|
Oh cmon pebbles, I'm not your arch nemesis. I just like good discussions.
I saw some grad placement figures quite a bit ago, but I forgot where they are now.
Ask simfish for them...simfish has data on just about everything college. You can't argue statistics.
And I'm not being too hopeful when I say Caltech students are overall, of higher "quality" than MIT students. This has basically been asserted on CC (especially on the Caltech forums), and one statistic doesn't lie:
Caltech:
SAT Critical Reading: 690 - 770 99%
SAT Math: 780 - 800 99%
MIT:
SAT Critical Reading: 660 - 760 97%
SAT Math: 720 - 800 97%
Obviously there are other intangible, subjective factors. However, when the MIT class admitted consists of a - significant - portion of URMs, unhooked but well rounded applicants that aren't really good at science specifically, etc. etc., it's going to be less competitive than a class that admits mostly strong candidates - and does a decent enough job retaining them.
pebbles, I'm not sure what you mean by a "difference of goals." MIT and Caltech are both "institutes of technology" are they not? To most people, the only thing that matters in a college is reliable grad school placement - not my words, but the words of one poster on an Ivy thread.
|