UC Davis vs Berkeley for Undergrad?

[IL Pre Med]

---

Members do not see this ad.

my mom always wanted me to go to ucb (though shes still happy if i choose ucd over cal)

Is this a real reason for choosing your school?

 

[drslaughter]

Dude do yourself a favor and don't go to Berkeley as a premed. You don't need that bs in your life. I had the same situation as you and chose to attend Santa Cruz. I got 2 years of research, great gpa, excellent clinical exposure, and got to get to the beach. I think the 10 interview invites I got attest to the fact that I made a great choice. There a still a ton of premeds that go to Davis too,so I still don't think it is an ideal choice. Although I will say that there aren't much places to live in CA that are cheaper than Davis.

 

[az43]

Dude do yourself a favor and don't go to Berkeley as a premed. You don't need that bs in your life. I had the same situation as you and chose to attend Santa Cruz. I got 2 years of research, great gpa, excellent clinical exposure, and got to get to the beach. I think the 10 interview invites I got attest to the fact that I made a great choice. There a still a ton of premeds that go to Davis too,so I still don't think it is an ideal choice. Although I will say that there aren't much places to live in CA that are cheaper than Davis.

I hear that sc isnt a good choice for pre meds since it doesnt have many research facilities. Where did you conduct your undergrad research?

 

[drslaughter]

I hear that sc isnt a good choice for pre meds since it doesnt have many research facilities. Where did you conduct your undergrad research?

On campus. If you want to do research you can get it. I don't know a single person who wanted research experience who didn't get into a lab. There's are plenty if labs where you can develop your own projects. What they don't have is a hospital so all research is basic science, therefore less chance of getting a publication.

 

[Aerus]

Thanks for all the input guys. All of you made great points. I have a question bout majors though? Would majoring in biochem and molecular bio at UCD put me at a greater advantage than if I majored in NPB (neurobio, physio, and behavior) or biological sciences at UCD ? I heard that biochem majors generally have more research opportunities than regular bio majors. Is this true?

You will not encounter any discrimination in terms of what sub-category of biology you major in. Many labs have certain requirements in terms of classes, number of hours per week expected, and/or experience, so be privy to those. But as for major, there's no distinction as no PI will care.

 

[az43]

Is this a real reason for choosing your school?

It's a small factor ~.~

You will not encounter any discrimination in terms of what sub-category of biology you major in. Many labs have certain requirements in terms of classes, number of hours per week expected, and/or experience, so be privy to those. But as for major, there's no distinction as no PI will care.

I see what you mean, makes sense

 

[Testosterone]

delete

 

[MDforMee]

Lol idk where the hell you got that from. I'm no grade robot...

Put down the fake tan and listen to what I'm saying, I didn't call YOU a grade robot, and I already told you to look me up here if and when you ever transfer. If what I said is true about helping a non grade robot, why would I be trying to help you?

Uhh, while you're thinking about that, think about this:
no matter which school you go to, your GPA will displace someone else's. That's the nature of "competitive" grading. If you're only choosing a school based on the ease of earning a certain GPA, you're stepping on students that earn lower GPAs. Some of those students would like to earn higher GPAs and go on in school, and for whatever reason, aren't performing up to their potential.

I've talked about these under-performing students over and over again in this thread, and they're the students I'm trying to help academically. This is a big problem at UCD, and its probably 10 times worse at UCD than at UCLA and UCB where most people want to go on in school and are fighting for grades. The simple truth is that UCD admits a lot more students (freshman and transfer), and they're not as hard working as UCLA/UCB kids. It's just the way that it is. This negatively contributes to UCDs reputation, and I'd like to help change that, as well.

