Harvard vs UCLA (Geffen Scholarship)

[Goljanoid234]

Hi Everyone, I’m looking for some help on this tough decision. Apologies for long post, but thank you for your input in advance. UCLA gave me a full cost-of-attendance scholarship (the Geffen scholarship), which includes tuition and an annual $32,000 stipend for room and board. I have been blessed enough to have also been admitted to Harvard, but with no scholarship/financial aid.

Basic information about myself: I am currently interested in going into ophthalmology but I’m not totally set on any specialty. My family does not qualify at all for Financial Aid at all so I am completely reliant on merit scholarships or I pay full cost of attendance anywhere. My family is graciously willing to help me with cost-of-living, but not able to help with tuition. I don't really want to go into academia/research, but I of course want to keep that door open, along with the possibility of working in pharma/consulting/biotech, although right now I think I just want to be a clinician. My family lives in the Midwest, so proximity to family/location is not an issue between these two schools. I would prefer to practice in the Midwest eventually, so not really in either of the areas of these two schools.

UCLA

Pros

+Geffen scholarship is a great deal as I would graduate with $0 loans and my family wouldn’t have to pay a cent.
+Could possibly fund my Roth IRA for 4 years in med school with some money I have saved up from gap year.
+I can do whatever specialty I want so if I’m interested in one of the lower-paying specialties, I have this freedom more since I don’t have to worry about loans.
+Beautiful weather. Minor point as I don’t think I’d be going to the beach much anyways. I'm pretty used to cold weather anyhow. Though, it would be a nice change.

Cons
-Curriculum is still 2 years preclinical, so less time after rotations to decide on a specialty. As I’m not set on a specialty yet, this is kind of a downside as I have less time for electives than in the case of Harvard.
-New location; no friends/family in the area whatsoever. However this probably shouldn’t be a problem since I’m going to build a new network in medical school anyways.
-Less prestigious in my mind.
-Perhaps limits my competitiveness for residency programs not on West Coast.

Harvard
Pros
+More prestigious in my mind. Not sure how much more so. Some people (especially one attending I know) have told me “It’s the best medical school in the known universe, you can’t turn it down.” If that's true, I'm wondering what would be the max limit someone would pay for Harvard before they said "That's too much." when they have the option not to pay at all? Is $360K above or below that limit?
+If I go into academia/pharma/biotech/consulting, Harvard could possibly help further my career and give me more prestige.
+1-year preclinical- gives me more time to decide on a specialty since I’ll have more time for electives earlier than if I went to UCLA. Since I’m not really decided yet, this extra time could really make me more decided/competitive for the specialty of my choice.
+Existing social network in Northeast.

Cons
-Total cost-of-attendance to me and my family is $360K (probably more since they raise tuition every single year) since we're not eligible for Financial Aid.
-My family can help me with cost-of-living ($120K over 4 years), but I would have to take a $240K loan for tuition.
-I think I’d be kind of self-coerced to pick a higher-paying specialty due to the loan, or at least due to the psychological factor that “I chose to pay $360K to go to Harvard over going to UCLA for free, so I need to make enough money to make my decision worth it.”

Summary: Is the prestige from Harvard worth taking a $240K loan over UCLA (in addition to the $120K my family would already be paying), given my career goals? Especially since I could graduate from UCLA with $0 loans and possibly some money saved up? Is a $240K loan actually that difficult to pay back considering that many medical students take on that much? What are the benefits, if any, of choosing Harvard over UCLA? How much of a difference will it make if I want to go into an extremely competitive specialty (Ophtho, Urology, Derm, or ENT)?

Thank you for your input.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[realitysickness]

Following. Very interested to see the discussion that ensues.

First of all, congratulations!! This is a wonderful problem to have!!

