Best uc pre med/ med school

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
UCLA:

In short, because I attend UCLA and you want to attend UCLA because I'm the kid that lowers the curve for you.:D

The best thing that can happen to you is for you to take a class with me.

Members don't see this ad.
 
which UC has the hottest girls lol

U-C-L-A UCLA, Fight, Fight, Fight!

Well it depends on what major(s) you are.
Some of the faculty is awesome, but some are well... I can see why they act the way they do with so many obnoxious pre-meds they have to deal with.

Great thing about UCLA is the resources you have. Whether it's world class research or clinical opportunities, you have access to all of them. Only thing is, there will be NO HANDHOLDING whatsoever. Enrollment can be a pain sometimes (even if you have priority through Honors or Athletics).
Go to the one that is A.) Best Fit B.) The one where you can achieve the highest GPA.

If you are dead set at being pre-Health, I would say go to a mid tier UC (UCI, UCD, etc...).... unless you decide to switch to pre-law (in that case, your "pedigree" matters). Why would you want to go to UCSD? I remember hearing that there's a committee that you have to go through. So that means that not everyone that wants to apply to med/prof. schoosl get to appy. As a result, UCSD's admit rate to med school is inflated. There's no cap at UCLA or Cal. Hence UCLA and Cal have the most students in med schools.

If you have the funds and have the grades/scores... I would personally go to Stanford, USC, or Claremont. Stanford makes things a lot easier. For example, you get to use the first week to TEST/TRY out your courses and switch your schedule around if you don't like the professors. Now that's a luxury that all pre-health students would love to have.
 
U-C-L-A UCLA, Fight, Fight, Fight!

Well it depends on what major(s) you are.
Some of the faculty is awesome, but some are well... I can see why they act the way they do with so many obnoxious pre-meds they have to deal with.

Great thing about UCLA is the resources you have. Whether it's world class research or clinical opportunities, you have access to all of them. Only thing is, there will be NO HANDHOLDING whatsoever. Enrollment can be a pain sometimes (even if you have priority through Honors or Athletics).
Go to the one that is A.) Best Fit B.) The one where you can achieve the highest GPA.

If you are dead set at being pre-Health, I would say go to a mid tier UC (UCI, UCD, etc...).... unless you decide to switch to pre-law (in that case, your "pedigree" matters). Why would you want to go to UCSD? I remember hearing that there's a committee that you have to go through. So that means that not everyone that wants to apply to med/prof. schoosl get to appy. As a result, UCSD's admit rate to med school is inflated. There's no cap at UCLA or Cal. Hence UCLA and Cal have the most students in med schools.

If you have the funds and have the grades/scores... I would personally go to Stanford, USC, or Claremont. Stanford makes things a lot easier. For example, you get to use the first week to TEST/TRY out your courses and switch your schedule around if you don't like the professors. Now that's a luxury that all pre-health students would love to have.


This is completely untrue. No such committee exists. UCSD's reported admit rate is actually below the national average. In 2007, UCSD had a 40% admit rate compared to a national rate of 45%.

http://career.ucsd.edu/sa/PMedHis.shtml
 
Members don't see this ad :)
That's completely irrelevant. Nobody is arguing about correlation between prestige and difficulty.

No UC campus is comparable to Ivies and the elite privates (MIT, Stanford, Caltech, etc.) when it comes to prestige. So, that's not even a point of contention. And within the UC system, whatever difference in prestige is hardly noticeable (especially between Cal, UCLA, and UCSD). On the other hand, the difference in difficulty is apparent.

bam! my point exactly :D
OP, it doesn't matter where you go; the difference between Cal, UCLA, and UCSD is too small to matter in terms of med school admissions.
 
This is completely untrue. No such committee exists. UCSD's reported admit rate is actually below the national average. In 2007, UCSD had a 40% admit rate compared to a national rate of 45%.

http://career.ucsd.edu/sa/PMedHis.shtml

My apologies then. I heard about that when I was a senior in HS (maybe there was a committee then). So I shall defer this matter to you and those who are at UCSD.
 
Last edited:
i hate how the UC system is set up, where every UC is compared against each other, and everyone doesnt feel there good enough unless they go to berk.
 
no one cares about berk except berk hippies
 
bam! my point exactly :D
OP, it doesn't matter where you go; the difference between Cal, UCLA, and UCSD is too small to matter in terms of med school admissions.