Look at some of the gems from the front page of this forum:

Community College Transfer Person Without a Clue That Will Probably be Parasitized
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/counseling-at-transfer-university.1054259/
"Hi, I'm new to this forum, but I've heard it's a good resource. A little background:
Graduated HS early without any idea what career I wanted to go into, with a vague idea of how the college system works (not that it's much better now). At first I settled on being a Nurse Practitioner, but decided to become a Physician instead (money, type of patient care etc.) I'm in the process of completing gen-ed transfer requirements at a community college and considering taking my pre med pre-requisites here as well; my only problem is that there is no pre-med counselor with...adequate experience at my college - she's the parent of a medical student w/ no other qualifications.

I don't want to sound snobby or anything, but I'm kinda concerned about the quality of counseling I'm receiving. Is it okay to seek pre-med counseling at the uni I want to transfer to??? IDK this seems like a stupid question now that I've typed it out. =/"



Someone that Most Likely Attends UCLA That Wants Out Because They're Probably Being Parasitized
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/transferring.1054084/#post-14878141
"As much as I love my school I was wondering if I should transfer.

There are pros and cons. I would be transferring a semester based school so hopefully it would be less hectic.
I am just SO stupid compared to the students here. It goes too fast (quarters) and I am doing bad. That being said, I would be transferring from a top school to a meh school. Would they look down on that?"

I knew a lot of people that crashed and burned at the big UCs, too. These are 3 girls I've dated or been involved with, by the way. They all wanted to be doctors and came from relatively good homes and good schools/areas. They were all white or Middle Eastern.

Girl 1.: Went to UCSD for Biochemistry and got beat down. Did a public health masters and years of GPA repair and is now starting at Alabama College of Osteopathic Medicine. She went to a good community college (Sierra College) and earned nearly a 4.0. Both of her parents are doctors.

Girl 2.: Went to UCLA for Chemistry and got beat down. I saw her transcript... it was NOTHING BUT C's. She now works in a fashion mall in the midwest and lives at home. Dad is a PhD from Caltech who worked at Amgen; she earned a 4.0 from a good community college (I think it was in Ventura) prior to going to UCLA.

Girl 3: Went to UCLA for Biochemistry and got beat down, switched her major to liberal arts and got beat down some more. She was from a ritzy part of LA, but wasn't a community college transfer. She attended one of those medical magnet high schools. Last I heard, she's a personal assistant to some real estate mogul, but she didn't get into medical school.

I've got lots of fun stories like these.

 

[sourdoughllama]

.

 

[MDforMee]

Sorry guyz, I have siblings at UCSD and UCSB and best friends at UCB and UCI and I went to UCLA and I have seen their course work, tests, and grade distributions. All schools are similarly competitive --> 3.3 = 3.8 between any two schools is ridiculous. UCB/UCLA/UCSD (especially UCLA/Cal) are roughly equal in terms of caliber of students admitted and competition is similar (feel free to look up admitted stats). If you think a 20 point difference in SAT and less than 0.1 difference in GPA from high school is going to make any school significantly harder than another then I would have to disagree. From what I've seen: Cal/UCLA exaggerate their difficulty (not to say it's not hard) while trying to downplay other UCs. To transfer people: upper divs at UCs are a joke compared to pre-med lower divs. The difference in difficulty between UCs at lower divs is noticeable but upper divs are comparatively easy everywhere

Since I know people will be too lazy to Google stuff:

Cal - SAT 2076, GPA 4.18
UCLA - SAT 2052, GPA 4.15
UCSD - SAT 1993, GPA 4.11
Source: http://admission.universityofcalifornia.edu/freshman/profiles/

And this is purely anecdotal, but Cal and UCLA cross admit like crazy with many kids from SoCal choosing Cal and many kids from NorCal choosing UCLA

Nice post, but I agree to disagree about lower division difficulty, at least in what I took at UCLA (the LS and Physics 6 series. I also had calculus, there).

The only thing "difficult" I ever found in the lower division prerequisites was in managing to memorize every detail of every slide note in the bio classes. That's only a function of how much time you spend sitting and staring at slide notes.