Second, I will say that I met two HMS first years on my interview day - one who turned down the Geffen to attend HMS and one who turned down Mayo (full tuition with stipend merit award) to attend HMS. Both said they did not qualify for much if any need based aid. The student who turned down Mayo said she would make the same decision again if she were to do it over. She went to Harvard for undergrad as well and already felt much more comfortable sticking around in Boston. She realized she didn’t want to live in Rochester, didn’t want a super small class size, etc. She also is strictly interested in clinical practice (ortho is what she is going for) not an academic career. The student who turned down the Geffen was less confident in his decision. He was very happy to be at Harvard and ultimately chose Harvard because he wanted an academic career and there were more opportunities at HMS for the research he was interested in. He also wanted the career network connections that an HMS education brings. But that being said, he was worried about the amount of debt he has to take on and seemed hesitant about whether all the debt was worth it. His family is also in SoCal so being away from them was another factor.

As someone also accepted to both schools (but without the Geffen), I would choose UCLA in a heart beat if I had been awarded the Geffen. But this is in part because for me cost is the number one deciding factor as I am interested in more low paying specialties of medicine. I know UCLA does have a renowned eye institute which is right up your alley if you choose to proceed with Optho.

Best of luck!

 

[meronebib]

I would choose UCLA.

1. There’s the money. It’s 240k + interest. Just imagine someone gave you a check for +300k now. That’s what UCLA is doing for you.

2. UCLA will not hinder you. Coming from Harvard may make it easier to get into a competitive residency program in the east coast (especially at MGH), but it’s not going to do magic. You still need the Step score. You still need the research. The name benefit is marginal, really, when it comes to T10 schools like this. Also, do you plan on working in a private practice or in an academic setting?

3. LA has significantly better weather than Boston, and the lifestyle at UCLA seems less stressful than at Harvard. Harvard has a pretty unique and rather rigorous curriculum (with the flipped classroom and whatnot) that you really need to consider when it comes to your wellness. UCLA has recorded lectures, and the students have tons of free time.

4. Harvard is more prestigious, yes. But putting “Geffen scholar” on your CV is also prestigious; it literally is probably the most well-known scholarship offered to medical students.

I hope this helps, and congratulations on your amazing acceptances!

Edit: Just saw that you’re not too interested in working in an academic setting. Harvard will benefit you more in an academic setting. So, more points for UCLA!

 

[Ms Procrastinator]

In regard to your question about how much more prestigious Harvard is, US News it at #1 and UCLA at #8, but what does it matter? They're both really good schools. It might suck to be so far away from your family but I think UCLA is the better choice since attending means you're going to be debt free. I think a lot of people find security in the fact that they're going to be doctors so the debt won't be that hard to handle but 240K in debt is no joke. I see a lot of doctors in residency (one's a Harvard grad) constantly worry about the amount of med school debt they have. It seems like no big deal now but it's probably gonna be a big deal in residency when you actually have the debt looming over your head. I don't think that the school you choose would make any sort of difference when you're trying to apply to uber competitive specialties since they're both top ten. Congrats on your acceptances!

 

[deleted962973]

I’ve posted this in couple of other threads, and I don’t want to get too repetitive, but >200,000 in debt (not even including interest) is life-altering. Yes you will almost certainly be able to pay it back, but you’ll need to plan your entire life around it for 5-10 years, if not more. That debt will be on your mind when you have children, when you buy a house, when you start saving for retirement, etc. In my opinion, if it’s avoidable, it’s just not worth it. Furthermore, I can’t imagine that having the Geffen scholarship on your resume would limit your residency options in any way. UCLA has a national reputation and I’m confident with good board scores, you could go anywhere.

I have a good friend who went to school in SoCal and the atmosphere there is incredible- great weather, beautiful scenery, generally more laid back people. The only downside is the cost of living, but on the Geffen, that’s no concern for you! UCLA has pretty robust research offerings in the life sciences given that it’s an Amgen site, and those are only at institutions with strong research programs. I don’t think you could go wrong with UCLA. Congratulations!

