MIT versus CalTech
MIT or Caltech. It’s a choice that faces more than a few technically-minded high school seniors each year. Both schools are ultra-selective, but the profile of the student they’re looking for is so similar that if you can get into one, the other is at least a good possibility–which leaves, for the lucky ones, The Choice. On the face of it, the schools seem quite equivalent. Both have extremely high average SAT scores, more guys than gals, a reputation for non-stop studying, and the tendency to turn out graduates who go on to very successful careers in math, science, and engineering. However, despite a host of similarities, the schools do have their differences, and your academic and non-academic experiences are likely to vary significantly based upon where you end up. I was confronted with this choice three years ago, and though I feel I made the correct one for myself, it was certainly tough. I’d like to share of few of the insights I gained in researching both schools while I was still deciding, along with some of my experiences after, to help you along on your way.
By far the defining difference between the two schools is size. At MIT, the freshman class is the size of the entire student body at Caltech. It really is a world of difference. Though both might be called “small” schools compared to a state school behemoth like Berkeley or the University of Michigan, the dissimilarity in the feel of 900 undergrads versus 4500 is quite tangible. As with most factors, this cuts both ways. At Caltech, you can reasonably expect to know most people in your class (and everyone in your dorm) by name, and most of the rest of the undergrads at least by sight. At MIT, this isn’t true–but conversely, there’s a sort of anonymity possible at MIT that is simply out of the question at Caltech, and if you have a (non-academic and non-music) special interest, the larger student body means more students who possibly share your interest. Interestingly, both MIT and Caltech seem to have ample opportunities for musicians. (There is, quite possibly, some truth to the notion that musical ability and mathematical acumen go together.) Similarly, Boston is one of the most famous and storied college towns in the world–but it’s hard to beat Los Angeles for sun, temperature, and access to the beach.
For general academics, it’s hard to give the edge to either school. Obviously, a science or engineering graduate from either school will have a significant advantage over the non-MIT-or-Caltech graduate, but making distinctions between the two is akin to splitting hairs. That said, it’s important to recognize the difference in what each school has evolved and is designed to do.
Caltech is designed to lead to graduate school, plain and simple. Nearly 50% of undergraduate alumni eventually earn Ph.D.’s in a technical field, which is the highest percentage of any student body anyplace. The famous “core” curriculum, under which students take virtually the same classes regardless of major for the freshman year and part of the sophomore year, is designed to provide a solid and universal background in math and each of the major fields of science. In part, this includes five terms each of math and physics for all majors–even biology or economics. The broad foundation that all of that physics (plus the required chemistry, biology, and lab classes) provides is designed to be the basis not for entering the workforce immediately after the B.S., but for the interdisciplinary collaboration common at the world’s top graduate programs. In sum, while many Caltech students, especially in the engineering fields, do enter the workforce directly out of Caltech, the more usual path is towards graduate school. The emphasis on undergraduate research experience dovetails well with that emphasis. A quick survey of professors’ web pages reveals that almost all research groups on campus have undergraduates associated with them, and 70% of the student body does a SURF (Summer Undergraduate Research Fellowship) project sometime during their time at Caltech.
MIT, of course, sends many of its students on to graduate school as well, but there is also an emphasis on entrepreneurship and applications of science that is sometimes lacking at Caltech. While Caltech just added an undergraduate Business, Economics, and Management major last year, MIT has for years had one of the nation’s top business schools in the Sloan School. While visiting MIT, a senior proudly told me that “90% of MIT startups succeed” and I fully believed him (granted, this was in the heyday of the last decade’s tech bubble at the time). The transformation of technical ideas from applied science into money-making possibilities seems to reach its apex at MIT. The Independent Activities Period, basically a month between fall and spring semesters that lacks regular classes, provides the opportunity for research projects, mini-internships with Boston-area tech companies, or a variety of offbeat, unusual, and interesting courses offered only during that time.
If you think the answer is as simple as “MIT for applied science, Caltech for pure,” though, think again. Any variety of other factors can and should influence your decision. Cross-registration opportunities with Harvard (which, to be fair, are much-touted but little-used) might tilt the balance towards MIT for a future theoretical physicist who also has a passion for Russian literature or some other very specific subject that might not be covered by many classes at a technical school. On the other hand, a potential aerospace engineer might be swayed to Caltech by the possibility of doing a research project or getting a hands-on job during the term with scientists at NASA’s Jet Propulsion Laboratory (located in Pasadena and run by Caltech). There is no one right answer.
I’m now a junior, and I have lived with the choice that I made–Caltech, by the way–for three years now. I’m confident that I made the right decision for me. What made my choice? Above all, it was the size. I visited both campuses and liked the small “feel” of Caltech’s better. I suspected that this was a place where I could really make some personal bonds, and it turned out to be true–most students on campus know who I am, and I know lots of them too. My professors can learn the names of all the students in tiny classes (once you get past core), and President Baltimore or Dean Revel says “Hi, Joe” if we pass on the Olive Walk. Personally, the small size of Caltech has allowed me to blossom. I serve on the student government and am very active in the music program. I got a truly great research job (good pay, flexible schedule, publication coming this July) for last summer just by asking a prof after class one day. The work is intense, but the camaraderie of the student body and the support of my friends make it possible.
“Yeah, I’m not really a college student: I’m institutionalized.” So goes the joke that I often share with my friends back home in Michigan, most of whom attend more traditional colleges and perhaps even occasionally spend their weekends on something other than studying. Now, things aren’t really quite that bad at Caltech, despite the reputation–my weekend so far has included an orchestra concert, a movie with friends, and some time jogging, in addition to studying rather more lightly than I would on a weekday–but it is true that life at one of our country’s top two schools with “Institute” in the name is a little different than life at a “University” or a “College.”
Article by Joe Jewell and courtesy of PrepMe.com.
