CSU or UC

[kdsingh24]

I'm getting ready to transfer in the next year or so and I was wondering, do pharmacy schools prefer students from a CSU or a UC?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Passion4Sci]

There's no preference at all, but as a matter of personal pride, UC all the way!

CSU professors are regurgitators, by and large, and do not produce original research like professors at UCs do.

Overall, UC has a better reputation. But, as far as Pharmacy schools are concerned, I really don't think it matters much (for now, anyway).

 

[Farmercyst]

There's no preference at all, but as a matter of personal pride, UC all the way!

CSU professors are regurgitators, by and large, and do not produce original research like professors at UCs do.

Overall, UC has a better reputation. But, as far as Pharmacy schools are concerned, I really don't think it matters much (for now, anyway).

CSUs are not generally equipped for original research the way UCs are, it's a matter of how the systems are segregated.

That being said, the majority of CA students admitted to USC are going to come from UCs, while only a select few from CSUs.
Primary feeder schools are USC, UCLA, Cal, UCSD, and UCI. We still get students from Cal-Poly, CSUN, and a few other CSU, just not many.
(I came from CSUSB myself).

 

[Passion4Sci]

However, that difference, however it was caused or however it is now propagated, makes a realistic impact on each schools' reputation.

 

[Farmercyst]

However, that difference, however it was caused or however it is now propagated, makes a realistic impact on each schools' reputation.

Agreed.

 

[confettiflyer]

UC for sure

 

[diastole]

I think it depends on what kind of a student you are. It has been a long time since I attended a UC but I remember having to compete against the top students of the state and they grade on the curve. If you can get in there, slug it out, and get top grades then chose the UC. It has a better reputation.

However, if you aren't necessarily that top student who can hold your own against brutal competition, maybe you should consider a CSU. You won't be competing against the top students so I imagine that you can earn a higher GPA there. You will be attending a school with a lesser reputation but a higher GPA makes up for a lot. Plus I imagine the reputation difference doesn't matter that much outside of California. With so many schools to keep track of, I doubt that someone on the East Coast is going to give much more than a passing thought to the difference between UCR and CSUN. However, I'm not in admissions so I can completely be wrong on this.

 

[Passion4Sci]

I think it depends on what kind of a student you are. It has been a long time since I attended a UC but I remember having to compete against the top students of the state and they grade on the curve. If you can get in there, slug it out, and get top grades then chose the UC. It has a better reputation.

However, if you aren't necessarily that top student who can hold your own against brutal competition, maybe you should consider a CSU. You won't be competing against the top students so I imagine that you can earn a higher GPA there. You will be attending a school with a lesser reputation but a higher GPA makes up for a lot. Plus I imagine the reputation difference doesn't matter that much outside of California. With so many schools to keep track of, I doubt that someone on the East Coast is going to give much more than a passing thought to the difference between UCR and CSUN. However, I'm not in admissions so I can completely be wrong on this.

UCLA and UC Berkeley are known countrywide. There's not a single CSU that is known outside of California.

 

[koercive]

With this decision consider the balance between how much you will learn vs. how much competition you will face.

If I had to redo my undergrad years, this would have been my main method of choosing where to attend.

I recommend a UC, which have you been accepted to?

 

[you2hotforme]

i say UC, I think by attending a UC you will be well prepared for pharmacy school. I think you will at CSU also, but you will have that competitive edge, and you will not be so "shock" how hard the competition will be. I think overall I would go with a UC, but it also depend on wat UC you go too...UCSD, UCB, AND UCLA ARE THE TOP TIER SCHOOLS, WHILE UCI, UCR, UCSB are middle tier, then the rest? I think thats wat the ranking was in '05..SO GO WITH UCLA UCB AND UCSD...

