undergraduate admits up 150 this year

undergraduate admits up 150 this year - Printable Version

+- The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board)
+-- Forum: C-House! (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-4.html)
+--- Forum: The CardBoard (https://thecardboard.org/board/forum-5.html)
+--- Thread: undergraduate admits up 150 this year (/thread-25559.html)

Pages: 1 2

undergraduate admits up 150 this year - 82lsju - 04-11-2025

Quote:Levin announced that the class of 2029 admitted approximately 150 more first-year and transfer students than in previous years. He also shared the creation of a new committee to investigate expanding the size of the undergraduate class.

“In the last fifty years, everything at Stanford has grown… but not the number of undergraduate students,” Levin said. “Some growth is overdue, and it’s possible without changing the fundamental character of the education we provide.” He added that this change will allow more young people to access a Stanford education: “The fact of the matter is that we turn away many qualified students, and it’s in our capability to educate more of them.”

https://stanforddaily.com/2025/04/11/levin-affirms-universitys-commitment-to-academic-freedom-announces-expanded-undergraduate-class/

if this continues the undergrad population will increase by probably +/-550 over the next four years. In Fall 2024 there were 7,554 undergrads

https://facts.stanford.edu/academics/undergraduate-profile/

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - Goose - 04-11-2025

(04-11-2025, 08:35 AM)82lsju Wrote:
Quote:“In the last fifty years, everything at Stanford has grown… but not the number of undergraduate students,” Levin said. “Some growth is overdue, and it’s possible without changing the fundamental character of the education we provide.”

Finally someone in "power" states the obvious. I don't think Stanford should (or ever could) aspire to admit an ASU size freshman class, but Stanford's failure to grow proportionally its undergraduate population is IMO clear malfeasance. It is well past time to rectify that.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - Mick - 04-11-2025

(04-11-2025, 08:57 AM)Goose Wrote:
(04-11-2025, 08:35 AM)82lsju Wrote:
Quote:“In the last fifty years, everything at Stanford has grown… but not the number of undergraduate students,” Levin said. “Some growth is overdue, and it’s possible without changing the fundamental character of the education we provide.”
Finally someone in "power" states the obvious. I don't think Stanford should (or ever could) aspire to admit an ASU size freshman class, but Stanford's failure to grow proportionally its undergraduate population is IMO clear malfeasance. It is well past time to rectify that.

Well past time indeed, says this article...from 2007. The points will look familiar.

Should Stanford Expand the Freshman Class? | STANFORD magazine

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - BobK - 04-11-2025

I’ve always read housing is needed for increased undergrad enrollment. Not true now??

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - 82lsju - 04-11-2025

(04-11-2025, 12:53 PM)Mick Wrote:
(04-11-2025, 08:57 AM)Goose Wrote:
(04-11-2025, 08:35 AM)82lsju Wrote:
Quote:“In the last fifty years, everything at Stanford has grown… but not the number of undergraduate students,” Levin said. “Some growth is overdue, and it’s possible without changing the fundamental character of the education we provide.”
Finally someone in "power" states the obvious. I don't think Stanford should (or ever could) aspire to admit an ASU size freshman class, but Stanford's failure to grow proportionally its undergraduate population is IMO clear malfeasance. It is well past time to rectify that.

Well past time indeed, says this article...from 2007. The points will look familiar.

Should Stanford Expand the Freshman Class? | STANFORD magazine

from the article

Quote:Amid this rising tide of achievement, the size of our undergraduate population has remained nearly level for more than 35 years. In 1970, the undergraduate class size was 6,221; in 1980 it was 6,630; last year it was 6,689.

so in 2007 the undergrad enrollment was 6,689 and last fall it was 7,554 or up 13%.....

https://facts.stanford.edu/academics/undergraduate-profile/

if it goes up by 600 (150/year) that would be another ~8% increase

(04-11-2025, 01:00 PM)BobK Wrote: I’ve always read housing is needed for increased undergrad enrollment. Not true now??

well way back when you were "guaranteed" on campus housing for three of four years, now I believe it is all four years. Adding 600 beds could be done by either adding a dorm or two (expensive and not likely allowed due to development restrictions), buying more "near campus" apartments for housing, adding some beds to existing rooms (e.g., make some doubles into triple), not guaranteeing on-campus housing for all four years, or converting some grad student housing to undergrads and finding new options (maybe those off campus apartments) for grad students

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - WindyCityCard - 04-11-2025

(04-11-2025, 01:00 PM)BobK Wrote: I’ve always read housing is needed for increased undergrad enrollment. Not true now??

