Caltech Admissions versus IIT Admissions

Colleges and Universities A-Z California Institute of Technology
1

<p>There was a thread on the Harvard Forum, now locked, in which much debate occurred on whether the Indian Institutes of Technology (IIT) various campuses are better places to go to college than Harvard. Aside from considerations that wouldn't be relevant to many people in the world, there was the assertion made that IIT bases admission PURELY on "merit," and Caltech--so the thread asserted--does not. That sounded odd to me and to other participants in that thread who regularly read the posts here on the Caltech Forum. The participant who made that assertion has declined repeated invitations to open discussion of that issue here, so I will. </p>

<p>Note to onlookers: I am not an alumnus or partisan of Caltech, IIT, or Harvard. I am curious about ALL of those schools, which is why I read online forums about them. I hope people who have INFORMED opinions about how admissions procedures differ between Caltech and IIT will post factual descriptions of those procedures here, for everyone's possible benefit in choosing a school to which to apply. </p>

<p>I hope the Caltech students who have participated in admissions committees in Caltech will have something to say about this issue.</p>

2

<p>Hmm, okay, I'll bite.</p>

<p>Unlike IIT, admission to Caltech is not based on a numerical ranking earned on an examination. </p>

<p>Like most of the other top universities, we don't accept the premise that merit is possible to measure or even very roughly estimate with a single exam. Consequently, we pay attention to a variety of factors when judging which candidates have the best combination of intellectual potential and the ability to realize it. For instance, while IIT's admissions process would not take into account that a student invented a novel cryptographic algorithm, our process would take that into account. </p>

<p>We think it is more meritocratic to look at all the evidence of brilliance in a candidate, rather than restricting ourselves to a single measurement. An analogy will help: two men are seeking buried valuable coins. One of them only examines the coin's size to see which coins are worth keeping. The second also takes into account the material, the shape, etc. IIT is more like the first prospector, and we're like the second. The second has a better selection process, because obviously, a number of factors determine which coins are worth a lot, not just their size.</p>

<p>On the other hand, we do not have an explicit or implicit admissions policy valuing factors irrelevant to excellence in math and science, like "well-roundedness". Getting people with particular ethnicities, genders, piano abilities, basketball talents, and the like, are not goals of our admissions process. </p>

<p>Of course, context does determine whether someone's achievements are amazing or merely expected. A poor, Hispanic orphan from the Chicago ghetto placing in the Intel competition will be more impressive than a the child of Ph.D.'s from a posh private school doing the same thing, but not because we value students for being poor or Hispanic. It's just that starting very low in the intellectual world and rising very high is more impressive -- on a purely intellectual basis -- than starting high and rising slightly higher, and I'd bet on the kid from Chicago to win the Nobel prize over the other kid.</p>

<p>A pure exam system cannot take any of that into account. By IIT's standard, if the kid from Chicago scores in the 99.8th percentile of an exam, he still has "less merit" than a kid from private school who scores in the 99.9th percentile. We think that's silly, and we think it just plain gets the wrong answer to who is more impressive, who will achieve more academically. That's why our system is better and more meritocratic.</p>

3

<p>Ben, thank you for the clear description of how admissions decisions can be based on merit without being monofactorial.</p>

4

<p>The problem in India is that a majority of applicants live below the poverty line and are pretty much all Indian; hence, it is much more of a challenge for IIT to establish quotas and considerations based on socioeconomic and ethnic factors like Caltech does. Besides, it is very probable that a good portion of each undegraduate IIT class is made up of students who were brought up in small and poor villages dispersed throughout Inida. It would be of no suprise to me if some of these villages had no eletricity or clean, drinking water. However, through hard work and perseverence, many of these bright, young individuals go on to succeed in math/sciences at the level of a Caltech math/science major and flourish at IIT. Where there's a will there's a way!!!</p>

5

<p><a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_notable_IIT_alumni%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/List_of_notable_IIT_alumni&lt;/a>
I am sure a more comprehensive list of notable IIT alumni exists and I will show it as soon as I find it.</p>

