caltech's admissions policies are ridiculous

<p>Seriously guys, don’t waste your time…</p>

<p>“Here’s the thing. Your facts are actually wrong, and I thought I proved this to you. Caltech’s acceptance rate is significantly higher than most top tier colleges. Last year it was about 17% and this year 15% before waitlist admits but if they accept any off the waitlist then its likely to go up to 16%. So lets look at the facts. Caltech had twice the acceptance rate of Stanford and more than twice that of Harvard this year. Last year it had 10% higher acceptance rate than Harvard. What do these facts tell us? Well the obvious is that no, they are not ranked so high because of their acceptance rate because that acceptance rate is significantly higher than their peer schools.”</p>

<p>You conveniently overlook the point that I spent SO MUCH TIME making. The fact that Tech’s SAT ranges are so high more than makes up for the difference in acceptance rate. Tech’s sat range is about 1470 to 1590, which takes first place easily. This contributes to the fact that Tech’s selectivity rank out of all the colleges in America is number one.</p>

<p>“More facts: their acceptance rate just recently dropped even that low. For the 03-04 school year, the acceptance rate was 21.4%, and trust me, Caltech was ranked just as highly if not higher when it had this oh so not selective acceptance rate. Furthermore, this year they had a record number of applications and that number just barely broke 4000 and not even four years ago, they were still under 3000 applications. Compare that again to its peer schools some of which get 25-30k applications.” </p>

<p>Yet again, you COMPLETELY ignore my point about the SAT ranges. Tech makes up for how it does not have the lowest acceptance rate by having by far the highest sat ranges, so it is according USNews the most selective school in America. You completely ignore my points as you make a pitiful argument. In addition, for the 03-04 year, a 21.4% acceptance rate was still among the most competitive in the nation.</p>

<p>Laughably, your own arguments helps illuminate my point even more. Tech NEEDS to refrain from practicing aa in order to keep its SAT ranges so high or else it will no longer be the Usnews ranking’s number one mot selective school. That is why it refuses to practice aa, even though it recognizes that its lack of minority students is a problem.</p>

<p>You have no idea how frustrating it is to keep reiterating a point and then have it go completely ignored. Seriously, in your entire response, you did not even mention the word “SAT scores.”</p>

<p>I’m going to take lizzardfire’s advice…</p>

<p>Hmm, you also conveniently do not mention that Tech’s fifteen percent acceptance rate is also among the top 5 lowest among nationa universities. I am going to be brutally honest with you. If Tech’s acceptance rate and SAT ranges weren’t so impressive, it would not be even mentioned in the same sentence as Harvard or Stanford. And it is very very arrogant of you to say that Tech is a peer institution with Harvard and stanford. very arrogant, and many would disagree with you.</p>

<p>Tech KNOWS that its selectivity (based on acceptance rate and sat scores) is what makes it so prestigious, and they will do anything to preserve it.
Think about it. If something is harder to get (a degree from Tech), it more desirable and prestigious.</p>

<p>“I’m going to take lizzardfire’s advice…”</p>

<p>Sure, right when I point out how you are ignoring my main point, you decide to back down. What a coincidence.</p>

<p>Read about Caltech Core. If Caltech admitted people with lower qualifications, they wouldn’t do well in core (even some people who are admitted with great stats do poorly in core). The main concern at admissions is “will this person pass core”- those with a lower SAT score probably won’t.</p>

<p>please don’t feed the ■■■■■■. thank you.</p>

<p>I’m gonna take one last stab since I figure the response will be kinda funny.</p>

<p>Why is Caltech well respected for its graduate school? Nobody cares about SAT scores for that.</p>

<p>Some Caltech students stay for the grad school. Caltech is being selective for its undergrads to increase the reputation of its graduate programs! Boo! Hiss!</p>

<p>Aww, you got me there. :(</p>

<p>Just want to make sure I’ve got this correct. The op’s problem with the Caltech admissions policy is that they choose people with higher gpas/test scores over people with more interesting life stories (minorities, low socioeconomic, top athletes, amazing artists, people with rich parents)?</p>

<p>My comment to the OP, ■■■■■ or not – I believe most of the ways colleges admit students are bogus if overanalyzed in some regard or the other. The schools I got into, I know people who got rejected from, and people who got in, and the correlation was bogus. I’m old-fashioned, and I don’t buy into this “interesting life story” business, and I don’t buy that high SAT’s or GPA’s are the best measure of how much a student belongs in these schools. My preference is that the student be very talented at what the student does, and demonstrate that however possible. </p>

<p>Caltech students are required to demonstrate in some way commitment to math/science. The school does what it can, and maybe there are improvements that can be made, but I feel like it makes an effort to admit students who will enjoy its kind of atmosphere. </p>

<p>Caltech is a peer institution to Harvard and Stanford because of its world class faculty and academics. And very frankly, I’ve been more impressed with how intelligent (face to face, I’m talking, not based on test scores) students who got accepted to Caltech have been on average than I am with those who got into Harvard and Stanford. Then again, I haven’t seen very many students, and am one person.</p>

<p>Frankly, my comment is that as long as the average student body is pretty intelligent, let’s all acknowledge that it’s kind of limited what one can judge a high school student on academically, compared to say what graduate schools have to look at when they see four years of college study on a student’s transcript; schools do the best they can, with different philosophies. No reason to hate on any specific one, even if some of them aren’t your favorite. I think they’re all somewhat silly in different ways, but I don’t have a better plan, so I can’t say very much.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>To the OP: the only SAT range released to the world is the 25%-75% range, and this is what is factored into the rankings.</p>