Stanford has much more housing than it used to, including the ~2400 beds recently added in EVGR. Some of it could be flexed between undergrad and grad usage.

That would of course reduce housing available for grad students, and I'm pretty sure that the # of grad students has increased way faster than the # of undergrads.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - CompSci87 - 04-11-2025

Back when I was a grad student in the '80s, you were lucky if you got on-campus housing for even your first year. I wasn't that lucky. I'm glad that it has gotten much better and hope it doesn't regress too much.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - chrisk - 04-11-2025

(04-11-2025, 01:57 PM)CompSci87 Wrote: Back when I was a grad student in the '80s, you were lucky if you got on-campus housing for even your first year. I wasn't that lucky. I'm glad that it has gotten much better and hope it doesn't regress too much.

Next year, there could be a drop in foreign students, particularly from China. The increase in undergrads may offset decreases in grad enrollment.

The plan was to phase undergrads out of EVGR over the next few years. If they are expecting pressure on graduate enrollment, they may slow that transition.

https://stanforddaily.com/2024/11/15/undergrads-dissatisfied-with-housing/

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - paloalto - 04-11-2025

I don't ascribe to the bigger is better principle when it comes to student population unless the campus infrastructure is in place first (dorms, dining, classroom seats, labs, etc.) Also I feel the requirements for Stanford TA's should be upgraded. Too many student TA's simply aren't that good at being class instructors.

You can read articles about the nightmares some Cal freshmen go through like housing a 45 minute drive from campus. Don't force the issue of more students unless you can provide a top rate college experience for all students.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - 82lsju - 05-02-2025

where the 150 will be living, Sally Ride and Junipero....

https://stanforddaily.com/2025/05/01/housing-expands-for-class-of-29/?utm_campaign=digest&utm_medium=email&utm_source=mailchimp&utm_content=May-02-2025?utm_campaign=digest&utm_medium=email&utm_source=mailchimp&utm_content=May-02-2025

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - TrumpCard - 05-02-2025

The article refers to 150 additional admits, which would suggest an additional 120 students in the freshman class, given recent yield rates. If Stanford continues with that 120 student increase in future classes, that would imply a ~3% increase in total population on campus, assuming yield rates are expected to remain the same and assuming grad student population is expected to remain the same. Those aren't givens, but let's assume for the sake of argument that the school is not expecting other offsetting changes, so the school is planning for a 3% increase in population on campus. That does not seem untenable to me. Stanford has constructed an enormous number of additional square feet over the last few decades without increasing the undergraduate population at all. I attended in the Stone Age, and when I went back for a reunion in 2019, the campus looked like a completely different place from the school I attended. Unless there's something I've missed, the additional square footage should be more than sufficient to support this relatively small increase in student population. If the additional square footage solely supported an increase in the grad student population, then: (1) I disagree with the values that drove the change over the last few decades; and (2) I would support a gradual decrease in the grad student population to allow the university to take this small number of additional undergrads.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - 82lsju - 05-02-2025

(05-02-2025, 11:57 AM)TrumpCard Wrote: The article refers to 150 additional admits, which would suggest an additional 120 students in the freshman class, given recent yield rates. If Stanford continues with that 120 student increase in future classes, that would imply a ~3% increase in total population on campus, assuming yield rates are expected to remain the same and assuming grad student population is expected to remain the same. Those aren't givens, but let's assume for the sake of argument that the school is not expecting other offsetting changes, so the school is planning for a 3% increase in population on campus. That does not seem untenable to me. Stanford has constructed an enormous number of additional square feet over the last few decades without increasing the undergraduate population at all. I attended in the Stone Age, and when I went back for a reunion in 2019, the campus looked like a completely different place from the school I attended. Unless there's something I've missed, the additional square footage should be more than sufficient to support this relatively small increase in student population. If the additional square footage solely supported an increase in the grad student population, then: (1) I disagree with the values that drove the change over the last few decades; and (2) I would support a gradual decrease in the grad student population to allow the university to take this small number of additional undergrads.

some things have changed, when I was an undergrad 1979-82, you were guaranteed three years of housing, now undergrads are guaranteed four years of housing so that's ~33% more housing required.