 

[Goljanoid234]

Thank you @realitysickness @meronebib @Ms Procrastinator @StanleyYelnats so much for your advice! I understand the arguments in favor of UCLA and that was my thought process as well. It looks SDN pretty strongly favors UCLA in this case.

However, I spoke to one attending I know today about this decision, and he genuinely thinks I should pick Harvard, knowing about the financial aspect and my career goals. He says that for any specialist who's making $300K a year or more, $240K in loans which I would have to take to attend Harvard is just a year's worth of salary spread out over several years. His argument was that for a specialist who will be an attending physician essentially from the age of 30 to 65 (retirement), their total income over their whole career would be more than $10 Million, and that the loans for Harvard would be well worth it to have that degree on your wall, increased respect from colleagues and patients, and possible higher-paying jobs in private practices, etc. He said if he were in my position, he would definitely pay to go to Harvard even with the option of going to UCLA for free. I talked to another attending and he gave me similar advice. Even though I don't think taking a $240K loan is something to be taken lightly, I have to say that his argument is enticing. How would you guys respond to this?

Thanks for your help.

 

[meronebib]

Thank you @realitysickness @meronebib @Ms Procrastinator @StanleyYelnats so much for your advice! I understand the arguments in favor of UCLA and that was my thought process as well. It looks SDN pretty strongly favors UCLA in this case.

However, I spoke to one attending I know today about this decision, and he genuinely thinks I should pick Harvard, knowing about the financial aspect and my career goals. He says that for any specialist who's making $300K a year or more, $240K in loans which I would have to take to attend Harvard is just a year's worth of salary spread out over several years. His argument was that for a specialist who will be an attending physician essentially from the age of 30 to 65 (retirement), their total income over their whole career would be more than $10 Million, and that the loans for Harvard would be well worth it to have that degree on your wall, increased respect from colleagues and patients, and possible higher-paying jobs in private practices, etc. He said if he were in my position, he would definitely pay to go to Harvard even with the option of going to UCLA for free. I talked to another attending and he gave me similar advice. Even though I don't think taking a $240K loan is something to be taken lightly, I have to say that his argument is enticing. How would you guys respond to this?

Thanks for your help.

Hey! So this is just my opinion as a lowly premed, but I'm going to have to disagree with these attendings. I don't think any patient, private practice, etc. will care about the medical school you went to. If anything, where you practice last (i.e. where you do your fellowship or your residency) is what's going to stand out most to academic colleagues, patients, etc. For medical school, everyone has different desires, but some common ones include being able to choose your residency (which is a lot less certain than being able to choose your own medical school), being near family, and, you guessed it, low cost. Looking at these factors, I think it's hard to beat the Geffen scholarship.

 

[fds86]

SDN's answer to this question will invariably land on the Geffen side (every year). Some people might say that's just because the Geffen is the objective correct path to take (and it certainly could be); however, I feel like a large part of it is the fact that the comparison is so abstract. Most of the people who'll end up commenting have interviewed at neither school, let alone had to make the same or a comparable choice. Because there's so little first-hand or qualitative data to employ, all they have to use to inform their judgement are easily obtainable quantitative facts. The only things that are really possible to objectively evaluate are that -240,000 is more bad than 0, and that #1 is more good than #8; BUT -240k being more bad than 0 is more bad than #1 being more good than #8 is good. Even though someone might argue that coming out of Harvard will pay for itself (either in career earnings or in non-monetary opportunities) there's nothing anyone can provide to prove that - the data (match lists, career outcomes, life satisfaction) is just so messy and complicated that no one could reasonably argue for any advantage. Therefore - Boom. Geffen. We're done here. Case closed. Goodnight.

For most people, the two schools don't really mean anything beyond their names and a very general sense/impression, but one has a bigger price tag - of course people are going to say go with the cheap one.

That's certainly not to imply some sort of elitism, or that people that didn't interview shouldn't provide input, or that following the money isn't the correct choice. Really, maybe the decision truly is that simple. Instead, what I mean to say is that you should take things with a grain of salt since opinions on here are going to be inherently reductive.