If that was your point, why did you argue yourself into a Gordian Knot about difficulty between UC's that you can't even begin to explain?

Sigh, typical.
 
I got into Berkeley and chose USC over it. Best decision ever. I had such a great time at USC and it's surprisingly cheaper than Berkeley with all the financial aids and grants. Moral of the story, choose a school you like. Most of the UCs are similar (UCB, UCLA, UCSD). Just choose a school you're most comfortable with. I have friends at UCB, UCLA, and UCSD and they are all doing fine and loving it.


BTW, Berkeley and Westwood are both more college-oriented cities than La Jolla. Something you might want to factor in.
 
That's completely irrelevant. Nobody is arguing about correlation between prestige and difficulty.

No UC campus is comparable to Ivies and the elite privates (MIT, Stanford, Caltech, etc.) when it comes to prestige. So, that's not even a point of contention. And within the UC system, whatever difference in prestige is hardly noticeable (especially between Cal, UCLA, and UCSD). On the other hand, the difference in difficulty is apparent.
Naah. I disagree. Berkeley is an academic and research powerhouse with world-reknown faculty and scientific advancements that rival the schools you mentioned. And mind you, Berkeley is a public school. USN&WR has an Ivy infatuation, but the international rankings aren't as biased and Cal has consistently been in the top 5. Imagine what it could do with Stanford's endowment.

As far as bickering over which UC is better. Who cares. They each have their pros and cons, just pick the one that matches you the best.

And UCSB has the hottest girls hands down. It's not even a competition. Whoever said UCLA should shoot themselves, sorry Bruins but it's the truth.
 
Naah. I disagree. Berkeley is an academic and research powerhouse with world-reknown faculty and scientific advancements that rival the schools you mentioned. And mind you, Berkeley is a public school. USN&WR has an Ivy infatuation, but the international rankings aren't as biased and Cal has consistently been in the top 5. Imagine what it could do with Stanford's endowment.

Agreed. Maybe among the general public Harvard or Yale sounds better than UC Berkeley, but anyone who knows anything about higher education knows how big of a deal Cal is. Aside from Berkeley being rated in the top 5 universities in the WORLD (ahead of the majority of Ivy schools), it's also the only school to have all of it's grad programs ranked in the top 5.
 
Dude, the Berkeley campus is AWESOME. I've been to quite a few campuses, and Berkeley is pretty much the only one that has such a wide variety of buildings in different architectural style...no boring one-style-fits-all there.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
UC Irvine's got a nice clean looking campus, the science depts have cool lookin buildings...w/ a nice park in the middle. You can actually see trees and hills when u look out the window as opposed to concrete walls @ UCLA, and the temp. tends to be nicer than UCLA, UCR (disgustingly HOT in summer!) or UCSD

Verdict:

UCI pwns!
 
And if you look at this link, you'll see how much UCSD SOM favors UCSD undergrads: http://career.ucsd.edu/sa/PDFs/UCSD%20Admits%2005-07.pdf

~35 every year... wow

Well, don't put all your eggs in one basket.

When someone says go to where you can obtain the highest GPA... that's true to a certain extent. No disrespect to CSUs... but how many Cal Staters do you see in Med Schools? You be the judge.
FYI, UCSF utilizes a point system that gives u an extra point for going to a top school (i.e. UCLA & Cal gets a 3 while UCD and UCI gets a 2... bot sure where UCSD falls to)

FYI, the avg. science GPA at UCLA is around 2.90. I imagine it's the same for Cal and UCSD. A high GPA at UCD, UCI, UCSB, & UCSC is better than a low gpa at the top 3 UCs.

Go where you fit the best. By fit, I mean academically and socially. What you do outside of class has a big influence on your academics as well as how you develop into a person.

If you were my sibling, I would personally recommend USC over the three UCs we are debating about, and I'm a Bruin myself. Go to USC or Claremont if you can afford it or get a great finanical package.
 
DAMN!! thank you to everyone who has and is infforming me..Its just that society implies that only these three UC schools are the best..I really want to go to UCLA cuz i've lived here all my life, yet i still have to check out UCSD

PS.Cal is nice, but Berkeley might be like a boring atmosphere for me (or someone looking into studying med). I hope UCSD isnt.
 
