| Our bottom line is pretty high because Caltech is one of the few schools where you really can't hide from the tough math/science curriculum. The bare minimum requirements for math even at MIT? Standard Calculus I (single variable) and Calculus II (multivariable.) Just two semesters. For physics? Standard college-level Physics I (mechanics with calculus) and Physics II (E&M.) Also just two semesters. Plenty of people take harder courses than that for math and physics, and some take more semesters of them, particularly if it's related to their major. The point is, though, that MIT has room to play with non-academic factors more since someone who would have a hard time with math/physics beyond this isn't necessarily going to be failing out. The core math requirements at Caltech are calculus with proofs, linear algebra, multivariable calculus, differential equations, probability, and statistics -- five terms in total past AP Calculus BC. Core physics requires a term of mechanics, two terms of electricity and magnetism + special relativity for people taking the analytic track, waves, quantum mechanics, and statistical mechanics. Also five terms in total. There are also two terms of chemistry that assume you've done the AP class and a term of chemistry lab. For most people, you're also going to be taking an additional year of complex analysis, ODEs, and PDEs with Caltech grad students.
In other words, when the people on the admissions committee see an applicant to Caltech who has a 700 SAT I Math score and a 750 SAT II Math II score without other evidence of good mathematical preparation (math past calculus, good results on math competitions, mathematical research, really good math recs) they are going to seriously wonder if they can make it through core math. The SAT II math is curved so generously that most people who are good at math (even just enough to be successful at Caltech's math core) are going to find it easy to get an 800. Caltech can't get away with making it easier for legacies/minorities/athletes to get in, even if we wanted to, because they would probably fail out in ridiculously high numbers. We already fail out quite a few people. Most come back and still manage to graduate in 4/5/6 years. Sometimes they do much better after some time off, sometimes they struggle all the way through and then find out that life after Tech is really easy.
Even if you don't fail enough classes to get kicked out for a term, nearly everyone here will utterly fail at least one test despite putting epic amounts of effort into preparing for it. As someone who was your standard Caltech "always the best math and science" student in high school, I can tell you that it's incredibly painful to fail something despite feeling that you could not have done any better or put any more time in. Ever spent four days straight working on the same physics problem, generating hundreds of pieces of paper filled with work, but not getting anywhere only to have a friend figure out the answer in ~20 minutes because you were "looking at it from the wrong angle"? For the vast majority of Caltech students, you will have times when you break down, you will feel burnt out and just want to give everything up, you will experience failure like you never thought you could have before. Caltech really lives up to its common description of being "soul-crushing" sometimes, and you will feel it, maybe not while on pass/fail, maybe not even until you've been here a couple of years.
Why doesn't Caltech just change their core/major requirements to be easier? Because there are already 4,000 other colleges in the country that have that covered, and even through the pain, some of us still enjoy it. Though I usually feel burnt out at the end of each term, I still love Caltech and wouldn't go anywhere else in a million years. |