Caltech is not offering scholarship to Freshman any more?

<p>bluebird, my experience has been that people on both this and the MIT board can be kind of harsh. It is weird, as my son assures me that his peers at Caltech are some of the nicest and most humble kids he has ever been around, as well as the most intelligent. Maybe it is a CC phenomenon. I'm not sure how anyone can deny that the Axline made Caltech more attractive to students that will not qualify for need based aid. From my standpoint, I wish this new policy applied to my son's class, as the gap between our EFC (which like everyone else, was ridiculously high and required substantial loans to meet even the EFC) and his Caltech grant was substantial. Fortunately, he got enough outside scholarships to cover most of this area, which Caltech was offering more crappy loans and work study to meet our need with. I would encourage you to visit both schools to get a feel for what would make you happy, as that really is very important in addition to money. Don't take anything around here too seriously either and good luck making your decision. It is a huge relief once it has been made.</p>

<p>bluebird, it seems there's a misunderstanding. That comment wasn't referring to students in general. blueriver seems to be deeply bothered by the removal of the scholarship, so I suggested he/she might be better off at MIT. However, given some of the things blueriver has said, it sounds like he or she has already decided to not attend Caltech. I later mentioned that after any financial aid is taken into consideration there's a huge discrepancy, ($10,000 or something ridiculous) then it would make sense to chose one school over the other. (depending on your financial situation of course; the $10,000 was just a number.)</p>

<p>"If you love two school what is wrong with choosing one that will enable you to graduate with less loans?"</p>

<p>Absolutely. If you love both schools equally or near equally, then the cost can be the deciding factor. This makes perfect sense. I'm not denying that. When taken out of context, I can see why that would appear to be harsh, but that wasn't the intention at all. </p>

<p>My main point, addressed to blueriver, is while money can play a big decision in choosing a university, you are at a great disadvantage to rank your choices based on how much money they're offering. Other factors need to be considered, otherwise you might just screw yourself over and realize that when it's too late. (and then go through the pain of applying to transfer somewhere else) Nor does it make any sense to chase a scholarship for the attached prestige and/or bragging rights; that defeats the purpose of having a scholarship in the first place. </p>

<p>crazymom is right; the people here are very nice. Perhaps it just comes off poorly because there's no real sense of voice tone or intended meaning through forums. (or perhaps my writing abilities just suck) I'll have to work on correcting this. Either way, please don't get the idea that caltech students on cc are rude, unpleasant people. We're not.</p>

<p>"I'm not sure how anyone can deny that the Axline made Caltech more attractive to students that will not qualify for need based aid."</p>

<p>I don't think anyone's denying that. I'm just saying that the recruiting benefit is not worth the cost. If Axline isn't a good predictor of how well students do, then why are we spending the money to recruit these students?</p>

<p>I try not to be harsh, but I also try to stress really strongly good and bad reasons to come here. This is VERY important because I don't want to lead people here who are going to be unhappy. If someone doesn't appear to be well suited for Caltech, I try to make them aware of the reasons I think this. I'd rather scare someone away than have them come here and be miserable for four years.</p>

<p>Finally, every Caltech student I know on these boards is an incredibly kind and caring person. They aren't here volunteering their time because it's fun, they are doing it because they care about these students. I, on the other hand, am often rude and occasionally unpleasant. Don't hold it against my school ;)</p>

<p>Thanks for the replies.
I am one of those people having a really hard time choosing were to go. I really like both. I was really hoping for some Caltech merit based aid, it would have made life easier not putting my family and myself in so much debt if I was awarded any. I will be doing Caltech in day in a week because I really do want one school to stand out more than the other.</p>

<p>Jsd472:</p>

<p>
[quote]
I'm not sure why your responses are so sarcastic; they come off a bit rude. I've been civil about this.
...</p>

<p>Pursuing an education and a career in science just because of money and prestige is extremely stupid, and perhaps that unfortunate soul will wake up one day and see how miserable they are.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>I may be a little over sarcastic, but at least I don’t comment people with remarks like silly, stupid or unfortunate soul.</p>

<p>
[quote]
"Yeah, right, Nancy Kerrigan was attacked by her rival in 1994 for the competition of USA team for Olympiad, thank god, we have not heard any rumors talking about canceling Olympiad. So many people are over eating to become obese, en, what we do about it, let’s stop food supply to whole human being……."</p>

