Reaction to article: "TO YOUNG MINDS of TODAY, HARVARD IS THE STANFORD of THE EAST"

(Appeared in The New York Times May 29th article by Richard Perez-Pena)

I think the headline is misleading—this is what I think the author is really saying - Is Stanford toppling Harvard as the new “IT"  school for technology? And, how much does Harvard really care?

Stanford has its connections to Silicon Valley which gets credit for giving birth to giants like Google, Yahoo and Cisco, yet Harvard has MIT down the road in Cambridge and is planning offerings in computer science and engineering across the river in the Allston area of Boston. Both have good tech credentials. In this article, the writer thinks Stanford’s are more impressive. Depends on what a college/university wants to emphasize as their signature feature.

Harvard has always excelled in the humanities, feeling that Liberal Arts is the hallmark of  “real undergraduate” preparation, not so with Stanford where science is king. But does science make or break a school?  Which school makes the valid claim to being a “sink or swim” educational challenge?

Harvard students tell everyone how hard they work and how intense Harvard is, while Stanford students may work really hard but show everyone how laid back they are. My conclusion— both are valid.

What do you think? Read the article here.