UoP or UK COP

[altharo]

Hey guys so I wanted your opinion on attending either UoP or UK COP. I have been discussing with several of my pharmacists between both schools. I am just looking for input/advice and this is a great place for that.

UoP Pros: CA school. 3-year program. Huge network (1/3 of CA pharmacists are UoP alumni. long history of the school. Top programs in CA.

UoP Cons: Expensive. Current rank #60. 3-year program(accelerated/no summers).

UK COP pros: Current rank #6 (was top 5 last ranking). Impressive facilities (5 story building built 2010). Huge beautiful campus. Long history/strength of program is known throughout nation (except CA, for some reason all my pharmacists drew blank stares) last residency match was around 95% (IMPRESSIVE. i want to do residency) 4 year program.

UK COP cons: its in Kentucky/relocation costs/time/anxiety (im a CA native and plan to work here). CA pharmacists dont have a clue of Kentucky's ranking. out of state tuition. 4 year program.

Thanks for your time!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[ldiot]

I'd say go to whichever is cheapest. I'm guessing that would be UoP considering it's in-state and only a 3 year program. Plus you want to work in CA anyways. I wouldn't spend an extra year in school, move across the country, and potentially spend more money just to say I went to a higher ranked school. If we were talking about a brand new unaccredited school it would be different.

 

[altharo]

I'd say go to whichever is cheapest. I'm guessing that would be UoP considering it's in-state and only a 3 year program. Plus you want to work in CA anyways. I wouldn't spend an extra year in school, move across the country, and potentially spend more money just to say I went to a higher ranked school. If we were talking about a brand new unaccredited school it would be different.

Thank you for your response!

 

[Rockinacoustic]

If it's possible to get in-state tuition, UoK would be much cheaper. Besides, Stockton might as well be Kentucky from what I hear.

 

[pharmrx33]

UK is a great school, and I would be very surprised if California pharmacists did not know about UK's rankings. Although it's across the country, the people that are involved nationally know everyone, and UK has a lot of national involvement. Secondly, Lexington, in general, is a great city to live in for four years (I completed my undergrad there). Lastly, yes, UK matches extremely well for residencies, but its also important to note they are matching at extremely competitive programs, as well. I do not think you can go wrong with UK, and I do not even go there.

However, your concern was tuition and I know that out-of-state tuition is pretty hefty at UK, as well.

 

[pharmrx33]

...also wanted to say, don't necessarily only go based on ranking. It depends on how many research dollars you bring in so it does not necessarily mean you will get the best education. With that being said, UK pharmacists are extremely well-trained.

 

[ldiot]

If you could get in-state tuition to UK that would be good. I was going to interview there but when
I saw the out of state tuition nope. But even if you can get in-state you will still probably have to pay out of state for your first year. That's still like 15k extra. I don't know what the Cali school costs but being a 3 year program I'm guessing you're going to save money whether or not it's more on a yearly basis. Bottom line is don't go to a more expensive school just to live in a nicer city for a few years or to say that you went to a top 5 school. That's just stupid. Reminds me of people who spend an extra 30k in undergrad to be able to play division III sports that will get them nowhere in life and justify it by saying that they got a scholarship even though it''s still way more expensive with the scholarship.... sorry that's a separate rant but just remember how much money you are spending and what extra you are getting out of it