Better Insight - CalTech/Stanford/MIT/...

Graduate School
1

<p>Hi everyone,</p>

<p>I have a few questions which I could not find any answer for yet and I hope someone will be able to help me.</p>

<p>I am an undergrad senior (actually graduating in December 2013) student at the New York Institute of Technology, majoring in Mechanical Engineering with Aerospace Concentration. I am looking into graduate schools for the Fall 2014. I have done some research already but, because I come from Belgium, I don't know know as much about top grad schools as Americans do and, as the title says, I am looking at schools such as CalTech, Stanford, MIT, etc.</p>

<p>Here is my first question: What are the actual differences between these schools? (I'm mainly interested in CalTech and Stanford but not limited to them) I have read that overall CalTech has a huge focus on research and a small community, that MIT has greater entrepeneurship development, and that Stanford has a lot of money, but this is pretty much it. Do you have any other information and, if possible, related to my field?</p>

<p>Another concern is about my admission. Here is some information about me:
-CGPA: 4.0
-Topics of interest: CFD, fluid-structure interactions, propulsion, energy
-Experience: about to have an internship this summer in a CFD development company + probably 8 months of work/internship between graduation and graduate school
-References: I can ask about any faculty in my department
-Actvities: Senator in the Student Government Association, Student Athlete Advisory Committee, captain of the NCAA Div II NYIT Men's Tennis
-Honors: multiple for academic excellence and leadership, including membership in Golden Key International Honor Society and Phi Eta Sigma Freshman Honor Society
-Computer Skills: Catia, Comsol Multiphysics, MatLab, Mathcad, EES, Autocad, java (I get to learn programs very quickly)
GRE: still need to take it
What do you think my chances are?</p>

<p>My last question is about financial aid. I can clearly not afford these schools if I have to pay it all by myself. I have heard that some schools (I think it was Stanford, but I am really not sure anymore) are "free" once you get in but you are required to work in some kind of teaching assistantship. Is this true? Anyway, is it easy to find graduate assistanships and financial aid at graduate level in these top schools?</p>

<p>I thank you very much for your help in advance and I am looking forward to hearing back from you.</p>

2

<p>If you’re going for a PhD and you get accepted into one of those schools you will be fully funded and get a stipend large enough to live on.</p>

<p>The biggest difference between the schools is the faculty you’d be working with. A PhD isn’t like undergrad where you’re just taking classes for a few years. After the first year or so you’re done with classes and you become a full time research employee for your advisor. That’s why who you could work with is really the deciding factor in where you should go.</p>

3

<p>First of all thank you for your help</p>

<p>Yes, I have actually read that often about PhD candidates. It seems though that it is not the case for students pursuing a master’s degree. Do you know how frequent it is for a master student to obtain some teaching or research assistantship and have (at least) full tuition covered?</p>

<p>It is good to know that faculties actually make the difference. I thought it was more a school philosophy. Are these graduate faculties usually open and accessible for discussion with prospective students?</p>

4

<p>I don’t know about the school’s you listed, but one of the school’s I got into gives full funding to there top MS students in the form of a TA and stipend. Actually it’s the same package I got as a Ph.D. applicant, except mine is longer. TA is about ~ 20 hours of work a week. I think funding depends highly on your competition in a given year, the department, etc. Look on the website, they usually specifically tell you how funding works for the MS and Ph.D. levels.</p>

<p>Also, why do you want to go to those schools? Pick the project, adviser, etc not the name of the school. It’s easy to rattle off the 3 most prestigious engineering schools and be excited, but if you hate what you are doing it won’t matter much while you are there.</p>

5

<p>Hi Aeromech. Extensive post incoming:</p>

<p>I actually sent in applications to all of these schools this go-round for aero. I’ve been crawling through the forums and pages for a while now so I have a small bit of info that may be of use to you.</p>

<p>Funding for aeros:
Stanford only accepts undergrads into their MS program, not Ph.D. You must have a master’s degree to apply for a Ph.D there (the MS can be from Stanford or elsewhere, but I talked with an aero prof at Stanford who admitted that they take caution when accepting people from other schools into their Ph.D program, as they would prefer to have all of their Ph.D students take the MS classes from Stanford). This means that you most likely will not have funding unless you get it through an external fellowship. The funding there is very competitive, and they generally reserve their positions for people who have passed their Ph.D qualifying exams (one and a half years in)</p>

