<p>Ive been trying to compare stanford and caltech for engineering. I gotta make my choice between these two by monday. After visiting both, Im pretty split. As I had expected before visiting, I had no preference for the atmosphere/feel of one school over the other. Trying to compare the academics of both schools in engineering seems to be just as hard. Stanford seems to be ranked better for engineering than caltech on US news in many different areas for undergrad. Can anyone explain to me why this is so? Stanford seems like an awesome place for engineering in grad school, but im having a difficult time being convinced that caltech isnt better than stanford for undergrad in most fields of engineering.</p>
<p>Wow, congrats on those acceptances.</p>
<p>I think just about everyone will tell you that there isn't any tangible difference in terms of academics, prestige, postgraduate opportunities, etc. Since you said you have no preference for the atmosphere/feel, maybe compare cost? If that's a non-issue, flip a coin?</p>
<p>I would perfer stanford due to the fact the school seems like it has a better atmosphere. The two school are so highly regarded that it really does not make a difference which is ranked higher.</p>
<p>it would seem that Stanford would give you more chances to do different things while in college, something that can be very important.</p>
<p>Stanford for the connection. You may get to work in one of the big name company that started from Stanford graduates. For Cal Tech the price is a bit cheaper but you might end up working for JPL. I used to work at JPL and have tons of relatives with Phds from Cal Tech and they all end up working at JPL. No stock options, no chance to get rich.</p>
<p>I would go with Stanford.</p>
<p>if you are male, definitely go to stanford. the male-female ratio is terribly high.</p>
<p>At caltech: "the odds ain't good, and the goods are odd"</p>
<p>id rather keep my decision based purely on the engineering programs of the two if possible. Supposedly, ive heard that caltech's engineering is very theoretical. I dont know how much this would help/hurt me if I plan on getting a PhD after and then going into industry. I have also heard from a couple caltech undergrads that where caltech stands out is in its sciences, not so much in engineering. At the same time, ive heard from others that stanford is a great place for grad school in engineering, not so much for undergrad. For example, I can join caltechs DARPA team as an undergrad, but Stanford has its team restricted to grads. I tried a little bit to compare the courses I would be taking at both schools, but Im still confused since I do not know exactly what the courses include and how theyd help me become a better engineer in the long run. Ugh im so confused</p>
<p>
[quote]
id rather keep my decision based purely on the engineering programs of the two if possible. Supposedly, ive heard that caltech's engineering is very theoretical. I dont know how much this would help/hurt me if I plan on getting a PhD after and then going into industry.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I think you just hit on the heart of the matter right there. If you want to get an engineering job or start your own company, then Stanford is almost certainly better, because of the geographic area it is in and the long-standing industry connections, not just to Silicon Valley tech companies, but also venture capital firms and the entrepreneurial culture. On the other hand, if you intend to become an academic, then Caltech might actually be better, because of the highly rigorous training you will get that will prepare you well for getting your PhD. </p>
<p>But I would emphasize that you don't really need to have a PhD to have an excellent career in technology. Plenty of people don't. In fact, at least from a monetary standpoint, the bulk of the riches of any tech company tend to accrue not to the PhD researchers and developers, but to the businessmen and managers. I believe Stanford will prepare you better for the business side of engineering. Engineering success is not just about producing a technically impressive product, but also about properly marketing it and understanding customer needs. </p>
<p>
[quote]
At the same time, ive heard from others that stanford is a great place for grad school in engineering, not so much for undergrad. For example, I can join caltechs DARPA team as an undergrad, but Stanford has its team restricted to grads.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Like I said above, it all depends on just how necessary you think doing research is. The vast majority of working engineers do not engage in research. Many highly successful tech companies engage in little research. For example, there is nothing groundbreaking from a technical standpoint about MySpace or YouTube. It's not like their technology is way better than their competitors. They won through savvy marketing and an understanding of customer desires, and as a result, the original engineers walked away rich. </p>
<p>Hence, it gets back to the question of what kind of work do you want to do? If you indeed want to engage in cutting-edge esoteric research for your career, then maybe Caltech is better. On the other hand, if you see yourself engaging in more marketable commercial projects, then Stanford is probably better. </p>
<p>I would personally choose Stanford over Caltech. Why? Simple - all I need is one reason - risk aversion. The truth is, Stanford is easier, particularly on the low end. While certainly it is difficult to get straight A's at either school, if all you want to do is pass, it's not that hard to do that at Stanford. As long as you do the work, you will pass. Not with a good grade, but at least you'll pass. And if you really really run into trouble, you can just change majors to one of those creampuff humanities majors where you really can pass while doing relatively little work. In contrast, you stand a very real chance of flunking out at Caltech. If you're doing poorly at Caltech, there's nowhere to run, there's nowhere to hide. </p>
<p>Like it or not, we live in a world where having a degree from any school and in any major, and with even mediocre grades, is still worlds better than not having a degree at all. Many employers won't even bother to interview you if you don't have a degree. That degree can be from ANY school, and in ANY subject. They don't really care that much, as long as you have a degree. The vast majority of graduate schools, even no-name ones, won't bother to consider you if you don't have a degree. Even if your degree was earned with mediocre grades in a different subject, you still have a chance of getting into a low-tier graduate school. You may need to take some prior graduate courses as part of continuing education in order to prove that you can handle the material before they will formally admit you into the program, but you still have a chance. But if you don't even have a degree at all, you basically have no chance. </p>
<p>Hence, it's far far better to graduate with a 2.5 GPA in a creampuff major from Stanford than to flunk out of Caltech. If you flunk out of Caltech, nobody is going to care why. You're not even going to have a chance to explain that you flunked out because Caltech is a difficult school and if you had gone elsewhere, you would have graduated. All they're going to see is that you don't have a degree, and they're not going to care why.</p>
<p>but, doesn't caltech not have 1st year grades (just pass/no pass?) besides, caltech has such small class enrollment that I can't believe they try to weed people out.</p>
<p>Caltech has an excellent reputation as a great undergrad program in the hard sciences, and has great opportunities for undergrad research experiences. If you want to do things like DARPA projects, then definitely caltech provides a lot of that.</p>
<p>Stanford is an excellent school also and you'll have a lot of opportunities there also. Really, you can't go wrong either way.</p>
<p>go to stanford. caltech doesn't even seem like a "normal" college.</p>
<p>theres more to life than just going to a very more prestigious better college.</p>
<p>
[quote]
but, doesn't caltech not have 1st year grades (just pass/no pass?)
