How full is UCSF? and UCLA or UCSF?

[ItsAnotherOne]

---

Members do not see this ad.

How full is UCSF?

Would you rather go to UCSF or UCLA if you had the option?

 

[KAP]

UCLA is SOO Much better than UCSF... like omg.

 

[howui3]

UCLA is SOO Much better than UCSF... like omg.

hands down ucla for me.....see you there next year KAP

 

[kiggar4l2000]

How full is UCSF?

Would you rather go to UCSF or UCLA if you had the option?

UCSF was 50-60% full after Oct,Nov, and Dec Interviews. I heard it's pretty full by end of January (the class is small - so go figure). Most likely, the December interviewees who got accepted (and waited) finally decided to attend UCSF after hearing back from other schools. And January interviewees who got accepted, probably cashed in on the remaining spots - like me. I heard it's completely full by late Jan or early February...as in like right now.

 

[dat_student]

I voted for UCLA because for the past many years UCLA seems to have attracted more students with high AA & GPA. Plus, UCLA students do better on board exams and UCLA's specialization rate is much higher. These are the numbers for UCSF's graduating class in 2004:

UCSF:
Results of an online exit survey completed by 88 of 90 graduating DDS students, including international program students:

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery....2
Orthodontics.......................7
Pediatric Dentistry................1
Periodontology.....................2
Dental Public Health..............1
GPR....................................8
AEGD..................................6

12/90 = 13.3% [specialties]
27/90 = 30% [post-grad. programs including specialties]

This means only 12 students got accepted to specialty programs. The number seems very low. Harvard, UCLA, UPENN, Columbia, UCONN, even UMD seem to generate more specialists. UCSF was definitely my top choice before I looked at the stats. Now, if given the two options (i.e. UCLA & UCSF) I'd go for UCLA. I looked at the success of students when making my decision. In case you are wondering, my source is:
University of California, San Francisco
School of Dentistry magazine
Inaugural Issue / Fall 2004
page 27
P.S. Some of those 12 students might be international students.

specialization rate.......UCLA........vs..........UCSF
specialties.................50%.........vs..........13%
post-grad. programs....75%.........vs..........30%
[The difference is huge]

 

[Gargamel]

Welcome back!

 

[food4thots]

what's howard's specialty rate?

 

[drhobie7]

I voted for UCLA because for the past many years UCLA seems to have attracted more students with high AA & GPA. Plus, UCLA students do better on board exams and UCLA's specialization rate is much higher. These are the numbers for UCSF's graduating class in 2004:

UCSF:
Results of an online exit survey completed by 88 of 90 graduating DDS students, including international program students:

Oral & Maxillofacial Surgery....2
Orthodontics.......................7
Pediatric Dentistry................1
Periodontology.....................2
Dental Public Health..............1
GPR....................................8
AEGD..................................6

12/90 = 13.3% [specialties]
27/90 = 30% [post-grad. programs including specialties]

This means only 12 students got accepted to specialty programs. The number seems very low. Harvard, UCLA, UPENN, Columbia, UCONN, even UMD seem to generate more specialists. UCSF was definitely my top choice before I looked at the stats. Now, if given the two options (i.e. UCLA & UCSF) I'd go for UCLA. I looked at the success of students when making my decision. In case you are wondering, my source is:
University of California, San Francisco
School of Dentistry magazine
Inaugural Issue / Fall 2004
page 27
P.S. Some of those 12 students might be international students.

Match rate................UCLA........vs..........UCSF
specialties.................50%.........vs..........13%
post-grad. programs....75%.........vs..........30%
[The difference is huge]

I'm surprised by those numbers. I find it hard to believe that only 12 people out of 90 specialized. It makes me question the validity of the sampling method/questionnaire. Although you say 88 out of 90 students completed the questionnaire, I still am suspicious.

Another noteworthy point, the term 'match rate' implies the success of residency applicants, not the percentage that specialize. A 50% match rate tells me that half the students who applied to specialties failed. This is definitely not the case at UCLA or UCSF. Instead of match rate, it is the specialization rate. Yes, about 50% of our graduates choose to specialize.

 

[dat_student]

I'm surprised by those numbers. I find it hard to believe that only 12 people out of 90 specialized. It makes me question the validity of the sampling method/questionnaire. Although you say 88 out of 90 students completed the questionnaire, I still am suspicious.

Another noteworthy point, the term 'match rate' implies the success of residency applicants, not the percentage that specialize. A 50% match rate tells me that half the students who applied to specialties failed. This is definitely not the case at UCLA or UCSF. Instead of match rate, it is the specialization rate. Yes, about 50% of our graduates choose to specialize.

#1)
I meant the % that specialize. Sorry about that.

#2)
I am also surprized by those numbers but those numbers are given by UCSF School of Dentistry. Those numbers definitely made me change my #1 choice. Take a look at the pictures below [Right under "postgraduate education plans" it says "Admitted to programs"]:

 

[Mrxle3]

dat_student, will you be attending UCSF or UCLA next year? For some reason, like Dr. Hobie, I place serious doubt in the percentages that you presented (this doubt is not directed towards you, since you found those numbers from a valid source). I always had the feeling that UCSF produced more specialists than that. However, there is more to a school than just numbers. In your previous posts, it seems like you do more number crunching than anything else when determing your "number one choice."