While it may sound unhelpful, I think you have to deploy your personal qualitative assessment of the two institutions to make your own choice (go to second looks to get a full assessment). Unfortunately people on SDN might not be able to help as much here. Having interviewed at both places, I can see why someone might choose Harvard over the Geffen. I can also see why someone would do the reverse, and think the former choice an absurd thing to do. I know people who've made either choice and have no regrets. Maybe you really liked Boston, the student atmosphere, the type of people there, the curriculum - like you felt some crazy euphoric emotion there, but very "eh" at UCLA. Or maybe you have some sort of connection, something pulling you there. Then it wouldn't be unreasonable to go H - yes, 240k is a substantial amount of debt that you'll have to plan around, but it's a pretty normal amount for people coming out of private med schools; in all likelihood you'd pay it off just fine and have a good quality of life. On the other hand, maybe you felt pretty indifferent, or liked Harvard only a little bit more, or maybe you preferred UCLA and are being neurotic about "prestige" - then just go with the cheaper of the two options and save that money for a nice house, a boat, or a gold-plated toilet.

So in summary, I think there's nothing you can truly "know" except that A) one is more expensive; B) one may be more "prestigious" in a ranking magazine; and C) one gives you a bump for matching at MGH/BWH/BID, the other a bump for matching UCLA. Anything beyond that is unverifiable conjecture - you'll have to fill in with your personal, unique, qualitative assessment.

 

[deleted962973]

Thank you @realitysickness @meronebib @Ms Procrastinator @StanleyYelnats so much for your advice! I understand the arguments in favor of UCLA and that was my thought process as well. It looks SDN pretty strongly favors UCLA in this case.

However, I spoke to one attending I know today about this decision, and he genuinely thinks I should pick Harvard, knowing about the financial aspect and my career goals. He says that for any specialist who's making $300K a year or more, $240K in loans which I would have to take to attend Harvard is just a year's worth of salary spread out over several years. His argument was that for a specialist who will be an attending physician essentially from the age of 30 to 65 (retirement), their total income over their whole career would be more than $10 Million, and that the loans for Harvard would be well worth it to have that degree on your wall, increased respect from colleagues and patients, and possible higher-paying jobs in private practices, etc. He said if he were in my position, he would definitely pay to go to Harvard even with the option of going to UCLA for free. I talked to another attending and he gave me similar advice. Even though I don't think taking a $240K loan is something to be taken lightly, I have to say that his argument is enticing. How would you guys respond to this?

Thanks for your help.

As a patient, I don’t know where most of my doctors went to med school. I doubt physicians are going to lose respect for a colleague just because he went to the #8 ranked school instead of #1, especially if he does his job well either way. Medicare reimbursements are awarded by procedure, not where you went to school- in fact, an NP performing a certain procedure will rake in the same cash as a fully fledged doc. Where is the attending you’re speaking to getting all these assumptions from? He sounds uninformed. This argument is simply a case for vanity- I can fully understand shelling out the cash for Harvard Law or a Harvard MBA, because the career options are very different than if you went to Podunk State, but as a doctor coming from any med school, and especially between med schools that are both in the top 10, your career prospects will be good regardless.

 

[Hydrochlorination]

redacted for anonymity

 

[bonedoc5576]

The Geffen is the top prize. One's medical career trajectory has more to do with the student's innate talent (and perseverance) than the name on the medical school sheepskin. Consider that some of medicine's greatest innovators (Michael DeBakey comes to mind) were trained and practiced outside of the ivory towers. All US medical schools are potential pathways to outstanding careers and it is laughable to think that some would argue that attending UCLA, an elite institution, would hold anyone back!