WOW Mr. Anteater,
Please deflate your ego. Man, I'm not saying you are, but you're acting like a douc**b*g. That condescending attitude is absolutely unnecessary. I have friends who attend UCSD who are smarter than folks here in Cal and vice versa. So let's not overgeneralize or imply X.

That being said, I spoke to my (or rather...our?) pre-med adviser about this issue before, and like someone else said before, it shouldn't make a difference to medical schools if you came from a TOP TIER UC SCHOOL. I don't know what top tier is...I assume it's subjective, and quite frankly, I don't care. If top tier means Cal, UCSD, and UCLA, more power to all the students who attend those schools.

Just relax bro. Personally, if I could, I would re-pick UCI b/c I hear the girls there are very pretty. You and I both know...Cal girls are not. Haha...JK SDN Cal girls (*Barf*).
 
I think that most of the UC schools have a great reputation and you'll have a good shot at med school from any of them. Percentage wise the two leading schools to place students in the top programs seem to be UC Berkeley and UCLA. For example, a rather large percentage of the UCSF class is made up of Cal, UCLA, and Stanford graduates. That's all nitpicky though. I'd say it doesn't really matter. Most important is gpa, mcat, experiences, and letters of recommendation.

Probably the most important thing that an undergrad school can offer is the chance to work with, and get a letter from a person that would be recognized and respected at a med school you would love to go to. That would probably give more of a leg up than simple school affiliation.
 
Well, don't put all your eggs in one basket.

When someone says go to where you can obtain the highest GPA... that's true to a certain extent. No disrespect to CSUs... but how many Cal Staters do you see in Med Schools? You be the judge.
FYI, UCSF utilizes a point system that gives u an extra point for going to a top school (i.e. UCLA & Cal gets a 3 while UCD and UCI gets a 2... bot sure where UCSD falls to)

FYI, the avg. science GPA at UCLA is around 2.90. I imagine it's the same for Cal and UCSD. A high GPA at UCD, UCI, UCSB, & UCSC is better than a low gpa at the top 3 UCs.

Go where you fit the best. By fit, I mean academically and socially. What you do outside of class has a big influence on your academics as well as how you develop into a person.

If you were my sibling, I would personally recommend USC over the three UCs we are debating about, and I'm a Bruin myself. Go to USC or Claremont if you can afford it or get a great finanical package.
Ohhh... get your facts straight on the CSUs sonny boy!

You don't see as many Cal Staters because not that many apply. My undergrad has 35K students but only averages about 30 applicants a cycle, compare that with UCLA or Cal which put out a thousand. Yet, we still send people (including many MSTPs) to Harvard, Hopkins, Stanford, the UCs, Vandy, Northwestern etc...

There are handful of us (cal staters) at my med school. And many more did a postbacc at a Cal State. Hell, as part of UCIs prime program, you get your MPH at Cal State Long Beach. That alone lets you know a State degree is well respected.
 
I vote we run as far away from this thread as we can before we start posting our school, major, GPA, and MCAT score for comparison


;)
 
Ohhh... get your facts straight on the CSUs sonny boy!

You don't see as many Cal Staters because not that many apply. My undergrad has 35K students but only averages about 30 applicants a cycle, compare that with UCLA or Cal which put out a thousand. Yet, we still send people (including many MSTPs) to Harvard, Hopkins, Stanford, the UCs, Vandy, Northwestern etc...

There are handful of us (cal staters) at my med school. And many more did a postbacc at a Cal State. Hell, as part of UCIs prime program, you get your MPH at Cal State Long Beach. That alone lets you know a State degree is well respected.

Yeah, exactly amigo. I was just pointing out that not many apply. There's nothing wrong with going to a CSU (a full ride at a CSU is a great deal). It's also important for someone who is easily influence by their peers to consider this fact. In other words, just make sure you are the exception and have the motivation to succeed. UCSF DOES rank. I'm not the one doing the ranking... just pointing it out. CSUs DO have smaller science class sizes compare to UCs (and that's an important point to consider). I don't disagree with you. It's reality that's it's tougher to earn high grades at a top tier UC compare than a CSU. But admissions folks also realize that an education from a CSU is not inferior. That's why the MCAT is required. Hell, a top CSU might even provide a better education because the atmosphere is more relaxing and helpful.