In 1980 ithe undergrad population was 6,630; and last fall it was 7,554, up ~14%

so back in 1980 ~ 5,000 undergrad housing spots vs ~7,500 today or ~50% more undergrad housing spots today

what I don't know is if there were a lot of singles in Sally Ride and Junipero for the non-frosh, when I was in Serra (now Sally Ride there were I think ~6 singles (three for the RAs and I think three others), I don't know if that's the same now, if there were more singles now then converting them back to doubles gives a "free" capacity increase.

saw some of the "newer dorms" visiting the virtual nephew about 10 years ago, they were much nicer and more spacious than Serra (where I lived one year)

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - TrumpCard - 05-02-2025

Fair points 82lsju. I should have clarified that, when I said I attended in the Stone Age, I meant that I arrived in 1995 when Stanford had not yet broken ground on the Science and Engineering Quad. I don't have precise numbers, but I seem to recall the freshman class was ~1600, so the total undergrad population was probably a bit over 6400. The school guaranteed 4 years of undergraduate housing at that time, so I imagine the school already had at least 6400 housing units for undergrads. When I went back for my reunion in 2019, the undergrad population was not far above the number in 1995 when I arrived, but the campus had added many, many new buildings. The amount of new construction seemed over the top to me given the relatively minor change in undergrad population over the preceding 24 years. I hadn't kept up with developments since 2019 and didn't realize that Stanford already increased the undergrad population another ~10% since 2019. Good for Stanford. In light of that, I don't have such a strong opinion on the potential to add another 7% to the undergrad population, but I'm still generally in the camp of those who think that Stanford should add as many undergrad spots as is reasonably practical. For example, I wouldn't restrict the number simply to maintain the exclusivity of the school, and given the current ration of undergrads to grad students, I would not restrict the undergrad population to allow further additions to the graduate student population.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - qwerty49 - 05-02-2025

(05-02-2025, 02:18 PM)82lsju Wrote:
(05-02-2025, 11:57 AM)TrumpCard Wrote: The article refers to 150 additional admits, which would suggest an additional 120 students in the freshman class, given recent yield rates. If Stanford continues with that 120 student increase in future classes, that would imply a ~3% increase in total population on campus, assuming yield rates are expected to remain the same and assuming grad student population is expected to remain the same. Those aren't givens, but let's assume for the sake of argument that the school is not expecting other offsetting changes, so the school is planning for a 3% increase in population on campus. That does not seem untenable to me. Stanford has constructed an enormous number of additional square feet over the last few decades without increasing the undergraduate population at all. I attended in the Stone Age, and when I went back for a reunion in 2019, the campus looked like a completely different place from the school I attended. Unless there's something I've missed, the additional square footage should be more than sufficient to support this relatively small increase in student population. If the additional square footage solely supported an increase in the grad student population, then: (1) I disagree with the values that drove the change over the last few decades; and (2) I would support a gradual decrease in the grad student population to allow the university to take this small number of additional undergrads.

some things have changed, when I was an undergrad 1979-82, you were guaranteed three years of housing, now undergrads are guaranteed four years of housing so that's ~33% more housing required.

In 1980 ithe undergrad population was 6,630; and last fall it was 7,554, up ~14%

so back in 1980 ~ 5,000 undergrad housing spots vs ~7,500 today or ~50% more undergrad housing spots today

what I don't know is if there were a lot of singles in Sally Ride and Junipero for the non-frosh, when I was in Serra (now Sally Ride there were I think ~6 singles (three for the RAs and I think three others), I don't know if that's the same now, if there were more singles now then converting them back to doubles gives a "free" capacity increase.

saw some of the "newer dorms" visiting the virtual nephew about 10 years ago, they were much nicer and more spacious than Serra (where I lived one year)

And then there was Manzanita Park, aka The Trailers, supposedly a one-year temporary "solution" in 1969 that lingered for 22 years.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - PVTree - 05-02-2025

Stone Age? Let me tell you about mine. I arrived in 1983 and landed at Donner. Not knowing the difference I thought it was an average dorm (as I thought all would be at Stanford) since my only point of reference was a dorm at Illinois Champagne-Urbana when I visited my brother.