They're not exactly testing people on Stokes Theorem, there, or asking them to solve open ended theoretical physical chemistry problems.

As far as upper division difficulty is concerned, grade curves are slightly more lenient in the upper divisions because the students are majoring in those subjects, unlike the pool of psych majors taking physics and chemistry because they have to. And, there is no comparison in upper division difficulty when you look at 2 different majors like engineering vs theatre.

No matter which way you look at it, upper divisions aren't a joke in the sciences, even if you did think it was harder to manage your time with lower divisions but that had easier material to begin with.

 

[sourdoughllama]

Nice post, but I agree to disagree about lower division difficulty, at least in what I took at UCLA (the LS and Physics 6 series. I also had calculus, there).

The only thing "difficult" I ever found in the lower division prerequisites was in managing to memorize every detail of every slide note in the bio classes. That's only a function of how much time you spend sitting and staring at slide notes.

They're not exactly testing people on Stokes Theorem, there, or asking them to solve open ended theoretical physical chemistry problems.

As far as upper division difficulty is concerned, grade curves are slightly more lenient in the upper divisions because the students are majoring in those subjects, unlike the pool of psych majors taking physics and chemistry because they have to. And, there is no comparison in upper division difficulty when you look at 2 different majors like engineering vs theatre.

No matter which way you look at it, upper divisions aren't a joke in the sciences, even if you did think it was harder to manage your time with lower divisions but that had easier material to begin with.

Yeah sorry I agree with you. I meant difficult as in the curves, not the material. Upper div science was definitely very dense in material but the curves were much more generous

 

[MDforMee]

Yeah sorry I agree with you. I meant difficult as in the curves, not the material. Upper div science was definitely very dense in material but the curves were much more generous

I hope I didn't sound like a jerk there. Bro hug.

 

[sourdoughllama]

I hope I didn't sound like a jerk there. Bro hug.

Nope you didn't haha

 

[az43]

I didn't call YOU a grade robot, and I already told you to look me up here if and when you ever transfer. If what I said is true about helping a non grade robot, why would I be trying to help you?

Oh my bad if I went on a rant, I guess I got the wrong message. I just really cant stand it when people make assumptions about others... Anyways, those stories of your's are pretty interesting lol. I'm not sure if I understood the first part of your message, but are you saying that UCD has a problem with the way in which it has tons of "under-performing" students transferring because they think it'll be easier to get a good gpa?

 

[MDforMee]

Oh my bad if I went on a rant, I guess I got the wrong message. I just really cant stand it when people make assumptions about others... Anyways, those stories of your's are pretty interesting lol. I'm not sure if I understood the first part of your message, but are you saying that UCD has a problem with the way in which it has tons of "under-performing" students transferring because they think it'll be easier to get a good gpa?

I can see how you'd think that, and I tend to rant, myself.

But, the problem at UCD as compared to UCB/UCLA is that it has
1. Transfer students admitted by the Transfer Agreement Guarantee from under-performing community colleges
2. Lots of Bay Area kids from good Bay Area High Schools
3. Lots of Central Valley/Northern California kids from bad Central Valley High/Northern California High Schools

#1 and #3 don't stand a chance to #2.

Demographics stats are attached. Feel free to draw your own conclusions from that.


Here are the TAG requirements of UCD vs UCSD (a more selective school):

UCD TAG
What are the requirements to submit a fall 2014 UC Davis TAG?
Fall 2014 minimum requirements for a TAG must be completed by the end of summer 2013, one year prior to your planned fall 2014 enrollment at UC Davis:

- 30 UC-transferable semester (45 quarter) units
- 3.20-3.30 overall GPA (dependent upon major)


UCSD TAG

• You must earn a cumulative 3.5 minimum UC GPA earned by the end of Fall term 2013 and maintained through the end of Spring term 2014.
• Both of the UC English courses and the UC math course must be completed by the end of Fall 2013, prior to Fall 2014 admission.
• You must be applying for admission with junior standing:
  • 60 UC-transferable semester units (or 90 UC-transferable quarter units) completed by Spring 2014

UCD's TAG is so easy to complete that it's ridiculous. A 3.2 from a California community college in 30 units? They're admitting kids that have taken a year of English, Humanities, and probably no science courses and putting them in classes with a bunch of Bay Area kids that are mostly Asian. Whoops.