OP: if you hate Cal's atmosphere... don't go there. I turned down Cal because I hated waking up early and experiencing overcast day in and day out. Vist the school, sit in the courses, and vist the med center (whether it's UCLA or UCSD) because chances are, you're going to be volunteering there, at least for a while. At any of these three schools, you're going to be dealing with gunners and idiots regardless. You can't control that, but you can control your surroundings outside of class. UCSD is a great school and don't let the fact that UCSD does not have DI athletics or a great spirt squad (hey, you might be interested in joing the Cheer squad) be a factor in your decision. I absolutely love SoCal, and I love the lifestyle. The time outside of class is very important. Sometimes we all get caught up in our studies and ignore that aspect. We're all humans after all. Good luck with your decision!
 
Last edited:
Well, don't put all your eggs in one basket.

When someone says go to where you can obtain the highest GPA... that's true to a certain extent. No disrespect to CSUs... but how many Cal Staters do you see in Med Schools? You be the judge.
FYI, UCSF utilizes a point system that gives u an extra point for going to a top school (i.e. UCLA & Cal gets a 3 while UCD and UCI gets a 2... bot sure where UCSD falls to)

FYI, the avg. science GPA at UCLA is around 2.90. I imagine it's the same for Cal and UCSD. A high GPA at UCD, UCI, UCSB, & UCSC is better than a low gpa at the top 3 UCs.

Go where you fit the best. By fit, I mean academically and socially. What you do outside of class has a big influence on your academics as well as how you develop into a person.

If you were my sibling, I would personally recommend USC over the three UCs we are debating about, and I'm a Bruin myself. Go to USC or Claremont if you can afford it or get a great finanical package.


Hey just wondering where you got your information from for UCSF's ranking system, was it from A recent Adcom or someone from a while ago.

Last I heard, its school ranking was out of 4/4, and I remember Cal having the highest points assigned, so either Cals points dropped or they changed the system to make it 3/3 (which I dont really see them doing).
 
Hey just wondering where you got your information from for UCSF's ranking system, was it from A recent Adcom or someone from a while ago.

Last I heard, its school ranking was out of 4/4, and I remember Cal having the highest points assigned, so either Cals points dropped or they changed the system to make it 3/3 (which I dont really see them doing).

It was from 2 years ago, but I cannot recall who I specifically heard this information from. But yeah, Cal has the highest point assigned.
 
The difference between various UCs is much smaller than the difference between UC and CSU. Adcoms and premedical advisers at both systems admit that there is bias against CSUs. And it is a fact that students at the UCs who get weeded out in biology transfer to CSU so that they can pass. This comes from a CSU adviser. The exodus from UC to CSU happens every year and med schools in CA know about this.

In terms of UCs, when you are comparing closely ranked schools, it doesn't really matter. But I was told that usually it is better to attend a school that has a teaching hospital available nearby, i.e., likely a medical school. But that's only if everything else is pretty much the same. I had to make some difficult choices myself, and the bottom line was that it will help if you can go to a top UC school, but not as much as to supersede the rest of the variables. Maybe for medical school it doesn't matter much, but in the sciences (like engineering) Cal is in a class of it's own. So if you were to attend it and major in physics and succeed, that would count for much more than the same feat at any other UC. Berkeley is a public Ivy. If you can get into Berkeley, chances are that you have a good shot at the top schools in the country. UCLA - you can get in with the right major. The rest of the schools, like UCI, UCR, USCD, UCSB, etc., are pretty much the same. You have to get buried in minutiae to find differences among these schools.