 

[sungieality]

i say UC, I think by attending a UC you will be well prepared for pharmacy school. I think you will at CSU also, but you will have that competitive edge, and you will not be so "shock" how hard the competition will be. I think overall I would go with a UC, but it also depend on wat UC you go too...UCSD, UCB, AND UCLA ARE THE TOP TIER SCHOOLS, WHILE UCI, UCR, UCSB are middle tier, then the rest? I think thats wat the ranking was in '05..SO GO WITH UCLA UCB AND UCSD...

I agree with most of this statement except I would not include UCR or UCSB in the "middle tier" schools. Where's Davis? That's definitely one of the top/middle UCs.

 

[you2hotforme]

sorry it was UCSB UCI and UCD typooo I mean UCD NOT UCR.

Source from the UC regents mag
Other Source from US News Ranking (mostly everyone look at this ranking)
TOP 3 UC SCHOOLS ARE UCB UCLA UCSD
NEXT 3 UCSD SCHOOLS UCI UCD UCSB
THEN I GUESS THE REST FALLS LAST TIER-UCR UCSC UCM

 

[confettiflyer]

It goes:

UCB/UCLA
UCSD
UCI/UCD
UCSB

UCR
UCSC

....

UCM

(obviously SF and Hastings are not included)


Yeah, go to a UC...however, if you didn't get into the top two-thirds of the UC system, just go to a state school for cheaper. I wouldn't pay UC fees for a degree from R, SC, or M. Remember, UC fees are the same system-wide...granted, even the lowest tier UC schools are in the top 50/100 nationwide (Merced excluded...they only get to brag about Mrs. Obama visiting for now, give them about 10 years to be ranked).

 

[koercive]

I think UCSB has been consistently ranking higher than UCI for the last few years (and maybe even davis)

 

[steveysmith54]

I agree withe everything diastole had to say.

I am a westernu student and have attended both uc and csu. I can say that my school looks at gpa (both science and cum), work experience, and you interview rather than what school u've attended. I have heard UCSF and USC might consider the school that you've attended although when asked they say they do not.

Back to what diastole was saying, CSU is a lot like CC in terms of delivery of their education. I like it more bc the profs are more into teaching than research. With the semester schedule you have more of an opportunity to learn the material which actually prepares you well for pharm school.

The UC system seemed very cut throat. A lot of large classes, curves that can really screw you ( only certain amnt of students can get A) and making you compete with your friends. I've seen a lot of very intelligent guys get screwed bc they slacked off a bit and got C's etc while at csu you can sometimes get by craming and get B's. But thats just my experiences...

So, ya you make the decision whatever that you're up for in terms of experience. Honestly, if you live next to a csu i wouldn't move just to attend a uc.

 

[confettiflyer]

I think UCSB has been consistently ranking higher than UCI for the last few years (and maybe even davis)

Not quite...all tied.

2009 rankings

 

[Passion4Sci]

Look at all those CSUs up there!

 

[diastole]

If I had to do it all over again, I'd choose Michigan. I like their fight song. It would give me a lifetime of pleasure if I had actually attended the school. Once you get past the next step like the first job or professional school, the prestige factor of your university doesn't do much for you. People judge you on what you have done lately. Might as well pick the school that will make you the happiest.

 

[ExpressMaiL]

I'm getting ready to transfer in the next year or so and I was wondering, do pharmacy schools prefer students from a CSU or a UC?

Transferring/requirement-wise, it's harder to transfer to a UC than a CSU. You should consider your major, area, moving costs, tuition costs, living costs, etc.

Knowing what I do now, I would personally transfer to a UC, but that's just me. My biggest factor in applying for college was money - tuition and living expenses.

About 5% of our class came from a CSU (~6 students).

 

[tomk]

if i had to repick my undergrad (i went to UCI)

i'd pick a team with a football team.

there is alittle bit of a UC bias within the UC system (it does exist), so you are probably at a disadvantage if you are applying to UCSF or SD.

pace and competition is alot stiffer in a UC than cal state, so it may prepare you a bit better, or could possibly crush your dreams of going into healthcare.

Here's a little bit of info that might help, at interviews, when school stats of those accepted and interviewed the year previous came up, the majority of interviewees and those accepted came from the UC system as opposed to the cal state. Don't know how you'd interpret that, but those are the stats.