<p>I honestly don't understand what this means. </p>

<p>

[/quote]

I was trying to say that just because there are some people acted improperly during Olympiad competition is not the reason to stop Olympiad. Too many obese nowadays is not the reason to stop food supply. This is not right way to correct problems, same as merit scholarship, some students cheated for this competition should not be a reason to remove those scholarships as you have suggested.</p>

<p>lizzardfire:</p>

<p>
[quote]
You also said "just Caltech used to be a little more academic advocated and now is giving up one of it's strong advocating action". I don't think this is the case. You're basically saying that we promote academics over other things, and by removing the scholarship we no longer do that? This isn't correct.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Read what I have said carefully, ‘Caltech used to be a little more…now it is giving up one of it’s strong actions.’ I was saying giving up one of many actions, did not mean Caltech is no longer relatively more academic advocating. That’s why I said ‘Removing merit scholarship adds one more similarity to MIT’ , while there are still many differences and similarities between MIT and Caltech. Or let me put it this way: removing merit scholarship takes away one of Caltech’s attractions, at least to me and some others out there to whom money does count. Be careful, I am saying one of the atractions, not all.</p>

<p>Jsd472;</p>

<p>
[quote]
My main point, addressed to blueriver, is while money can play a big decision in choosing a university, you are at a great disadvantage to rank your choices based on how much money they're offering. Other factors need to be considered, otherwise you might just screw yourself over and realize that when it's too late. (and then go through the pain of applying to transfer somewhere else) Nor does it make any sense to chase a scholarship for the attached prestige and/or bragging rights; that defeats the purpose of having a scholarship in the first place.

[/quote]
</p>

<p>Bluebird and crazy mom said it better than I dId, Money does matter to some people when two schools are about equally good to them. It may also matters in many other cases. So for some people, money can play a critical role when making final decisions, even that means at the cost of other things.</p>

<p>You have mentioned several times that people wanting to get scholarship is for prestige and bragging rights. Like in many other things, it is possible for few people, but it’s very unfair to make this kind of judgment for majority students. I really don’t understand where did you get that kind of feelings, from you schoolmates who previously got scholarships? I thought I read from this board before that many students don’t even know his Caltech classmates were Axline or other scholarships recipients for very long time until they accidently discovered from other sources. </p>

<p>Intel just announced this year’s semifinalist, I hope you would not comment those student are just chasing after prestige and bragging rights.</p>

<p>I, myself personally admire those winners (scholarships, Intel, Olympiad..and so on) , because winning those awards requires not only high intelligence , it also demands for persistence, hard working habits and a drive to go through many painstaking periods, no fun at all. So I usually don’t like to put any negative thoughts to those winners. And I would not be a sour grape if they do brag it in front me since I definitely lack of those traits.</p>

<p>blueriver, I think I understand where you are coming from. I'm not sure why people are often so ready to make assumpotions about people's motives because they applied for a scholarship or applied to a school. Moreover, issues about "prestige" are very confusing around here. On one had, some poor girl innocently posting a chances thread made the mistake of saying she was applying to several other schools including some Ivies. She was accused of applying to Caltech just because she was applying to "prestige" schools, and asked to defend her math/science passion. I know from our own process, there are many reasons to apply to a particular school based upon the program you are looking at, financial aid, whether your parents get you legacy consideration. etc. On the other hand, there is a discussion about improving Caltech's public relations machine in order to improve "prestige" and draw more of the best applicants (who would then, it seems at least to me, be applying to the school because of its "prestige.") Now concerns are expressed about people going for scholarships just for the "prestige." My inclination is that many people apply for scholarships for the money. I fear if my son really knew how much the Caltech experience is hurting our family financially, he couldn't sleep at night. One year at Caltech costs more than our house. Since the FAFSA is such an outdated document, even those that they say have no financial need may actually need the money. The range of applicants is going to have different needs, and this move will help some people and make the institution less atrractive to others.</p>

<p>I sympathize with both blueriver and jsd472.</p>

<p>Blueriver is right that Axlines and other prizes fuel the dreams of highschoolers. It's not a bad thing. These kids may love science, but it is nice to add a little glamour and sparkle to doing well. Their motivation is not strong enough, YET, to keep them pushing hard toward their goals. It doesn't mean that their motivation is false. </p>

