MSTP - Columbia vs UCLA

[swiftimpetuous]

---

Members do not see this ad.

Hi all,

I've been really lucky to receive acceptances to these two amazing programs and now I'm dealing with the really difficult decision of picking which is best for me and what I want to do. Boiled down, it seems like a choice of career vs lifestyle to me.

Columbia
Pros:
- Super prestigious, could open doors to the most competitive residencies in the future (eg MGH, BWH, CHOP) and put me in a great position to vie for a research faculty position
- Really strong researchers in the field I'm interested in (genetics/genomics)
- Can get around easily without a car

Cons:
- Not sure about NYC, I'm more of a homebody and I feel like it would be kind of wasted on me
- Could be harder to match back to the west coast?
- Location isn't great

UCLA
Pros:
- Amazing location
- Great chance to match in CA, or somewhere else on the west coast
- Weather!! New England weather sucks, I wouldn't mind waking up to the sun shining everyday

Cons:
- Would need a car, traffic sucks
- Not as prestigious (given, as an MD-PhD, I can probably still match into the competitive places I'd want on the west coast like UCSF, Stanford, UCLA, UCSD)
- Not really many researchers in the field I'm interested in
- Possibly less funding/money overall because it is a public school.

Some things I'm thinking about:
- I grew up on the west coast but I've lived in New England for six years and I want to move back eventually. This might be my only chance to do so for another 8 years. When I match it's not even a guarantee that I'll be able to move back so part of me feels like I should just take this opportunity and run with it.

- Columbia could really set me up well if I want to go into a career in research, the thing is, I'm not even sure I want to run a lab in the future (but I'm open to the idea depending on how my PhD goes). I think I'd be happy as a clinical faculty member, which would be more than possible at UCLA.

- Another big factor is there aren't many faculty members in my specific area of interest at UCLA (genomics tech dev). Is this a red flag? There are people whose work I'm kind of interested in but I would find the research at Columbia much more fulfilling. But given that I'm not 100% set on running a lab in the future is this a salient point? Should I just suck it up and shift my interests a bit?

Thanks for your thoughts 🙂

 

[ClimbsRox]

Do you want to live in NYC or LA? That's what it comes down to I think. MSTP=first choice residency at just about every school I interviewed at. If research volume matters, then go to Columbia. The prestige really isn't that different between the schools.

 

[Woe_is_me23]

Columbia. Given that there aren’t many researchers in your field of interest, that is a huge deal breaker for MSTP. Also, if you’re a homebody, maybe Washington Heights is ideal!

Also, looking at Columbia’s match list, I saw plenty of people matching to the west coast/cali. And I’m certain that there would more if more people wanted to go.

 

[puahate]

Columbia. Research interests are critical

 

[Aree]

In terms of matching, I personally don't think there's a big diff between the two. UCLA matches just fine into top programs, both in CA and on the east coast. I'm personally deciding between the two as well and leaning towards UCLA. I don't think that the slight (if any) prestige difference justifies living somewhere you don't like. Also, could I ask specifically what kind of genetics research you're interested in that you don't think UCLA is strong in?

 

[lococola]

I've been struggling with a similar decision and your post really resonated with me. How do I weigh research opportunities vs location and lifestyle? How important is program organization? What about interview and second look vibes? I've spent far too much time making and staring at pros and cons lists.

The whole future in science thing has also been something I've been thinking about. If only 10-15% of us will end up running labs, what's the point of doing an MSTP? Maybe it's more efficient to identify a clinical field early and do a quick translational PhD as a means of landing a top residency spot. Or maybe just take a T3 MD offer and forget basic science altogether? I ultimately realized that I really really enjoyed doing research. I liked crafting wacky theories to explain things I observed, and then coming up with creative ways to test them. I liked the prospect of discovering things that have existed for thousands and thousands of years but that are still unknown to us (even if marginal).

It's hard to know what you will want or how things will be several years down the line, so I ended up making my decision largely based on what I was excited in the near future - doing cutting edge science. I'll probably be joining the program that allows me to explore these interests most extensively and (hopefully) figure the rest out. Only you know what the right answer for you is. Maybe it's developing new genomic technologies or maybe it's surfing and basking in the LA sun. There's a million ways to break this down, but at the end of the day both places will take you where you want to go. Go with the program you feel most excited about and don't look back.

 

[CarpeDiem1993]

Columbia!!