Newcomer Seeks Information

Colleges and Universities A-Z California Institute of Technology
1

<p>I'm largely unfamilliar with Caltech. I've pretty much focused the majority of my energies on researching MIT. Recently, however, I was directed to Caltech as a school which rivals MIT in most areas (except humanities). At the same time, I've been told Caltech is a VERY different school and I must go there to notice the differences. Anyway, I was wondering if any experienced applicants or enrolled students could post their experiences and perceptions. </p>

<p>Here are some of the areas I'm concerned about:</p>

<p>Academics (biological engineering in specific, and also fields like neuropsychology and engineering possibly)</p>

<p>Extracurricular activities (clubs, social life, etc.)</p>

<p>Research (I'm unfamilliar with Caltech's research program ~ do they have something like UROP?)</p>

<p>Statistics (what's the typical profile of a caltech student, what are the ranges of SAT scores, etc.)</p>

<p>Professors/Curriculum (I've heard Caltech doesn't really have good professors, but has an advanced curriculum)</p>

<p>I will also be going through other threads in the Caltech forum, but I also wanted some personal advice. I've recieved a wide range of feedback regarding Caltech. Campus Dirt, for example seems to provide a LOT of negative feedback (in terms of their rating and ranking of various aspects of Caltech). I don't want to sound like a "troll", but I want to gain a better understanding of how Caltech differs from MIT. I want to learn what it's strengths and weaknesses are, and how well I would fit. I would greatly appreciate any information you can provide.</p>

2

<p>because I just got up and REALLY don't want to do my math set yet:
Also, I'm a current sophomore at Tech who got in to MIT as well. So I have some sort of credibility in comparing the two, inasmuch as I did it myself. </p>

<p>Academics: Top notch, but VERY hard. For the most part, probably no more so than MIT, but Caltech's core is tougher for everyone, I believe. MIT has a few more tracks, whereas EVERY caltech student takes Quantum, regardless of major. I know nothing about bioengineering- I'm a MechE. MIT's probably better for the engineering in terms of pure academics, but I liked Tech better.</p>

<p>EC stuff: There exist clubs. I'm not in any of them, so I dunno. Most of them kinda disappear from view once the frosh join up and they have their meetings wherever. Sports are fun, or at least, fencing is.
For social life, you need to look into the hovse system. I'm not going to go on about it right now, but I'm sure it's been mentioned in previous threads, and it's probably the most important part of Caltech's social life. </p>

<p>Research: likewise, top notch. And if you want to do research here, you will do it. Just after freshman year I did research at JPL through the SURF program. SURF = summer undergraduate research fellowship.</p>

<p>Stats: do these really matter? I mean, beyond a "can I get in" sort of way? They're basically the same as MIT. </p>

<p>Professors: This is kinda hit-and-miss. Especially for core. I've found that the core professors aren't so great. But we have lots of TAs for all the core classes, and the recitation sessions are good. My MechE profs are both very good, and my hum profs have been mostly good, with one exception. From what I've heard, pretty much all the non-lecture classes have at least decent profs, and Tech classes are very good about having TAs and office hours to help with work. And friends who understand what's going on are invaluable.</p>

<p>I'm sure more detail can be supplied by others. </p>

<p>But in terms of choosing between the two schools, the academic differences are basically negligible. It comes down to personal preferences. If you'd like a larger school that's actually in a city instead of a suburb, if you're not 100 percent sure you want to do science, if you like the northeast, go to MIT. If you want a small school that's not in a city, if you hate cold weather, or if you really, really, really want to research at JPL, go to Caltech. If none of these are deal-breakers, tour both- I chose Caltech based on a sort of "feel" for the school, more than anything else. Although the Southern California thing helped.</p>

3

<p>Thanks si1verdrake, for your guidance. Any other posters?</p>

<p>Caltech students: Please post your perceptions of Caltech.</p>

4

<p>Why would you want to plunk $40k a year for MIT?</p>

<p>I just checked quickly, and UROP's summer program seems much less structured than SURF (surf.caltech.edu). Well, at least SURF is a $5000 stipend, and the program works hard to find outside sponsors and alumni to fund it.</p>

<p>To put it shortly, what do you want to do after graduation? If you're sure you want to attend graduate school, Caltech has much more of a research atmosphere at the UG level--but I think this has already been noted in many threads on this board so you should check in the previous threads.</p>

5

<p>Definitely, research after graduation. I want to get a PhD.</p>

6

<p>Okay, I am also an undergrad (frosh) here. And I also don't want to start my set. So I will weigh in on what I can say.</p>

