I don’t know why, but something about Caltech just clicked with me when I visited. My parents think I’m crazy since I have zero STEM ambitions, but what do you guys think?
I’m super crazy about their Business, Economics, and Management program given the unique interdisciplinary nature of it and unique classes like investments, hedge funds, and Quant Risk/Portfolio management. I have the GPA, SAT, and class rigor (although the only advanced science class I’ve taken is AP Physics 1, and I’m in AP Calc BC as a senior) to meet their middle 50%. I’m also from a top 5 high (private) school in NJ. I have many quality extracurriculars and have leadership positions in them all however, they’re all related to business/econ/finance/investing. I don’t intend to double major.
Am I out of my mind to possibly waste my EA on a place like Caltech? Some places like US News claim a grand 0% of 2021 Caltech grads majored in a social science!
Interesting question. Probably requires a present student or somebody who knows caltech very well to answer.
Meanwhile look at the courses offered each term to indirectly gauge the interest in social sciences there …
Having trouble seeing how this is “unique” to Caltech. You can major in Econ and take classes in other areas that interest you at virtually any university in the country. You can take “unique” classes like investments, hedge funds and Quant/Risk at any university with a strong finance program.
To me, the question boils down to the Cal Tech Core:
If you see this array of classes and say “Hooray, that sounds like me” then go for it. if your response is “Oh my gosh, that looks hard” then go find one of the dozens of colleges where you can replicate the “unique” Cal Tech Business/Econ/Management program without first being trained as a scientist (the goal of the Cal Tech core- to make you a better scientist).
Your parents have a point. They don’t have your major, so it doesn’t really matter whether you really like the college. My kid really liked Harvey Mudd, but they don’t have her major, so she never considered it.
Not only do I think that it’s a bad idea to apply EA to Caltech - I do not see a reason to apply to Caltech altogether.
What you should do is figure out why you like Caltech, and see which college which has your chosen major is similar in character to Caltech.
My guess is that Caltech will solve this problem for you by seeing that, while you’re a great student, you’re not really a fit for Caltech. I’d expect that most successful applicants there have, not only the stats, but also tangible evidence of passion for and commitment to STEM. While your stats are in range, I’d venture that this is true of many if not most of the 93% of applicants that Caltech rejects, as it is a highly self-selected applicant pool.
Caltech states that “the difference in admit rates is negligible” between RD and REA, so the only real benefit is getting a decision earlier.
Where else are you planning to apply?
If what you’re looking for is a quant-heavy undergrad business program at a school with a STEM-heavy vibe, I’d give CMU Tepper a close look. Undergraduate Business Concentrations - Tepper School of Business - Carnegie Mellon University If you want to shoot the moon at a tippy-top STEM school, MIT Sloan has much more “critical mass” as a business program - you wouldn’t be a total unicorn there for focusing on business/econ. But as with Caltech, it would be a very tough admit without a beefier STEM resume.
If you’re already considering Tepper or Wharton, where ED would give you a real boost, then foregoing ED at one of these to apply REA to Caltech could indeed be a waste.
Based on your stated interests you should be looking at highly rated undergraduate business programs with a strong finance or quant orientation (think UPenn, MIT and CMU). I second sfo’s recommendation to speak with someone who is familiar with CalTech’s business program. You might want to do some homework on where graduates of that program land by geographic location, industry and company/organization.
I am not sure about your “waste my EA” comment. Did you mean ED (early decision) where you are obligated to attend the school if accepted? EA is just an early application, which generally shows strong interest in a school. These days, however, EA is the new regular admission, and I recommend applying EA to every school on your list that offers it.
If there were any college on the planet that understood metrics and statistics, I’d bet on Caltech having a pretty good grip on the differences from REA/EA/RD. It’s a small U-their admissions are not fanciful or hard to predict-- and their is a high degree of self-selection going on.
I agree with @blossom that you need to figure out, first of all, whether you’re comfortable with Caltech’s sciences/math core. Caltech’s BEM program is primarily meant to be a second major (or for a few students who lost interest in STEM each year). It’s also much more math heavy than almost any other economics or finance program (because it can assume students in that major have all had the same math background that its core requires). As a result (for its economics program), its microeconomics program is excellent (perhaps even among the best), but it doesn’t really offer macroeconomics beyond some introduction. It does have an exchange program with UChicago where a Caltech student can take courses in its Booth school to make up for what Caltech doesn’t offer.
The math and science resumes of caltec kids boggle the mind. It is not a school for those who are casually interested. And, like other schools, being in the middle 50 of the distribution means you will have an average shot - well below 10%, and considerably less if you have a weak stem resume. If you are interested in business, finance, Econ or other social sciences with a strong quant component, echo the suggestions of others - cmu, Penn, Chicago and Mit. Note that MIT is still regular ea, though they want you to honor the decision of your Ed schools. (MIT will also be an exceeding difficult admit even with the highest level stem resume)
Our son attended Caltech.
You need to be aware that it is a RESEARCH institution.
If you are looking for a small college experience, Caltech is NOT it. That is not what you are going to get. Yes, it is a very picturesque and very beautiful campus.
You need to remember that this is a research institution.
Lots of self-starter students already doing research and independent studies.
Also, this is a VERY expensive school. I have the depleted checkbook to prove it. Are you sure you want to go to a school whereby you will be on your own, frequently, and expected to know what to do and how to do it?
Thanks for the feedback. I am aware that Caltech is a research institution. I’m almost done with an independent econ research project right now, my school’s Research Club (which has tons of experience and success getting in high school and sometimes professional research journals) is helping me get published. Thankfully, I won’t need any financial aid, and my parents are willing (a tad bit reluctantly) to let me go across the country/world for college. As far as being on my own academically, I’ve applied to quite a few other similar places.
You may have missed the point here. @aunt_bea is not mentioning the fact that Caltech is a research institution in relationship to your research experience. It is to clarify what the faculty do, and how much time they have to invest in your education.
Because Caltech is a research institution that means that only 40%-45% of the faculty’s job is teaching, and that teaching is split between undergraduates and graduates. Their research generally only involves undergraduates in a tangential way, and is not set up to specifically involve undergraduates. At Harvey Mudd, which is a primarily teaching institution, most of the faculty’s job is undergraduate teaching and research which is generally set up so that it involves undergraduates.
So even though Caltech is a small school, and the classes are small, the faculty have far less time to help and support undergraduate students than do the faculty at Harvey Mudd, or other colleges with similar number of undergraduates as Caltech, most of which are predominantly teaching institutions.
Our son’s tests were formulated/experimented by inexperienced international graduate students, who had never taught any courses. Those same tests were then graded by the same grad students. They then couldn’t explain how any student could arrive at an answer, given the complicated mistakes in the originally posed question, when the rest of the students complained to the professors who referred the students back to the grad students. It’s a research institution.
Publish or perish
The professors lecture and conduct research. That’s it. The tests and grading of these tests is done by the grad students. Never the twain shall meet.
Why stuff a square peg in a round hole? Take a flyer on a school where that’s in their wheelhouse, like MIT or Wharton. Even Dartmouth and Brown would better serve you. Why the fascination with Caltech?
