanford's team will almost certainly be running professionally within a few years, and there are some excellent recent alumni. Same could be said about NAU's team though too I suppose. But yeah, I don't know, honestly you're going to hear great and horrible things about each school from anonymous people on an online message board.

Cole Sprout Reporting For Duty wrote:

Okay, I didn't realize this thread would obtain so much attention.

For some background, I'm a high achieving student (not just runner). I have a 3.87 GPA and a 31 ACT. Of course these aren't phenomenal, but definitely a lot better compared to most of the kids in my school (it's a private school too). I'm planning on studying exercise physiology in college.

As for my running, I'm more of a 3200/5k runner. I don't want to give out specific times to keep my identity private. With that being said, I'm under 9:00 and 15:00.

I took my official visit to CU a few weeks ago and have eliminated it from the list. Went to UNC and loved it. Taking my officials to NAU and Stanford in the coming weeks.

If you are planning on studying exercise physiology, which schools have the best programs? Enjoy your running in college as much as possible, but it isn't your future. Normally this is an easy choice, Stanford, but given your choice of study, I don't think any of these schools are the right choice as they don't appear to offer that coursed of study. Go to BYU, it is the best running program that does.

The actual answer is Princeton, Yale and Harvard. You can get grants to cover everything. Stanford too. None of them would make the grants contingent on you running for them... if you are actually admitted? You want to graduate undergrad with no debt. That is the goal. Then you can decide what to do.... like maybe even run in Flagstaff or Boulder.