<p>Overall which is better,if I want to get a high paid job or entrepreneurship which one is a better choice?</p>
<p>Any input appriciated.</p>
<p>In my opinion (as a GT student), both are excellent schools and you won’t go wrong with either of them in terms of jobs. Choose the one which is a better fit for you personally :)</p>
<p>GT is a lot easier to get into… CalTech is onpar with MIT in most areas, but GT isn’t very far off. Both have lots of smart people that go to each, GT costs less, but CalTech’s got the big name that anyone would recognize. Certainly I wouldn’t pass up and oppurtunity to go to CalTech if I ever got an offer, but MIT and CalTech would probably be the only two schools I would give up my HOPE scholarship to GT for. Possibly Stanford but more likely than not I would reject that.</p>
<p>So… CalTech, on the basis that historical figures have been at CalTech.</p>
1 Like
<p>Personally, I would go to Georgia Tech as an undergrad and Cal Tech as a grad student. Cal Tech’s reputation is based largely on its research and graduate programs, and while it is a wonderful undergrad school as well, I feel like GT would give me (and anyone) a more full college experience, and for the near equality of programs, that would be the deal maker for me.</p>
<p>thank u 10 Char</p>
<p>my impression is that Caltech is a school for people who want ot become scientists,am i right?</p>
<p>Um… sort of? Really any major engineering school will have a lot of people that want to become scientists, but I suppose CalTech does seem to have a higher percentage of those.</p>
<p>Whoa whoa whoa. GT is kinda not very comparable to caltech. Sure, both are “strong” programs, and if GT is in state for you and you were choosing between the two I’d certainly strongly consider it due to the low low cost, but riddle me this batman: Georgia tech is a huge school with around 20k students and professors that don’t give a crap about you, a horribly skewed gender ratio, and is basically a somewhat nicer than average, much much nerdier state school. Caltech on the other hand has less than 1000 undergrads, professors that really care about their students (only the ones that want to teach have to due to the small number of undergrads), an awesome unique culture, great research opertunities, a balanced gender ratio, and a nice party scene (if you’re into that, its also a good school if you aren’t). Also, caltech isn’t as pricey as it seems, for they give great financial aid, although its hard to imagine any school being cheaper than Gatech instate.</p>
<p>Yeah, I’d go Caltech, if you have the option.</p>
<p>Spacepope, are you kidding? Pretty much all of your characterizations of Caltech are wrong. It’s a great school, but just wow you can’t have even read anything on Caltech.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Maybe you should go to RateMyProfessors for Caltech and see what they have to say about that. Number of undergrads has next to nothing to do with student:faculty ratio. Just because you heard about the Feynman Lectures doesn’t mean every Caltech class is like that.</p>
<p>
Not going to argue research opportunities, but mentioning this as the “other hand” pretty much ignores the fact that Georgia Tech is rife with funding and research opportunities as well.</p>
<p>
<a href=“http://finance.caltech.edu/budget/cds2005.pdf[/url]”>http://finance.caltech.edu/budget/cds2005.pdf</a> page 4, the ratio is around 1:3 or 1:4</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>prowlier du college disagrees . A lot of parties are about sports, and Caltech doesn’t even have that.</p>
<p>I’m sure G.P. will make his way into this thread and so I’ll abstain from rebutting the GT comments.</p>
<p>The schools are in general going to give you extremely different experiences. GaTech is a large state school that has strong industrial ties, CalTech is a small private school that focuses more on the pure science. From the students I’ve met at both, and I worked at GaTech for a while, the GaTech social scene seems to be much much better than CalTechs. With that being said, from a purely intellectual standpoint I think CalTech is on another level when compared to GaTech. I actually would put CalTech on another level than just about any school in this country when it comes to science and engineering. But the pricetag is going to be a major issue when deciding where to go to school.</p>
<p>ratemyprofessors doesnt really give any useful information because there are too many sources of bias in using it to evaluate a college’s professors in my opinion.</p>
<p>The gender ratio at caltech is not 3 to 1. its 59% male, 41% female ([College</a> Search - California Institute of Technology - CALTECH - At a Glance](<a href=“College Search - BigFuture | College Board”>College Search - BigFuture | College Board), more recent source), witch is a hell of a lot better than GT’s 70 to 30 ratio.</p>
