I went in to talk to the MSTP director, Stanley G. Korenman M.D. It was very formal. The guy barely smiles and doesn't seem to be very enthusiastic. He seems nice though. Although, because I was very prepared, the conversation flows fairly well. This is just a bit of an early test for interviews. I was fairly keen on making a good impression so I was a bit nervous at first. I would've dressed up if not for the fact that I didn't bring my nice shoes to California.
Anyway, long story short, UCLA is very rigid about MD/PhD each having its own cirriculum...no cirriculum intergration. it takes close to eight years to complete on average. Six years is virtually unheard of. This seems to be the new trend for MDPHDs. Also, the clinical years are not shortened. Bygones are the ol' days of my research advisor, who's an MSTP from UCSD, and it only took him five years! (Yes 5)
Also, for international students out there, he said that it's definitely possible to do it without the funding. What they are really looking for is the qualification, not the funding sources. He commented on how internationals tend not to be able to communicate effectively, etc.
The caltech program is separate from the UCLA program and it takes an addtional day of interview. Usually this program competes with students who are simultanously accepted by Harvard and the like, go figure. Only two are enrolled every year.
Finally, it's rolling admissions, but they usually don't have a bias towards people who are interviewed at an earlier date. (This one is a little shaky though...I recommend submitting your app as early as possible and get the earliest date for interviewing as a rule of thumb.)
He said that California kids tend to want to stay in California. However, residency is not going to be looked at AT ALL. Specific research (3 yrs in 1 lab) is not favored over broad research (1 years in 3 diff labs). These can be probably taken as the general rule for MSTP admissions. Interviews are all research based. This may not be the case for other schools. He mentioned that it's possible that the interviewer is a researcher in your field and a clinician simultanously. Also, it's possible to have him as one of the interviewers. (Be forewarned...)
Unfortunately he didn't disclose any insider's info (or "intel"). I didn't get too much out of it, except that UCLA really really has a really really rigorous standard. (yeah whatever) At the end some janitor came in to vacuum the room, and he told me that I'll get in somewhere (what in the world, he barely knows who i am...) and the important part is not getting in, but where.
Didn't ask for my record. I'm expecting this sort of supercilious manners all the way through next year. Man i wish i could call Dean of Medical School "dude" instead of Dr. X. The day I become an ADCOM member, I'll drink beer with my interviewees, I swear to god...
if not, i suggest you vigorously argue my case for the remainder of the meeting.