<p>Many other fields have much more opportunities for recognition. Sports, especially, has lots of high visibility recognition, but that doesn't automatically lead to poor sportsmanship, the wrong kind of competition, etc.</p>

<p>On the other hand, jsd472, I think, is saying that if you have mainly the kind of motivation that seeks external rewards, science research is not the field for you. Doing research requires an extremely high tolerance for frustration and delayed gratification. During those dry spells, you need internal motivation and discipline to draw on to keep being productive. Many, many, PhD students don't finish their degrees. The main problem is usually motivational, not intellectual.</p>

<p>So Axlines, like Nobel prizes, are good for the community because they give kids a moon to shoot for. On the other hand, if you get too dependent on external affirmation you are never going to have the intellectual independence to be a grown-up scientist.</p>

<p>How and when to develop this internal motivation is extremely tricky. There was another thread here that mentioned "Caltech syndrome" which they defined as students coming in full of promise and drive and becoming unsure and demotivated. I have no pat answers about how to maintain motivation. However, I don't think screening out or putting down those that get excited by external recognition when they are undergraduates is the answer. My guess the secret to developing internal motivation lies somewhere in the vicinity of "good mentoring"</p>

<p>I don't think that most applicants who hope to receive an Axline are looking for prestige. They are looking for money. I'm in a position where I may be forced to turn down Caltech simply because I cannot pay for it. I probably wouldn't have been in the running for one anyway, but I can certainly understand someone in my position being very angry about this. "Prestige" and "recognition" would have nothing to do with it.</p>

<p>My son (still a sophomore) will be disappointed. Caltech was a really good fit - personality and interest-wise, and he was hopeful for the money (realizing that it was a long shot). He has been told that he should only apply to places we can afford (no Ivies), and we are not expecting any FA. There are many places where he will get merit aid, but they aren't Caltech.</p>

<p>Two points: One, I want to point out that I didn't link the scholarships with prestige. I don't personally find people shooting for scholarships to be a big problem. I just think that from an institutional perspective it doesn't benefit us as a whole, despite helping individual students. Blueriver, you are correct that you did not say it was the only thing that made us more comparably "academic", but I still feel that you place far too much emphasis on it. It's not that big of a deal from the institution's policy perspective. It's only a big deal to the individuals who would have benefited from this money. On the other hand, the movement of the money from scholarship funds into financial aid funds helps a lot more people. I can't say that I'm sorry Axline is gone. </p>

<p>Two, crazy mom makes a reasonable point: How can I argue on the one hand that people shouldn't come here for prestige and on the other that we should become more prestigious?</p>

<p>I hope that I can clarify this: Prestige increases visibility, which in turn means a greater number of students apply. This is good from an institutional perspective (we have more to choose from) and from a personal perspective (more students who might not find us and would fit here, do). It's OK to apply to a school in part for its prestige or even attend there in part for its prestige. That being said, no matter how prestigious Caltech becomes there will still be other schools that have a higher prestige:work ratio. If you're coming here PRIMARILY because of prestige you're making a huge mistake. When the work hits you like an overwhelming tidal wave all the prestige in the world isn't going to comfort you. You have to love the work to ride it out. </p>

<p>It's wonderful to be able to sit on the sidelines and talk about that "poor girl innocently posting". You're EXACTLY right. She is innocent, and I want her to maintain that innocent optimism. I've seen people who came here for the prestige destroyed by this school. I've seen them reduced from confident individuals to shells of their former selves. I'd rather be harsh and make her next four years a lot happier than be "nice". One of two things will happen--she'll reconsider her decision to apply here and will either decide that the work isn't worth it (and in that case she wouldn't be happy here) or she decides "to hell with that guy" and come here anyway (and that motivation will help her immensely).</p>

<p>Choosing to come to Caltech can be one of the best decisions of your life, but it is a choice that should be made very, very carefully.</p>

<p>EngMom, if your son is good enough to be competitive for an Axline scholarship, there are probably numerous other external scholarships that he could qualify for. None of them are easy to get, but then again, neither was Axline.</p>