<p>It is not an average. The bottom 24% stat-wise have zero impact on the 25%-75% range. I don’t know how else to explain this.</p>

<p>ok, let me give it one more try.</p>

<p>Let’s assume that in 2008, Caltech’s 25%-75% range is 1590-1600. In 2009, they come to their senses and decide to admit all of USC’s football recruits. The next year Caltech wins the national championship. Let’s say these football recruits have an average of 800 on the SAT. Can you explain to me how that would change their 25%-75% SAT range?</p>

<p>A = (0,0,0,1600, 1600,1600,1600,1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600)</p>

<p>B = (1600, 1600,1600, 1600, 1600,1600,1600,1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600, 1600)</p>

<p>What are the 25%-75% ranges for the two data sets A and B?</p>

<p>To the OP: your main argument seems to be that Caltech is not as academically rigorous as it claims to be, and is playing the system to appear as if it is a better school than it is. My question to you, therefore is: Do you have any proof that the curriculum at Caltech is any less rigorous than any other top name colleges? The reality is that Caltech only accepts such qualified students so that it can be sure that each has a reasonable chance to succeed in the institute core, which is an extremely intensive and rigorous process. Also, if Caltech was actually not as strong as it’s ranking indicated, you would expect a very high four year graduation rate, but Caltech’s 4-year graduation rate is about 80%, which is significantly lower than the national average, despite admitting so many highly academically qualified students.</p>

<p>Essentially, Caltech admits the best so that they can be safe knowing that they can offer the hardest curriculum to it’s students. If Colleges such as Rice or Duke (to use your examples) used the same process as Caltech for admission, then they could possibly look as selective, and they could offer courses at the level of rigor of Caltech. But they don’t. So they can’t.</p>

<p>In the article that you keep going on about, stating that they refuse to use Affirmative Action to keep their selectivity high, I think you may have missed something. They didn’t say that it was because they wanted to remain selective, it’s because they felt that they couldn’t do that, since it would set these students up for failure. They are excited when a minority can achieve at the level that they expect of all students, but they cannot make it possible for under qualified students to achieve without damaging the quality of the education that Caltech takes great pride in.</p>

<p>One last thing: you keep going on about the abysmal sports records at Tech. I can’t speak for all of Tech, but I couldn’t care less how well the teams do, and most Techers are generally too busy doing better things with their time than watching games, or caring at all, if a Techer does a sport, it is generally for exercise, and a break from studying, not because they care about how the team does. In short, if you care how your sports teams do, tech is not for you, so stop whining.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>I imagine many of them would be ineligible to play due to NCAA academic requirements. ;)</p>

<p>“And it is very very arrogant of you to say that Tech is a peer institution with Harvard and stanford. very arrogant, and many would disagree with you.”</p>

<p>Caltech is a peer of Harvard and Stanford. Guess I’m “very very arrogant”. The people I spoke with at Stanford seemed to share this opinion (profs and grad students) when I was there about two weeks ago. Maybe they don’t think we’re a peer at Harvard, but I won’t be going there to find out. Why? Their program in my field is not good enough for me to consider applying there for grad school. (I’m pretty sure we turn out better undergrads in Engineering than they do, too).</p>

<p>For those of you who are bored, he started this thread in College Search & Selection also:
<a href=“http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/709207-caltechs-admissions-policies-ridiculous.html[/url]”>http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/college-search-selection/709207-caltechs-admissions-policies-ridiculous.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p&gt;

<p>You don’t need to rush over there and correct him right away. The people there seem to agree with us. An excerpt from one of my favorite responses: “I read through the whole thread, and your sense of entitlement, disrespect for people different than you and lack of a sense of reality are simply astonishing. Not everyone gets everything they want in life, you have to deal with sacrifices and make your choices. Perhaps you’ll come to realize that with more rigorous training and intense challenges, or perhaps you won’t.”</p>

<p>for your information Caltech is a world renowned institution and is high not just in USNews ranks. In world’s universities of TIMES (British) it is classified on 5th place at this time
[Times</a> Higher Education](<a href=“http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/hybrid.asp?typeCode=243&pubCode=1]Times”>http://www.timeshighereducation.co.uk/hybrid.asp?typeCode=243&pubCode=1) </p>

<p>the prestigious nature of Caltech lies more in its fabulous faculty and the number of alumni nobel prize winners, not on selectivity.</p>

<p>If selectivity is the only reason why Caltech is high in rankings, please explain how Caltech manage to be on 6th place with admission rate around 16%, at the same time when the schools that as high as Caltech must have 6-8%!!</p>

<p>And about affirmative action. Do you really think that admitting people from third world countries is not another sort of a game? Do you think that admitting a person from let say Cambodia (nothing personal) with 1700 from SAT, the institution has no interest in that?</p>

<p>Can’t you see that in these countries having a diploma from a top USA school opens multitudes of opportunity for a graduate? The institution employing affirmative are just playing a POLITICAL GAME. After graduation the person is able to receive a high position job or even in the government of his/her country of origin. This person is most probably influenced by the institution’s ideology and feels sorts of sentiment for the school. Thus, being in a high position in Cambodia this person support the university with endownments or just promote it.</p>

<p>Caltech’s PR on the other hand is very poor. It was very hard for me to seek information about its social life, about campus, there are like no photos online. Bad advertising surely affects the applicants pool, which in turn results in Caltech’s being less selective than it really is.</p>

<p>You’re definitely right about our PR being poor, greenhills. This has been a huge issue for me for years but I have no idea how to go about fixing it.</p>