 

[confettiflyer]

Hmm in my class, all the Californians are from:

UCSD
UCSD
UCI
Berkeley
UCR
UCR
UCR
UCI
UCSD
Cal Poly Pomona
Pepperdine

I'm in a small private pharm school in PA.

 

[Passion4Sci]

Who would leave CA to go to Penn? Ew >.>

 

[confettiflyer]

Who would leave CA to go to Penn? Ew >.>

CA is too competitive, haha...hence instead of spending 2-3 years improving my app, we came out here. They don't call it Filthadelphia for nothing!

 

[Passion4Sci]

CA is too competitive, haha...hence instead of spending 2-3 years improving my app, we came out here. They don't call it Filthadelphia for nothing!

I guess that works!

 

[MrBoba]

I only finished one year of college so far, but I would recommend just going where you are happiest, and where you have the most options available.

For my situation, going to the UC was a bad choice (I went to UCSB for a year). It was expensive as hell, I couldn't find a pharmacy close enough to me to work at, and I didn't achieve the GPA that I wanted, but that's entirely my fault.

I'm just saying there is more to think about than just whether or not pharmacy schools look at what school you went to, and I personally think that they do not. I chose UCSB because I wanted to see what it could offer, and it ended up not working out. I'm going back to community college and transferring to Cal Poly Pomona. Cheaper, theres TONS of pharmacies that I can solicit until they hire me, and I'm hoping that I can save my PharmCAS GPA through cc/CSU though I know that it's not a walk in the park either.

 

[UES Girl]

While statistics are certainly against CSU students, keep in mind that you are applying as an individual with personal accomplishments to your name. 😉

 

[confettiflyer]

keep in mind that you are applying as an individual

...who is being compared to everyone else.

going to the UC was a bad choice (I went to UCSB for a year). It was expensive as hell,

Try telling someone who goes to a lower ranked private school that UC is expensive as hell...they'll laugh in your face. Us Californians are spoiled when it comes to higher ed. We want the Ivy League at discount prices (and we by and large get it).

 

[Transformer]

...who is being compared to everyone else.



Try telling someone who goes to a lower ranked private school that UC is expensive as hell...they'll laugh in your face. Us Californians are spoiled when it comes to higher ed. We want the Ivy League at discount prices (and we by and large get it).

Wow! What?? UCs are expensive as hell now? (well yeah, if you compared UC tuition to that of CSU or Community colleges. Federal aid and the BOG should cover it all or at least most of it.) My friends who went to private schools would kill me if I told them that. They're still more than 40k or 50k in debt while I've already paid off my 17K for a UC degree.

If I were the OP, I would definitely go to a UC school after attending the first 2 years at a community college. UC degree at half the price.

 

[tomk]

while most people hated the curve, I personally loved it.
and no, its not because I ruined the curve (far from it)

i was a CC transfer who actually got better grades at a UC than CC. The reason? At a CC, i was always hovering around the B+/A- range on tests. This meant i got alot of B+'s which are essentially b's. However, at UCI, those B+'s became A's due to the curve because I scored the same no matter which school I attended. If you feel you are in the 90+ percentile of students no matter what type of school you are put in, the curve will help you. An off day on exams that would result in a B, will still probably net you an A if the exam is curved.

nothing better than getting a 60 on your exam, and finding out that a 55-100 was an A.

the curve helps some (like me), but i do understand that the pressure/competitive nature of the curve puts some people off.

and to those complaining about the limited number of people getting A's within a curve. If you score 90% on your exams in a UC you have no worries about being left out, from what i remember, to get an A on an exam consisted of scoring in the 60's and 70's.


also note to CC transfers, the majority of bio exams are not multiple choice at a UC (i dont remember buying any scantrons for bio classes). They may have a section, but alot of it is fill in.