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Yes, that helps. But what happens in the 2nd year and beyond? I think we can all agree that, if nothing else, Caltech is a very tough school. What if you're just not good enough to handle it? Then you'd end up with no degree. Like said, at Stanford, in the worst case scenario, you can always just retreat to one of those creampuff majors and still get a degree. That's a whole lot better than getting nothing at all. </p>
<p>
[quote]
besides, caltech has such small class enrollment that I can't believe they try to weed people out
[/quote]
</p>
<p>I don't think they * try * to weed people out either. But it doesn't matter whether they * try * or not, if it happens anyway. </p>
<p>Go on over to the Caltech section of CC and you will see even Caltech boosters like Ben Golub conceding that Caltech is a highly unpleasant experience for those students who don't do well (and there are indeed some students who don't do well). These students would have been better off if they had gone to a different school, like Stanford. </p>
<p>
[quote]
go to stanford. caltech doesn't even seem like a "normal" college.</p>
<p>theres more to life than just going to a very more prestigious better college.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>You seem to be talking as if Stanford is somehow less prestigious than Caltech. If anything, the reverse is true.</p>
<p>I like caltech for UG. stanford for Grad. You will be noticed at caltech, i'm not so sure you will be given the same level of attention at stanford as an UG.</p>
<p>Caltech will be harder, but it wont be so hard that I wont get a degree, Sakky. If its that hard, I will transfer. Yes, I may fail a class once or twice but that wont keep me from getting my degree. Now if I was planning on going to medical school, I would see where going to a school like Stanford would be better because a higher GPA would matter. I would definitely rather do caltech for UG and stanford for grad than the reverse. But maybe Stanford UG and MIT grad would be better? Banking on that seems risky though. However, I do realize I have to keep my mind open. What if I decide I dont want to get a PhD all of a sudden in college? Then i would be in a better situation at stanford I think, in more ways than one. As for the kind of work I want to do, I think I would rather work on high-level engineering projects than on simple stuff like youtube. For example, fusion power, nanotechnology, etc.</p>
<p>Honestly, have you ever heard of a Caltech engineering grad that tried reasonably hard there and ended up unemployed? </p>
<p>I think people are way overanalyzing this. You're opportunities will be nearly limitless at either school.</p>
<p>lol they may both be great schools but i gotta choose one....by the end of this weekend.</p>
<p>How can one not have a preference between Caltech and Stanford? They are polar opposites? I could understand if your choices were Caltech and MIT or Stanford and Cal. But Caltech and Stanford are at complete opposite ends of the spectrum.</p>
<p>Im just that flexible a guy I guess...</p>
<p>Not really CrazyGlue, I think you haven't carefully evaluated your interests. You aren't chosing between a top university and a crappy university. You are chosing between two of the top 4 undergraduate Engineering programs in the US. Academics shouldn't play a part in this. Environment and overall experience should be your primary deciding factor.</p>
<p>^ that's exactly what i was hintin at earlier with my comment about male-female ratio (which I maintain, at stanford, is much more favorable)</p>
<p>to get the ball rolling, here are some questions you should ask yourself: have u visited both? which had a better campus? which one had a better atmosphere? at which one could you look at the student body and imagine a part of? which had clubs and activities that interested you? do you plan on taking any classes in the liberal arts? which is more affordable? which has a more appealing surrounding area/town? how is the quality of life (dining, residences) at each?</p>
<p>debating the educational rigors and the academic prestige of those two schools is moot when both schools are in the top 5. at this point, college will end up becoming what you make of the various opportunities available to grow as a person (isn't that what college is for, after all?), because the career advancement and the education is virtually identical. you have a very rare chance in the next few days to define how EVERY aspect of your life will be in the next four years. "every aspect of your life" goes way beyond academics dude.</p>