i don't agree with you, but we're then just talking about what's inside nathan's brain without actually being inside nathan's brain. i would not say berkeley, stanford, ucla, or caltech is in a lower tier than yale. not an ivy, but stellar schools. and he's not a yale legacy either, so i'm not quite sure why
All four of the schools you name are excellent, and I wouldn't rank any of them in a lower tier than Yale either. But each is quite different from Yale, and from each other. Caltech is tiny, with less than 1000 undergrads, and consequently oriented more toward its graduate students. It's also much more heavily male (about 2:1 at present, though working on gender balance). Stanford is in the middle: around 7000 undergrads, pretty evenly balanced between male and female students. UC Berkeley and UCLA are big state schools, with around 30,000 undergrads each, again pretty evenly balanced in terms of gender. By comparison, Yale has about 5500 undergrads, again with a pretty even gender balance.
At big state schools, most students move to off-campus housing after their first year. Many introductory classes will be huge lectures; there will be many smaller classes where you have a chance to get to know your professors, but it may take you a little while to find them. Many students will take some classes online or in the summer. I'm less familiar with Caltech's and Stanford's academic systems, but I would expect them to be similar to Yale, with a few large lectures (especially introductory science courses) but mostly smaller lectures and seminars. Yale requires all students to live on campus for their first two years and offers very few courses in the summer or online. And Yale is the only one of these institutions with the residential college system, meaning that most students live not just on campus but with the same smaller group of students in a physical and social community for all four years. (Stanford probably comes closest to the Yale experience, with the vast majority of students living on campus for all four years.) In other words, Yale attempts to engineer a cohesive academic and social experience for its undergraduates, while the UCs offer more flexibility.
Caltech is heavily oriented toward the sciences and engineering; to a slightly lesser extent, so is Stanford, though both do have excellent humanities; they're just not what most students are there to study. The UCs offer just about everything you can think of, but it helps to be self-directed and willing to experiment to discover the full range of intellectual possibilities there. Yale's historic strengths have been in the humanities and life sciences; of course they are very strong in the hard sciences too, but a larger percentage of the student body is oriented toward the humanities and to extracurriculars emerging from the humanities, such as theatre, music, dance, and writing.
I'm not saying that any of these models is better than any other; each is right for some students and not-so-right for others. These huge differences between universities are a big part of why choosing a college is such a long and stressful process for so many students. (And we're just talking about one small slice of the full higher-education picture in the US, without even considering liberal-arts colleges that only award bachelor's degrees, or the regional campuses of state universities that do so much of the heavy lifting in postsecondary education, or two-year colleges that offer associate's degrees and serve as essential stepping-stones to four-year institutions for students who haven't had a smooth path to college for whatever reason.)
In the end, as colton12314 says, none of us is inside Nathan's brain. Maybe one or another of these factors particularly appealed to him. Maybe he wanted to try living in a different part of the country, seeing the leaves turn and experiencing four seasons. Maybe he just liked the pizza.