 

[574522]

HMS student here. I'd say the 'right' choice really depends on your career goals. A lot of students here turned down the Geffen or similar offers from peer universities, but that is largely due to aspirations very outside of clinical medicine (e.g. policy, tech, venture capital, etc..) for which Harvard offers unique opportunities. On the flip-side, I have a friend who took a Geffen-like offer to have the career flexibility and peace of mind offered by not dealing with a 3k/month debt payment (you're talking ~500k after interest), and is now coming to train at BWH so he'll still get that "Harvard-trained doctor" moniker.

I'd say put some thought into what your career goals are, and decide from there. Firstly, pick a city you'll be happy in for 4 years. If you want access to the full range of non-traditional career opportunities, HMS is probably worth the debt. If your primary goal is to be a kick ass clinician or clinical researcher, there's a strong argument to be made for UCLA.

Feel free to PM if you have any follow-up questions

 

[Lucca]

UCLA if your main goal is to practice medicine, do clinical or biomedical research.

 

[TRT7]

The reason that UCLA offers Geffen scholarships, is to lure students away from top-5 schools. If your academic performance in med school is similar to your undergraduate numbers, you'll be able to pick any residency you want coming out of UCLA. $300K is a lot of debt, and will take forever to pay off, even as a surgical specialist.

I think that there is probably some loss of prestige in going to any medical school that's not Harvard, but it won't hurt you at all if you want to train and practice on the west coast. Have a look at UCLA's match list.

I don't think that you are allowed to fund an IRA if you have no income.

 

[Lawpy]

UCLA hands down. You can do a lot of stuff you want to there, so cost here matters significantly.

 

[puahate]

UCLA

 

[TempuraOreos]

UCLA fammo. Top 10 no debt. Absolutely wurf.

 

[lalalallala]

I feel like people are acting like this any old state school vs top private school debate. UCLA is a fantastic top 10 school. It has great connections - it is very prestigious. If you want to go into venture capital then sure fine pick Harvard but otherwise it would be absolutely crazy to think that HMS is so much more prestigious and will hinder your match options. The reason if you look at UCLA's match list that you see a lot of California residency programs is because of self selection and the strength of many of those programs. It is not that UCLA students can't get residencies at top east coast programs. Pick UCLA so you can spend those hundreds of thousands on something enjoyable and worthwhile and so you don't feel like you have to pick a lucrative speciality.

 

[rball]

I agree completely with fds86. I want to give you my honest opinion as this choice isn’t as clear cut as most on this site would make it out to be. First, the rankings are worthless; it doesn’t matter that UCLA is considered a top 10 or that Harvard is considered 1 by a magazine ranking. What matters to you are the match outcomes/historical reputation amongst schools.

Coming out of Harvard will give you an extraordinary advantage when it comes to residency/fellowship/jobs etc, unless you really screw it up there. UCLA is a fantastic school, but just looking at the historical match outcomes of each school tells you that Harvard is in a different league. I can tell you as an intern here on west coast, Harvard has a sizeable reputation advantage over UCLA (which is still great), and students from Harvard are looked at differently than students from other schools when they do away rotations, are evaluated for match, etc. And this continues when you are considered for a fellowship and job. You’ll have a lot of premeds on this site insist this stuff doesnt exist, but once you get to the next step of your training you realize how much it matters. I think this is evidenced by your own discussion with two physicians who told you to take Harvard.


If you want to just practice clinical medicine, you are ready to absolutely gun for ophtho in medical school and are fine with matching anywhere (likely a west coast program), you should go with UCLA. It has a world class optho program (though unfortunately this doesn’t always translate down to the med students), and if you work hard there you will be successful in matching into this competive field. If you want to go into academic medicine on the west coast I’d still go with UCLA. However, if you want to become a leader in academic medicine, want to do anything outside medicine like pharma, consulting biotech, or simply Make it easier to match into top ophtho programs (esp on east coast), I think Harvard is the better option.

In either case you are doing the right thing by seeking out the advice of real-world attendings. Take all of the advice on this site, including my own, with a grain of salt. Best of luck!