.

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
It's generally easier to get 3.7+ from UCR than UCLA/UCSD/Cal. Thus, 3.7+ from UCLA/UCSD/CAL seems more impressive than 3.7+ from UCR, IMHO.
Also, top med schools generally favor top UCs over other UCs, maybe because students from top UCs are generally more competitive (research, ECs, etc.).
 
@jessicajonesharvard still a 3.7+ is a 3.7+, the MCAT equalizes everything out and as long as someone scores well undergrad is still irrelevant at the majority of institutions... And again EC's and research productivity are a product of the student not the institution. If there wasnt something available to me at UCR, I went out and created the opportunity myself. I get "prestige" weighing at the top schools but the fact of the matter is the average applicant isnt getting into a top school... even then i HIGHLY doubt that someone from UCR with T20 stats and EC's will get rejected just because of their undergrad. My friend didnt and got multiple II's to T30 schools

If stats really are the deciding factor all else being equal, go to the place where you can get the best stats am i wrong?

All im saying is, if there were bias against UCR grads then there is no WAY i get 10 II's this cycle with average stats for accepted students
 
Last edited:
I think there's a difference between encouraging students to take acceptances at other UCs due to UCR being less prestigious and UCR "hate". Undergrad prestige is considered in med school admissions, and while it's hard to know how impactful it truly is, it does play a factor and so is important for incoming students to consider. It sounds like you may be taking some of the recommendations too personally.
 
differentiating said:
I think there's a difference between encouraging students to take acceptances at other UCs due to UCR being less prestigious and UCR "hate". Undergrad prestige is considered in med school admissions, and while it's hard to know how impactful it truly is, it does play a factor and so is important for incoming students to consider. It sounds like you may be taking some of the recommendations too personally.
Click to expand...
Then why are adcoms on here saying that UG prestige is a very small factor in decision making. I completely understand the T20's favor Ivy's and Top UC's but as i mentioned before T20 may be average here on SDN but t20 is not average in the application pool as a whole. I am simply arguing the logical perspective to people and think people here are putting too much weight into UG prestige.

If UCLA/UCB are known for grade deflation and UCLA alone has the most pre-meds comparative to other UC's wouldnt it make sense to go to a UC that has less people, that is supposedly "easier" to get a high GPA at, has less competition for research and student organizations, and has an attached medical school that has demonstrated commitment to their UG students?! Why is that not a huge selling point... You can strategically play the game to increase your odds at gaining admission to UCRSOM and potentially staying in CA.

The biggest issue I have is these kids who go to UCLA or UCB think that they can get lower GPA's and their UG name is going to carry them when that is just plain false. Get good grades, get a good MCAT, have solid EC's and you are going to be a doctor. In my eyes, that is strategically easier to obtain at UCR... but we will just have to agree to disagree
 
Last edited:
djsbaseball2014 said:
Then why are adcoms on here saying that UG prestige is a very small factor in decision making. I completely understand the T20's favor Ivy's and Top UC's but as i mentioned before T20 may be average here on SDN but t20 is not average in the application pool as a whole. I am simply arguing the logical perspective to people and think people here are putting too much weight into UG prestige.

If UCLA/UCB are known for grade deflation and UCLA alone has the most pre-meds comparative to other UC's wouldnt it make sense to go to a UC that has less people, that is supposedly "easier" to get a high GPA, less competition for research and student organizations, and has an attached medical school that has demonstrated commitment to their UG students?! Why is that not a huge selling point... You can strategically play the game to increase your odds at gaining admission to UCRSOM and potentially staying in CA.

The biggest issue I have is these kids who go to UCLA or UCB think that they can get lower GPA's and their UG name is going to carry them when that is just plain false. Get good grades, get a good MCAT, have solid EC's and you are going to be a doctor. In my eyes, that is strategically easier to obtain at UCR... but we will just have to agree to disagree
Click to expand...

My point is that it is indeed a factor, as listed by multiple surveys, and how influential it is varies from school to school. I don't think it's unrealistic to consider it, the same way you'd want to maximize as much of your application as possible. To be clear: I didn't attend the most prestigious undergrad I was accepted to for a variety of reasons, so I'm not saying it's the be-all, end-all. But it's one of many factors to consider when making the decision.

IMO the big benefits of UCLA & Berkeley are their research opportunities, which are unparalleled amongst the other UCs. But you're right, good grades can be harder to achieve - so the students who do well at those schools look very good and are competitive for T20s, and those who struggle will likely have to do some reinvention and aim a little lower. That being said, as we've discussed before, UCR's medical school does still emphasize "mission fit" for accepting its own undergrads, so that may not be as automatic as you suggest. Plus, students may feel similarly to yourself and not want to stay at UCR for medical school anyway.
 
