Get help with your application
Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.
Rush is a great spot, especially if that was where you are currently leaning. DGSOM is a great spot, though and if you want to place in california, then you will be at an advantage at DGSOM.
OrphanAnnieEyez
Full Member
UCLA will open more doors on research and competitive specialities - I know you’re not interested now but I think it can be worth keeping doors open.
Both of these schools will give you lots of opportunities to work with urban underserved populations, especially Spanish-speakers.
Do you have feelings on living in LA vs Chicago? Pretty different vibes. Chicago is very “neighborhood-y” and can feel like a small town if you want it to, in a good way. Also better public transit. I’ve lived in the area near Rush in Chicago if you have questions about it!
Both of these schools will give you lots of opportunities to work with urban underserved populations, especially Spanish-speakers.
Do you have feelings on living in LA vs Chicago? Pretty different vibes. Chicago is very “neighborhood-y” and can feel like a small town if you want it to, in a good way. Also better public transit. I’ve lived in the area near Rush in Chicago if you have questions about it!
Lets take prestige out of the picture.
UCLA is P/F & much more curriculum support with that third year. I wouldn't worry about the 1 year pre-clinical hiccup - lots of schools have implemented that now. It makes year 1 much tougher but you'll be thanking yourself later. Much more time to pursue your interests.
Add that to the fact that you want to match in California: Rush is going to not do great in that arena. Meanwhile with UCLA, you'll be the cream of the crop for Cali residencies. This is an oversimplification but UCLA opens more doors, just in terms of geography.
UCLA is P/F & much more curriculum support with that third year. I wouldn't worry about the 1 year pre-clinical hiccup - lots of schools have implemented that now. It makes year 1 much tougher but you'll be thanking yourself later. Much more time to pursue your interests.
Add that to the fact that you want to match in California: Rush is going to not do great in that arena. Meanwhile with UCLA, you'll be the cream of the crop for Cali residencies. This is an oversimplification but UCLA opens more doors, just in terms of geography.
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
tweedledumb
Full Member
UCLA is moving to a 1.5 year preclinical as a response to student concerns about the 1 year btw! If you want to end up in Cali, I agree that UCLA is the better option.
Plus they are good at taking feedback. UCLA has a lot of more resources and name recognition than Rush. Not saying Rush isn't a good place, but UCLA is the name and the brand. Side note though, having visited Chicago, it's probably one of the prettiest and cleaner major cities in the US.
tweedledumb
Full Member
I believe they are gearing up to announce the change at SLW
Goddo Usoppu
Full Member
go to ucla:
- discovery year (can get a dual degree ... e.g. MBA)
- lots of global health opportunities
- Early Authentic Clinical Experience (you can start seeing patients from year 1 - not at Pitt)
- 1st year students can be health coaches, patient navigators, etc. (really cool opp)
- more free clinic/homeless outreach than Pitt (if you are big on underserved)
- better hospital system (for M3 M4)
- really invested mentorship opportunities compared to rush
- curriculum is a problem everywhere: self-learning is the way
- Status
