<p>As i've gone through the threads about what makes an applicant stand out to the Caltech admissions officers, it seems to be a combination of research and awards. Unfortunately all of these threads are for high school students. </p>
<p>As a college student, is it possible to participate in any academic contests like the AMC? I wouldn't think I could actually take the AMC test but if anyone knows of anything similar it would be appreciated. </p>
<p>Also, research experience obviously seems to be a huge part of being accepted to tech. Would even a year of research be good or is it generally dismissed as dabbling in the field? The problem is that I missed deadlines for programs this summer and probably won't have two more years before I am forced to transfer to UCSD. </p>
<p>If any of you know how transfer students are judged I would really appreciate that piece of information. </p>
<p>Thanks for any advice you can give.</p>
<p>Isn't the Putnum roughly the college equivalent to the AMC?</p>
<p>It's even harder to get in as a transfer applicant, because they take such a VERY VERY small number.</p>
<p>I know a prof at Caltech, who also went to grad school at Caltech, who didn't get in as a transfer.</p>
<p>Yeah...I am aware of the fact that they take about 6 people a year from CC's. The only way I can even dream of making my chances better than the 10% is to do the SURF program or some other research program over the summer. It's not like my career as a physicist will be destroyed if I don't go to Caltech, it would just be nice to have the trial by fire to get ready for graduate school and beyond. UCSD is a good school and I am guaranteed to get in so I will just do whatever I possibly can and, if I don't get in to Caltech, then there are six people doing just a bit more.</p>
<p>Putnam vs. AMC - I would judge it more to the equivalent of the USAMO. Most students get 0 on the Putnam, while most do get something on the AMC and 1 or 2 on the AIME.</p>
<p>===========</p>
<p>BTW - Caltech has a lot of dropouts so it's probably easier to get into Caltech than another through transfer. But it's still insanely hard to get in via transfer.</p>
<p>Umm, sorry, I'm wrong.</p>
<p>
[quote]
The examination is considered to be very difficult: it is typically attempted by students specializing in mathematics, but the median score is usually one or two points out of 120 possible, and perfect scores are exceptionally rare. In 2003, of the 3615 students taking the exam, 1024 (28%) scored 10 or more points, and 42 points was sufficient to make the top 102.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Hmm...I don't think it's equivalent to the AMC still, though it can be considered roughly the equivalent of the AIME 'cuz the median score on both is `1 or 2 points - of course, taking the Putnam can't be regarded as an achievement, unlike taking the AIME.</p>
<p>I was a little bit wrong up there -- the Putnam is the same as the AMC in the sense of being the "entry-level" of the largest and most prestigious math competition, but it's more like the USAMO in terms of structure and difficulty (also in being simultaneously the highest level). The problems are notably easier individually than USAMO probblems, but that's because you get 1.5 hours per problem for the USAMO and .5 hours per problem for the Putnam.</p>
<p>If you're in college and want to show off your math interest/skill outside of class, you take the Putnam; in high school you would have taken the AMC to see if you could go higher.</p>
<p>If you haven't read this thread already, you should read it and pay especial attention to Ben Golub's posts. Caltech is the most rigorous of all colleges and if you show any indication that you cannot handle the courseload whatsoever, then you're not in. </p>
<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=26083&page=1&pp=40%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showthread.php?t=26083&page=1&pp=40</a></p>
<p>I thought I knew so much about Caltech. But simply knowing the fact that Caltech is more difficult than other schools is an understatement. It is significantly more difficult - how can a school with such top-calibre applicants have so many students who do not graduate? I was pretty ignorant of the admissions process myself, so I found the thread enlightening.</p>
<p>When I decided to enter university early, I have to admit that I was hoping to transfer to Caltech. But I must admit that quite honestly, my hopes are most likely to be disappointed. I ultimately decided that two more years of high school and the possibility of Caltech weren't worth the possibility of Caltech rejection and having to go to a state school (my parents have only given the state school or Caltech as options). While getting in Caltech is certainly a cause for celebration, if you don't get into Caltech through transfer, it can only be the expected route.</p>
<p>I do not have an internal knowledge of the Caltech admissions process so take my words with a grain of salt. I believe that those who get in must show significant drive and an ability to perform exceptionally well in university-level courses, for they are nothing compared to Caltech-level courses. How do you demonstrate your aptitude and drive? If you're doomed to taking classes that everyone else takes, then you can only rely on three other factors:</p>
<p>1: teacher recommendations
2: The Caltech Transfer Examination.