<p>CalTech accepts people for Ph.Ds only, and 98% of accepted grad students get full funding + stipend, so funding is almost guaranteed upon acceptance.</p>

<p>MIT gives funding and scholarships to master’s students and Ph.D students alike (MIT is rich!).</p>

<p>Top schools:
I applied to all of these schools this application season, and what I have learned is that the main thing these programs search for is research experience. I know numerous people with 4.0s, incredible letters of rec, lots of honors, and perfect GRE scores that have been rejected from these programs due to their lack of first author papers. Somebody at the grad cafe just mentioned that at CalTech there were about 20 incoming aero PhDs last year, 2 of which did not attend ivies/top 5 engineering programs for their undergraduate degree. You will have to be one of those 2 extraordinary people from around the world to get that spot! The competition is INCREDIBLY fierce at these top schools currently.</p>

<p>I applied to all of these with a 3.93 from a top 20 engineering school well known for grade deflation (highest GPA of ~2000 students), perfect GRE quant, 2 relevant conference papers in review (one first author), very good research fit, strong SOP, 2 years worth of research, and letter writers who told me they would write the best letter they had ever written for any student they had ever had (they themselves had attended CalTech, Stanford, and UMich, respectively). I haven’t been admitted to any of these programs and am not expecting to this time around due to my lack of first author research papers at top journals/conferences. Research papers will be CRITICAL to your admittance to these top programs.</p>

<p>MIT specifically is known to take its own aero undergrads in. Very few aero undergrads from MIT who apply to their graduate program do not make it in. That means that if in your year many MIT aero undergrads apply, there will be fewer slots and a lower chance for you to get in.</p>

<p>Stanford does not have an undergraduate aero degree (which is one reason why getting funding is hard… since you can’t TA for aero classes).</p>

<p>School comparisons in aero:
Stanford is known for its entrepreneurial spirit. I’ve read forum posts from berkeley/MIT grads stating that they were more likely to have a Stanford grad as their boss than from another top 5 school. This is understandable; Stanford is in the heart of silicon valley.</p>

<p>CalTech is very small and very theoretically based. JPL is just up the hill and I believe many CalTech grads head over there for research/summer/jobs. </p>

<p>MIT is MIT. Great school, very sharp people there. I don’t know much more about their aero dept specifically.</p>

<p>No one school is better than the others. If you were to be admitted to all 3, it would be more wise to compare schools based on your fit with the advisor than the school/aero program as a whole.</p>

<p>Good luck! Hopefully your dreams can come true!!</p>

6

<p>Engineer913:</p>

<p>Thanks for your help. This is the kind of information I am looking for in terms of funding: experience from people who went through it already.
As for the “choice” of my schools, it is actually “simple”. My hometown university has a pretty good aerospace engineering program. It has largely the level of average American graduate schools and it is extremely cheap!! So, this is the deal: either I get into a top US school or I go back home almost for free. At least, it makes sense in mind. Aren’t these school really way over average?</p>

<p>zecone13:</p>

<p>Thank you for this really complete answer to my post. I think you went over all my concerns. Your sections about funding and school comparison are exactly the kind of info I am looking for and it gives me a better overview of the situation.</p>

<p>As for the admission, I never know what to think. When I am in my classes and I ask around (to American students and professors) what my chances are, the answer is “if you don’t get in, no one does”. However, I always have that feeling that this is not enough and you just confirm it. I was supposed to start a project with a faculty here (ultimately for publication) but it finally didn’t happen. I find myself kind of stuck with my application for Fall 2014 and only one summer research (I think) internship. I also want to apply for a research internship at ESA (European Space Agency) for the time laps between graduation and the beginning of grad school but this will be after the apllication deadline and will not help me. Do you have any suggestion on how I could really boost the strength of my application in the year and a half I have left?</p>