<p>Profs/Curriculum? Well I'm taking five academic classes. Three of them are quite good, one is quite bad, and the other doesn't quite care. So the one that is bad is David Goodstein, prof of phys 1a. I don't think he should be lecturing for that class. He had an injury last year that has left him quite fragile, and so he doesn't teach nearly as well as in the MU videos. The lectures are pretty much useless unless you want to see cool demos. That's why I've resigned to stop going to them and just watch videos of him teaching the same stuff, but 30 years ago, along with cool cg. I guess I should qualify this by saying that the first lecture he said that the lectures weren't meant to be too useful, just mostly nice demos. My TA for my section, who is actually a prof, is excellent though. The prof that doesn't care is the prof of APh 9, which is known as a pass/pass class. The "theory" behind the class is to show us ug's the application of advanced concepts so that we will be inspired to and excited about learning the concepts later on, because the concepts are actually junior level apparently. So while he goes through the motions of teaching all of it, since there are frosh, he doesn't really care if we learn it or not. The class is a joke, basically like a high school class.</p>

<p>I think in general, the profs go way too fast, but not unnecessarily. I think there is just too much material that is required, but then again, that's why it's tech?</p>

<p>Academics? I don't think Caltech has no peer among US colleges in terms of rigor of core requirements? Maybe I'm just trying to make myself feel better about my suffering, but talking to my friends at berkeley/stanford/harvard, I think what I say is true. Those institutes do have tough classes that you can <i>opt</i> to take, but I don't think any of them have as hard required courses.</p>

<p>On a side note about your interest in biology, Caltech recently got quite a nice bio building, Broad Center? I think there is an MIT analog. Either way, I think you will find a lot of resources if you have an interest in bio. It seems like the powers are trying hard to push/advance the option. And it's one way to stand out, as most of us are Physics/Math/Engineering majors.</p>

<p>Social life is as someone else said defined by the house system. Some like it, some don't. The houses are very similar to fraternities (though I've never experienced a frat, but from what I've seen in movies/news/etc.).</p>

<p>Extracurriculars? As someone said there are quite <i>a lot</i> of clubs. It almost feels like high school. I'm not in anyone, but I am involved in sports. And for me, one who has always loved to play sports but always been mediocre, it's nice to get attention from coaches (people here are not too great at sports, and there aren't that many people). I must add that it's quite annoying how early the gym closes on weekends...</p>

<p>Since you're deciding between MIT and here, I think I should add that you should strongly ponder whether you want to live in a small suburban environment or like Boston. Like I've stayed at berkeley over night (visiting friends) and staying in a city and big campus is quite different from what I'm experiencing here. It's really nice to be able to leave five minutes before class and not have to worry about being late. On the other hand, it's not too exciting. Like being in berkeley, I felt like I was part of some lively, exciting place. Then again, that could have to do with which house, or "house," I live in.</p>

<p>Whatever, I'm wasting time. Don't come here unless you want to get inundated with rigor, intensity, hardcoreness, etc. Proof after proof is getting annoying...</p>

7

<p>I did not know Goodstein was ill.</p>

<p>He was always known as a great lecturer and terrific teacher (the two not always going together). Granted he is doing poorly now and probably very sub par, but the fact that Goodstein is the "bad" teacher in your bunch speaks volumes to me about how good the teaching situation has become. Compared to Goodstein, our bad teachers were <em>ahem</em> really bad (as in an order of magnitude worse).</p>

<p>I'm terribly sorry for him. Sic transit...</p>

8

<p>Goodstein taught me physics. I have so many MU episodes taped on VCR...</p>

9

<p>it might not be a great idea to make your decisions based on what you want to do after college, since those plans can change very easily.</p>

10

<p>What are "MU" tapes?</p>

<p>Also, I agree that I shouldn't completely select the school by the major. That's why I want a strong general science school, which has a strong backbone in the specified subjects (engineering, biology, psychology).</p>

11

<p>"MU" is short for "Mechanical Universe," a television series of Professor Goodstein's physics lectures. I've only seen clips out of a couple episodes that he showed in class last year.</p>

12

<p>Ah.. These must be purchaseable online.</p>

13

<p>They are, but you can only purchase half the set (26 episodes) for 250 USD or the whole set (52 episodes) for 450 USD.</p>

<p><a href="http://www.learner.org/catalog/series42.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.learner.org/catalog/series42.html&lt;/a&gt;&lt;/p>

14

<p>Olo:
You seem to be fairly knowledgeable about both MIT and Caltech. Surely, you've seen atleast one of MIT's OCW courses (I think you've mentioned EM Professor Walter Lewin of MIT). How would you compare the two lecturers--their styles, the content, the demos, etc. Also, would you recommend purchasing the series, given simillar content is available freely on MIT's OCW? Please provide some input.</p>