Also, look at UCD's list of impacted majors:
all majors in the College of Engineering
all majors in the College of Biological Sciences
and the following majors in the College of Letters and Science:
Communication
Design
International Relations
Psychology

Cough cough cough this is a joke. Okay, a bunch of Engineering students (not premedical), a bunch of easy bio majors (premedical), then a bunch of really easy junk majors (premedical or people that aren't going on in school) are the norm at UCD.

If you're going to knock on me for saying that bio majors are easy, well, they are. The UCD website even states that bio majors have to take less rigorous math classes. The chemistry for bio majors is even more of a joke. Look at this:

I'm done ranting, for now.

 

[sinombre]

Yeah sorry I agree with you. I meant difficult as in the curves, not the material. Upper div science was definitely very dense in material but the curves were much more generous

The upper division science classes I took at Davis (genetics, biochem, etc) were not curved more generously... the curve was still set at a C+/B-. Granted it was more than a few years ago, but I doubt it's any different now.

 

[Jennyfishy]

Small correction to above post - science majors are now required to take the 17 calc series and stats 100 as of 2009. Bio major itself is obviously less rigorous than chemistry and engineering etc since they require different "skills" (memorization vs application as an example for many of the classes).

And "junk majors" is a hilarious comment, considering many pre-meds and hard science majors seem to do more poorly in many of those "easy GEs" and writing classes. This and majors that are impacted are an issue at countless schools, transfer agreement or not.

And from the looks of it, most of the transfers, especially the ones I've met, do not end up being pre-meds, if at all. There aren't enough of them to offset a curve in any given class.

Obviously the academic environment at LA/Cal are diff from UCD's. If every school had the same admissions standards, we'd all be alike. Don't expect to get a 3.5+ without trying though, especially since curving varies between professors of the same course. For upper div, usually many of the ones who switched their major after the weeder pre reqs are no longer there, making the curves less generous (many times, non-existent) as well. This GPA comparison essentially boils down to prestige/reputation and selectivity in place to maintain said prestige/reputation.

Also comparing UCSD/UCD seems more and more irrelevant since more "ranking folks" are now considering the two on equal playing fields.

None of the debate in this thread should have changed anything other than reinforcing the OP's belief of where they think they will he happier and succeed more at.

Edit: pie chart seemed random, but wanted to also point out that most of "Asian" are Chinese and South Asian. The majority of other east asians, especially southeast asians are not as represented at many of the UCs. If you lump that many large populations together, of course it's going to look like whites are not being admitted. But compare CA stats to the demographic breakdown of any other school outside of CA, and it's not as "displaced."

 

[sinombre]

I've talked about these under-performing students over and over again in this thread, and they're the students I'm trying to help academically. This is a big problem at UCD, and its probably 10 times worse at UCD than at UCLA and UCB where most people want to go on in school and are fighting for grades.

This seems to be the main point you're trying to make. But these students by and large are not taking the pre-med weed out classes... so I fail to see how the majority of what you've said is relevant. Non-science/non-weed out classes typically aren't curved (or at least not to the same extent), and so grades earned outside of the basic science/upper division science courses are essentially independent of how the rest of the class performs.

You've made a series of observations of the quality of transfer students from community colleges (who only make up a minority of pre-med students), and I've made a series of observations of Davis alumni who have applied to medical school. The majority of my friends and acquaintances were successful (as was I) in applying, and as far as I know we were all adequately prepared to succeed (which can basically be deduced by whether or not someone is successful in gaining admission to med school, because the US MD attrition rate is close to 1%).

