- Joined
- May 1, 2005
- Messages
- 104
- Reaction score
- 0
i had a fellow sdn inform me that he heard from rush this past week - has anyone else heard?
gary5 said:Loyola's facilities are newer and so Loyola seems better. They also have shorter lectures schedules. However, Loyola is not in Chicago. Rush has older facilities, but is in Chicago and has a better clinical reputation. You also rotate through Cook County. Non-medical and non-Chicago people will recognize the Loyola name because of the university. Medical people seem to prefer Rush. Frankly, you'll be fine with either program. I consider them to be at the same level.
ExtraAverage said:I live in Chicago and I would consider myself a "medical person"... whatever that means. I'm going with Loyola.
I disagree with the poster's claim that Rush is considered to have a "better clinical reputation." I have researched both schools extensively and haven't come across any information that would suggest this. Perhaps he's using anecdotal evidence (e.g. a couple years ago he was accepted by Rush and waitlisted by Loyola). From what I can tell, they seem to be fairly similar (the facilities notwithstanding). Like one poster said before, each has its benefits. If you already have a specialty picked out, look at the match lists or U.S. News rankings.
cubs08 said:i'm haveing a hard time discerning between the large discrepancy in the poll - why is there such a large gap if these schools are inherently the same?
p.s - anyone else heard from rush (who have interviewed in the last month)