Hi guys! I was wondering what you guys thought about ICO vs. Pacific. I'm trying to decide where to go and I've listed pros and cons for each, but still the decision is still very difficult for me. Any input would be greatly appreciated. Thanks!!
You are using an out of date browser. It may not display this or other websites correctly.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
You should upgrade or use an alternative browser.
Pacific vs. ICO
- Thread starter jade1314
- Start date
both are good schools. 2 major considerations are board pass rates and cost. If you live near one and can live at home, i would do that. Board rates are similar I think.
Assuming you have to move for both, look at program, facilities, experience, and what piece of paper you want hanging on your wall after.
I have recently chosen ICO, over NOVA. I have not applied to Pacific, but i will tell you why ICO is my first choice regardless.
ICO's facilities are very good. nearly 40 exam lanes. The Illinois Eye Institute sees a huge amount of patient diversity compared to other clinics. The residency programs are top notch, even though i don't know if I will do one. Chicago is a pretty cool city with good public transportation. Lots of young people. The residential complex is right across the street. ICO is set up to make the transition to a new place easy. There are scholarships and work study opportunities. Overall, it seemed very professional when i went there. Everything is laid out for you, cost, what you learn, what is expected, in detail, unlike some others.
I think you would see more going to ICO. ICO is on quarters, so more tests, but more breaks. I have been told the program is perhaps slightly more rigorous than some, but I have no first hand experience to substantiate.
I think both schools would be good, but for me, ICO's program is a little more polished than some. I think you might have to put a little more in, but would also get more out. I know my values are different than yours and as cliche as it is, try and think of the experience you want to have. Some don't care about patient diversity, or want to live in a big city.
Good luck. BTW, I shadowed an OD that went to Pacific, she said it was a good program. She then went to Chicago to do her residency. She said you see a lot more diversity in chicago.
just my 0.02
Assuming you have to move for both, look at program, facilities, experience, and what piece of paper you want hanging on your wall after.
I have recently chosen ICO, over NOVA. I have not applied to Pacific, but i will tell you why ICO is my first choice regardless.
ICO's facilities are very good. nearly 40 exam lanes. The Illinois Eye Institute sees a huge amount of patient diversity compared to other clinics. The residency programs are top notch, even though i don't know if I will do one. Chicago is a pretty cool city with good public transportation. Lots of young people. The residential complex is right across the street. ICO is set up to make the transition to a new place easy. There are scholarships and work study opportunities. Overall, it seemed very professional when i went there. Everything is laid out for you, cost, what you learn, what is expected, in detail, unlike some others.
I think you would see more going to ICO. ICO is on quarters, so more tests, but more breaks. I have been told the program is perhaps slightly more rigorous than some, but I have no first hand experience to substantiate.
I think both schools would be good, but for me, ICO's program is a little more polished than some. I think you might have to put a little more in, but would also get more out. I know my values are different than yours and as cliche as it is, try and think of the experience you want to have. Some don't care about patient diversity, or want to live in a big city.
Good luck. BTW, I shadowed an OD that went to Pacific, she said it was a good program. She then went to Chicago to do her residency. She said you see a lot more diversity in chicago.
just my 0.02
both are good schools. 2 major considerations are board pass rates and cost. If you live near one and can live at home, i would do that. Board rates are similar I think.
Assuming you have to move for both, look at program, facilities, experience, and what piece of paper you want hanging on your wall after.
I have recently chosen ICO, over NOVA. I have not applied to Pacific, but i will tell you why ICO is my first choice regardless.
ICO's facilities are very good. nearly 40 exam lanes. The Illinois Eye Institute sees a huge amount of patient diversity compared to other clinics. The residency programs are top notch, even though i don't know if I will do one. Chicago is a pretty cool city with good public transportation. Lots of young people. The residential complex is right across the street. ICO is set up to make the transition to a new place easy. There are scholarships and work study opportunities. Overall, it seemed very professional when i went there. Everything is laid out for you, cost, what you learn, what is expected, in detail, unlike some others.
I think you would see more going to ICO. ICO is on quarters, so more tests, but more breaks. I have been told the program is perhaps slightly more rigorous than some, but I have no first hand experience to substantiate.
I think both schools would be good, but for me, ICO's program is a little more polished than some. I think you might have to put a little more in, but would also get more out. I know my values are different than yours and as cliche as it is, try and think of the experience you want to have. Some don't care about patient diversity, or want to live in a big city.
Good luck. BTW, I shadowed an OD that went to Pacific, she said it was a good program. She then went to Chicago to do her residency. She said you see a lot more diversity in chicago.
just my 0.02
Assuming you have to move for both, look at program, facilities, experience, and what piece of paper you want hanging on your wall after.
I have recently chosen ICO, over NOVA. I have not applied to Pacific, but i will tell you why ICO is my first choice regardless.
