Help! I can't seem to decide between the two programs. Tri-I is such a research giant and the program is so well run. UCSF's program has a better medical school (as well as awesome research) but seems to be less organized. My research interests are diverse (Cancer, Biophysics, Immunology, Neuroscience)...I'm not particularly attached to any type of research. Any thoughts?
Cornell Tri-I or UCSF?
- Thread starter invt
- Start date
B
b&ierstiefel
Both are great programs. I voted based on my location preference (sorry, not a big fan of NYC).
P.S. These polls are better if they're not public polls.
P.S. These polls are better if they're not public polls.
- Joined
- Jun 17, 2004
- Messages
- 256
- Reaction score
- 0
I say Cornell because I think San Francisco is way overrated. I forgot where you are from, but unless you are just really looking for the California experience, I would go for New York. UCSF is an awesome place though. My only problem with it was that it didnt have a very academic feel, which was something that I was looking for.
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2004
- Messages
- 67
- Reaction score
- 0
invt said:
For the types of research that you're looking at, I think UCSF really has an edge (okay maybe not cancer, since there's Sloan-Kettering). But even if you're not attached to any particular research field, you should still choose UCSF for academic reasons. UCSF has a better overall reputation for research and medicine than any of the three institutions at Tri-I.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2001
- Messages
- 1,066
- Reaction score
- 19
invt said:
First, I would like to congratulate you on having two excellent options.
Currently, I am mid-way through UCSF's MSTP. I interviewed at both UCSF and Cornell (in addition to many other programs) and ultimately decided on attending UCSF for several reasons. As becoming a physician-scientist is a major goal of mine, I wanted to go to a place that offers extremely strong training in both medicine and basic research. In addition, location was very important to me and I fell in love with San Francisco; the beautiful views, culture, art, superb restaurants, nearby getaways (wine country, mountains/hiking, Monterey, etc) and such.
The program itself has become vastly more integrated and improved since Art Weiss took the helm as director a few years ago. The program has expanded to 12 per year, indicating strong support from the Dean, and helping form a crtical mass of MSTP students on campus. The time to graduation has steadilty been decreasing--last year 2 students graduated in 7 years total. I would say the average is somewhere around 8.5 at this point, but that is still inflated due to more senior students who were around before many of the changes. There is a whole batch who are returning to medical school this summer that will take 8 years total to graduate. I am on course for 7 or 8 years total.
Some of the changes:
-laboratory rotations during the summers before and after the first year of medical school.
-reduced class time (new curriculum) during the 1st two years of medical school, allowing you to take more graduate classes earlier.
-streamlined graduate program requirements (2 rotations, fewer course requirements)
-some graduate programs waive the teaching requirement
-requirement to have an MSTP council member on your thesis committee.
-requirement to have a committee meeting every 6 months.
For integration:
-ability to take graduate courses, complete lab rotations during medical school
-a 1st & 2nd year medical sciences journal club (I helped start this) that now regularly has 30+ students in attendance.
-ability to complete 1-2 clinical rotations before starting Ph.D.
-optional clinical preceptorship of your choice during Ph.D. years
-Basic Science of Disease journal club (students & faculty present basic disease-oriented research papers, clinical background)
-MSTP Grand Rounds (clinical cases for students in the graduate years to stay familiar with clinical reasoning, medical knowledge, etc)
As you can see there are abundant opportunities available here for integration. One of things that has impressed me greatly is the diversity and accomplishments of people in the medical school class. It is quite enriching to talk to other students who at one time were teachers, lawyers, military, investment bankers, social workers, basketball players, etc.
To be sure, the case could be made for NYC and the TriI program. It is an extremely tight ship, with Olaf pushing people through. Others (like Habari) can better comment on these things, and choosing between the two programs.
I apologize for the length of this post, but as you can probably tell, I am very excited to be at UCSF. Ultimately, you have to decide what factors are most important to you and where you will feel the most comfortable. Good luck and let us know what you decide!
