<p>I am from the Midwest and am currently choosing among MIT, Caltech and UChicago. I plan to major in Economics (currently my first choice), but I may change my mind to be on pre-med (currently my plan B). If financial aids are pretty similar amongst the three colleges, what are the other things I should consider for my decision making? </p>
<p>Thanks in advance!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Does the idea of a liberal arts education and atmosphere appeal to you? MIT has some nice humanities classes, but it’s not the same animal as U. of Chicago.</p>
<p>Are you a talented writer and have interest in the humanities? U. Chicago has a core requirement that requires specific humanities classes. If this isn’t a forte’ of yours, it may hurt your GPA.</p>
<p>Of the three, Caltech is probably the most dangerous for premed for the opposite reason. MIT is a bit more manageable, especially as an econ or bio/chem major, but it’s not easy either.<br>
And it’s not known for economics as far as I know (especially compared to the other two) although any theoretical class at Caltech is going to be great.</p>
<p>MIT and (possibly to a lesser extent) Caltech are better for getting a job on Wall Street (Goldman Sachs) or consulting firms (McKinsey, Boston Consulting Group).</p>
<p>The locales and campuses are pretty different. U. of Chicago has nice-looking campus but it’s in a dangerous neighborhood. MIT is also urban, but is not quite as dangerous. Caltech is in a sunny California town, Pasadena. Completely different architecture. U. of Chicago looks like what you would imagine an ivy would look like. MIT has buildings that look like sponges and don’t have right angles. Caltech has Spanish architecture (not sure if this is the proper term). If you have a reaction to the campus for or against, this may be an important factor.</p>
<p>If you are interested in econ, you should also consider majoring in applied math. You can still do econ with an applied math major.</p>
<p>At Caltech, not only do they have a more expansive technical core (quantum mechanics and statistical mechanics on top of the MIT general requirements), but also they force you to take the theoretical version. At MIT, you have a choice between the regular and theoretical versions. For instance, regular version would be Halliday/Resnick physics versus Purcell E&M for theoretical. Or regular calc versus theoretical calc (Apostol.) </p>
<p>MIT has the most entrepeneurial vibe of the three. U. of Chicago (according to an alumni friend) has the coffee-drinking intellectuals. Caltech has the people most dead-set on actually pursuing a career in research (as opposed to consulting, premed, Wall Street, tech startup, etc.)</p>
<p>The above post covers the different strengths of the three schools pretty thoroughly. I’m going to make a pitch here for considering location. You’ve grown up in the midwest, you say. Since college is a chance to learn new things and broaden your horizons, why not consider a different region of the country?</p>
<p>As a Californian, I encouraged both my children to apply out of state. My daughter applied to the Northeast, the South, and the Midwest in addition to the UC system. My son applied to the Pacific Northwest, the South, the Midwest, and the Northeast. Both are now living in completely different regions of the country, and this aspect of their college experience has been very rewarding.</p>
<p>Wherever you go, that will be your home for four years. Where would you like to live?</p>
<p>CollegAlum, a very nice synopsis of wherein lie the choices for “littlesunshine”. But just one, minor, quibble about those of us who found a natural home in Chicago: schnapps, or fine whisky, and not just strong black coffee, can nicely lubricate the intellect.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I actually wonder, what is the difference, besides the latter I assume using the language of multivariable calculus? I think of theoretical as describing the fundamental ideas and focusing on deriving important things from first principles. The opposite would be focusing in using the statements.</p>
<p>Economics major Chicago
Engineering - Caltech or MIT
Premed - Chicago, Caltech, MIT (Caltech provides some nice summer programs in the local hospital for premeds).</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>It’s hard to explain and it’s been quite awhile since I took physics as you might imagine. I actually did take the theoretical version (8.012/8.022). Purcell is much more enjoyable to read. More elegant, less likely to ground the arguments in “real-world examples.” However, arguments aren’t all math but conceptual arguments are visualized in as fundamental and stripped form as possible (e.g., a particle.) </p>
<p>Also, Halliday has hundreds of problems in each chapter whereas Purcell (and Kolenkow, the mech equivalent) have only a few.</p>
<p>BTW, my freshman year 8.012 was taught by Wolfgang Ketterle, who would win the Nobel Prize a few years after I graduated.</p>
<p>
I politely disagree. According to RePEc, the top 10 University Economics Programs are:
<p>I do not think that Econ at Chicago is a shoo-in over Econ at MIT, though if you are thinking about Econ strongly, that may preclude Caltech. The key to me is the very different core curricula. MIT’s core includes 6 Mathematics and Physical Sciences subjects (which is the same number as the Chicago science core, but they are arranged differently), but have a fairly free hand with the required 8 HASS subjects. Chicago’s core is more structured on the HASS side including a Foreign Language requirement, subjects in Art, Music or Drama, etc. It is quite a different experience.</p>
<p>Caltech’s econ department is very small, and very focused on experiments. They do a lot of fMRI work (for which Caltech students get paid richly to volunteer), analyzing/scanning people as they make economic decisions or play economic games.</p>
<p>If that’s your thing, and you want to do research on how people actually make split-second decisions, Caltech would be a good match. If you’re interested in a broader program, Caltech’s econ program is probably not for you.</p>
<p>Some go to med schools from Caltech.</p>
<p>I have a similar choice.
Although I am on the waitlist for MIT I have been accepted by university of chicago and caltech. But MIT is my dream school, and if I get accepted then I shall surely attend.</p>
<p>collegealum314 said:
“The locales and campuses are pretty different. U. of Chicago has nice-looking campus but it’s in a dangerous neighborhood.”</p>
<p>I can assure you that Hyde Park is not dangerous. </p>
<p>“Caltech is in a sunny California town, Pasadena.”</p>
<p>Don’t forget the smog, it can get pretty bad at times. Otherwise it’s pure California, you’ll like it there.</p>
<p>Caltech would not be a bad to place to do UG work because of its size. As collegealum314 suggested, you should look into Applied Math if you are into Econ. I had a friend who started out in Econ at Caltech, ended up in Applied Math and then went on to get a DBA from Harvard. Also, if med school is a possibility, don’t forget to check out the Caltech/UCSD med scholar program.</p>
<p>MIT and Chicago have completely different economics departments. You will learn very different things and be trained in very different ways. You should take this into account when picking between the two. </p>
<p>[Saltwater</a> and freshwater economics - Wikipedia, the free encyclopedia](<a href=“http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Saltwater_and_freshwater_economics]Saltwater”>Saltwater and freshwater economics - Wikipedia)</p>
<p>Granted, it’s not as big a difference as it was in times past (Mankiw is at Harvard, etc), but it’s very different still.</p>