ICO's facilities are very good. nearly 40 exam lanes. The Illinois Eye Institute sees a huge amount of patient diversity compared to other clinics. The residency programs are top notch, even though i don't know if I will do one. Chicago is a pretty cool city with good public transportation. Lots of young people. The residential complex is right across the street. ICO is set up to make the transition to a new place easy. There are scholarships and work study opportunities. Overall, it seemed very professional when i went there. Everything is laid out for you, cost, what you learn, what is expected, in detail, unlike some others.
I think you would see more going to ICO. ICO is on quarters, so more tests, but more breaks. I have been told the program is perhaps slightly more rigorous than some, but I have no first hand experience to substantiate.
I think both schools would be good, but for me, ICO's program is a little more polished than some. I think you might have to put a little more in, but would also get more out. I know my values are different than yours and as cliche as it is, try and think of the experience you want to have. Some don't care about patient diversity, or want to live in a big city.
Good luck. BTW, I shadowed an OD that went to Pacific, she said it was a good program. She then went to Chicago to do her residency. She said you see a lot more diversity in chicago.
just my 0.02
- Joined
- Dec 12, 2010
- Messages
- 60
- Reaction score
- 0
I agree with stix on pretty much everything he said, both schools are very good. so ill just tell you why I (from Illinois) chose pacific and a little about why i didn't submit my supplemental app at ICO
Pacific Pros (for me)
1. i dont like big cities and being forest grove it felt much more comfortable.
2. i dont know if anything will come of it, but im interested the the sports vision aspects that are at pacific.
3. the weather and environment in oregon are amazing.
4. I was very impressed by the clinical manager guy, sorry i forgot his name but he talked at the interview day. it seemed like he would prepare you for the real world.
5. all the staff and students i met were very nice, helpful, and encouraging.
6. i would like to get away for 4 years to experience something new.
Cons:
1. cost
2. clinic experience seemed a little shaky, although it sounded like it was improving
3. far away (pro and con haha)
ICO Pros:
1. very good clinic and facilitys from what i hear
2. close to home (3 hours)
Cons:
1. huge class make me think id be just a number
2. dont like big citys
3. not in a good part of town from what i hear.
I have many friends who live in chicago and love it, i just felt its not for me. i agree that you probably cant go wrong either way. Think about what you really want to do and you'll be fine. good luck in your decision!
Pacific Pros (for me)
1. i dont like big cities and being forest grove it felt much more comfortable.
2. i dont know if anything will come of it, but im interested the the sports vision aspects that are at pacific.
3. the weather and environment in oregon are amazing.
4. I was very impressed by the clinical manager guy, sorry i forgot his name but he talked at the interview day. it seemed like he would prepare you for the real world.
5. all the staff and students i met were very nice, helpful, and encouraging.
6. i would like to get away for 4 years to experience something new.
Cons:
1. cost
2. clinic experience seemed a little shaky, although it sounded like it was improving
3. far away (pro and con haha)
ICO Pros:
1. very good clinic and facilitys from what i hear
2. close to home (3 hours)
Cons:
1. huge class make me think id be just a number
2. dont like big citys
3. not in a good part of town from what i hear.
I have many friends who live in chicago and love it, i just felt its not for me. i agree that you probably cant go wrong either way. Think about what you really want to do and you'll be fine. good luck in your decision!
so ill just tell you why I (from Illinois) chose pacific and a little about why i didn't submit my supplemental app at ICO
that's kind of funny, since I (from Portland, Oregon) chose ICO over pacific for this upcoming fall lol.
OP, here are my main reasons for choosing ICO.
-i was very impressed with the facilities at ICO. the EyePod blew me away. pacific's just looked a bit dated, and i felt like for the amount i would be investing at the school, they should invest a bit in their facilities as well for the student.
-i wanted to attend ICO for the amount of patients and potential to see unique eye disorders/diseases. being in downtown chicago, i felt like there may be a greater opportunity for that. i also heard that pacific was moving one (of i think five?) clinics from SE portland area to the suburban Beaverton areaaa, so i wasnt too happy about that either.
-more of a personal reason, i have grown up and lived in the portland area my entire life. I just thought this would be a great opportunity to step out of my comfort zone and experience something new and exciting. I hear chicago is an amazing city, i am really excited for the fall.
i am sure there were more factors that came into play, but i can't think of them at the moment. those were my main concerns, hope it helped.
Thank you guys for all of your input! I really appreciate it!! (And I loved how one of you was from Illinois moving out to Pacific and the other from Oregon moving out to Chicago) haha. I'm still on the fence about both. Both have really different, but ALOT of pros. And both have a few, miniscule cons. I'll keep you guys posted after coming back from sincity for reading weeekk! Thank you so much!
I think they give out the scholarships after the acceptance but I'm not sure. I just know that they have the scholarships presetned during the white coat ceremony at the end of august ( so 2 weeks into class). Hope this helps!