Then I started visiting other dorms and saw that not all dorms were made equal. Come "draw" time, I put Storey as my top choice along with some of the brand new dorms at governor's corner.

Alas, it was not meant to be. I had awful draws all three years and was relegated to living in Stern Hall ALL 4 years that I was a student.

Back then, I recall that the incoming freshman class was close to 1600 and the overall number was 6500. Some rough math taking into consideration that students were guaranteed housing 3 out of their 4 years, I'll estimate that there was housing for 3 classes (1600 x 3 = 4800) plus half of the remaining class (1600 x 0.50 = 800) to give a total of 5600.

If all students are guaranteed 4 years today, Stanford must have built ~ 1500 more dorm spaces in the last 40 years which seems completely plausible.

How long before Stanford starts building graduate dorms in Redwood City to reassign their on campus spaces to undergraduates? There can be a Marguerite shuttle taking students back and forth every 30 minutes to Stanford.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - WindyCityCard - 05-02-2025

(05-02-2025, 05:44 PM)qwerty49 Wrote: And then there was Manzanita Park, aka The Trailers, supposedly a one-year temporary "solution" in 1969 that lingered for 22 years.

Almost, but not quite correct qwerty49. The trailers lingered until 1995. I know, because I lived there in 1994-95.

And @PVTree...I lived in Donner too, in 1989-90. Stern >> trailers.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - chrisk - 05-02-2025

A significant number of undergraduates have been living in EVGR since the pandemic. The spots were going to revert to graduate students in the near future. Stanford has taken over apartment buildings at Oak Creek and about a dozen other buildings from Redwood City through Palo Alto where they provide subsidized housing for grad students.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - 82lsju - 06-16-2025

Stanford had their largest undergrad graduation ever yesterday with 2,140 people, ~400 had deferred enrollment in the COVID fall of 2020

https://news.stanford.edu/stories/2025/06/commencement-ceremony-graduating-students?utm_content=httpsnewsstanfordedustories202506commencementceremonygraduatingstudents&utm_source=feedotter&utm_medium=email&utm_campaign=ext-06-15-2025&mkt_tok=NjYwLVRKQy05ODQAAAGbF8yQCV63btH0nKmrPKACEzl8MEcwXvxi5bU2ZtOXP5rYvN5XELaWMqGBNhqRtAI-koF6vtzgxKsOPYABbz6ytrMLheK9VOd5CdlETe8

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - fullmetal - 06-16-2025

(04-11-2025, 02:49 PM)paloalto Wrote: I don't ascribe to the bigger is better principle when it comes to student population unless the campus infrastructure is in place first (dorms, dining, classroom seats, labs, etc.) Also I feel the requirements for Stanford TA's should be upgraded. Too many student TA's simply aren't that good at being class instructors.

Agreed...I hate to say it, but I did not have a great experience in some upper-level classes where my TAs had very limited command of the English language. Did not make complex concepts easier to understand.

RE: undergraduate admits up 150 this year - Goose - 06-16-2025

(06-16-2025, 10:33 AM)fullmetal Wrote:
(04-11-2025, 02:49 PM)paloalto Wrote: I don't ascribe to the bigger is better principle when it comes to student population unless the campus infrastructure is in place first (dorms, dining, classroom seats, labs, etc.) Also I feel the requirements for Stanford TA's should be upgraded. Too many student TA's simply aren't that good at being class instructors.

Agreed...I hate to say it, but I did not have a great experience in some upper-level classes where my TAs had very limited command of the English language. Did not make complex concepts easier to understand.

I had a professor for Stat 116 that did not speak English. I mean it literally. His lectures were totally unintelligible. He also couldn't work many of the problems from the textbook because he couldn't understand them. He was a visiting professor from mainland China. I never had problems with TAs that didn't speak the language, although I can see how that could happen. I did however have quite a few TAs whose grasp of the material was questionable.

When I was a TA myself I did have problems with a few students whose grasp of English wasn't all that great, but we worked through that. This was a graduate EE course and the students involved were French speakers. I don't speak French, so it took some doing. These students did speak some English so we could communicate except for vocabulary limitations. Once I figured out what they were asking it generally went OK :-).