7

<p>Sorry about the big downer post about admissions. I’m reciting my experience and what I’ve witnessed from my friends and peers who also applied. Competition is rough</p>

<p>If at all possible get some research going in a lab. Try to get a paper out as best you can. It is still possible in the amount of time you have left there.</p>

<p>I would still highly recommend applying no matter what it looks like. It’s a small fee and it only takes one advisor who sees potential in you on the admissions committee at one school to be headed off to work on a Ph.D!</p>

8

<p>zecone13:</p>

<p>Don’t worry. I appreciate your help and I prefer to actually have a realistic than an optimistic idea of my chances. I am gonna try toget some research going. I have some good relation with my department chair (a Cornell PhD) and see if we can work something out.</p>

9

<p>Hello,</p>

<p>Another long post! The aerospace programs at Stanford, MIT, and Caltech are structured quite differently so I’ll give you a brief outline of each.</p>

<p>Stanford: I believe you have the option of a non-thesis based masters degree or a thesis-based masters degree. The former involves more classes while the latter includes a research component. At Stanford you can only be admitted as a Masters student once you have completed your undergraduate degree. You can also apply to Stanford for a PhD if you complete your masters elsewhere. Since Stanford only admits you as a masters student, they are not likely to fund you. About 20% of incoming students are awarded fellowships from the department. The remaining 80% get TAships (this is difficult since the aerospace program is for graduate students only), receive external fellowships (NSF, NDSEG, Hertz, SMART, etc.), or pay their own way. </p>

<p>Once you complete most of your coursework, you take the qualifying exam during your second year in either the fall or the spring. The qualifying exam at Stanford is pretty difficult and a fair number of students end up retaking it. Overall, the department is very strong and has great connections to industry. One advantage (or disadvantage depending on how you look at it) is that you don’t start off with an advisor immediately, so you have time to shop around a little during your first year while taking classes. Once you have passed the qualifying exam and have joined a lab, your advisor will fund you with an RAship so you don’t pay your way once you are a PhD student. I would also say your education there takes a more applications-based approach as opposed to a theoretical one.</p>

<p>MIT: This is the program with which I am least familiar but I do have a couple of friends who went there with Aerospace. Like Stanford, they only admit you as a masters student but 100% of their students are funded in some way or another. Your masters degree generally takes 2 years (the longest amount of time out of the three) however you begin research right away and you are assigned an advisor upon arrival (unlike Stanford). I don’t know how difficult the MIT’s qualifying exam is but I got the impression Stanford’s is more difficult. </p>

<p>The Aero Astro department’s strength is controls. Their options in fluids is a little more limited but they do have a space propulsion lab. Unlike Stanford and Caltech though, MIT has some interesting labs such as Human and Automation (so labs outside the general areas of aerospace such as fluids, propulsion, controls, and structures). Like Stanford, MIT takes a more applications-based approach as well. </p>

<p>Caltech: The department is the smallest of the three in terms of size of the student body but the student:faculty ratio is much smaller. At Caltech, your first year is devoted entirely to coursework so that your earn your masters in one year- no exceptions. As a result, the first year is very difficult. You take the qualifying exam in October and work on your candidacy during the second year. Like Stanford, you do not have a research advisor during your first year since you are taking classes so you have the chance to talk to different professors. Unlike Stanford and MIT, Caltech admits students directly to the PhD program and funds all its students. </p>

<p>The aerospace program does not include controls since that is a separate department at Caltech (Controls and Dynamical Systems aka CDS). The fluids department (computational and experimental) is very strong and some graduate students in the past have coordinated their PhD work with JPL. Caltech takes a very theoretical/mathematical approach to education so its drastically different to Stanford and MIT in that respect.</p>

<p>Feel free to ask more questions.</p>

10

<p>Fiddlekrt:</p>

<p>Wow thank you some much for all this. This is exactly what I was looking for. According to your description, I’d rather go to CalTech. Greater focus on fluids, better funding, better student:professor ratio, smaller school. However, because of the latter, I guess that it is also harder to get in and that the acceptance rate is lower, right? You also seem to know these schools very well, what do you think my chances are to get in? Do you also have any advice on how I could improve my application in this year and a half I have left?</p>