<p>It is important to remember that as a member of the Caltech community, whether it is reasonable or not, people get an impression of the school based upon the people they encounter, even online. If Caltech students come across as harsh, egotistical, belligerent, etc., it can also impact negatively upon the school and and have a subtle influence on the choices of potential students. I have yet to meet a current student who was anything but perfectly pleasant in person; however, they can come across differently online.</p>

<p>You're right, crazy mom, it is important to remember that. I have never forgotten it. I hope that doesn't mean I can't make comments in jest from time to time...</p>

<p>"I may be a little over sarcastic, but at least I don’t comment people with remarks like silly, stupid or unfortunate soul."</p>

<p>Although these words had carry a negative connotation, they were actually serving as advice, for a student to make a mistake and find out when it's too late. That's all. I don't really see your point.</p>

<p>"I was trying to say that just because there are some people acted improperly during Olympiad competition is not the reason to stop Olympiad. Too many obese nowadays is not the reason to stop food supply. This is not right way to correct problems, same as merit scholarship, some students cheated for this competition should not be a reason to remove those scholarships as you have suggested."</p>

<p>I never suggested or implied students cheated to get the scholarship. Since everyone was automatically considered for it in years past, the only way to "cheat" would be to lie on your application. I never mentioned any of this. Again, what is this getting at? </p>

<p>"Bluebird and crazy mom said it better than I dId, Money does matter to some people when two schools are about equally good to them. It may also matters in many other cases. So for some people, money can play a critical role when making final decisions, even that means at the cost of other things."</p>

<p>I explicitly addressed this in the first part of the post where you took the quote from. Why are you bringing something up again that was already clarified? I completely understand how money can sometimes force students to go to a school that wasn't their first pick. (out of the acceptances)</p>

<p>"You have mentioned several times that people wanting to get scholarship is for prestige and bragging rights. Like in many other things, it is possible for few people, but it’s very unfair to make this kind of judgment for majority students. I really don’t understand where did you get that kind of feelings, from you schoolmates who previously got scholarships? I thought I read from this board before that many students don’t even know his Caltech classmates were Axline or other scholarships recipients for very long time until they accidently discovered from other sources."</p>

<p>I didn't say that at all. I'm not sure how you reached this generalization, but given some of your replies, I was referring to your case (and the students in your town you spoke of) in particular, and any other student pursuing a scholarship for similar reasons. Other than monetary purposes, scholarships don't really have much use. I was previously unaware that people used scholarships in the ways you described. I can't say I've seen anyone here motivated to do work and/or research for the chance of winning a scholarship. (and being able to boast about it, unless you meant something different. It certainly sounded like this is what you meant.)</p>

<p>"Intel just announced this year’s semifinalist, I hope you would not comment those student are just chasing after prestige and bragging rights.</p>

<p>I, myself personally admire those winners (scholarships, Intel, Olympiad..and so on) , because winning those awards requires not only high intelligence , it also demands for persistence, hard working habits and a drive to go through many painstaking periods, no fun at all. So I usually don’t like to put any negative thoughts to those winners. And I would not be a sour grape if they do brag it in front me since I definitely lack of those traits."</p>

<p>I know nothing about theses students or their motives, so all I can do is speculate. Given the amount of time and energy involved in these projects, I find it hard to believe someone could put up with it that long if they were only after the money, but I could be wrong. If they were to start bragging about winning the scholarship though, they will certainly appear pretentious and conceited to others. Whether you say anything or not, they will quickly find themselves alienated by peers and professors.</p>

<p>I hope this has cleared things up, since your comments have almost all derived from some misunderstanding or misinterpretation.</p>

<p>"I may be a little over sarcastic, but at least I don’t comment people with remarks like silly, stupid or unfortunate soul."</p>

<p>These words may carry a negative connotation, but they were only giving advice to a student who could potentially make a mistake, and find out when it's too late. I'm not sure what your point is.</p>

<p>"I was trying to say that just because there are some people acted improperly during Olympiad competition is not the reason to stop Olympiad. Too many obese nowadays is not the reason to stop food supply. This is not right way to correct problems, same as merit scholarship, some students cheated for this competition should not be a reason to remove those scholarships as you have suggested."</p>

