[TrumpCard]

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.

[TrumpCard]

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.