- Joined
- Apr 27, 2007
- Messages
- 13,095
- Reaction score
- 334
I'd have to disagree with this. UCLA is equivalent to UM, in my opinion. UCLA has the third best hospital in the country behind only Hopkins and Mayo (if you don't like USNWR, then at least UCLA has a good hospital). UCLA has way better weather too! Still, UCLA has some glaring drawbacks/oddities about their program. They don't do dissections (or even prosections?) and I think they're PBL heavy too. Michigan is widely known for the strength of its clinical training, which is the most important part of medical school. I think pre-meds tend to focus too much on pre-clinicals, when years 3 and 4 are really what's most important (why I love condensed curricular programs like Duke/Penn).
Personally, the UCLA curriculum didn't mesh that well with me, which is why I declined my interview there (and my interview was scheduled on a Tuesday! 😡). I still think it's an amazing school and I'll apply for residency there.
At any rate, I'll just say I think UCLA and UM are peers whereas Carver is a step or two below.
What about it? Just curious.