I'll share a few of the details that I found out about different UCs when I was making a decision: for example, UCSD may not be a bad school, but the faculty and the administration there came off as very unfriendly. I was unable to find out some specific information that I needed. They kept transferring my calls about five times on one occasion and at the end the person had to direct me to their website for that information because she either didn't know the answer or didn't care to disclose it. The website didn't have the full information either. I also know some people who went to law school in San Diego and thought that the population was generally pretty shallow. Having been in that city several times, I agreed with that observation. Then you have Berkeley (or any other strongly technical school, such as Harvey Mudd, Caltech, etc). One of issues here is money - it is tough to get a good scholarship at such competitive schools. But a more important issue is the risk because very few people make it out from there with a good GPA - if they major in the department that the school is known for. So then the decision is whether you are willing to risk your GPA taking courses at one of the toughest schools in the nation. One of my teachers at one of these schools said outright that you have to be a genius to get an A in her class. The text we used was the exact same text they use at medical school and we were expected to know about 70% of the book (around 700 pages) almost by heart. Around half of the class dropped out after the midterm, and most of those who stayed behind were graduate students. This class was a lot of work. Can it be done? Of course. But imagine having three classes like this, trying to volunteer, join clubs, and work. If you do get a low GPA, you're not going to make it. There are people from places like Caltech and Mudd that have not been able to get into any medical school with low GPAs. Med schools just don't realize or care about the difficulty at these schools. If you get a low GPA, you won't make it. Then there is UCI - classes are not easy, but they are not as bad as the big three mentioned above. However, UCI has it's own drawbacks - there is more competition to get research positions, there is a class you have to take before you can do any research (losing an entire quarter), and premedical advisers are non-existent. I had to talk to someone in the UCI med school about med schools because UCI undergrad doesn't have anyone officially involved with that. UCR is another school - it has probably one of the friendliest faculty, classes are small, campus is almost the smallest (some love small schools), there are specific med school advisers and there is a special program where premeds exclusively from UCR can apply to UCLA med school and 24 seats are reserved only for UCR students every year, there are a lot of research opportunities and the students are actively asked to participate, but the location sucks and there is no medical school...

The above list goes on and on, but I hope that it clarifies a bit more as to what "Best UC" really means. It's not something static. There are many pros and cons to each school and that's why you can't say what UC is really "the best." Will a physics major at Berkeley trump every other UC? Maybe. But the catch is will you be really able to get over 3.5 at Berkeley? If you don't like an overly competitive environment or a big campus, then the top UCs are out of your list and the best school for you would be a smaller campus, like UCR.

I know that ranks matter and if you look at a list like this you'll see that UCLA and Cal send the largest number of white applicants to med school. But does that really mean anything? Not really. That list is almost expected because UCB and UCLA have the most students. Some approximate numbers (2005): UCLA-35700, UCB-33600, UCD-29000, UCSD-27000, UCI-25000, UCR-16700, UCSC-15000. A school like UCSC has less than half the students of UCLA or Berkeley. Obviously a small school like that is not going to have as many med school acceptances or research money, which is one of the crieteria for US News ranking. This is why it just doesn't make sense to look at the AMCAS list or even US News rankings alone to decide what is and what is not a good UC. Personally, my favorite UC is UCSC. I know that some people talk condescendingly about places like UCD and mentioning those cows, but I believe the environment at these places is the best for peaceful studying and maturation. I don't think I have seen a campus as breathtakingly beautiful as UCSC. The people are very friendly as well. Now that's an ideal environment for someone who wants complete peace and concentration on learning. As such, for a lot of students it is the "best" UC.
 
ing) Cal is in a class of it's own. So if you were to attend it and major in physics and succeed, that would count for much more than the same feat at any other UC. Berkeley is a public Ivy. If you can get into Berkeley, chances are that you have a good shot at the top schools in the country. UCLA - you can get in with the right major. The rest of the schools, like UCI, UCR, USCD, UCSB, etc., are pretty much the same. You have to get buried in minutiae to find differences among these schools.

berkeley isnt the only uc public ivy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ivy

for all u nay sayers, i know wiki isnt the best source, but its accurate in this case.

on another note, i wonder how davis has a higher endowment than san diego..any takers on this?
 
Last edited:
Doesn't really matter for med school, in fact a private school that'll baby you would be better than Berkeley. Berkeley has the best name if you change your mind about medicine and decide to go for something else, but in terms of undergrad education quality there is no difference. Berkeley is renowned as a GRAD school - it's Ivy league quality in that respect - but the undergrad experience is the same as the other UC's, except more difficult (harsher curves, more classes where there are 1,000 things to memorize and the final exam tests you on the application of 5 of these things that were mentioned the least in class).
 
berkeley isnt the only uc public ivy:

http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Public_Ivy

for all u nay sayers, i know wiki isnt the best source, but its accurate in this case.

on another note, i wonder how davis has a higher endowment than san diego..any takers on this?

