<p>It seems that Caltech is incredibly difficult to do really well at, so i was wondering if anyone can tell me the average gpa of techers?</p>
<p>According to the most recent Registrar's Newsletter, as of Jan. 19 2007:
[quote]
Approximately 9% of undergraduates currently have a GPA of 4.0 or higher; 34% have a GPA of 3.5 or higher; and 58% have GPA of 3.0 or higher.
[/quote]
I really don't think that's unreasonable at all considering that most employers and grad schools will look at the average 3.2 from Caltech as better than a 3.2 from almost any other school.</p>
<p>yeah i was wondering the same thing. hopefully i can maintain close to a 4.0. that will be really difficult.</p>
<p>The average GPA is 3.2. It has been since 1970, and has risen from a 2.8 in the 1940's</p>
<p>Craig, do you have graduation rates for the past 60 years? That would be really interesting to see.</p>
<p>Nah, I've got a slide that shows the average graduating GPA of once a decade from 40s to 90s, then a every other year from the 90s to 2002 or so.</p>
<p>"hopefully i can maintain close to a 4.0" is a prescription for probably not being very happy at Caltech... I mean, if you're able to do that, good for you, but you can do absolutely anything you want in the future, including top medical/law programs and international scholarships, with a lower GPA than that.</p>
<p>Is it not true that it's easier to get a 4.0 in Caltech than in say Berkeley since all exams are take home?</p>
<p>I don't think people at Caltech are smart enough to use the trust of their professors and the naiveness of Caltech's H-Code to get a perfect GPA. Silly, right?</p>
<p>But seriously, from what I've heard, some of the tests are not only take-home, they are also open-book. Now, if pofessor says that, and there still are students failing from time to time, I do not think that getting a 4.0 GPA at Caltech is easier than at Berkeley. (Although I must admit, I have no clue about the latter, except for the fact that it's huuge)</p>
<p>That said, I am confident cheating takes place, but rarely and in single digits.</p>
<p>I don't think you realize the difficulty level of our take home exams. Yes, most of them are open-book :)</p>
<p>The tests emphasize challenging your analytical skills, not how well you've memorized the material. This is why open-book, infinite-time tests can be the hardest around. I certainly have never memorized an equation since I've come here. I've learned new ones, but only because I've had to use them so much that their physical importance has become second nature to me.</p>
<p>I do realize the "difficulty" level of the take home exams. For students who are truly capable, it's almost certain that they'll score well. In time limited but easier exams, like SAT Math, the outcome is less predictable.</p>
<p>The take home exams often have time limits. I don't really buy your argument since there are also fewer problems on the finals (~4 problems per opposed to 100 for the SAT), so messing up on one or two problems on a midterm/final can easily knock down a grade level for a class.</p>
<p>As others have said, open book does not equate with easy at all. Very very often, tests here will ask you questions of a type you've never seen before; yet with the stuff you learned, you're <em>supposed</em> to be able to figure it out. (Supposed to, but of course that doesn't always happen.) I had a particular 4-hour test here with a question that required us to use what we learned in class to solve for zeta(2). That question made us use course material in a way I had never seen before, and I ended being one of the unlucky ones who just stared at the problem for more than an hour without figuring out how to go about it.</p>
<p>"I do realize the "difficulty" level of the take home exams. For students who are truly capable, it's almost certain that they'll score well. In time limited but easier exams, like SAT Math, the outcome is less predictable."</p>
<p>These two sentences seem slightly contradictory to me. If you consider what you're saying in reference to the same subject, scoring well on a Caltech exam requires a great level of mastery of the material. The SAT test does not. Barring the exception of a student who has some sort of learning disability that makes their work correct but incredibly slow (and typically on the SAT these students can apply for a special extended time, I think...could be wrong on that) someone who is going to score well on Caltech exams regularly is also going to score well on easier exams, regardless of the time limit (of course, if the material is easy but the timing is very fast, I suppose this can be considered hard... but the SAT is NOT hard). It's also worth noting that most of our exams are time-limited.</p>
<p>Also, I'm curious as to why you put the word difficulty in quotes.</p>
<p>I will disagree right off the bat. I personally believe that there is a certain spectrum of thinkers. On one extreme there are people who can think through stuff and do computations incredibly quickly, but not necessarily with accuracy or with ingenuity. On the other extreme there are people who think through everything very deeply and completely, and often show ingenuity in their thinking, but require a long time to arrive at any result. (Of course this is a simplification of a 2-D spectrum to 1-D. There are certainly some absolutely brilliant people who can come up with the most amazing reults in no time at all, and there are also some who... well, you know the rest.)</p>
<p>Personally, I fit very well in the second category and not the first. I recall from my high school days that I found the Chemistry AP test to be almost infinitely easier than the Chemistry SAT II for this precise reason. On a not exactly identical but similar note, here is an interesting article from Mike Vanier, the CS1 lecturer and one of the CS11 lecturers, that discusses thinking fast versus thinking thuroughly in the context of programming competitions: <a href="http://www.cs.caltech.edu/%7Emvanier/hacking/rants/programming_competitions.html%5B/url%5D">http://www.cs.caltech.edu/~mvanier/hacking/rants/programming_competitions.html</a></p>
<p>DWR- I agree with you, but I have to ask a question: did you do badly on the SATs? I'm not saying you found them easy, but even the people who prefer other exams over the SAT that I consider smart did well on the SAT, they just didn't like it.</p>
<p>(Edit: By the way, AP Chem and SAT II Chem have slightly different content as well, which might contribute. I knew there was stuff on SAT II Chem that I had never seen before)</p>
<p>Sorry to digress, but I saw the title of the thread and wanted to ask a question.</p>
<p>I was admitted to a med school program with Caltech, in which I have guaranteed admission to UCSD Med School. However, this admission is contingent upon the fact that I maintain a 3.5 GPA during my studies at Caltech. </p>
<p>I saw the statistics posted earlier, but I do not recall seeing a personal opinion, so, my question is: how hard is it to maintain a 3.5 GPA at Caltech? =)
Does such a goal make a significant dent in one's spare time/social life? Will I need to study 24/7? Please give your thoughts, I appreciate all comments!</p>
<p>Very hard to answer the question. There are some who are close enough to being geniuses that they can pull off a 4.0+ with comparatively little effort, and then there are some who have to work very hard just to get a 2.8. My guess is that if you were able to beat out the competition and get into the med program, then you should be able to get a 3.5 without overdoing yourself. As with any other Techer, you will probably still find yourself having a little less free time than you may want, but that's just life. As far as studying 24/7 goes, it's never a good idea. Very few people do it because most understand their limits on how much they can handle academically. Those who do attempt to study 24/7 often just end up being unhappy. I think it's pretty safe to say that the majority of people with solid grades don't spend that many more hours on academics than they sign up for.</p>
<p>As a sophomore in bio and someone who will be applying to med school, getting a 3.5 while having a life is not as challenging as it seems. I've managed to be on a Caltech sports team and hang out a decent amount without affecting my academics.
Getting good grades and still having a social life really just boils down to learning to use your time efficiently. You can finish the same problem set in nine hours when you're tired, or four hours when you're awake. Sometimes its better to sleep in for that extra hour rather than go to class - you'll be much more productive during the day and you can always get posted lecture notes online.
You've managed to beat out a lot of motivated, smart people for the med school program. I don't think GPA should be your main worry.</p>