<p>My own point of view is that I like to save money for a rainy day. With a full-ride to an honors program in a very good school, today is not a rainy day. Also, because this is something your S has earned, this is a great time to start letting him go, an opportunity for him to become a lot less dependent on you.</p>
<p>blossom, thanks for the post. Our first priority is to cut mom and dad’s expenses and dip into my retirement savings, but that won’t be enough for four years. Yes. We do need to be careful with the feelings of other kids. </p>
<p>We’ll consider dropping activities in which they don’t particularly have a passion and talent. We just need to reprioritize and be more efficient with our limited funds. Mom and I are prepared to support other kids in similar situation for college. Except for college classes, we dropped all of S1’s paid EC’s at the end of his sophomore year. He received partial scholarship for college classes, but we still bridged a small gap after he kicked in all his chess tournament and science fair earnings. All his college classes were directed to further his pursuit in bio/genetics, no interest exploration outlier type of classes.</p>
<p>Here are answers to some of the questions asked by various posters:</p>
<p>S1 is social and articulate. He has friends in all academic standings, from high school dropout to Harvard bound. I would say he is slightly off the mainstream with diverse interests. He can talk to you about Kant, switch the conversation to gene therapy, and wrap it up with a discussion on the special theory of relativity. </p>
<p>He can be assertive and persistent in pursuing what he wants. His initial passion was art and literature, but due to my encouragement to focus on something with better job prospect, he redirected that passion to bio because he sees art and beauty in nature even down to the molecular level. Not all of his original passion in art is absorbed by bio though, he recasted some to breakdance, which mom and I initially opposed (because we didn’t know better), but he persisted.</p>
<p>He is somewhat interested in math and physics but has never developed a passion for them, though he did take the hardest AP or equivalent level classes in these subjects. He was one of fewer than 20 kids selected to the AP Physics C class last year. Nonetheless, he would tell you he is not good at math and physics. I think he says that because looking at what he has accomplished and attained in bio, his math and physics pale in comparison.</p>
<p>He will be aiming at grad school to continue his study. MD is not in the plan, but he will consider the degree if it gives him leverage in his research in the future.</p>
<p>PCP-- if it were me, I would not send a kid without a clear and vocal passion for math or physics to Cal Tech. (nor to MIT; but that’s not on the table.) I would happily send such a kid to Chicago and based on what you’ve written (and I concede there may be some parental projecting there) it seems like the adcoms there really nailed him.</p>
<p>I would not sell a kidney nor use retirement funds to finance Chicago over a free ride at U Mass, and I wouldn’t cut the funding to my other kids to do so either. I would keep my car another 5 years (assuming the aged Honda cooperates); I would cut out recreational spending for H and me; I would defer maintenance on the house except what is necessary for warmth; I would moonlight at a second job. I would take a job which paid more even if it meant more travel, or I would take a job which paid less if it meant that I could do a second job which netted me more than my current situation. I would borrow against my life insurance policy if, all things being equal, the kids/surviving spouse would be ok without it. Your insurance agent can help you here. And I would encourage my kid to take on 5K per year in loans and work a campus job, summer job, etc. to finance the gap.</p>
<p>Just me. Cal Techs charms will fade quickly if your son doesn’t get into the math/physics groove relatively soon. It is an intense place- as is Chicago, but Chicago has hundreds of kids who share your S’s former passion for art and literature, and will share his current passion for bio. Can’t promise anything about the break dancing.</p>
<p>Blossom’s #43 bears re-reading. Great post.</p>
<p>I must say that from your last post your son sounds much more like a “U of C” kid than “CalTech” kid to me…</p>
<p>Only you can make the financial decision that is right for your family. But from our (admittedly limited) experience I can tell you that spending 4 years in CalTech- or UofC-type environment is a truly life-changing experience. Being a part of this type of community is inspiring and invigorating, both intellectually and emotionally. </p>
<p>The argument that “all schools use the same textbooks” is just silly.</p>
<p>I don’t know PCPs kid of course, but I wouldn’t completely write off Caltech just because he doesn’t percieve himself to have a passion for math or science. After all, the adcoms at CIT read his application and decided to admit him, and MIT waitlisted him.</p>