That's amazing. When I said "public ivy" I had no idea that it is an actual term. You probably randomly googled my phrase and came across that information. According to that book, you would be correct, but my phrase was an unofficial approximation. I'd be curious to know as to why the rest of the UCs were suddenly excluded. It seems pretty random to say that UCI is an "ivy" but UCR or UCSC are not. Merced is a brand new school, so maybe that's understandable, and since UCSF has no undergrad, it should be "6 out of 9," not "out of 10." Note that the guy who originally created this list was and admissions director at UCSC and included ALL UCs in the list. Then someone else came along and "expanded" the list by dropping two UCs. There better be a really good reason for that as this ranking sounds completely random.
 
come on guys, why argue about better/worse campuses? don't you all simply go to the University of California? 10 campus, one university! I think it's safe to say that the UCs just kick butt in general, and it doesn't matter which ones are better than the others
 
As a Cal student, I have to say that it is extremely difficult here. I studied for o-chem with friends in SD, LA and Davis and they were not up the standards of Cal.
The bad thing about Cal is that, I felt that the professors don't really like teaching. Most of them are into research and feel that teaching is a waste of time. I had a sociology professor tell this to me straight up. The lack of a medical school also really hurts Cal's pre-med population. It is an hour-and-a-half travel to SF. Also, there are practically no pre-med advisors. You have to figure out everything by yourself, which kind of sucks. People here are extremely competitive and tend not to help each other. This in turn turns the professors against pre-med kids. Grades wise, I wish I had gone to some other place where I could have gotten a much higher GPA. Of course, all this is only true if you are a middle-of-the-pack student like I am. A 4.0 kid in SD will probably get the same in LA and Cal.
The good thing about Cal is that it is very easy to get into research.

BUT, the discussion really doesn't atter b/c medschools don't, for the most part, care where you go to school.
 
As a Cal student, I have to say that it is extremely difficult here. I studied for o-chem with friends in SD, LA and Davis and they were not up the standards of Cal.
The bad thing about Cal is that, I felt that the professors don't really like teaching. Most of them are into research and feel that teaching is a waste of time. I had a sociology professor tell this to me straight up. The lack of a medical school also really hurts Cal's pre-med population. It is an hour-and-a-half travel to SF. Also, there are practically no pre-med advisors. You have to figure out everything by yourself, which kind of sucks. People here are extremely competitive and tend not to help each other. This in turn turns the professors against pre-med kids. Grades wise, I wish I had gone to some other place where I could have gotten a much higher GPA. Of course, all this is only true if you are a middle-of-the-pack student like I am. A 4.0 kid in SD will probably get the same in LA and Cal.
The good thing about Cal is that it is very easy to get into research.

BUT, the discussion really doesn't atter b/c medschools don't, for the most part, care where you go to school.

Maybe it's just your friends. I'm sure there are students at UCLA, UCSD, UCI, UCD, etc who could smoke Cal students in ochem and vice versa. A great school isn't going to make someone a great student.
 
i would smoke idleburra in o-chem
 
The difference between various UCs is much smaller than the difference between UC and CSU. Adcoms and premedical advisers at both systems admit that there is bias against CSUs. And it is a fact that students at the UCs who get weeded out in biology transfer to CSU so that they can pass. This comes from a CSU adviser. The exodus from UC to CSU happens every year and med schools in CA know about this.
Haha naah man. I disagree. I didn't know any UC "transfers" at my undergrad. The UC students that were there were doing a postbacc or earning a masters. Secondly, if someone couldn't "hack it" at a UC then you would see multiple universities on their amcas with an obvious difference in grades. I doubt adcoms are ignorant enough to "assume" that CSU grads are actually UC students in disguise that couldn't hack it.

Furthermore, I took bioinformatics at a UC and the coursework wasn't anymore difficult than the material at a state. And for my med school classes, the CSU gave me plenty of prep.

Final thought, the value of your undergrad is not nearly as drastic as sdn premeds make it out to be. If you're a star, you're a star.
 
