hi gradcafe fellows,
I would love to get some opinions on Berkeley vs. Stanford for international policy (energy and climate change). Both schools are strong in energy research so it comes down to more subtle factors such as reputation, location, $$$ and culture. Both schools rank very high in international evaluations so I don't think there is a big difference in reputation/prestige, or is there? Is the name recognition equal outside the U.S.? Many argue that the Stanford brand carries a long way, here and abroad (but I would think Berkeley does too?). At the same time, I felt a stronger affinity to Berkeley when visiting the campus. Stanford seems to have a bit of an attitude/arrogance going on (during the application process as well as even after being admitted) but I guess that could be just an impression. Berkeley appears much more down to earth (although perhaps a bit too much and the people at GSPP are extremely happy with their program. GSPP also seems much better managed (and staff approachable) than IPS, probably due to size and number of years being established.
However, Berkeley's GSPP severely lacks the international component, Stanford's IPS is more expensive and I have the feeling it is geared more towards Silicon Valley than international policy making. It seems to be more of an engineering, law and business school, less strong in policy, so I am worried about the IPS program's strength. I favor Berkeley's location and more approachable culture (easier to commute and more urban feeling) over Stanford's (suburban corporate campus that feels a bit isolated) At the same time, Stanford's curriculum is more international and much more flexible compared to GSPP's, which only has 5 electives. A lot of people say "Stanford, no question!" Other say Berkeley is a better fit and just as good of a school as Stanford. This is a tough choice. I appreciate your insight (and votes).