 

[az43]

Bio major itself is obviously less rigorous than chemistry and engineering etc since they require different "skills" (memorization vs application as an example for many of the classes)."

Do you mind telling me what your major was at UCD

Will i be put at a disadvantage if I do biosci as a major? I've been thinking about switching from biochem and mol bio to biological sciences (w/ emphasis in medical microbiology). I'm just wondering if med schools will view this as being less "rigorous" or something

 

[Jennyfishy]

Do you mind telling me what your major was at UCD

Will i be put at a disadvantage if I do biosci as a major? I've been thinking about switching from biochem and mol bio to biological sciences (w/ emphasis in medical microbiology). I'm just wondering if med schools will view this as being less "rigorous" or something

I was a Bio major with NPB emphasis because I couldn't make up my mind about double majoring in Spanish or Writing (then went over units and didn't finish either), haha. You will not be at a disadvantage since a bio major will ensure you take all your med school pre reqs and upper div courses (as long as you keep track and register appropriately). If you stay on top of it and do well on mcats, plus have the ecs and lors, you will not be any less competitive than an app from elsewhere.

Some schools will appreciate a 3.7 in chemistry or engineering more than a 3.7 in bio, but it's not to the point that you would be rejected for doing well in your major. If you did poorly, that would be harder to forgive though. Also, if you take more in depth classes, you will be doing far less than the raw memorization that happens in a lot of the classes. My upper div bio and npbs were a lot of math and lab work by nature of the ones i took (biochem, neurology, advanced physio labs). This will depend on the emphasis track you end up declaring 🙂

 

[MDforMee]

Hi Jennyfishy, I don't want to be argumentative, here, but I do want to point out a few things.

Small correction to above post - science majors are now required to take the 17 calc series and stats 100 as of 2009. Bio major itself is obviously less rigorous than chemistry and engineering etc since they require different "skills" (memorization vs application as an example for many of the classes).

It says in the registrar's listing that the 17 series is at the same level of rigor as the 16 series.

And "junk majors" is a hilarious comment, considering many pre-meds and hard science majors seem to do more poorly in many of those "easy GEs" and writing classes. This and majors that are impacted are an issue at countless schools, transfer agreement or not.

Communications, design, psychology, and international relations won't get you into a STEM field for graduate school, or prepare you for higher paying fields in business. In fact, a big push at UCD right now is in the recruitment of traditionally underrepresented groups into STEM graduate fields. There are entire blocks of resources available on campus for women and minorities in STEM fields, as well as programs like MESA that prepare disadvantaged undergrads for STEM graduate schooling and careers. Professional schools outside of medicine, such as nursing, physician's assistant, occupational therapy, pharmacy, dentistry, and so on all require science coursework.

And from the looks of it, most of the transfers, especially the ones I've met, do not end up being pre-meds, if at all. There aren't enough of them to offset a curve in any given class.

Obviously the academic environment at LA/Cal are diff from UCD's. If every school had the same admissions standards, we'd all be alike. Don't expect to get a 3.5+ without trying though, especially since curving varies between professors of the same course. For upper div, usually many of the ones who switched their major after the weeder pre reqs are no longer there, making the curves less generous (many times, non-existent) as well. This GPA comparison essentially boils down to prestige/reputation and selectivity in place to maintain said prestige/reputation.

I think that I understand what you're trying to say, but there are a lot of transfers that are premeds. I'm a former committee member of the AMSA ARC (community college AMSA chapter http://www.amsaarc.org) and president of another AMSA community college chapter, and let me tell you if you're unaware, there are a significant number of community college students that want to attend medical school. Your attitude is part of the stigma that I've helped work against for some time, now. Your opinion is completely unfounded. That's all I'm going to say about that.