As a Cal student, I have to say that it is extremely difficult here. I studied for o-chem with friends in SD, LA and Davis and they were not up the standards of Cal.
The bad thing about Cal is that, I felt that the professors don't really like teaching. Most of them are into research and feel that teaching is a waste of time. I had a sociology professor tell this to me straight up. The lack of a medical school also really hurts Cal's pre-med population. It is an hour-and-a-half travel to SF. Also, there are practically no pre-med advisors. You have to figure out everything by yourself, which kind of sucks. People here are extremely competitive and tend not to help each other. This in turn turns the professors against pre-med kids. Grades wise, I wish I had gone to some other place where I could have gotten a much higher GPA. Of course, all this is only true if you are a middle-of-the-pack student like I am. A 4.0 kid in SD will probably get the same in LA and Cal.
The good thing about Cal is that it is very easy to get into research.

BUT, the discussion really doesn't atter b/c medschools don't, for the most part, care where you go to school.

thats b.s..ive heard the same thing from students at davis about the other, ucla about the others, sd about the others, sb about the others (which is just absurd)..heck, ive even heard that from nyu kids talking about columbia kids and wisconsin kids talking about michigan kids. someone has always studied with kids from another school back home and realized that those kids from other schools were not as good as their own schools...its just another way of patting ones own back...how about this...my friends at cal dont seem to be as smart as my friends at usc, and for damn sure, arent as smart as my friends at stanford. and i go to neither. in all honesty, at least to me, and i spend alot of time in berkeley with friends of mine that go there, that cal kids are no different from the kids at other UC's, except that they like to ACT smarter, throw what they know in your face, even if you know more than they do on a subject, are more pretentious and like to use the excuse, i go to cal.

to the op: id go to cal over the other uc's, great sports, great location (i like the grimey feel of the campus and there is tons to do and eat on telegraph), great fraternities and sororities (if you are into that), skates on the bay, ghetto gourmet, great shopping on telegraph( not as good as harvard, but they have an h&m, shiekh shoes, urban outfitters..to name a few) and you get all this with a "college town" feel...just dont let it turn you into one of these pretentious and pedantic a-holes that cal tends to change its students to simply because they go to "CAL"...and if you ever find yourself saying "well, my GPA sucks becuase i go to Cal, and Cal is so much harder"..please, slap yourself.
 
thats b.s..ive heard the same thing from students at davis about the other, ucla about the others, sd about the others, sb about the others (which is just absurd)..heck, ive even heard that from nyu kids talking about columbia kids and wisconsin kids talking about michigan kids. someone has always studied with kids from another school back home and realized that those kids from other schools were not as good as their own schools...its just another way of patting ones own back...how about this...my friends at cal dont seem to be as smart as my friends at usc, and for damn sure, arent as smart as my friends at stanford. and i go to neither. in all honesty, at least to me, and i spend alot of time in berkeley with friends of mine that go there, that cal kids are no different from the kids at other UC's, except that they like to ACT smarter, throw what they know in your face, even if you know more than they do on a subject, are more pretentious and like to use the excuse, i go to cal.

to the op: id go to cal over the other uc's, great sports, great location (i like the grimey feel of the campus and there is tons to do and eat on telegraph), great fraternities and sororities (if you are into that), skates on the bay, ghetto gourmet, great shopping on telegraph( not as good as harvard, but they have an h&m, shiekh shoes, urban outfitters..to name a few) and you get all this with a "college town" feel...just dont let it turn you into one of these pretentious and pedantic a-holes that cal tends to change its students to simply because they go to "CAL"...and if you ever find yourself saying "well, my GPA sucks becuase i go to Cal, and Cal is so much harder"..please, slap yourself.
gottem
 
That's amazing. When I said "public ivy" I had no idea that it is an actual term. You probably randomly googled my phrase and came across that information. According to that book, you would be correct, but my phrase was an unofficial approximation. I'd be curious to know as to why the rest of the UCs were suddenly excluded. It seems pretty random to say that UCI is an "ivy" but UCR or UCSC are not. Merced is a brand new school, so maybe that's understandable, and since UCSF has no undergrad, it should be "6 out of 9," not "out of 10." Note that the guy who originally created this list was and admissions director at UCSC and included ALL UCs in the list. Then someone else came along and "expanded" the list by dropping two UCs. There better be a really good reason for that as this ranking sounds completely random.

haha, naw, ive actually known that term for a long time now.
 
lol ditto, we all use the same book, a professor from DAVIS and Berkeley wrote the ochem book...

huh? do you guys use the Brown/Foote one? at least thats what we used, but its been like 4 years since I took o-chem.
 