 

[dat_student]

dat_student, will you be attending UCSF or UCLA next year? For some reason, like Dr. Hobie, I place serious doubt in the percentages that you presented (this doubt is not directed towards you, since you found those numbers from a valid source). I always had the feeling that UCSF produced more specialists than that. However, there is more to a school than just numbers. In your previous posts, it seems like you do more number crunching than anything else when determing your "number one choice."

It took me a long time to find this valid source. I love UCSF but now I like UCLA a bit more for the reasons that I stated above.

 

[DREDAY]

It took me a long time to find this valid source. I love UCSF but now I like UCLA a bit more for the reasons that I stated above.

Dude, the percent of students taht specialize has nothing to do with their ability to specialize. It just so happens that the majority fo the class that year did not want to specialize for some reason. We ranked 4th highest board scores this year, I am sure given our high board score rate, more people could specialize had they chosen to do so. I see the same trend in my class of 2009. Our class is consistently scoring higher in most of the exams than previous years, and I am sure that will translate to even higher board scores, but it again seems like alot of students in my class do not want to specialize. Which means less competition for those who do want to specialize. So in reality, it should be seen as a plus. You should search it on the DENTAL forums for a thread that discusses this years UCSF matching rates. Here it is its copied and pasted :

OMFS: 5/5 (the 6th person was from the class of 2005)
Perio: 1/1
Endo: 1/1
Ortho: 5/6
Pedo: 13/16 (not 100% sure on this figure...)
GPR/AEGD: Too many to count. But I believe everyone who applied to one matched somewhere, MOST at their #1 choice

Like I sad, the majority of UCSF students for some reason do not want to specialize. BUt in terms of matching rate 25/29 matched whcih = 86%

 

[luder98]

Dude, the percent of students taht specialize has nothing to do with their ability to specialize. It just so happens that the majority fo the class that year did not want to specialize for some reason.

I have to agree with Dreday on this. If someone from either UC plans to specialize, I doubt that the school choice will play an important role in their getting matched.

 

[Mrxle3]

Thank you Dreday for clearing this up.

 

[kiggar4l2000]

It took me a long time to find this valid source. I love UCSF but now I like UCLA a bit more for the reasons that I stated above.

I chose UCSF over UCLA b/c

1) UCLA Dental grads and current dental student friends told me UCSF is better. I think the key word here is "friends". My friends gave me their honest opinions on their thoughts of UCLA (which may not be representative of the whole student body but I have good amount of friends there).
2) UCSF has a better (i.e. bigger) population pool than UCLA --> more realisitic exposure to dentistry and dental cases.
3) UCSF prepares you better clinically than UCLA
4) UCLA is too academically oriented which is not to say they have bad clinical/research exposure but not as balanced as UCSF. Balance
5) Students at UCLA are paying mind-numbing dues to become a DDS; UCSF is tough but they're more "relaxed" than LA counterparts
6) UCLA is currently going through a transition into more clinically-orientated curriculum and I don't want to be in the middle of the whole transition phase cuz you know it's never a great idea to be in the middle of a change when they're figuring things out.
7) UCSF students get good board scores. Maybe not better than UCLA students but they're still damn good (4th in the nation).

I could go on. But the bottomline is both schools are great and I just see myself being more happy at UCSF because students seem to genuinely love it there. Some UCLA students probably do love their school too but I know too many people say they are studying way too much, comparatively...perhaps more than neccessary to keep up the UCLA's fame for having good board scores.

 

[kiggar4l2000]

It took me a long time to find this valid source. I love UCSF but now I like UCLA a bit more for the reasons that I stated above.

I chose UCSF over UCLA b/c

1) UCLA Dental grads and current dental student friends told me UCSF is better. I think the key word here is "friends". My friends gave me their honest opinions on and about UCLA (which may not be representative of the whole but I have fairly good amount of friends there).
2) UCSF has a better (i.e. bigger) population pool than UCLA --> more realisitic exposure to dentistry and dental cases.
3) UCSF prepares you better clinically than UCLA (may not be the best in CA, but better than LA for sure)
4) UCLA is too academically oriented which is not to say they have bad clinical/research exposure but not as balanced as UCSF is.
5) Students at UCLA are paying mind-numbing dues to become a DDS; UCSF is tough but they're more "relaxed" than LA counterparts relatively speaking.
6) UCLA is currently going through a transition phase into more clinically-orientated curriculum (they recognize their own shortcomings) and I don't want to be in the middle of the whole transition cuz you know it's never great to be in the middle of a change when they're figuring things out. Might be exciting but not great.
7) UCSF students get good board scores. Maybe not better than UCLA students but they're still doing damn good (4th in the nation). How much difference could 0.5-1.0 points in average board scores make in its predictability of you doing well or better in boards by you going to UCLA over UCSF? I say not much.

I could go on. But the bottomline is both schools are great (and affordable) and I just see myself being more happy at UCSF because students seem to genuinely love it there. Some UCLA students probably do love their school too but I know too many people who aren't. Friends tell me how they study way too much, comparatively to UCSF students...and perhaps that is why UCLA is able to continue on with their call to fame of having slightly better board scores than UCSF. Slightly.