 

[confettiflyer]

I know right, I have a top 50 (top 10 public) degree for ~$25k (I forgot how much I spent). I feel bad for the blokes spending $30k/yr for some random liberal arts college no ones heard of...seems kind of a waste (unless you're into that).

I remember reading an article about how a lot of those colleges are struggling and are merging with other institutions due to falling enrollment. Now, I look at my tuition bill ($30k) and get sad...I spent more in one year in pharm school than 4 years as an undergrad.

It was simple math, though. Either I was going to spend the 2-3 years getting an MA/upping my GPA to get into UCSF/UCSD for in-state tuition, or I was just going to go to the first school that would take me. Considering each year delayed = ~$120,000 lost, paying OOS tuition won.

 

[confettiflyer]

while most people hated the curve, I personally loved it.
and no, its not because I ruined the curve (far from it)

i was a CC transfer who actually got better grades at a UC than CC. The reason? At a CC, i was always hovering around the B+/A- range on tests. This meant i got alot of B+'s which are essentially b's. However, at UCI, those B+'s became A's due to the curve because I scored the same no matter which school I attended. If you feel you are in the 90+ percentile of students no matter what type of school you are put in, the curve will help you. An off day on exams that would result in a B, will still probably net you an A if the exam is curved.

nothing better than getting a 60 on your exam, and finding out that a 55-100 was an A.

the curve helps some (like me), but i do understand that the pressure/competitive nature of the curve puts some people off.

and to those complaining about the limited number of people getting A's within a curve. If you score 90% on your exams in a UC you have no worries about being left out, from what i remember, to get an A on an exam consisted of scoring in the 60's and 70's.


also note to CC transfers, the majority of bio exams are not multiple choice at a UC (i dont remember buying any scantrons for bio classes). They may have a section, but alot of it is fill in.

UCI technically eliminated the curve sometime in 2004, so A's were technically no longer "restricted" to the top 17%. I had to kinda push with the associate dean to get the memo out to professors who still structured their grades this way.

The curve is FANTASTIC so long as you outperformed your peers and remained 1SD above the statistical mean, in that way, you ride the curve forward. If you're in the bottom half, goodluck, you're falling backwards due to the curve.

And I don't know when you were at UCI or what classes you took, but the majority of my exams were multiple choice...only in my upper divs were they mixed multi/short answer.


Man I miss undergrad...when getting 40% raw on an exam often meant you were a god among gods, and you'd get an A in the class

 

[tomk]

UCI technically eliminated the curve sometime in 2004, so A's were technically no longer "restricted" to the top 17%. I had to kinda push with the associate dean to get the memo out to professors who still structured their grades this way.

The curve is FANTASTIC so long as you outperformed your peers and remained 1SD above the statistical mean, in that way, you ride the curve forward. If you're in the bottom half, goodluck, you're falling backwards due to the curve.

And I don't know when you were at UCI or what classes you took, but the majority of my exams were multiple choice...only in my upper divs were they mixed multi/short answer.


Man I miss undergrad...when getting 40% raw on an exam often meant you were a god among gods, and you'd get an A in the class

the thing i miss most is EEE, you can see exactly where you stand amongst your competition.

as for scantrons, I don't remember buying any for the 93-99 series (these are the only classes you need for pharm). Upper div definately not. Things might've changed since you left, from what i remember, the majority was fill in/short answer.

some profs had a caveat to their grading, if you scored a 90% on a test, you would still get an A no matter what the curve was. lol good luck with that.

The curve does foster some negativity amongst students though. At a CC i would pray/hope that i performed well. At UCI, I would pray,
"dear 7lb 3oz baby jesus, I pray that those chinese girls sitting in the front row will score a 63 on the exam, that way they will still get an A, and so will I. Thank you."

 

[Transformer]

I know right, I have a top 50 (top 10 public) degree for ~$25k (I forgot how much I spent). I feel bad for the blokes spending $30k/yr for some random liberal arts college no ones heard of...seems kind of a waste (unless you're into that).

