Is Caltech mostly for geniuses who want to do super nerdy research?

[Anonymous]

Read the house descriptions here and see if this is the kind of social life that your DD would enjoy....

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/House_system_at_the_California_Institute_of_Technology

It's fun for the right person, but not a fit for everyone.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In terms of science lab facilities, Caltech appears at the top of this list:

Best Colleges for Science Lab Facilities | The Princeton Review https://share.google/1rwSW1TXPL6WDYEIX

Followed by Lake college, Union College and St. Olaf's. All seem to only be small private colleges. Not so convinced by the list.

From this group, I have seen Union's science facilities. In terms of available equipment, scientific displays and the general design of the buildings, particularly that of the atrium of its newest building, they are fantastic.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:I went to Caltech, but it was 20 years ago so I'm not sure how much the culture has changed.

Back then, at least, yes it was a place for super nerdy kids who wanted to do research. But they also embraced a "work hard play hard" approach to life. Some kids party a lot, some are really active in extracurriculars, some spend all of their free time in the lab.

It's a really small school, so the pool of people who have similar interests is going to be very small. Most personality types are represented (at least they were 20 years ago). The trick is to find the small set of kids who do crazy research during the week and then go backpacking on the weekend (or party, or play sports, or whatever your jam is) - they exist, but there will only be a few of them because you only have 1000 students to begin with. There were plenty of parties on campus, interhouse sports, clubs, etc. But all of the people doing them will also be super nerdy and spend a lot of their time studying.

This is the best description I've read yet.

[Anonymous]

To me, it sounds as if the logical target for the student in the original post is Harvey Mudd.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:In reality, Caltech is for MIT rejects. I haven’t heard anyone chose Caltech over MIT.

I know several this past cycle who were accepted to Caltech and rejected from MIT.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reality, Caltech is for MIT rejects. I haven’t heard anyone chose Caltech over MIT.

I know several this past cycle who were accepted to Caltech and rejected from MIT.

Is there an echo???

Meaning, I don't think you argued what you think you argued.

[Anonymous]

CalTech is usually ignored on this board so happy to see a thread. My DD is super smart, wants to major in physics. Does not do any social media, never been to a dance, has friends but stays out of group drama. However, she is also super sporty, outdoorsy, and funny. I have been wondering if CalTech would be a good fit.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:In reality, Caltech is for MIT rejects. I haven’t heard anyone chose Caltech over MIT.

I know several this past cycle who were accepted to Caltech and rejected from MIT.

Oops. I meant the opposite. Several accepted to MIT but rejected from Caltech

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MIT is a more traditional college experience, with a STEM focus. Caltech, I'm not sure. We always hear how hard it is to get in, but the one student who was accepted and attends from our HS was rejected by every other similar caliber private school she applied to. It kind of makes me think there was something unlikable about her application but Caltech overlooked it?

Caltech is unpopular with women so there is a huge boost if you are female.

[Anonymous]

Your kid isn't getting in, so dot worry about it

[Anonymous]

Caltech is the fourth ranked Undergraduate Engineering program by USNWR and that is by far the main major and why people go there. It definitely has to be the right person that wants to go there.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:MIT is a more traditional college experience, with a STEM focus. Caltech, I'm not sure. We always hear how hard it is to get in, but the one student who was accepted and attends from our HS was rejected by every other similar caliber private school she applied to. It kind of makes me think there was something unlikable about her application but Caltech overlooked it?

Caltech is unpopular with women so there is a huge boost if you are female.

That used to be the case: https://www.caltech.edu/about/news/incoming-class-50-percent-female

Caltech has been working on the gender parity for the past 2 decades.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:Both Cal Tech and MIT seem like dreadful college experiences. Trade schools basically. I mean they offer no traditional college experiences.

MIT is the best school for partying in Boston, and is second to only Zoomass in the state.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:MIT is a more traditional college experience, with a STEM focus. Caltech, I'm not sure. We always hear how hard it is to get in, but the one student who was accepted and attends from our HS was rejected by every other similar caliber private school she applied to. It kind of makes me think there was something unlikable about her application but Caltech overlooked it?

Probably too nerdy / not "well rounded" enough.

[Anonymous]

Anonymous wrote:This is anecdotal but I was recently chatting with a recent Cal Tech grad. Physics major working in high tech. Incredibly nice guy but not an extrovert. 6”6 and a power forward on the basketball team (a muscular and not a thin guy). I was a D1 scholarship guy long ago and so we talked about sports, including UCLA basketball. I was struck by his intensely cerebral approach towards basketball. He was extremely close with the coach, who was about intellectual development as much as athletics. It is hard to describe, but it appeared he chose the absolute right place for him. That is all that matters.

Can you expand on his cerebral approach?