Can I make it to a UC?

[CogitoErgoSum]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi,

I'm currently applying with a 3.66 and a 30Q on MCAT. Do you think I have any chance at a UC? And how can I enhance my chances?

Thanks,
To die is nothing, but to live in defeat is to die everyday.

 

[Street Philosopher]

maybe

as far as raising your chances... lots of ways.

1. retake mcat
2. write compelling personal statement + secondaries
3. practice doing interviews
4. do not wear hunter green

 

[UCLAMAN]

I had similar stats(higher gpa and similar mcat) but didn't get an interview at any of the UCs. I had 11 interview invites, 3 accepts, and a bunch of waitlists. I was even waitlisted at Stanford but couldn't even score an interview from UCI...go figure.

Honestly...with your stats(based on that alone), its really a crapshoot with the UCs. I know people with lower stats than you and I who got interviews at UCLA and UCSD. I agree with streetphilosopher...if u get your mcat score to a 33 or higher then you probably will have a better chance at getting into a UC. California just has too many applicants than the UCs can accept. There are sooo many cali residents with stats like yours that its really a crapshoot. You never know what will happen. Raising your stats is one of the best ways to improve your chances.

 

[CogitoErgoSum]

Well, let say I have a lot of good extracurricular activities and good letters of rec. Would that be enough?

 

[Street Philosopher]

personally, my hunch is that your essays and interviews are very important. it's not so much about having the right activities, but also writing/talking about your activities in the right way... like what you got from the experience, etc.

let's just say that with a 3.66 30Q, you won't be rejected solely based on your stats alone. it will not help you (unless you are urm), and there is a small chance that it will hurt you. my guess is that it will do neither, and other things (activities, LOR, interviews) will become much more important.

 

[LJoo83]

I don't live in Cali so therefore I don't understand the UC system; and I don't venture out this far often, so...

Why is it so difficult to get into a UC med school? This poster had great stats....so great that he shouldn't even ask if he has a chance for a UC school.

 

[Street Philosopher]

because of several factors

1. CA has the largest number of premeds in the nation
2. the number of premeds far outnumber the available spots at CA schools
3. UC schools all have great reputations
4. UC schools are inexpensive
5. California has great weather

 

[deez4life]

Originally posted by LJoo83
This poster had great stats....so great that he shouldn't even ask if he has a chance for a UC school.

Three of the UC med schools are in the top 20. Average stats will get you nowhere in sunny Cali.

 

[LJoo83]

got it...thanks for the prompt reply. 🙂

 

[UCLAMAN]

Originally posted by CogitoErgoSum
Well, let say I have a lot of good extracurricular activities and good letters of rec. Would that be enough?

Everyone in cali has "good extracurricular activities" and "good" LORs.

I had good extra curriculars and good LORs(research scholarship, publications, a leader in several volunteer programs, LORs written by the paid head honchos of the programs, etc.)...I really think to help improve your chance at a UC its all about stats(assuming you have good ec's and good LORs)

I'm not saying you don't have a chance at the UC's...My point is that unless you have a 3.85 and mcat>33 you really never know what the UC's will do with you because a lot of californians have those stats and "good EC's" and "good LORs."

 

[SaltySqueegee]

Don't forget that UC schools pull ~97% of their matriculants from California only, the other 3% are from other states participating in WICHE and MD/PhD applicants that smoke enough crack to complete the long sought after ideal medical school pre-reqs:

Saved the world from a meteor.
Came up with a cure for cancer (in general).
Currently being published for their new AIDS drug discovery.
and has a good gpa 4.1 with MCAT score of 47Z

... just in case you were wondering...

 

[meanderson]

street philosopher, that's a really low class move(you know what I'm talking about). that's all.....

 

[calipremed]

Here are the numbers from US News 2004.

selectivity score (the lower, the more selective)/average GPA/average MCAT/acceptance rate/ranking

UCSF: 9 3.75 11.2 5.8% 6
UCLA: 22 3.68 10.6 4.6% 14
UCSD: 13 3.78 10.9 7.1% 16
UCI: 20 3.69 10.7 7.2% 52
UCD: 48 3.52 10.4 6.0% 53

Refer to http://www.studentdoctor.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64058&perpage=20&pagenumber=2 to compare with other schools. And yes, US News started ranking schools below 50 this year, down to 69. Like rankings in that range matter.

Regarding Street Philosopher's list:
1. Haven't seen these numbers but sounds believable
2. see above
3. UCSF certainly does, UCLA and UCSD have good reputations...
4&5. extremely true, though really contributors to #2, as is #3

To the OP: Doesn't look like your numbers will keep you out. However, the UC's are really unpredictable with their admissions, so don't count on anything.