<p>Sometimes, kids percieve their abilities and passions differently than they actually are. PCPs son has perfect or near perfect scores on his PSATs and SATs math sections. He’s in the most advanced Math and Physics classes at his school. He’s a chess champion, and apparently one of the top biology student sin the country. He’s already lined up an internship.</p>
<p>I remember being shocked by an MIT student on here who enligthened me that not even all MIT students have Calculus before they enter school.</p>
<p>Here’s the MIT intro math diagnostic. </p>
<p><a href=“http://mit.edu/firstyear/mathdiagnostic/PracticeExam2008.pdf[/url]”>http://mit.edu/firstyear/mathdiagnostic/PracticeExam2008.pdf</a></p>
<p>I assume since they give this exam, not everyone scores 100%. This isn’t really that hard of a test. And yes, I know that this is a placement test, so it is not indicative of the difficulty of the classes. I’d just look over the curriculum and if possible talk to some curent or former students before writing this off based on some offhand perceptions.</p>
<p>I will say from the posts here I sensed a little reluctance on PCPs son’s part to Caltech, but I thought that was because he would have preferred MIT. And I’ve got nothing against Chiago - I actually know little about it, except that from what I read here it has a rigorous general education program.</p>
<p>I’m going to chime in on U of C after reading your son’s profile. </p>
<p>My H was a bio major there, and I don’t know about rankings, but I can’t imagine anywhere could be any better. We see his profs’ names in the news still all the time, and he really knew them because all of the classes were small. Plus even as a total science kind of guy he still talks about his Common Core experiences and how he was broadened in art history, etc. </p>
<p>I was an English major and while they didn’t have minors probably I minored in Studio Art. It was lovely then, and I’ve heard the program has grown considerably. It was a great balance for the more “academic” work.</p>
<p>A while ago I wrote of my nephew who was at a focused program in Computer Science and found himself nowhere near as committed to it as his peers, trapped in a too-narrow program, maybe “wasting his parents’ money.” He took a major ego hit from that, and from his experience and others’ I do worry about kids who get caught where they can’t diversify. (That said, I’m supporting my D in applying to BFAs in theater next year - but she only wants to apply where there is a college/university around it and lots of liberal arts opportunities, and to apply also to BA programs with regular college experiences.)</p>
<p>I’m definitely getting the vibe that your S will enjoy doing some more exploring as he grows, even if he does pursue this definite major. I do hope wherever he goes won’t make him feel constrained.</p>
<p>PCP,</p>
<p>My son had 800s on SAT Math (both I and II), a 5 on the AP Calc BC test, several university math classes past Calc BC, in which he did very well, a 5 on AP Physics C, many state and regional math competition awards–and he still did not think of himself as enough of a math and physics guy to even apply to CalTech. I generally don’t like to give advice to other people, but I feel a bit compelled to say that Univ. of Chicago sounds like a better bet than CalTech for your son.</p>
<p>The discussion about MIT is irrelevant. MIT decided some time ago to broaden its student profiles and fill up some of its non-techy majors. MIT may well have been a good fit for this student. That doesn’t mean CalTech would be.</p>
<p>However, this thread is not about CalTech vs Chicago. PCP is struggling with the offer of a full-ride to a school about which he is unsure. My question to PCP is, what is your son’s inclination? Does he have doubts that he can find fulfillment at UMass? Is he likely to take a lot of pride in personally paying for some of his education? </p>
<p>Re dipping into your retirement savings: Unless you have accumulated more than you think you will need, you might want to consider the long-term implications of doing that. My husband and I help support our mothers–and of course that has impacted what is available for our own children. Do you want to put your children in the position of supporting you after retirement?</p>
<p>Bovertine, in no way was I implying that PCP’s kid couldn’t handle the work at Caltech. It’s a demanding school with rigorous standards and if they admitted him, they know he can handle it.</p>
<p>My question was a cultural one. For a kid who loves art and literature and is now focused on bio and genetics and break dancing, will he show up at CalTech and feel right at home? Will he find the very hard work challenging and stimulating and intense, or find it a grind and stressful? And for a kid who demonstrated a moderate propensity not to give 100% to things he wasn’t interested in (PCP, did I summarize his high school career appropriately?) the intensity of Caltech, which is a few degrees off for PCP’s kids interests, may not be the life affirming and exhilerating experience everyone is hoping for.</p>
