<p>In my mind, these are the three top tech schools, and are often compared in terms of rigorous science programs, ridiculously high SATs, and ultra selective admissions. What main differences do you see among these schools, and which would be the best fit for which kind of student (assuming said student had the stats and theoretically got into all three)? </p>
<p>For brownie points, check out my chance me profile <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1508050-chances-science-undergrad-new-post.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/what-my-chances/1508050-chances-science-undergrad-new-post.html</a> and rate these for me (with the assumption that I boosted the math to 740-760 range on the june test date), but that's totally not necessary if you don't want to :)</p>
<p>Caltech and Harvey Mudd are much smaller than MIT.</p>
<p>Be aware that all three schools have general education requirements in math that go far beyond what a biology, psychology, or neuroscience major is likely to need anywhere else.</p>
<p>MIT’s frosh calculus is accelerated, covering three semesters’ worth of stuff (through multivariable calculus) in two semesters. Regular and “with theory” options are available.</p>
<p>Caltech and Harvey Mudd offer only what appear to be similar to MIT’s “with theory” option in “frosh calculus”.</p>
<p>Size and location are always factors, but what I’m truly looking to find out is the less obvious differences. Perhaps differences in types of student, learning/teaching styles, overall campus environment. The students who would get into these schools could presumably handle the coursework, the hard math/science classes are precisely what help tie the three together.</p>