Edit: pie chart seemed random, but wanted to also point out that most of "Asian" are Chinese and South Asian. The majority of other east asians, especially southeast asians are not as represented at many of the UCs. If you lump that many large populations together, of course it's going to look like whites are not being admitted. But compare CA stats to the demographic breakdown of any other school outside of CA, and it's not as "displaced."

I've consistently talked about the term "Asian" being a misnomer for the demographics purposes its used for on this board. Southeast Asians are underrepresented in the UC system, as are many other "Asians" that aren't Chinese or Korean. In a previous post on this board, I analyzed UCB's demographics and compiled this data:

State
Filipinos Chinese Vietnamese Koreans Japanese Total
1474707 1349111 647589 505225 428140 4404772
0.33 0.31 0.15 0.11 0.1 1

UC Berkeley
Filipinos Chinese Vietnamese Koreans Japanese Total
108 942 142 260 68 1520
0.07 0.62 0.09 0.17 0.04

Filipinos are underrepresented by a factor of 4, Chinese are overrepresented by a factor of 2, Vietnamese are underrepresented by a factor of 60%, Koreans are overrepresented by a factor of 50%, and Japanese are underrepresented by a factor of 2.

However, the term "white" is also an umbrella term, and whites are underrepresented at the UC system, as well. A problem that goes largely unrecognized, here, is that those of Middle Eastern descent are being lumped into the "white" category, and since there are as many Middle Easterners as Chinese in this state, the numbers of "white" people in the UC system is misleading, at best. Here are the numbers for this state:

1,349,111 Chinese

And
715,000 Arabs
500,000 Iranians (in Southern California, alone)
50,000 Afghans
20,000 Israelis
_______________
1,285,000 Middle Easterners. This doesn't include various other Cacuasians that aren't white.

Further, a new racial classification term called "SWANA" (Southwest Asian and North African) a.k.a. Middle Eastern will become a racial checkbox in the UC system, soon. Middle Eastern students became tired of being marginilized by an ethnically inappropriate term (white) and this SWANA designation will start to become used within the coming years. Google it.

Honestly, though, no one is talking about whites being displaced but you.

And another thing, I've said repeatedly in this thread that its n0n-grade robot community college kids that I want to help succeed in matriculating to medical school. A larger problem, as I see it, is that too many kids are being pushed into medicine by their parents or because of the allure of money and prestige. Oftentimes, these same students are extremely insular and out of touch with the real world.

 

[Jennyfishy]

It says in the registrar's listing that the 17 series is at the same level of rigor as the 16 series.

Having taken both (I was able to drop 17 and switch to 16), the rigor is not equivalent. 16 series was hilarious, and we didn't have any weekly quizzes, graded hw, etc. People in 16 complain about how bad the professor is, not how hard the class is. People who took advantage of the optional 16 only did so because it helped ensure a higher GPA.

Communications, design, psychology, and international relations won't get you into a STEM field for graduate school, or prepare you for higher paying fields in business. In fact, a big push at UCD right now is in the recruitment of traditionally underrepresented groups into STEM graduate fields.

Point is, many folks who come in as pre-med do not end up seeing it through, same as those who start at the 4 year as pre-med. Most people in those majors do not go in with the intention of inflating their GPA to pursue a STEM field anyway, even if UCD (and many unis, including secondary schools) are pushing for more STEM majors with their scholarship incentives + college-prep programs. All majors and related careers careers maintain society just as much as science and math does.

I think that I understand what you're trying to say, but there are a lot of transfers that are premeds...there are a significant number of community college students that want to attend medical school. Your attitude is part of the stigma that I've helped work against for some time, now.

There are countless CC and undergrad students alike who want to attend medical school. It doesn't stay that way for either group very long with the high attrition rates and weeder courses.

By your own argument, then the issue isn't bringing in underperforming transfers with TAG programs, but retention on many levels once they get here (this also applies to the 4 year undergrads). I also work extensively in mentorship programs with transfers and undergrads (as well as high schoolers), so making this opportunity available to many students who may not otherwise have access to a UC system isn't the underlying issue for pre-med transfers. I'm not trying to perpetuate any stigmas against transfers.