<p>My kid knew lots of kids at MIT who were dual majoring in an engineering discipline and poli sci, or CS and music, or Applied Math and linguistics. They found the non-science offerings at MIT to be both broad and deep, and were able to craft some pretty sophisticated interdisciplinary study around their passions. But I don’t think any of them would have told you that they weren’t passionate about math (and for some of them, math and physics. But for all of them, math. The jokes are in math. The hacks are in math.) The music community at MIT is filled with folks who are fascinated by the intersection of math, music and neurology. It’s not Julliard, it’s MIT. </p>
<p>And I find the Cal Tech folks I know to be MIT folk on steroids.</p>
<p>So given the notorious work load at Cal Tech, and given the very singular culture there (unlike at a place as huge as U Mass where 15 subcultures can co-exist in a single dorm, let alone on campus) I would be strongly encouraging my kid to give Chicago another look. Or just decide that the free ride trumps the full freight. </p>
<p>Of course the kid can do the work. The question is where he fits.</p>
<p>And on the retirement angle… I had kids young, so by the time I was done paying for college I still had plenty of earning years ahead of me. But a colleague at work was a decade older, figured that with two incomes and by saving like crazy when the kids were out of college they could make back the money… and then the markets tanked, housing went south, husband lost job… and the retirement funds are barely hanging on.</p>
<p>So lots of questions before you dip into your retirement funds. how old are you? How secure is your job and spouses job? which of you are at risk of being outsourced and if so, what’s plan B? Do you have disability insurance, and do any of the grandparents have long term care insurance or are you the long term care insurance? (NB- you’re either quitting your job to care for an infirm parent, or paying someone to do it.)
And the 64K question- are you willing to move somewhere cheap and live modestly in your retirement years, or does the plan involve travel and living the high life???</p>
<p>^^^^
Yes, after reading these two posts above, I went and looked at the CIT biology curriculum and it does look like they require significantly more Physics and proof based math than your typical biology program at even a very difficult school. So that is something to consider. You can be good at something and not want to spend a lot of time studying it.</p>
<p>Tough decision all around. But nice to have the options.</p>
<p>nngmm - But a science master’s is usually funded too, while hum/socsci master’s degrees (e.g. library science, education) are almost never funded.</p>
<p>
IMHO, this is one of the very best reasons to choose an expensive elite school over a free state school. If one’s primary focus is future success, the cheaper option is almost always the best choice.</p>
<p>Another way to think about it, admittedly with obvious bias: your S has a greater chance of “standing out” at UMass. But standing out at Caltech or Chicago, if he can manage it–certainly it is extremely difficult–would benefit him more than standing out at UMass.</p>
<p>From your description, I agree that he sounds much more Chicago than Caltech. Both have core curriculums, but Caltech will require a lot more math and physics.</p>
<p>Wow, I totally disagree, Kel. I went on a (near) full-ride to a state school, and I easily found peers, both in and outside the honors program, who were every bit as smart, driven, and intellectual as me, if not moreso. I felt challenged by my courses (some more than others, of course), and I now have two peer-reviewed journal articles (non-first author, though, but one is in the top journal in my subfield), something that is very much a level playing field, regardless of school attended (peer review is anonymous, so reviewers don’t know the names and affiliations of the authors).</p>
<p>^I’ll assume that was directed at me, though my name isn’t Kel. I’m going to further assume that you disagreed with my first sentence after the quote.</p>
<p>The point is not that you can find intellectual peers. I agree. You can find intellectual peers most anywhere (though I know of some reported exceptions on the high school level)… I go to a reasonably competitive public high school, and a good number of my peers are going to the state flagship.</p>
<p>The two examples you cite, course rigor and research output, are exactly the type of intellectual experience that is most easily replicated at a state (or any accredited) school. But being immersed in the social environment of Chicago or Caltech–these two schools come with particular social evironments that some students, no matter their “smartness,” may hate–has, I believe, a not-insignificant effect on one’s education. (My only support for this belief is anecdotal, addressed in the next paragraph below.) The OP’s S will not have to “find” people who love math/science at Caltech; I think he’d have to search pretty hard to find someone who didn’t love math and/or science.</p>