- Joined
- Feb 20, 2003
- Messages
- 483
- Reaction score
- 1
i had this choice a couple years ago and came here. vader, as usual, has spoken well and made a good case for ucsf. the things i would mention is that the integration at triI has been great for a long time - the offered courses [including rockefellers full catalogue, which is available during ones first two years - and not at all a stretch to take], programs, and activities throughout are excellent and well run.
the graduation times here have always been reasonable [~7.5]. this allows for a 4 year phd [with people taking more or less time], because our medical school segment is 3.5 years [the universally agreed upon 'dead' time in the 4th year has been removed at ours and most other programs]. also - i fear that olaf's powers are limited with regards to pushing us through, he doesn't sit on our thesis commitees, nor can he request that we 'be finished' if the commiteee isn't satisfied. nevertheless, he does make sure that each and every student isn't getting an unecessarily hard time, but by an large, the process is student driven - with an eye on getting out in a reasonable time. and this translates into something measurable: one has to just look at what our alumni are doing/where they are - burn out and frustration with medicine/science hasn't been an issue.
the issues that clinched the decision was the sense that despite changes in ucsf's program, it was still not particularly integrated*, and that the graduation times weren't going to drop substantially because of the structure of the graduate programs and california state law requiring the full 2 clinical years. concomittantly, i simply found the tri-institutional allure to be greater; perhaps because the three institutions are packed in such a relatively small area, there is definitely a different feel and ethos to the place. after two years of medical school, i'll will definitely miss my classmates [they aren't gone yet!], but there is a large cadre of md/phds here who share quite a bit of camaraderie. i like sf and nyc both greatly for different reasons, but i thought nyc would be best for this segment of my training/life. i certainly can't compare that aspect my experience, but i have the feeling that it has been true. i suppose coastal alliegances have a large impact on preference, and i'll leave that up to you. best of luck.
*a note about 'program integration': i'm not looking for hand-holding our excessive structure; rather an institutional acknowledgement that the needs of an md/phd student are in many ways different from those pursuing either degree alone. it puts the 'program' into mst'p'.
- Joined
- Jun 5, 2001
- Messages
- 1,066
- Reaction score
- 19
I think Habari makes an excellent case for TriI.
Just one note to clarify what he mentioned regarding California state law: while it is true that more clinical weeks (I don't have the precise number) are mandated by state law than other states, it is not generally thought to play a significant role in extending time to graduation.
In fact, the new medical school curriculum (now a few years old--my class was the first to go through it), is very streamlined. The basic science portion ends in early April and you study for and take Step I. In the 4th year of medical school, there is more elective time, which translates into reduced requirements for MSTPs since the thesis work counts toward electives.
Historically, at UCSF the major hold-up has been the lack of integration between medical and graduate school. This is simply no longer the case--and I have outlined in detail the changes that have been made to address these issues. Students only within the last few years have been completing lab rotations and taking graduate classes during the 1st two years of medical school--so the effects of these changes will manifest within the next couple of years.
The MSTP director, associate directors, program administrators, Dean of the medical school (i.e. institutional support) are all very confident that the changes will considerably reduce overall graduation times. In fact, I have alluded to some recent graduates who have finished in 7 years total and we strongly believe that this will become very common for all the new MSTP classes that have started within the last few years.
The bottom line is that we are really splitting hairs when talking about all these program details. You will receive excellent medical and scientific training at either program, and graduates of each become leaders in their respective fields. As Habari alluded to, it really comes down to what place fits you the best and where you can see yourself spending the next 7-8 years of your life. Good luck!
Just one note to clarify what he mentioned regarding California state law: while it is true that more clinical weeks (I don't have the precise number) are mandated by state law than other states, it is not generally thought to play a significant role in extending time to graduation.
In fact, the new medical school curriculum (now a few years old--my class was the first to go through it), is very streamlined. The basic science portion ends in early April and you study for and take Step I. In the 4th year of medical school, there is more elective time, which translates into reduced requirements for MSTPs since the thesis work counts toward electives.
Historically, at UCSF the major hold-up has been the lack of integration between medical and graduate school. This is simply no longer the case--and I have outlined in detail the changes that have been made to address these issues. Students only within the last few years have been completing lab rotations and taking graduate classes during the 1st two years of medical school--so the effects of these changes will manifest within the next couple of years.
The MSTP director, associate directors, program administrators, Dean of the medical school (i.e. institutional support) are all very confident that the changes will considerably reduce overall graduation times. In fact, I have alluded to some recent graduates who have finished in 7 years total and we strongly believe that this will become very common for all the new MSTP classes that have started within the last few years.
The bottom line is that we are really splitting hairs when talking about all these program details. You will receive excellent medical and scientific training at either program, and graduates of each become leaders in their respective fields. As Habari alluded to, it really comes down to what place fits you the best and where you can see yourself spending the next 7-8 years of your life. Good luck!