As a Cal student, I have to say that it is extremely difficult here. I studied for o-chem with friends in SD, LA and Davis and they were not up the standards of Cal.
The bad thing about Cal is that, I felt that the professors don't really like teaching. Most of them are into research and feel that teaching is a waste of time. I had a sociology professor tell this to me straight up. The lack of a medical school also really hurts Cal's pre-med population. It is an hour-and-a-half travel to SF. Also, there are practically no pre-med advisors. You have to figure out everything by yourself, which kind of sucks. People here are extremely competitive and tend not to help each other. This in turn turns the professors against pre-med kids. Grades wise, I wish I had gone to some other place where I could have gotten a much higher GPA. Of course, all this is only true if you are a middle-of-the-pack student like I am. A 4.0 kid in SD will probably get the same in LA and Cal.
The good thing about Cal is that it is very easy to get into research.

BUT, the discussion really doesn't atter b/c medschools don't, for the most part, care where you go to school.

walking?
 
i would smoke idleburra in o-chem

I am sure you would. I really suck at o-chem. We were using the practice exams from Berkeley and they were not able to do them... but, it could just be my friends.

The hour-and-a-half includes waiting for busses, walking from home to bus stop etc. If you have a car... obviously, the timing is different.

I was told, by people who transferred from Davis, that Berkeley was more competitive and harder to do well at.

On the flip side, I could just be bitter that haven't gotten in anywhere and could be rationlizing my crappy gpa by saying that Berkeley is harder. Someone wrote that I should slap myself because I complained that my gpa was low because I go to Cal. Done and done. Seriously, I get it. I am not at the top of the class and I only meant to voice the opinion of an average kid. However, there's no need to call me "pretentious and pedantic a-hole." Seriously, calm yourself. If you don't agree with what I said, there is a nice way to say that. The op asked for an opinion and I gave mine. If I was not supposed to do that, well, just let me know politely and I will shut up. Cal is a great school, but it is also harder than many.
 
Last edited:
Haha naah man. I disagree. I didn't know any UC "transfers" at my undergrad. The UC students that were there were doing a postbacc or earning a masters. Secondly, if someone couldn't "hack it" at a UC then you would see multiple universities on their amcas with an obvious difference in grades. I doubt adcoms are ignorant enough to "assume" that CSU grads are actually UC students in disguise that couldn't hack it.

Furthermore, I took bioinformatics at a UC and the coursework wasn't anymore difficult than the material at a state. And for my med school classes, the CSU gave me plenty of prep.

Final thought, the value of your undergrad is not nearly as drastic as sdn premeds make it out to be. If you're a star, you're a star.

Students who transfer from UC to CSU probably don't constitute a large number. The significance here is not the number of students, but rather the process demonstrating that classes are probably harder at some UCs than at some CSUs. I know you went from CSU to UCSF and that's a great accomplishment, but I am talking about general trends here. My sources are advisers at both school systems. One of the CSU advisers specifically told me that every year they get students from UCI who transfer to their CSU because of the inability to even pass the biology at UCI.

Having attended a CC myself, I appreciate the difficulties of the lower ranked schools, be it a CC or CSU. But the real issue here is what adcoms think of your education and they don't hold CCs or CSUs in highest regard. Looking over the statistics, to me it seems that CSUs don't affect you much if you are URM and if you're not, your chances of getting any acceptance without a post-bacc and other extra work depend on a very high GPA. White applicants from UCs don't seem to have so much trouble getting into medschool with sub 3.6. At CSUs, that's not the case from what I have seen. That's why I decided to not go there. And to be fair, CSUs really don't have the resources that UCs have and you end up with less EC opportunities, especially research.
 
Which of these 3 UC schools are best for pre-med/ med school?
1. UCLA
2. CAL (I KNOW THEY DONT HAVE A MED SCHOOL)
3. UCSD

and is it true that med schools favor their pre-med students? By this i mean would UCLA look down on me if I did my pre- med at UCSD?

Actually...
1.Berkeley ( UC SF used to be its med school )
2. UCSD
3. UCLA
 
Top