[Hulk01]

I think Stanford had a greater impact on me than 95 percent of the students there,  because those students were prepared well for it.

I was not.

I went to a horrifically bad, small public high school on the Oregon Coast.  The faculty was heavily made up of teachers who were getting their last chances; they'd screwed up other places and had no other place to go.  There was the sex offender who taught English, pulled open Iona Tucker's blouse, dropped a piece of paper down it with some innuendo-charged comment, and was gone.  Two years later, he committed suicide while in prison on yet another offense.  He was an outlier, but not by much.

One year, we managed to attract four new teachers who had just graduated from college.  One of them no doubt became an excellent teacher.  The second was an English teacher who could not pronounce many English words, most famously "plaid," which he pronounced as "played."  The new German teacher was not emotionally equipped for any known job or profession.  The fourth may have turned out Ok.  But none had even taught a class, yet they may have represented the top 15% of all teachers at that school.

I read two books in high school: A book on excellence by Gardner, and Anthem by Ayn Rand.  I took Calculus and have no idea what it was about, exactly.  I took Physics and learned there are some things called vectors, which are indicated by arrows and must imply some force.  I read the first few pages of Ivanhoe; it made my head throb.  I had the same reaction, and took the same approach, to Red Badge of Courage, which is about a war. 

My entire approach to high school was to try to get to 3:30 p.m., and practice: football, basketball, track and golf.  Almost everything I learned in high school came in those practices.

So when I arrived at Stanford, I was the equivalent of a high school freshman, but taller and stronger.  I had to learn how to read, how to study, how to take tests, how to listen and take notes.  I had to learn to think, write papers based on evidence--everything involved in being a successful college student.

The Reggies--the kids from prep schools and merely good high schools--were miles ahead of me.  I was an Archie of the lowest possible order.  I'd never been exposed to good teachers, bright students, and medium-to-bigger ideas.  Everything about Stanford was new.

So Stanford was certain to have had a greater impact on me--provided that I worked at it, which I had to--than almost anyone of my generation, and perhaps anyone since.  I assume no student before me or after entered Stanford with a 2.26 high school gpa.  Stanford's teachers were geniuses; my dorm mates were geniuses; the required texts were written by geniuses.  And so my Stanford experience was sheer genius, for which I had experienced no precedent.

So when I insist Stanford is the ultimate 40 year decision, I should stress that it was for me.  It had to made less impact on most of you; it merely added to your understanding and learning.  But for me, Stanford was my understanding and learning. 

And the people there really are special.  I was able to be affected and inspired by friends who won Olympic medals and Rhodes Scholarships, and many who were less obviously gifted but truly good men and women--and I needed that influence and example, too.  But I should add here that many of the friends who have affected me most since came from everywhere and dozens of other schools: Wisconsin, Wisconsin Eau Claire, Tulane, Cornell, Dennison, Iowa, as well as more than one who never finished college.  They've been important to my life and its quality, too.

My muddled point here is that I am speaking only for me when I describe Stanford as life-changing--utterly.  My life had to be changed.  At the same time, I passed through two other schools en route to Stanford, and they had dramatically less impact.  One good lit teacher, a good Civ teachers--that was about it.  The students were just passing through, attending college because it was viewed as a needed step.  There may have been some bright, interesting students from whom I might have learned a lot, but I never came across them.

And yes, to the last point: I know that Stanford's brand, justified or not, helps.

[Hulk01]

I think Stanford had a greater impact on me than 95 percent of the students there,  because those students were prepared well for it.

I was not.

I went to a horrifically bad, small public high school on the Oregon Coast.  The faculty was heavily made up of teachers who were getting their last chances; they'd screwed up other places and had no other place to go.  There was the sex offender who taught English, pulled open Iona Tucker's blouse, dropped a piece of paper down it with some innuendo-charged comment, and was gone.  Two years later, he committed suicide while in prison on yet another offense.  He was an outlier, but not by much.

One year, we managed to attract four new teachers who had just graduated from college.  One of them no doubt became an excellent teacher.  The second was an English teacher who could not pronounce many English words, most famously "plaid," which he pronounced as "played."  The new German teacher was not emotionally equipped for any known job or profession.  The fourth may have turned out Ok.  But none had even taught a class, yet they may have represented the top 15% of all teachers at that school.

I read two books in high school: A book on excellence by Gardner, and Anthem by Ayn Rand.  I took Calculus and have no idea what it was about, exactly.  I took Physics and learned there are some things called vectors, which are indicated by arrows and must imply some force.  I read the first few pages of Ivanhoe; it made my head throb.  I had the same reaction, and took the same approach, to Red Badge of Courage, which is about a war. 

My entire approach to high school was to try to get to 3:30 p.m., and practice: football, basketball, track and golf.  Almost everything I learned in high school came in those practices.

So when I arrived at Stanford, I was the equivalent of a high school freshman, but taller and stronger.  I had to learn how to read, how to study, how to take tests, how to listen and take notes.  I had to learn to think, write papers based on evidence--everything involved in being a successful college student.

The Reggies--the kids from prep schools and merely good high schools--were miles ahead of me.  I was an Archie of the lowest possible order.  I'd never been exposed to good teachers, bright students, and medium-to-bigger ideas.  Everything about Stanford was new.

So Stanford was certain to have had a greater impact on me--provided that I worked at it, which I had to--than almost anyone of my generation, and perhaps anyone since.  I assume no student before me or after entered Stanford with a 2.26 high school gpa.  Stanford's teachers were geniuses; my dorm mates were geniuses; the required texts were written by geniuses.  And so my Stanford experience was sheer genius, for which I had experienced no precedent.

So when I insist Stanford is the ultimate 40 year decision, I should stress that it was for me.  It had to made less impact on most of you; it merely added to your understanding and learning.  But for me, Stanford was my understanding and learning. 

And the people there really are special.  I was able to be affected and inspired by friends who won Olympic medals and Rhodes Scholarships, and many who were less obviously gifted but truly good men and women--and I needed that influence and example, too.  But I should add here that many of the friends who have affected me most since came from everywhere and dozens of other schools: Wisconsin, Wisconsin Eau Claire, Tulane, Cornell, Dennison, Iowa, as well as more than one who never finished college.  They've been important to my life and its quality, too.

My muddled point here is that I am speaking only for me when I describe Stanford as life-changing--utterly.  My life had to be changed.  At the same time, I passed through two other schools en route to Stanford, and they had dramatically less impact.  One good lit teacher, a good Civ teachers--that was about it.  The students were just passing through, attending college because it was viewed as a needed step.  There may have been some bright, interesting students from whom I might have learned a lot, but I never came across them.

And yes, to the last point: I know that Stanford's brand, justified or not, helps.