<p>Just one more question on the side: do you have other too schools to suggest me, considering two of my main concerns are funding and focus on fluids/CFD/propulsion?</p>

11

<p>Dude no ones gonna tell you your chances because no one can possibly know that. The most important thing in the application process is your LORs and SOP, were u describe ur Previous research experience and have professors you’ve worked for talk about your research skills. Without those your app will end up in the countless number of declined apps from students with 4.0s. How can we possibly know what those 2 criteria look like for you? Think about it.</p>

12

<p>aeromech,</p>

<p>I would agree with pyroknife that your letters of recommendation, statement of purpose (which includes your research experience), and GPA are the three most important aspects of your application. I would be very careful as to who you choose to write your letters. If you have TA’d for a professor or worked in his/her lab these are good people to ask since the will probably know you and your work personally. You also have an internship coming up over the summer so you might want to consider your work supervisor especially since its a research environment. Generally the admissions committee prefers letters from faculty.</p>

<p>In terms of improving your application, it would be great if you could seek out an opportunity to present research at a student conference or something along those lines. You don’t need to have publications since it is very rare for an undergraduate to have accomplished significant research. </p>

<p>I’m not that qualified to say what other schools are good in the fluids/propulsion department although Maryland certainly has a few professors who are doing work that might be of interest to you. Georgia Tech, Purdue, Illinois, Princeton, Michigan, Texas Austin all have strong aero programs so it would probably be good to take a quick look at all the faculty profiles at these schools.</p>

13

<p>A high GPA is not going to get you into those kind of programs. Too many factors play in an applicants GPA-rigor of undergrad institution, your competition, etc…-that adcoms take into consideration. This typically means that GPAs within certain ranges are viewed somewhat equal. </p>

<p>The LORS and SOP, however, are your identity and there is a clear distinction between applicants.</p>

<p>If you’re serious about grad school, you should look at some if these things yourself, especially as a senior? Fluids is way Too broad. These kind of schools would expect you to know which aspect of fluids you’re interested in working with. </p>

<p>I thought I hAd already posted in here or did y mans 2 threads?</p>

14

<p>OP,
Your realistic chances of acceptance at Caltech are currently very low, due to a lack of research during your UG years. Caltech’s focus is on developing future scientists and professors-which requires having a strong interest in doing research. I suggest you find ways to do a few years of serious, quality research , either here or at home, see if that IS your cup of tea, get great LOR’s and then apply to CT, that is, if getting a PhD is still your goal.
Many of the admitted students in my son’s incoming Graduate class at Caltech already have a MS degree, as well as lots of research experience. It can’t hurt your chances to have both already under your belt when you apply .</p>

15

<p>Thank you all for your help. pyroknife: yes, sorry for the double thread. I thought I made a mistake when submitting it and that it didn’t get posted so I made another one.</p>

<p>I have one last question. Are these professors usually easily approachable? Would it be a good idea to contact them to discuss all this with them? I have already spotted a few of them whose research areas are very close to what I want to do…</p>

16

<p>Objectively you have very little chance to be accepted to any of the top three research institutions due to a lack of research. They will laugh at your activities like these. Remember you’re not applying to college .
“-Actvities: Senator in the Student Government Association, Student Athlete Advisory Committee, captain of the NCAA Div II NYIT Men’s Tennis
-Honors: multiple for academic excellence and leadership, including membership in Golden Key International Honor Society and Phi Eta Sigma Freshman Honor Society”</p>

17

<p>I have one question. I am an undergraduate Student from India presently in my senior year. I applied to stanford for masters in aero in autumn 2014.
I have a first author paper in AIAA Sci-Tech and 6 months research ex at virginia tech.
I have 2 LoRs from Virginia Tech and one from my college.
I got a GRE score of 313 and have GPA of 8.3/10
do I have strong chances at Stanford for Masters?</p>

18

<p>This is an old thread, please start a new one with your question.</p>

19

<p><a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1599545-admission-chances.html?highlight=admission+chances[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1599545-admission-chances.html?highlight=admission+chances&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>this is the link to the new thread… could you please reply there??</p>