<p>Just a thought, but it’s possible that the perceived lack of understanding from admissions/Prado is due to pressure put on them, and not because of how they are personally. The incoming class is still really big from what I’ve heard, and we’re still cutting it very close as far as accommodating all the students who currently have a spot reserved, so it’s absolutely possible that the people working admissions have been told not to make any more exceptions or admits to the incoming class to ensure that the chances of staying overenrolled is minimal. I’ll admit I have no idea who Prado is (or, in fact, anybody in admissions, since I have no connection with them whatsoever), but I don’t think it’s really terribly reasonable to assume that their unwillingness to bend the rules is a result of some unhelpful mentality, you know?</p>
<p>haha I have a feeling we’re going to be overenrolled anyway, but we’ll see</p>
<p>yeah, according to the incoming class profile, there are 253 students enrolling
(down from 257, but still too high? The year before was only 241, and it looks like that is still on the higher end)</p>
<p>It would be a lot of trouble for the admissions office, and they don’t really have any reason to accept me other than that it’s what I want, and it seems pretty clear that they don’t want me. (Not that it’s unreasonable at all…I wouldn’t want me either if my class were overenrolled. But yeah it was kind of sad that all of the recruiting things are not that sincere and only meant to try and get exactly the right number of people :P)</p>
<p>I think I will just go to MIT, even though I like Caltech more. Things will probably turn out okay, and if I really hate it at MIT, I suppose I could try to transfer to Caltech after all the extra people drop out when they find out what it’s really like. (Just kidding about that last part! 
)</p>
<p>If I were you, I would try again with the director when he gets back - make a personal case for why you think Caltech would better for you. You don’t have anything to lose, and you certainly shouldn’t feel guilty about waffling. This isn’t anything like a date - schools don’t have feelings, and if the director of admissions feels personally insulted that you wanted to go to MIT, then he’s a moron. I doubt that this is the case. Good luck whatever happens.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>I think you’d be surprised. Admissions officers look for people who are passionate about their school because those people are more likely to do well / take advantage of opportunities. Additionally, if one is to convince admissions officers to do something that is a personal hassle to them, it helps to develop some rapport. Finally, I think you’d also be surprised to find out how much of themselves admissions officers put into the admissions process–for some, it can be quite emotionally involved.</p>
<p>
What?</p>
<p>
Again, what?</p>
<p>
But apparently, only if it’s required of you in order to graduate?</p>
<p>MIT doesn’t have a core. “Core” refers to a set of required classes that all students take. MIT instead has what are generally referred to as “general requirements” which allow you to take a number of different courses that satisfy some general requirement (for instance “biology”). </p>
<p>Note that Caltech does not have a “pure” core, our required classes are partially a core and partially general requirements. </p>
<p>It’s also worth noting that our core is much more extensive than MIT’s general requirements–even our english majors have to take 5 terms of physics (mechanics, e&m, quantum, thermo, waves) 5 terms of math (proof based calc, linear algebra, multivariable, odes, probability/stats), 2 terms of chemistry, 1 term of biology… etc. </p>
<p>The argument that you should be taking these courses anyway (even if they were not required) is one that holds some validity, but I do not personally subscribe to it. It can be very difficult (scheduling wise, support wise, and content wise) to take courses far outside of your field. Requiring the courses means that they are much more accessible to individuals who otherwise may not have the opportunity to take them at all. </p>
<p>I’m not saying that this is better or worse, but it is certainly different.</p>
<p>As for MIT’s research opportunities, I don’t know anything about that.</p>
<p>MIT has what are called GIRs (general institute requirements). GIRs consist of 2 semesters of calculus (single and multivariable), 2 semesters of physics (mechanics and e&m), 1 semester of biology, and 1 semester of chemistry (also humanities and lab stuff). There is a little flexibility within the GIRs, but not much. For instance, there are 3 versions of mechanics - 8.01 and 8.01L which both cover the same material but one goes a little slower for people who had a weaker background in high school, and 8.012 which goes more in-depth and is often referred to as “physics for masochists”. Everyone must chose to take one of the three versions offered.</p>
<p>It is very easy to take further math and physics classes. Most majors require further math than the GIRs, and you’ll probably be able to fit in a couple of extra semesters of physics if you really want. Sure, it isn’t <em>required</em>, but a lot of people chose to do this (me, for instance).</p>
<p>As for research, we have this thing called UROP (undergraduate research opportunities program). Undgrads are able to get UROPs (either for credit or pay) during the semester, IAP, or summer. Its really easy to get involved in UROPs (~85% of undergrads do). and UROPs are involved in real research - many even end up publishing papers.</p>
<p>Anyways, I just wanted to clear up those few points. Good luck getting into Caltech if that’s what you want, but I hope you’re happy wherever you end up!</p>
<p>ahh lol!
@kryptonsa
the people i talked to at MIT seemed unhappy to have to even take MIT’s versions of mechanics and E&M (8.01, 8.02), so i was worried that if i wanted to take further physics, i’d be alone in a sea of physics majors</p>
<p>it sounds like it’s an unfounded worry though, so that’s good :)</p>
<p>i guess i should probably ask other questions on the MIT board, haha</p>
<p>Haha, are you the airport kid?</p>
<p>edit: link here <a href=“http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html[/url]”>http://www.boingboing.net/2007/09/21/mit-student-arrested.html</a></p>
<p>Nah, she actually transferred out of MIT this year (something about the jerks at Logan).</p>
<p>Oh well… do you MIT kids read our forums a lot or something? I feel like every time MIT gets mentioned we get MIT kids in here with in a day of the mention, every time. It’s crazy.</p>
<p>Not that that’s bad or anything, just a little funny.</p>
<p>I mean its not like we have anything better to do… what psets?</p>
<p>:P Go have fun!</p>
<p>I think a lot of caltech associated people read the MIT boards too</p>
<p>Definitely, I think a decent number of MIT people read the Caltech forums, and vice versa. But more importantly, I think generally people interested in math/science/engineering type stuff end up reading the MIT and Caltech forums, and only naturally, because these are where a lot of people passionate about these subjects ask questions or make comments. That’s sort of why I find myself on both of them once in a while.</p>
<p>I personally don’t go on the MIT boards except in very rare instances. Maybe this is because I am old and I feel I would not have much to contribute to that board. After all, I don’t read CC for entertainment, I do it because someone has to answer all of the prefrosh questions.</p>
<p>I don’t read the Caltech board. I read threads that show up in a search for “USABO.” :P</p>
<p>
She did?!</p>
<p>Yeah, she was having a rough time living in Boston after everything that happened and felt like MIT wasn’t the most supportive place for her at that point…</p>