I remember reading an article about how a lot of those colleges are struggling and are merging with other institutions due to falling enrollment. Now, I look at my tuition bill ($30k) and get sad...I spent more in one year in pharm school than 4 years as an undergrad.

It was simple math, though. Either I was going to spend the 2-3 years getting an MA/upping my GPA to get into UCSF/UCSD for in-state tuition, or I was just going to go to the first school that would take me. Considering each year delayed = ~$120,000 lost, paying OOS tuition won.

You made the right choice. Similar to your situation, I wasn't going to spent another 3 to 4 years to improve my dismal GPA to get into a UCSD/UCSF pharmacy school. I don't know about you, but I was so fed up with the UC undergraduate system (not extremely pleased with UC's "you are nothing but a number" experience).

Sadly enough, what I will spent in half a school year or 1 semester in pharmacy school is what I paid, for 5 years of UC undergrad.

 

[catchsomezz]

back to the OP:
i think UCs have a slightly better reputation/opportunities than CSUs; and among the UCs, the difference is even more slight.

regardless, i think GPA is king. if going to a UC means getting a 3.0 as opposed to a 3.5 @ a CSU, i'd opt for CSU.

ESP if you're set on pharmacy. IMO, the last degree you receive is what counts

 

[Passion4Sci]

Your distinction from 3.0 to 3.5 seems extreme to me, Catch. Sure, if you could go to a school which would all but assure you an A average vs. a school that'd make you work for a B- average, I guess everyone would choose the first school, all other things equal.

But really, I mean, how can you know for sure if you're going to get a 3.0 at UC Davis vs. a 3.5 at CSU Sacramento? I recognize that everyone has limitations in their scholastic prowess but at the same time I really don't think going to UCLA vs. CSULB is going to result in a net increase from 3.0 to 3.5 for everyone. My GPA hardly moved at all from Stanford to UCD (it actually went down .1), and most people would consider Stanford, the "West coast Ivy League" school that it is, to be far superior to UCD.

GPA isn't a rote, mathematically predictable thing in this way. You can't have OP choose whether to go to a CSU or a UC based solely on a 3.0 vs. 3.5 decision. No one can tell the future - Perhaps OP will appreciate the more academically rigorous UC environment and will flourish?

The OP's question is whether Pharmacy school AdComs prefer UC to CSU, irrespective of GPA and everything else. Assuming a 3.7 from either UC Los Angeles or CSU Sacramento, I would have to say that, being how UCs are considered in common knowledge to be far superior to CSU, the AdCom will look much more favorably upon the UC Los Angeles candidate.

 

[UES Girl]

...who is being compared to everyone else.

Yes, but at the same time be concerned about your own application, not the 1600 other applicants that are applying to the same school as you.

The whole UC vs. CSU dillema/rivalry will exist as long this pre-pharmacy forum will continue to function. I don't plan on engaging in this debate because I remember myself posting in at least 10 of identical threads.

 

[catchsomezz]

i agree; a jump from 3.0 to 3.5 is overly optimistic.
realistically estimating, i would say +0.2 is definitely in reach. in terms of class-by-class, +0.2 means that in half your classes you would have gotten the next higher grade eg. B+ instead of a B, A- instead of a B+.

 

[Transformer]

While statistics are certainly against CSU students, keep in mind that you are applying as an individual with personal accomplishments to your name. 😉

You have a point here.

When 2 applicants' GPAs are the same and both are above 3.5, so many different factors play into the admission decisions.

Many of us would agree a UC degree is looked upon more favorably than a CSU degree. This doesn't mean the degree alone will determine which of the two will be admitted over the other. I like to think other factors such as: Recommendations, pharmacy/research work and volunteer experiences, reapplication, personal statement, community services, and the level of dedication and understanding for the pharmacy field may play into the admission decisions.

Personally, between the two applicants I described above, I would admit the applicant with the most dedication and pharmacy experiences and the one who is a better fit for the school of pharmacy; in accordance to the pharmacy school's mission statements.

