<p>^^I got into both CalTech and MIT as well and I disagree with this assessment. This sounds like what MIT does in admissions, but not CalTech. From what I understand, CalTech basically tries to subjectively assess who are the top 800 people in terms of talent, work ethic, and the likelihood to contribute to science, math, or technology in the future. Caltech is a lot more straightfoward than MIT admissions or Harvard (which is even more flaky than MIT's). When considering their admitted class, Caltech doesn't think about who is going to be running the school newspaper, playing tuba in the band, or if they need a circus clown in their incoming class...</p>
<p>Since I've heard it's common for Caltech students to participate in the admissions process, perhaps they can better comment on this.</p>
<p>I was on the admissions committee for two years as a student and I'd say this is mostly right if a little idealistic. Caltech isn't really into balancing the class demographically or by interests, although of course unusual applicants still stand out. But I would say Caltech is probably the only top American institution that is committed to admitting what it views, a priori, as the top n% of the class academically. (Where academic quality is judged by a comprehensive evaluation, not based on any single factor or small group of factors.)</p>
<p>I would not say anything bad about either school, they are both great in my assessment. Going to Prefrosh weekend in Pasadena, and CPW in Boston, I would have to say that I met more students that were at the top of their class in Boston, not Pasadena. And furthermore, a majority of us chose to spend the next 4 years in rainy, cold Boston instead of sunny California.</p>
<p>As a MA native, have fun in March ^__^ Just don't let the constant numb pain in your fingers make you bitter or anything :) There are...certain positives to having winters....</p>
<p>"When considering their admitted class, Caltech doesn't think about who is going to be running the school newspaper, playing tuba in the band, or if they need a circus clown in their incoming class..."</p>
<p>collegealum314,
pretty cheap shot, r us jealous or what?
I won't stoop that low to respond to this....
Why does Caltech always have to compare itself to MIT, inferiority complex?
does Caltech call itself "MIT of the west"?
i know for a fact, MIT does not call itself "Caltech" of the east"
again, both are equally great schools, attending either is an honor.</p>
Why does Caltech always have to compare itself to MIT, inferiority complex?
[/quote]
</p>
<p>does it matter,
is Caltech bashing warranted in this case?
"inferiority complex", give me a break :-P</p>
<p>
[quote]
i know for a fact, MIT does not call itself "Caltech" of the east"
[/quote]
</p>
<p>It's okay, you guys'll come around in a few years, once you realize. ;)</p>
<p>
[quote]
again, both are equally great schools, attending either is an honor.
[/quote]
</p>
<p>Agreed. :)</p>
<p>
[quote]
"When considering their admitted class, Caltech doesn't think about who is going to be running the school newspaper, playing tuba in the band, or if they need a circus clown in their incoming class..."
<p>LOL. For the record the statement about the <em>circus</em> clowns was more a reference to Harvard. I heard about a guy whose hook to get into Harvard was that he went to clown school.</p>
<p>MIT doesn't have a clown community yet LOL...
The thing about the newspaper or being in the band might apply to MIT.</p>
<p>ah!