15

<p>I've worked through Mr. Lewin's 8.01, 8.02, and 8.03... the books for some were out of print though, so I did the problem sets for 8.012 and 8.022. I haven't been able to get around to MIT OCW 8.033, so I can't comment on that. If you want to work the 8.012 psets, look into getting Kleppner & Kolenkow. The K&K book is pretty decent, but I would recommend buying it used. My friends helped me with the $160, and I feel very guilty, as the book isn't too useful for anything other than providing great problems to solve. Definitely get it used. For the 8.022 psets, find a friend who has finished freshmen physics E&M at any college. Almost all upper-level physics classes use Purcell's E&M, I've found. Be prepared to get beaten with the unit system.</p>

<p>As for MU vs MIT OCW... With Walter Lewin, you're actually in an MIT class, seeing exactly what the students see. The demos are great, and it's a lot more "Here's how to do the physics" based. Mr. Lewin assumes you go into the class knowing nothing of physics, but does expect you to know basic calculus. If you're starting off in physics, it's a wonderful resource (especially his E&M stuff).</p>

<p>With Dr. Goodstein, you encounter more of the history and philosophy of science. Granted, it's not exactly math-light, it may just be that they assumed whoever was watching MU was already decently grounded in mathematics (which is quite likely, given that it was a Caltech production). It's important to remember that Mechanical Universe was designed for a TV production, and while you are in the class with Caltech students, the series frequently runs off on tangents related to the original lesson. You'll encounter a lot less interesting problems to solve, but a lot of conceptual stuff. The benefit here is that you get to more easily follow how the original solver of a problem came about solving it.</p>

<p>In both cases, you get great senses of humor, which I believe is fundamental to learning physics. :).</p>

<p>All in all, I liked both, but I wouldn't spend 450 USD on Mechanical Universe. I'm lucky that my parents taped it for me, so I have most (sadly, not all) of the episodes. Lewin is a great resource, even if 8.01 and 8.02 are a bit "light," you can always work the 8.012 and 8.022 psets from this year or the OCW year, which provide much more of a challenge.</p>

<p>So if you ask me, spend the $80 to buy K&K used, maybe another $80 for the Purcell book used or get it from a friend, and do the OCW. MU is great, but it's not great enough for me to justify telling anyone to drop $450 for it. I believe the series is more meant for schools to purchase, anyway. I would highly recommend getting your high school science department to consider using the MU series.</p>

16

<p>Thanks, I absolutely love Walter Lewin's lectures! Unfortunately, I only recently found out about OCW. And, while I love the lectures, I have lots of school work and have only been able to get through the first few (3-4 lectures). Nevertheless, I will definitely watch the rest! He really does teach well. I'll probably follow your advice and purchase the recommended books. Will also get to the PSETs. I've only tried bio psets, will try the physics ones soon.</p>

<p>Thanks for the detailed comparison!</p>

17

<p>Not a problem! If you have any more questions, feel free to ask. And like I said, make sure you get a used copy. It's really, really, not worth it to spend $160 on one book, especially considering there are so many other books out there just as good that only cost $30-50.</p>

<p>I will say this though: K&K is unmatched in the interesting problems it provides. It really gets you thinking.</p>

18

<p>Actually, you can watch MU online for free. You just need a learner.org account. I remember watching them as an 8th grader (but didn't expect to get much out of it back then because I thought that calculus was really hard, and they did derivatives really early). I also liked "World of Chemistry" whcih is also offered free on learner.org. </p>

<p><a href="http://www.learner.org/resources/series42.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.learner.org/resources/series42.html&lt;/a>. Just click on Video on Demand.</p>

<p>While Goodstein is in the intro and the end of each video, most of the video does not feature Goodstein. It's sad that he's injured now... He's 66 now...</p>

<hr>

<p>Also, check out:</p>

<p><a href="http://www.math.caltech.edu/classes/ma1a/index.html%5B/url%5D"&gt;http://www.math.caltech.edu/classes/ma1a/index.html&lt;/a>. Contains practice assignments and exams for Caltech's freshman course. Does Caltech's freshman math course only assign these assigned problems as homework? It seems quite easy for a mediocre student to copy off the solutions off an advanced student for the homework problems. And it seems that the homework can be more difficult than the exams, as one can have more time and help for homework. Besides, I can do some of the exam problems even though i'm not in Caltech and that means something. ;)</p>

<p>Also, does anyone have an idea why Caltech uses Serway for physics, rather than K&K or Halliday?</p>

<hr>

<p>Jars, I know someone who knows you (his SN has Liar on the end of it). Did you only have one year of high school calculus, without prior experience in proofs?</p>

19

<p>jars, are you taking 5 courses per quarter? Do Caltech people take more or less courses per quarter as they move up in academic status?</p>

20

<p>Thanks for all the useful information!</p>