3: research experience</p>
<p>Teacher recommendations should demonstrate that you are significantly more driven than virtually anyone else at your university and capable of overcoming hurdles to be on par with everyone else at the university. Face the facts - as Caltech offers an unrivaled academic experience, you will be behind and have to catch up.Ben Golub said that sophomores at Caltech have enough knowledge to literally double major in math and physics at any other university. You need a high score on the Caltech Transfer Examination because Caltech won't admit someone who will need to do a significant amount of catch-up work. And as for research experience, while it is not necessary, I do not know how important research experience is but it is another way to demonstrated what you are capable of, despite the fact that your coursework is subpar to Caltech's.</p>
<p><a href="http://www.collegeconfidential.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?8/31%5B/url%5D">http://www.collegeconfidential.com/cgi-bin/discus/show.cgi?8/31</a></p>
<p>Apparently, there have been a lot of posts concerning the Caltech Transfer Examination on the old boards, although many of them have few replies. I would say that the Caltech Transfer Examination is what triages some applicants from the rest like the SATs do. If you do well, you advance to the next round. But if you don't, your app won't get evaluated.</p>
<p>I'm planning on applying freshman and soph years. Hopefully with research experience and practice from the first exam I'll have a better chance soph year, though I cannot count on it.</p>
<p>Now, a reply to my other post on the board (I cannot imagine how oblivious I was to your post): As I understand admissions goals, we don't do "nice" so much as "we think this guy could be elite but his high school sucked." Since you get to pick what college you want to go to on a much greater scale than you can pick your high school, your logic doesn't extend that far.</p>
<hr>
<p>And a correction from the previous post:</p>
<p>I ultimately decided that two more years of high school and the possibility of Caltech weren't worth the possibility of Caltech rejection and having to go to a state school (my parents have only given the state school or Caltech as options).</p>
<p>Or, not worth the possibility of high school + state school which ensures more review than I could ever manage to handle.</p>
<p>
[quote]
Ben Golub said that sophomores at Caltech have enough knowledge to literally double major in math and physics at any other university"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>To be fair, I said "almost." It wouldn't be quite 100% at Harvard, Princeton, or MIT. When I looked at this in a fair bit of detail, I calculated that you'd need an extra semester at the other university (that is, about four to five courses), to fulfill the in-major requirements for math and physics. But those are pretty much the only exceptions (with perhaps one or two similarly ranked schools that I missed due to carelessness.) At the majority of US universities (even good ones), the Caltech core really is enough for a math/physics double major.</p>
<p>Thanks for the clarification, Ben. gryphon and I are not, however, from Harvard/MIT/Princeton so for us, we would have to take more courses to satisfy what two years of Caltech cover.</p>
<p>Here is some information about Caltech transfer:</p>
<p><a href="http://www.aiccumentor.org/Planning/transfer_handbook_2002_2003.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://www.aiccumentor.org/Planning/transfer_handbook_2002_2003.pdf</a></p>
<p>Well - they need a high school transcript, not good, I better not let my umm... sophomoritis run too rampant.. ;) Fortunately however, no high school diploma so my lack of one will no doom me.</p>
<p>Does Caltech pay you for this Ben? You are seriously the most helpful person on the internet. </p>
<p>As for the old board messages, I read them all when I first started my mad drive towards Tech. It might be a little strange but I find the prospect of being able to double major in two of the most rigorous subjects after two years to be pretty amazing. This is a bit troublesome though because, not being a Caltech student, how could I ever hope to pass an examination designed for incoming juniors? i know the answer is hard work but, if the amazing and horrible fact Ben said is true, how can anyone get in as a transfer?</p>
<p>No, Caltech doesn't pay me :). But thank you for your kind words.</p>
<p>For the record, of course <em>Caltech</em> won't award you a double major in math and physics after two years. You'd have to do a bit more work for that :)</p>
<p>As for the exams, they're not that brutal. The import of my previous messages is that math/phys degrees from most places aren't all that amazing, and with hard study you can be at that level and pass the Caltech entry exams.</p>
<p>Yeah, a double major (or a single major) in physics or math in two years would be a bit much. The reason I am worried is because, as I have stated earlier, I am at a community college right now. I don't mean to put down the whole community college system because it does give many people a good chance to get ahead but it isn't made for people trying to go to Caltech. Some of the professors are very talented and teach at universities but it just seems like babysitting for the most part. My chemistry class is so incredibly simple (objectively) and the average score is a low C. I know it's supposed to be a C but it is unfathomable to me that people like drinking so much that they can't look at a periodic table every once and a while. </p>
<p>Anyways, enough bashing my poor school. I'm just concerned that the gap of knowledge will be so vast that it would be nearly impossible to fill it. If you say the test isn't that bad though i'll trust you. By "that bad" I will assume you mean "not totally impossible for students of other schools."</p>
<p>That's exactly what I mean. Read the rest of your textbooks (the parts not covered in class); ask for an outline of topics. I think if you do that you'll succeed.</p>
<p>Best of luck :)
Ben</p>