<p>Also, just because caltech is not a sports school doesnt mean that it doesnt party. Contrary to popular belief, succesful nerds like the ones at caltech (as opposed to loser nerds like the ones in moms basement) party down. Ever hear of MIT’s legendary parties? Same principle applies to caltech.</p>
<p>Also, although GT does have very good research ops, caltechs are kinda on a much much higher level.</p>
<p>I don’t know if I’d consider the parties here at Caltech legendary. They’re certainly different, with some really cool ideas done, but none I’ve seen are legendary.</p>
<p>Also, as far as I’m aware every professor has to teach at least two classes a year.</p>
<p>Anyway, one of my labmates went to GT for undergrad, and says he’s much happier he went there for undergrad than Caltech. I feel the same way with the school I attended for undergrad.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>This sounds like the post of someone who’s never been to Cambridge. MIT’s “legendary” parties. Needless to say, the parties aren’t that “legendary”. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>The social scene is not comparable because it’s a small private school vs. a large public school. But other than that, they’re both top research universities (with GT ranked ahead of Caltech). </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Caltech has JPL, which gives them a unique advantage over everyone in some AE research, but in every other area, the schools are very similar in research output. </p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Said like a true high school student.</p>
<p>I think the one thing that can be said about research at Caltech versus GT is that on average the professors tend to have “higher quality” researchers. So there very well be more professors that are great at research at GT than Caltech. All that means is if you’re joining a random lab, you’ll probably get a better one at Caltech. But, if you do your research, then you shouldn’t have any problem finding a top quality lab to work in at GT.</p>
<p>If you’re going to make that argument, you have to consider only active researchers. Because of it’s size, Tech has many professors that only research, consult, or perform service. You’re not at risk of finding their “low quality” lab since they don’t have a lab.</p>
<p>What the hell burdell? Thats kinda uncalled for. Everyone knows that nobody actualy bothers to spell/grammer it up on forums. Also, this forum is frequented by many international students, and if I were one of those I’d be even more insulted than I am now. Stop clutching at straws man- the chewbacca argument is the sign of a desperate man.</p>
<p>SpacePope, ever notice how just about everyone on THIS forum does use at least decent spelling/grammar? Usually when topics are semi-professional in nature, the language used is similar. The majority of the posts here are grammatically correct compared to your average forum.</p>
<p>Still, I am not sure how the issue of grammar came up. The real issue is that CalTech is not lightyears ahead of GaTech as you implied. It is a great school, don’t get me wrong, but it is not that far ahead of GT, and even that is arguable since each school has its own specialties and strengths. CalTech has higher admissions standards, sure, but that just affects the average incoming student quality, not the quality of the students it outputs and not the quality of research done there. If you were comparing CalTech to Ohio State or something, then you could say “well OSU is a good school but CalTech is just a league beyond that,” but like it or not, GT is at least the near equal of CalTech for most things.</p>
<p>Yes Spacepope, GP doesn’t mince words, but just realize that outside of the specialty forums (which tend to have more sanity) schools get painted all sorts of ways by eager high school students who heard from a “friend of a friend”, along with all the other nonsense talk that goes on (e.g. “lower Ivies” vs “upper Ivies”). I have no personal experience with Caltech students so I know little about the campus or research since they are not active in my sub-subfield, but I don’t believe the way you characterized it with respect to GT was very accurate at all.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I’m confused. When did I attack your grammar/spelling? </p>
<p>The only thing that I noticed was that I put legendary in quotes twice, but that was to denote that they are legendary in name-only (besides, you spelled it correctly).</p>
<p>Or was it the “high school” comment? That was because the comment really made no sense and sounds like something that would come out of an informed source (e.g. a high school student who’s knowledge of each school’s research quality is what he hears second hand).</p>