Again, both schools are great and I'm happy for y'all CA residents going to those fine institutitions. We're very lucky!

 

[KAP]

hey, i'm not from cali!!

 

[drhobie7]

2) UCSF has a better (i.e. bigger) population pool than UCLA --> more realisitic exposure to dentistry and dental cases.

Is this just anectodal or do you have some kind of statistic? Seeing as LA is the biggest city in California and there are only 2 dental schools (LLU is not LA) and everyone drives I can't imagine there'd be a significant difference in patient pool size or variety.

3) UCSF prepares you better clinically than UCLA (may not be the best in CA, but better than LA for sure)

How would you know this if unless you completed dental school at both UCSF and UCLA? Again, is this anecdotal?

4) UCLA is too academically oriented which is not to say they have bad clinical/research exposure but not as balanced as UCSF is.

Too academically oriented? There's more to dentistry than cutting a prep. Not as balanced in terms of research exposure? That's ridiculous. You do as much research as you want here. Clinical exposure? We spend two years in clinic just like UCSF. What do you think we're doing during that time, prophies?

5) Students at UCLA are paying mind-numbing dues to become a DDS; UCSF is tough but they're more "relaxed" than LA counterparts relatively speaking.

Mind-numbing? Maybe for some. That's pretty melodramatic though. Hate to break it to you but dental school is hard, and 3rd and 4th years are stressfull. UCSF isn't going to be easy. Here at UCLA we work our asses off, but still find time to have fun. Dentistry is not a profession for slackers, with the exception of ortho. 🙂

6) UCLA is currently going through a transition phase into more clinically-orientated curriculum (they recognize their own shortcomings) and I don't want to be in the middle of the whole transition cuz you know it's never great to be in the middle of a change when they're figuring things out. Might be exciting but not great.

I have no idea what you're talking about. We are constantly improving everything here: clinic, classes, facilities, administration. Stagnation is counterproductive and inefficient. My class in particular constantly strives to improve all facets of the school. However, there is no large scale transition.

7) UCSF students get good board scores. Maybe not better than UCLA students but they're still doing damn good (4th in the nation). How much difference could 0.5-1.0 points in average board scores make in its predictability of you doing well or better in boards by you going to UCLA over UCSF? I say not much.

Just admit it, we're better. 😀

Seriously though, choosing a school based on the performance of other students on NBDE is a bad idea, unless you're certain you'll perform like them.

Here's the problem with your claims: you're comparing two schools when you haven't the experience to do so. Sure you've got friends at UCLA who say the grass is greener at UCSF. Unfortunately, they were never dental students at UCSF. Maybe they've got friends up there who say life is chill while they're down here stressing. You hit ups and downs in dental school. Each person deals with things differently. The grass is always greenest when the going gets tough.

The bottom line is this: unless you thoroughly experience life as a student at each school you can't draw your conclusions.

 

[WestCoast]

Hate to break it to you but dental school is hard, and 3rd and 4th years are stressfull. UCSF isn't going to be easy. Here at UCLA we work our asses off, but still find time to have fun. Dentistry is not a profession for slackers, with the exception of ortho. 🙂

I dont' know about you but dental school was cake for me. especially since it only took me 3 weekend course to get my degree.

 

[PDizzle]

Deciding between UCLA and UCSF is really just based on where you want to live for 4 years. They both kick holy a$$ in NDBE's and have spit out awesome dentists.

Also, I know DAT_Student is all about the numbers but if you want to specialize, either school is a fantastic choice. Remember, they will be looking at you, not your classmates, when they pick you up for a specialty program.

So, to summarize, do you like fog or smog?? That's the only real choice!


BTW, UCSF is better then UCLA!!! Neener neener neener..

 

[dat_student]

...I know DAT_Student is all about the numbers

I care about officially released numbers.

...Remember, they will be looking at you, not your classmates, when they pick you up for a specialty program...

True and part of the application is which school you attend and the quality of the student body and the competitiveness. In that respect, UCLA edges a bit higher.

Anyhow, I believe both UCSF & UCLA are great schools and you can't go wrong with either one. I'd be very happy to study at either university.

 

[Mrxle3]

Fog vs. Smog hahahahah! I like that PDizzle! Being from Los Angeles myself, I personally know about the smog part, and after studying in San Diego for 4 years, I now know about the fog part as well. It looks like once again, I must decide between Fog and Smog for professional school. Sigh, life's so hard =)

 

[luder98]

FYI.

 

[dat_student]

FYI.
...

luder98,
Thanks so much for the image. When I said ~12 of 90 UCSF students get accepted to specialty programs some people (including drhobie7, a UCLA student) probably thought I had wrong data. I posted the numbers for 2004. It looks like the 2005 graduating class had similar stats (i.e. again ~12 UCSF students got accepted to specialty programs). For some reason, during my interview I was told 35% of UCSF students get accepted to specialty programs when the correct % is ~13% (i.e. 12/90). Again, thanks a million for the image and verification of the data I posted.