6

<p>One argument that my dad likes to use (He is an immigrant from India) is that many schools like IIT and European schools teach students to solve problems. Now that is all well and good for the everyday technical job and supervising. But what they do not teach is how to innovate and think as an individual to present a solution that is out of the box. He claims that schools in America do very well in that regard to prepare a student to think and innovate rather than just be able to solve problems. He says that those are the ones that go far in business and management. Those who can present an unconventional view will go farther than those who can simply do equations.</p>

7

<p>
[quote]
...establish quotas and considerations based on socioeconomic and ethnic factors like Caltech does

[/quote]
</p>

<p>We don't have quotas, of any kind, or anything even close. Your credibility decreases when you speak about what you do not know.</p>

<p>
[quote]
it is very probable that a good portion of each undegraduate IIT class is made up of students who were brought up in small and poor villages dispersed throughout Inida

[/quote]
I don't believe you. My Indian friends have described that most IIT students are from urban areas, with well-educated parents who have reasonable incomes. If you think IIT has a lot of kids from the slums and from poor villages, show the data.</p>

<p>And, since you decided to post an alumni list (what is it supposed to show?), you're undoubtedly aware that although Caltech has been around for only about 80 years, and is absolutely tiny compared to any institution of its caliber, it has 31 Nobel prizes to show for it, not to mention a list of alumni that includes the founders of Intel and Compaq; the creators of Mathematica and MATLAB; the man who discovered the chemical bond and won two Nobel prizes (Linus Pauling) -- and those were just the ones I noticed first at <a href="http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Institute_of_Technology%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/California_Institute_of_Technology&lt;/a>. IIT is comparitively enormous and hasn't half the achievement, and I'm being charitable here.</p>

<p>I do not dispute that IIT is an excellent school, and anybody should be proud to go there. I am not about to denigrate the achievements of its alumni. But don't try to tell people that scientific powerhouses like Caltech aren't as good at picking or training the best in the world. You can earn the right to say that when your favorite school has 31 Nobel prizes. Or one.</p>

<p>Finally, don't tell me, a member of the admissions comittee, that we don't do a fair job. As the above data shows, we're pretty good at what we do; taking into account people's opportunities makes us more fair, and better at pickng the most talented, as I explained. And maybe if IIT better understood the complexity of merit, it could become an even better institution, as good as you would like it to be.</p>

8

<p>
[QUOTE]
We don't have quotas, of any kind, or anything even close. Your credibility decreases when you speak about what you do not know.

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>That's precisely what I tried to explain to this sixteen-year old after he wrote this in the Harvard forum;</p>

<p>


</p>

<p><a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=1093077&postcount=90%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/showpost.php?p=1093077&postcount=90&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

<p>It's unfortunate that high school sophomores/juniors spread false information about admissions practices and students at leading universities they will likely never even be admitted to.</p>

<p>Someone who doesn't know any better might just believe them!</p>

9

<p>I must have been misquoted because I never said that Caltech didn't have a fair admission policy. It is undisputably one of the most certified technological institutes in the world, but so is IIT. The thing about Caltech is that is one among numerous good tech schools in the US(MIT, etc.), while IIT is veritably the premier tech institution in India.</p>

<p>Regardless, I am not going to try to provide any more comparisons. Like Mr. Golub said, both are fantastic schools that one should be proud to attend if admitted. It is worth noting also that a sizeable amount of IIT undergrads go on to be Caltech grads and vice-versa.</p>

<p>HarvardAlum98': It is not in your place to dictate my shot at admission at any university(Caltech, IIT, etc.). Without being specific, I have relatives that do have some affiliation with both Caltech and IIT, so I am somewhat knowledgeable about the admission practices at both these universities. Besides, having received at least 4 years of Harvard education, I am suprised that you are still oblivious to the fact that age doesn't matter in many of these circumstances. Since you apparently haven't been admitted to Caltech either, I doubt that you are any more certified to lecture to anyone about Caltech admission practices than me. Good day to you sir.</p>

10

<p>
[QUOTE]
Without being specific, I have relatives that do have some affiliation with both Caltech

[/QUOTE]
</p>

<p>How charmingly convenient that you don't include any specifics...</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Oh, is that why you wrote this?</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>And this gem is lovely;</p>