 

[jmcfa002]

I went to UCR for my first 2 years of undergrad. I transferred this year to CSUSB for my junior year. As far as difficulty, there was not much difference. I think prereq's like bio and ochem may even be harder here. They both have pros and cons. I was done w/ the main science prereq's in 2 years (gchem, ochem, physics, bio, and calc). I hated UCR though. The teachers were really impersonal and didn't seem to care much. Going to CSUSB was so much better. The teachers actually know your name and say hi in the halls. There is also more undergrad research available, @csusb atleast. I never heard about it at UCR. One of the downside's of csu's is the budget available. I've heard alot of classes are being cut.
Its really up to you though... just weight it out

 

[UES Girl]

As far as difficulty, there was not much difference. I think prereq's like bio and ochem may even be harder here. They both have pros and cons. I was done w/ the main science prereq's in

On the subject of difficulty of classes: I don't know why people always consider UC classes are harder than CSU. Why do UC students always asume they are getting superior education in that sense ?


At my school at least, for the last 2 years of my education, nearly every professor I had was a Berkeley professor who taught at CSU part time. My last semester I was taking a graduate class with masters students and we had a researcher from UCSF teach it.

Again: I don't like getting involved in UC vs. CSU debate but I am trying to emphasize, that if you are strong applicant you should not stress over which undergraduate instutition you attended.

 

[tomk]

UC has a higher school ranking, which attracts a higher caliber of students, and is on a curve,

grab a random cal state bio student, and pit him against a random UC bio student. Who are you going to bet on?

every school has ******s, and those who excel, but in general, the pool of students at a UC is gonna be a little bit smarter. IN GENERAL.

due to the competitiveness of attending a UC, general higher caliber students, and a curve makes the curriculum a bit tougher at a UC.

this is just general truth.

 

[ExpressMaiL]

UC or CSU... there is no literature or research on who gets in when the GPA is identical.

Simply put, there are too many OTHER factors the ad coms will consider. Such as... undergrad/masters GPA; science GPA; math GPA; english GPA; cumulative GPA; pre-pharm GPA; PharmCAS GPA; PharmCAS-prePharm GPA; number of dropped/W classes; years in undergrad; PCAT scores; number of PCAT attempts; in state or out of state; strength of personal statement/essay; LORs and LOR writers; work experience; volunteer experience; travel/study abroad experience; military experience; BREADTH of experience; athletics; extracurricular activities; undergrad institution; DUI/felony trouble; citizen or not; ESL; occupation history; punctuality and PC-ness of application; syntax/diction errors in application; consistency in application; ET CETERA.

It's an application process for these reasons - to see which 'applicant' is better suited and prepared for the demands of pharmacy school. Sure, someone can completely bull S4!7 their application... but the interview is there to see who you really are.

As for saying which class is harder - UC or CSU... there is absolutely no way of judging that, even if someone was to study the same major at both schools... it would still be biased, subjective and inadequate. One student may thrive in a ruthless environment while another does well with a lower student:faculty ratio. Aside from that, every [all] school has an exceptionally hard course, right?

The OP asked if pharmacy schools prefer students from a CSU or UC. Sorry, but having that type of mindset won't help you get into pharmacy school. If you attend a UC thinking, "Oh, as long as I have a decent GPA from this school, I can get in..." you're only hurting yourself in the long run.

Transfer to the school YOU want to go to, and work hard. Be committed in what you do, and show your passion through a good work ethic, strong LORs, competitive GPA and amazing ECs. Enough said.

 

[confettiflyer]

Yes, but at the same time be concerned about your own application, not the 1600 other applicants that are applying to the same school as you.

Mm disagree here.... if you're an unexceptional 2.9 student and you want to apply to UCSF, you should be concerned about the applicant pool/accepted student profile (ie all the other applicants) or else you're just wasting your time/money.

Also, if you are just starting your undergrad career and you can help what you go into (major, school, activities, etc...), you better think what the other 1600 students are up to so you don't look like some loser who didn't do anything when it comes to application time.