<p>I know a lot of people who have found great, fulfilling success at a “lesser” school–you’re certainly not alone in that regard. But repeatedly the theme that they cite, what they name as the most important factors of their intellectual experience, is professors. Professors, not students. Their peer groups are perfectly adequate, but pale in comparison to professor relationships. When I visited elite LACs–though this is getting tangential from the OP–and asked what students loved most about X school, the answer was nearly always “the students.”</p>
<p>Will the OP’s S find the same level of intimate professor interaction at Chicago/Caltech as he would at UMass? Maybe, maybe not. Certainly it would be easier for him at UMass. But if he can excel at Chicago/Caltech, he’ll get those same opportunities and the highest-level student body.</p>
<p>Yes, and I found my professors to be excellent and accessible. My success in research is directly BECAUSE of my excellent, accessible professors, in fact! And I didn’t actively seek out any of the excellent peers I found–they were just part of the school.</p>
<p>The fact that you are going to Swat (congrats!) is no doubt coloring your opinion, as my experiences are no doubt coloring mine. </p>
<p>(And, sorry–I always read your shortened name as “Kel.”)</p>
<p>^I believe I disclaimed my obvious bias upthread, as did you implicitly. Congrats on your excellent grad school results, btw!</p>
<p>I remain convinced by anecdotal evidence that peers matter at least as much as do the professors, and that highly selective holistic admissions to “build a class” leads to a different peer experience than statistical selection. IMO, it’s much easier to find excellent professors than it is to find excellent students–at any school. Excellent students are also present at any/every school, but being also LAC-biased, I care about percentages rather than raw numbers. </p>
<p>I want to be wowed by the feeling that the majority of the people around me are “better” than myself; I’ve been in the opposite situation before, though obviously not wrt to college, and I did succeed but I also know that I could have accomplished more during that time period if I hadn’t been at the top of the peer pool. (And yes, I got a ton of attention from my teachers, which helped. But the experience was different.)</p>
<p>Of course, if you can’t afford that “experience”–which is very much a luxury–then you shouldn’t destroy your life trying. I’m definitely against taking on unmanageable debt, though overall I’m savings-positive rather than debt-averse. I believe very strongly, as do my parents, that moderate educational debt is not fiscally negative and is in fact a net positive over one’s lifetime.</p>
<p>^^^But, the OP is talking about spending retirement savings and cutting back on younger children’s activities, not taking on “moderate educational debt” that is “a net positive over one’s lifetime”. </p>
<p>If U Chicago could be managed by the <em>son</em> taking on moderate educational debt, then the choice seems easier.</p>
<p>D1 was admitted to Mt. Holyoke. While we were visiting, we also toured Amherst. I asked the student tour guide about the 5 college consortium. He said that he had never been inclined to take a course at one of the other schools, and he was pretty sure he had never had someone from one of the other schools in his classes. I think he said that the Amherst students pretty much fill up the slots in their classes, and there isn’t much opportunity for kids from the other 4 schools to get into them. Not sure if this is true… but my impression is that a student at one of the other 4 schools shouldn’t plan on taking many classes at Amherst…</p>
<p>^^^This was not true in the past, but I don’t know about recent years. I have known economics students, as one example, who took a whole lot of econ courses at Amherst. I knew a biochemistry student who did research in an Amherst lab. Again, these are not recent anecdotes, and maybe the opportunities are harder to come by now. But I wouldn’t take the work of one undergraduate tour guide. </p>
<p>Not sure how to confirm that one can readily cross-enroll. It would be good to know for sure.</p>
<p>I know that Smith students regularly take classes at Amherst though Smith, which has excellent science courses and a brand new science building with great facilities, is the greatest net importer among the Five Colleges of consortium cross-registrants. The shuttle bus from MHC is to Amherst is probably one of the longer loops, exceeded only by MHC to U/Mass and back.</p>
<p>My daughter is a current student at Mount Holyoke and has taken classes both at Amherst and UMass. She doesn’t mind the bus ride. which is 25 minutes to Amherst and 35 minutes to UMass. Actually, Smith, at 40 minutes, is the farthest from Mount Holyoke. Hampshire is the closest. <a href=“Page Not Found - Transportation Services - UMass Amherst”>Page Not Found - Transportation Services - UMass Amherst;