<p>


</p>

<p>Yeah, I'm merely a silly idiot who attended Caltech for grad school. </p>

<p>Because of this, I obviously have no clue about their admissions practices, although by some freak chance my opinion of their standards happens to coincide exactly with what an actual admissions officer (Ben Golub) wrote.</p>

<p>I only wish I were intelligent enough to have attended what you believe to be the finest university in all subjects math/science (IIT), instead of the lowly Harvard and Caltech.</p>

<p>Again, I don't mind factually incorrect statements by themselves. I'm just a little concerned that someone thinking of applying to Caltech might read your little libel and gather the wrong impression about the university.</p>

11

<p>Yeah, that was my concern, that some of the statements made in the earlier thread on the Harvard Forum, and repeated here, are incredible as to the situation at IIT and even more incredible as to the situation at Caltech. An intelligent person (intelligent enough to have been admitted to Caltech, or to Harvard, or to both) who has greater life experience and who is willing to be specific about verifiable information is usually to be believed over a person (however intelligent) with less life experience and unwilling to provide specific, verifiable observations.</p>

12

<p>I can add something to Ben Golub's comments that has been overlooked in the discussion -- I believe that Caltech is the most purely meritocratic university in the US. Where it differs from IIT is in having multiple criteria (right or wrong) for brilliance and intellectual potential. </p>

<p>In contrast, I think I am safe in saying that all the well known non-technical schools in the US set aside a large (perhaps 20% or more) and important chunk of their admissions for BALANCE. By this I mean that a person's ethnicity and background are valuable in providing context about that person's overall record at Caltech -- but is NOT valuable in and of itself.</p>

<p>I think it is factually the case that even the great Ivies such as HYP will accept some people -- whether athletes, minorities, legacies -- who by any objective measure are ex ante less likely to perform as well as many other students they've rejected. Caltech either does not play this game or does so in very unusual circumstances.</p>

<p>From my years at Tech and in academia, including stints at multiple schools and having spoken to many faculty all around the world about this issue, it is safe to say that Caltech's goal is to pick the entering class that is most likely to succeed at Caltech over ANY other class that could have been selected from the applicant pool. This does not mean that the admissions committee is prescient or perfect in their forecasts. A rejected student might well win the Chemistry Nobel in later years.</p>

<p>It does mean that in comparing (let us say) 2 applicants, they are not likely to admit the one that everyone on the committee would agree is ex ante an academically inferior candidate, just because he/she has shown a greater commitment to extracurriculars and the other comes from a US state which is already "over-represented" in their admissions pool. There are good reasons for this, but it dilutes the claims of most other universities to having selected the "most qualified" entering class. When pressed to the wall about this, most admissions officers at other schools will say something like "Every candidate accepted to XXX was well-qualified."</p>

<p>In contrast, the only area where Caltech systematically practices something like a bias/quota (I believe, and Ben can chime in here) is with respect to international students.</p>

<p>Now revealing my own bias, I wish there were a major Ivy League school that had the same Caltech style admissions policies that were not exclusively sci/tech. Any of the top colleges that implemented such a policy would rapidly rise to the top of the heap internationally.</p>

13

<p>That was a simply terrific post, "not yet old".</p>

<p>Regarding international students, I think CIT typically admits those with incredible levels of research/ international math, chemistry, physics, or programing olympiad experience/ extraordinarily advanced coursework in their application, correct me if I'm wrong. </p>

<p>It's a policy which makes quite a bit of sense and is implemented at MIT too.</p>

14

<p>
[quote]
In contrast, the only area where Caltech systematically practices something like a bias/quota (I believe, and Ben can chime in here) is with respect to international students.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Right. In essence, we have two admissions processes, one for international students and one for domestic students. MIT and every single other one of our peer schools does the same -- capping the total number of international admits -- and the main reason is the lack of federal funds to financially support more than a fixed number of international students. (Not considerations about "balance" or anything like that.) Caltech has to provide all financial aid for internationals purely out of its own private funds.</p>

<p>I personally don't like it, but it's not really our call to make. And, for what it's worth, it's still true that in both the international and domestic pools, we would never pick an academically weaker student over an academically stronger one for "balance" of any kind. As you say in your great post, not quite old, that is what distinguishes Caltech from other top universities.</p>

15

<p>
[quote]
And, for what it's worth, it's still true that in both the international and domestic pools, we would never pick an academically weaker student over an academically stronger one for "balance" of any kind.

