<p>
[quote]
Someone who has graduated from a college with very lax standards has, at the most, shown that his parents probably have money.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Many employers are looking for no more. That is why a college degree is almost always a useful job-market signal, even if the degree doesn't signal intellectual prowess.</p>
<p>I contemplated this for a bit, so I'm glad you thought of it too. But here's the question... why would employers want to sort based on parental wealth, as opposed to some other trait like competence? Maybe because parental wealth is the best available proxy or correlate for competence, but I'd really doubt that; wouldn't you?</p>
<p>There is a very nifty economic model suggesting that "pointless" college degrees are still useful job market signals, but it is a different kind of pointlessness at issue. Suppose I study something very esoteric and inapplicable (say, the history of Latin and Greek syntax and morphology between 300 and 200 B.C.). Suppose this thing has the property that is much easier for people who are very smart than for people who are not so smart. Now suppose employers were to hire business consultants only based on whether one got a degree in a subject like this. If you get the degree, you get the job, which pays you p, in dollars, over a lifetime. Now, even a dumb person can get the degree, but it'll be hard. So the cost in effort and pain, and money c<a href="converted%20to%20dollars">/i</a> to the dumb person is high; hopefully so high that *p - c < 0 and getting the degree is not worth it, even though it pays p. So stupid people wouldn't get the degree, even if they could with enough pain. But for smart people, c is smaller; studying is easier, and often less expensive in money too. So p-c > 0. So they get the degree, signaling they are smart, which gets them the job. Thus, even if the standard for employment is a degree in an esoteric and useless field, there is still a way for smart people to use this to inform employers that they're smart. The upshot being that college can be useful in the job market doesn't have to teach you anything applicable.</p>
<p>But this model had the crucial feature that learning is easier for smart people... so intelligence still comes in somewhere along the line. I don't see how this is so in the parental wealth situation.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but then again I've met plenty of kids at Caltech that are very strong at literature or history or foreign languages. I'd say the atmosphere here is somewhat more intellectual than at many of our peer schools, and that goes across the board -- (I say this having taken courses in both math/science and the humanities at Princeton for a year).
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I would agree with the notion that Caltech has a very strong if not the strongest intellectual atmosphere among the US universities. However, I also met plenty of Caltech kids who know nothing about history, sociology, etc, but math and physics and science related subject. My perception however, would exclude the International (esp. Asian) students, since in Asia, strong literature, history and humanities are also absolutely required to be in the cream of outstanding students and hence let them have the chance to form the very small int'l student body. In this case, however, I refer to the general observation on the students and not any particular one. Pick one by one, Caltech students will overwhelm Stanford (or even MIT) students with their scientific knowledge. But in humanities, many Caltech student don't have the 'necessary' background to start with.</p>
<p>So, the first question arises again, finally :</p>
<p>** Caltech vs MIT for engineering**</p>
<p>*Did anyone win? *</p>
<p>**
?
?
?
?
**</p>
<p>Or is it possible for anyone win over the other?</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>They both win.</p>
<p>w00t. Agreed.</p>
<p>Though I have always felt the proximity and presence of JPL to/at CalTech to be of positive value to the students pursuing Engineering there, especially Aero/Astro/Space Tech. But the inputs to the discussion on this thread has indicated that this factor may not be of much advantage to international students like me.</p>
<p>What does really appeal at CalTech is the Quantum Mechanics there, especially Ph 125. And with places like Institute for Quantum Information, the place is surely a gem, if you are a postgraduate student, plus a US citizen!
And shall I need to mention the Explosion Dynamics Lab!</p>
<p>Both MIT and CalTech are winners in their own domains, but what matters to me is the following:
~Ben Golub : *"MIT generally has much broader offerings in Aero/Astro. I would recommend MIT for your interests."*</p>
<p>SO, THAT'S IT FOR ME !</p>
<p>.</p>
<p>Thanks for sharing!</p>