As someone who went to Cal I will say that there might be a miscorrelation between what you observed vs what is really happening. I agree that there are a higher percentage of kids at UCSF med who went to cal/UCLA for undergrad vs other UCs. However this does not necessarily mean the undergraduate institution they went to made the influence. I think this has more to do with the fact that there is a higher probability that a student at CAL is a better applicant in terms of stats than a student at UCR. It’s difficult to get into cal and therefore self selecting in a way. Yes there is severe grade deflation here however the kids who do make it out with a competitive gpa are likely to score higher on the mcat. My counselor told me the average score was 515 for acceptanced students when I went in over a year ago. Again this is self selecting. It’s impossible to determine how much if at all any impact the name plays into things when the applicants themselves are higher scoring. If I took a kid at my school who had a 3.3 they could definitely ace it anywhere that didn’t have as severe of a grade deflation and competition. Unfortunately there are many kids with 3.3s who would’ve succeeded and became doctors if they went elsewhere. Imo it’s silly to even consider undergrad school prestige if you want to go to med school. If you’re not worried about grades and know that you’ll ace it anywhere you go then by all means go to cal. The research opportunities are amazing and there are tons of professors with Nobel prizes or other crazy accolades. The clubs here are insane. They’re extremely impressive. However none of this extra fluff matter if you don’t have the stats to back it up. Your school is only worth as much as your mcat and gpa. If a kid at MIT has a crap mcat and crap gpa then they weren’t all that great to begin with. Or atleast that’s what med school will think.
 
CalBear57 said:
As someone who went to Cal I will say that there might be a miscorrelation between what you observed vs what is really happening. I agree that there are a higher percentage of kids at UCSF med who went to cal/UCLA for undergrad vs other UCs. However this does not necessarily mean the undergraduate institution they went to made the influence. I think this has more to do with the fact that there is a higher probability that a student at CAL is a better applicant in terms of stats than a student at UCR. It’s difficult to get into cal and therefore self selecting in a way. Yes there is severe grade deflation here however the kids who do make it out with a competitive gpa are likely to score higher on the mcat. My counselor told me the average score was 515 for acceptanced students when I went in over a year ago. Again this is self selecting. It’s impossible to determine how much if at all any impact the name plays into things when the applicants themselves are higher scoring. If I took a kid at my school who had a 3.3 they could definitely ace it anywhere that didn’t have as severe of a grade deflation and competition. Unfortunately there are many kids with 3.3s who would’ve succeeded and became doctors if they went elsewhere. Imo it’s silly to even consider undergrad school prestige if you want to go to med school. If you’re not worried about grades and know that you’ll ace it anywhere you go then by all means go to cal. The research opportunities are amazing and there are tons of professors with Nobel prizes or other crazy accolades. The clubs here are insane. They’re extremely impressive. However none of this extra fluff matter if you don’t have the stats to back it up. Your school is only worth as much as your mcat and gpa. If a kid at MIT has a crap mcat and crap gpa then they weren’t all that great to begin with. Or atleast that’s what med school will think.
Click to expand...

This. Bright, organized premeds are more likely to go to "higher ranked" undergrads. Top undergrads do not magically confer a bump in admissions.

/thread
/forum
 
djsbaseball2014 said:
explain plz
Click to expand...

In the case of two students with the exact same application, I would bet the top undergrad will fare significantly better at top schools. Top schools are known quantities, they know the type of student that will come from there. Imagine it like you buying an apple from Walmart, you know what you're getting. Sure, the apples might look exactly the same and have the same price at SuperFoodsSuperMarket, if both stores are right next to each other where are you going to buy your apple from?

An example is that WashU has matriculated less than 3 students over the past decade from my undergrad. Why would they take a risk when there's an almost identical applicant from an undergrad whose students they are already familiar with? Luckily, I would say that most UCs are well recognized across the nation.

Also, 3.7 at one school =/= 3.7 at another school. cue @efle on the WashU grade deflation.
 
dodolol21 said:
In the case of two students with the exact same application, I would bet the top undergrad will fare significantly better at top schools. Top schools are known quantities, they know the type of student that will come from there. Imagine it like you buying an apple from Walmart, you know what you're getting. Sure, the apples might look exactly the same and have the same price at SuperFoodsSuperMarket, if both stores are right next to each other where are you going to buy your apple from?

An example is that WashU has matriculated less than 3 students over the past decade from my undergrad. Why would they take a risk when there's an almost identical applicant from an undergrad whose students they are already familiar with? Luckily, I would say that most UCs are well recognized across the nation.

Also, 3.7 at one school =/= 3.7 at another school. cue @efle on the WashU grade deflation.
Click to expand...
I already told you guys I understand the bias from top UG's to T20 medical schools but the AVERAGE pre-med is not getting into a T20!!!! I am not arguing T20 admissions man, but even then I find it hard to believe that my friend with a 4.0/520 is not going to get into a T20 this coming cycle but we will wait and see.

At the end of the day for the AVERAGE medical school (NOT T20) stats, GPA, solid EC's id argue are more important than the name on the degree. Thats the only point im making here. And the fact that YOU have full power to make your application competitive regardless of institution is that not true?
 
Lawper said:
Tbh i haven’t seen the UCR hate on SDN until this thread mentioned it
Click to expand...
There has been like 2 threads in the past week where someone was trying to decide between UC's and everyone quickly disregarded UCR as too low tier and a unwise choice, when all im arguing is that it might be wiser than you think.
 
djsbaseball2014 said:
There has been like 2 threads in the past week where someone was trying to decide between UC's and everyone quickly disregarded UCR as too low tier and a unwise choice, when all im arguing is that it might be wiser than you think.
Click to expand...

I think something to consider is the people on SDN are focused on prestige for whatever reason and its probably better not to get invested on what some random people say on the internet.
 
Status
Not open for further replies.
Top