<p>I never suggested students cheated for scholarships, even indirectly. The only way to "cheat" would be to lie on your application, since everyone's considered anyway. This will only hurt you in the end, and I would like to believe no one applies to Caltech with the intention of purposefully misrepresenting themselves. How did you come to this conclusion?</p>

<p>"Bluebird and crazy mom said it better than I dId, Money does matter to some people when two schools are about equally good to them. It may also matters in many other cases. So for some people, money can play a critical role when making final decisions, even that means at the cost of other things."</p>

<p>Again, I didn't say that either. This was explicitly explained in the first part of the post you quoted. I completely understand that money can sometimes make the decision about where to attend. However, an extra $2000 could be the difference between misery and happiness, but this varies for each student. A small loan may be worth it if someone is in such a situation.</p>

<p>"You have mentioned several times that people wanting to get scholarship is for prestige and bragging rights. Like in many other things, it is possible for few people, but it’s very unfair to make this kind of judgment for majority students. I really don’t understand where did you get that kind of feelings, from you schoolmates who previously got scholarships? I thought I read from this board before that many students don’t even know his Caltech classmates were Axline or other scholarships recipients for very long time until they accidently discovered from other sources."</p>

<p>That's not what I said. I was referring to your particular case and the students in your town you mentioned, plus anyone else pursuing a scholarship for a similar reason. Other than monetary reasons, scholarships don't serve much purpose. I can't say I've ever seen anyone here motivated to do work and/or research for the chance of winning a scholarship. (to boast about it later. It sounded like this is what you were referring to, but I could be wrong.)</p>

<p>"Intel just announced this year’s semifinalist, I hope you would not comment those student are just chasing after prestige and bragging rights.</p>

<p>I, myself personally admire those winners (scholarships, Intel, Olympiad..and so on) , because winning those awards requires not only high intelligence , it also demands for persistence, hard working habits and a drive to go through many painstaking periods, no fun at all. So I usually don’t like to put any negative thoughts to those winners. And I would not be a sour grape if they do brag it in front me since I definitely lack of those traits."</p>

<p>I don't know these students or their motives, so all I could do is speculate. Given the amount of time and effort put into these projects, I find it hard to believe someone could remain motivated and interested in their work if they only wanted the money. This, of course, could be wrong. Since the winning projects (usually) require the most work and intelligence, these type of students, in my experience, tend to be more modest. However, even if they did start to brag about it, they would certainly appear pretentious and conceited to their peers and professors. Whether or not you say anything, they would quickly find themselves alienated. (in any case, arrogance is usually a sign of ignorance of how much more there is to learn, at least from someone of high school age.)</p>

<p>I hope this has cleared things up, since many of your comments were from misunderstandings and misinterpretations.</p>

<p>(Browser problems above, so this unfortunately resulted in essentially the same message being printed twice, with no way of deleting one.)</p>

<p>Also,</p>

<p>Some of the posts almost make it sound as if there was a close to certain chance of winning an Axline. I imagine they were just upset that there was no chance for financial aid of any sort (including merit-based), but if you honestly believe this was a sure thing for you, it's not. Even the IMO, IPhO, etc. kids aren't guaranteed to get this scholarship. (For those still considering Caltech, and received a very unreasonable aid offer, as I said before, calling the financial aid office is worth it. Outside scholarships and student loans are other options. There are ways to make this work.)</p>

<p>"Some of the posts almost make it sound as if there was a close to certain chance of winning an Axline. I imagine they were just upset that there was no chance for financial aid of any sort (including merit-based), but if you honestly believe this was a sure thing for you, it's not."</p>

<p>I agree with this. Axline's were incredibly hard to get. I think for your average Caltech student, funneling this money into need-based aid will be a positive change, rather than a negative.</p>

<p>An article in today's Tech confirms that there will be no parental contribution for families with incomes under $60,000, which indeed sounds like it may be a better recruiting strategy and benefit the student body more than the Axline program did. Last year only 5 out of 25 Axlines accepted the offer, and the actual matriculation rate was possibly even lower.</p>

<p>I'm writing a follow-up piece for next week; prefrosh (EA or waiting for a decision) who care about the issue are welcome to contact me with opinions. Are you disappointed there's no possibility of merit-based aid, or hopeful that you'll get a better finaid package now that the money has been reallocated?</p>