 

[exmike]

Originally posted by calipremed
Here are the numbers from US News 2004.

selectivity score (the lower, the more selective)/average GPA/average MCAT/acceptance rate/ranking

UCSF: 9 3.75 11.2 5.8% 6
UCLA: 22 3.68 10.6 4.6% 14
UCSD: 13 3.78 10.9 7.1% 16
UCI: 20 3.69 10.7 7.2% 52
UCD: 48 3.52 10.4 6.0% 53

Refer to http://www.studentdoctor.net/forums/showthread.php?s=&threadid=64058&perpage=20&pagenumber=2 to compare with other schools. And yes, US News started ranking schools below 50 this year, down to 69. Like rankings in that range matter.

Regarding Street Philosopher's list:
1. Haven't seen these numbers but sounds believable
2. see above
3. UCSF certainly does, UCLA and UCSD have good reputations...
4&5. extremely true, though really contributors to #2, as is #3

To the OP: Doesn't look like your numbers will keep you out. However, the UC's are really unpredictable with their admissions, so don't count on anything.

I've noticed this before. Isn't it odd how ucsd AND uc IRVINE's numbers are higher than UCLA? Does UCLA's pimp ass med center make that much of a difference?

 

[nanosomic]

Originally posted by CogitoErgoSum
Hi,

I'm currently applying with a 3.66 and a 30Q on MCAT. Do you think I have any chance at a UC? And how can I enhance my chances?

Thanks,
To die is nothing, but to live in defeat is to die everyday.

I think you have a chance. Apply and see what happens. Some people with similar stats do get accepted. Goodluck

 

[gogiants]

Originally posted by CogitoErgoSum
Hi,

I'm currently applying with a 3.66 and a 30Q on MCAT. Do you think I have any chance at a UC? And how can I enhance my chances?

Thanks,
To die is nothing, but to live in defeat is to die everyday.

are you male or female? i think that actually is significant also. if you are female you have a better chance with those stats then if you are male. just my thoughts.

 

[Street Philosopher]

Originally posted by exmike
I've noticed this before. Isn't it odd how ucsd AND uc IRVINE's numbers are higher than UCLA? Does UCLA's pimp ass med center make that much of a difference?

Numbers don't tell the whole story. UCLA can afford to take a reputation hit (numbers wise) in order to get what they want (diversity).

 

[CogitoErgoSum]

Too bad I'm a male. Moreover, I'm asian too. There goes my chances...

Thanks everyone for the encouragements!!!

 

[Radiant Baby]

It certainly doesn't hurt to try!! The application process is such a CRAPSHOOT anyway... True, UCs are tough to get into, but you won't know unless you try. Personally, I had a pretty low GPA (3.4 combined, something pathetic like a 3.2 in science) 36 MCAT score and I got into two UCs (UCI and UCD) and two top-25 schools. You probably know this already, but just apply to a variety of schools-- you just never know which schools will call you up for an interview...

 

[meanderson]

Does the moderator in here have any respect for this forum?? If so, do something about Street philosopher. Aside from the legal questions surrounding his picture, it clearly shows a tremendous lack of class and is an embaressment to this forum.

 

[quideam]

legal issues surrounding his picture? what are you talking about?

 

[meanderson]

It's the girl involved in the kobe bryant rape case. Colorado law prohibits certain outlets from giving the picture/name of the alleged victim in any sexual assault case. I have no idea whether or not this forum falls under that jurisdiction, but something like that clearly violates the decent standards of this forum. Whether it is legal or not, the moderator really needs to take the pic off.

 

[spinestudent]

That's not correct dude. Now the media and friends of the girl are saying that most of the prom pictures being posted aren't even her, including the one posted by SP. So now what we have is a picture posted of a posible rape victim whose identity is attempted to be shielded which may actually be a picture of a different girl alltogether. Which may even be worse than posting the real picture of the girl. Either way the picture needs to be removed until most reputable media outlets are showing it

 

[Street Philosopher]

Look, I think the deal with hiding the identity of the ALLEGED victim but not the ALLEGED perpetrator is a double standard. The racist hicks in Eagle CO plastered Kobe's mugshot everywhere and arrested him and made a public press conference about it before even charging him with a crime. But the ALLEGED victim's identity should somehow be kept private?

Well, you ask, if it was my daughter or whatever, would I want her identity revealed? Well guess what, if the ALLEGED perpetrator was my son or whatever, I wouldn't want his identity revealed either! Since Kobe's mugshot was plastered everywhere, I decided to do the same for the accuser. Call it renegade justice if you will, but I stand by my actions.

 

[profunda]

you guys who just look at numbers are a bit delusional, the reason being:

those numbers are strictly for undergrad gpa. med school consists of many nontraditional students who got their acts together after screwing around in undergrad to get a MS, MPH, PhD, postdoc, took years off to publish many papers or save a country, or some other significant experience that raise their qualification for med school. the fact that ucla's "numbers" (undergrad gpa) are lower doesnt mean they dont have more qualified students in their program.

Originally posted by exmike
I've noticed this before. Isn't it odd how ucsd AND uc IRVINE's numbers are higher than UCLA? Does UCLA's pimp ass med center make that much of a difference?