[/quote]

I think Caltech is the only school (among the elite group) which does that. I get the feeling that MIT is becoming more Harvardish.</p>

16

<p>An amusing footnote. I was travelling this summer and met a well-known professor (not in econ). He had gotten his BA (and maybe his PhD too?) from Harvard, but had transferred to H from Caltech after his freshman year. We were sitting with a bunch of profs talking about schools and the difficulty of being tough graders at our schools and how much grade inflation there is, blah, blah... </p>

<p>One of the others mentioned I'd gone to Tech. The first guy said, "Well, I like to tell everyone I went to Tech as well. I was just unlucky enough to graduate from Harvard." </p>

<p>Have a good week.</p>

17

<p>Over the last few weeks I have gotten the feeling that Caltech is very much attracted to big awards and achievements, like USAMO, MOSP, USACO, USABO, USACHO(sp?), USAPO, AIME, IMO, IOI, RSI, ISEF, STS, Siemens Westinghouseetc.</p>

<p>What I want to know is what if a student is very good, but not good at competitions like these. I for one know that I cannot sit down and answer these difficult questions very quickly. I can perform much better when working on projects given time. I have done stuff I know that people attending these camps could not do</p>

<p>Basically, I have to "prove myself" to Caltech. Whereas at MIT, they take into consideration a lot more about passion. Some extremely smart kids don't want to spend highschool doing specific things to help them get into college. Some kids like to tinker all day with robotics, or programming, and don't want to spend time filling out forms to enter competition, or studying for various tests.</p>

<p>I have talked to a Nobel Prize Winner, and what he said to me was:</p>

<p>"You shouldn't live to win the [nobel] prize. You should do science for the sake of science. Investigate in the spirit of discovery. Dream of the future."</p>

<p>I forgot his name, but he visited Harding Univ. School, last year, and did something on protein research.</p>

18

<p>I totally didn't win or even attend any of those, and find it puzzling how you got that feeling. Maybe you can point a few examples out for me? There are more undergraduate slots than Olympiad winners, after all. You say you're capable of doing more productive research than an RSI student, so attach it to your application and talk about it in your essays. The admissions committee will be thrilled.</p>

19

<p>The key phrase I heard about Caltech at its regional information meeting in my town last year was "passion for math or science." That may or may not produce awards by high school age, but it is pretty hard to fake, I think.</p>

20

<p>
[quote]
Basically, I have to "prove myself" to Caltech. Whereas at MIT, they take into consideration a lot more about passion. Some extremely smart kids don't want to spend highschool doing specific things to help them get into college. Some kids like to tinker all day with robotics, or programming, and don't want to spend time filling out forms to enter competition, or studying for various tests.

[/quote]

Both I and a good friend of mine were admitted to Caltech without any notable awards at those competitions. However, we both showed passion for science and math by getting involved in research, taking more advanced science courses than anyone in our school's recent history, starting science and programming clubs, etc. Interestingly, we were also both waitlisted at MIT. </p>

<p>In my experience, MIT values passion for science and math much less than Caltech does. Whereas Caltech explicitly states that passion for math and science is a key part of their admissions, I don't remember seeing that in MIT's application (certainly not so prominently). It seems like MIT is trying to become HYP through their admissions practices rather than seeking the best talent in science and math.</p>

<p>There are plenty of kids at MIT who get in not because of their interest in science, but because of some extracurricular interest in things like music or athletics or because they have the right race, gender, and hometown to contribute to MIT's "intellectual diversity." </p>

<p>I found an interesting thread on Philip Greenspun's site that might be relevant: <a href="http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000th4&topic_id=Ask%20Philip&topic=%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://philip.greenspun.com/bboard/q-and-a-fetch-msg?msg_id=000th4&topic_id=Ask%20Philip&topic=&lt;/a>
Applicants like this get rejected from MIT all the time despite their passion. I think Caltech would have valued his passion to a greater extent.</p>