now that the class clown has been clearly identified, I will bow to the association of it with H. I was a little unconfortable with the connection to MIT students. As with the band or sports, can't comment on that, but it could be true. Why can't an athlete or a musican be smart? I believe there have been a few during the course of history. Many high acheiving students are also top musicans with county and state level awards.</p>
<p>To the original topic at question:
at application time, maybe because we knew more about the admissions process (standardized test results) at CalTech, maybe because we knew about the M-F demographics, we were a little more confident with CalTech than MIT. We felt there were more intangibles being assessed and we also knew the pool of applicants would be swimming with greater numbers of qualified students. Maybe this holds true for certain ORM's and majorities, but I believe there is a threshold expected on standardized testing, class rank, taking advantage of what is available, outside participation (science fairs) and they are all important criteria for admissions. I believe that CalTech (for better or worse) puts a little more emphasis on the first two. So, maybe they are more straight forwards in there admissions process. Test scores does not equate to tougher admissions. Standardized test scores are probably the easiest to achieve be because its pretty cut and dry, you either know it or you don't. </p>
<p>We currently have family attending both CalTech and MIT. They have provided significant feedback with regards to each campus and student body and course rigor - things you don't see at Prefrosh or CPW. Maybe because of the MIT intangibles, it was much harder to predict acceptance into MIT. Whether it is considered a joke or not, being accepted into CalTech or MIT is something truely outstanding and should not be forfeited. Only a minute fraction (1500/800) of students are offered an opportunity like this. I also believe that giving up a full ride to GT, in favor of either of these 2 schools was the right choice for my daughter. No Regrets at All.</p>
<p>I was thrown off by the leet speak at first. Thought Lefty was one of those annoying internet brats "i r the 1" etc...</p>
<p>It's weird having a parent type in internet shorthand...</p>
<p>Also, Lefty, a lot of people at Caltech are musically inclined, if the dude I saw playing the hardest violin peice ever is any inclination. Forgot what it was, but it was definitely one of the hardest violin peices ever...</p>
<p>Music is considered a "standard asian" thing. I don't really think it helps an Asian applicants much, since I know a lot of Asians with pretty high musical achievemet rejected from MIT, but got into Caltech.</p>
<p>Regarding admissions and diversity, I recommend reading Daniel Golden's "Price of Admission" for an interesting look at Caltech's admission procedure. Interestingly, when I interviewed Mr. Golden, he initially intended that chapter to be about MIT, but after talking with many admissions officials decided that Caltech lived up to the ideal better.</p>
<p>Regarding the supposed changes in the process, things are being discussed currently. Since students are being listened to and faculty are always listened to, I would be greatly surprised if a major departure from current practices was announced. Of course, my roommate and I are discussing all sorts of crazy proposals (return to all-male, which results in some interesting projections) just to bounce around things.</p>
<p>Regarding AA, it's practiced in neither early nor regular admissions. Our population of minorities has varied greatly over the past four decades simply (by what I can tell) based on who applies. We have had a growing number of Asian students since the 50s. There was a large number of black students in the 60s and again in the 80s, though that number has declined a large amount in this decade. The number of hispanic students has been growing somewhat over the past decade. For more on this, I suggest reading this report written in the early 90s by a Techer: <a href="http://homepage.mac.com/ehgoins/papers/caltechs_minorities.pdf%5B/url%5D">http://homepage.mac.com/ehgoins/papers/caltechs_minorities.pdf</a></p>
<p>I know nothing about MIT's admissions procedures, but here, assuming you make first cut, you are guaranteed to be reviewed by, at minimum, a student, a professor, and an admissions officer.</p>
<p>about mit clown community-they have one alright. i was there this winter and there was some student run circus going on-this kid was riding a unicycle through the hall, and there was juggling and stuff-made me want to go to MIT.</p>
<p>^^yeah, but the point is being a circus clown shouldn't help your chances admission. Certainly, it shouldn't be more valued than superior technical ability just because there aren't more circus clowns...</p>
<p>Well I have gotten the sense that Caltech is more straightforward than MIT in admission. Like if you have a 1600/1600, as long as you're not a C student you'll probably be accepted at Caltech. However, we know nothing can "guarantee admission" at MIT save doing really well on USAMO or something. Yet, Caltech students on average are smarter than MIT students on average.</p>
<p>Well OK, I was not fully correct about the perfect SAT scores, but Caltech does place a higher emphasis on them than their peer schools. And, Caltech students on average are smarter at the very least in maths and sciences. I know I'm referring to test scores again...but Caltech has the highest average in the nation and Caltech doesn't practice AA and athletic recruitment that arguably lowers the "smartness" of other peer schools...such as MIT. I think it's a pretty fair statement.</p>