Those few transfers who do make it from CC to medical school are in the minority, as are the undergrads who finish through and are accepted as well. All I was saying that having been affiliated with the transfer programs on campus at UCD, many of the students (in my experience) were not "Pre-med" even if they were science majors (or later switched), if not in majors that our school is more known for (econ, stats, ecology and evolution, etc.) relative to the larger "transfer population."

However, the term "white" is also an umbrella term, and whites are underrepresented at the UC system, as well.
(words/stats)

I was interpreting what you meant by pasting the pie chart based on the lack of information you provided. Usually when people post these types of pie charts in the past, it was to argue how Asians are not URM and are in fact, doing better than their "White" counterparts, so I was just pointing that out. I'm not trying to argue semantics or who is less represented here.

 

[MDforMee]

Having taken both (I was able to drop 17 and switch to 16), the rigor is not equivalent. 16 series was hilarious, and we didn't have any weekly quizzes, graded hw, etc. People in 16 complain about how bad the professor is, not how hard the class is. People who took advantage of the optional 16 only did so because it helped ensure a higher GPA.

If you haven't taken calculus for scientists and engineers (21 and above), you have no frame of reference. I do. I had big boy calculus at UCLA, and the difference between it and Calculus for social and biological sciences is significant. Just looking at the course descriptions at UCD, I'm shocked that they even teach three different stages of calculus (based on rigor, mostly) to begin with. Short calculus? Are you kidding me?

This raises an interesting point, on its own. UCD itself is claiming that its courses aren't as rigorous as others. So how, then, do the standards of admissions policies for medical school -- that allegedly can't discriminate different University's GPAs -- apply, here? The short answer, like short calculus, is that they don't. I believe that you could even argue this successfully in court if you had to.

The 3.3 vs 3.8 correlation mentioned earlier in this thread isn't all that far from the truth, in my opinion. It might not be as drastic as this, but I don't think that its too impossible to consider.

Point is, many folks who come in as pre-med do not end up seeing it through, same as those who start at the 4 year as pre-med. Most people in those majors do not go in with the intention of inflating their GPA to pursue a STEM field anyway, even if UCD (and many unis, including secondary schools) are pushing for more STEM majors with their scholarship incentives + college-prep programs. All majors and related careers careers maintain society just as much as science and math does.

There are a lot of split issues in your paragraph, here. I'm not sure what your larger point is.

There are countless CC and undergrad students alike who want to attend medical school. It doesn't stay that way for either group very long with the high attrition rates and weeder courses.

By your own argument, then the issue isn't bringing in underperforming transfers with TAG programs, but retention on many levels once they get here (this also applies to the 4 year undergrads). I also work extensively in mentorship programs with transfers and undergrads (as well as high schoolers), so making this opportunity available to many students who may not otherwise have access to a UC system isn't the underlying issue for pre-med transfers. I'm not trying to perpetuate any stigmas against transfers.

No, I never said anything about retention. I've said over and over again that my emphasis is on community college students and under-performing undergraduates; if I wanted to work with retention, I'd work in community colleges and specifically with students that are placed on academic dismissal from UCD. When a student goes below a 2.0, they're given the option to improve coursework for one term, and if they don't, then they're asked to leave the University and they take classes at the community college. Feel free to look up this policy for yourself, I'm a little busy, today.

Anyhow, although I do work at community colleges, too, my focus there is on transfer guidance and science tutoring.

Those few transfers who do make it from CC to medical school are in the minority, as are the undergrads who finish through and are accepted as well. All I was saying that having been affiliated with the transfer programs on campus at UCD, many of the students (in my experience) were not "Pre-med" even if they were science majors (or later switched), if not in majors that our school is more known for (econ, stats, ecology and evolution, etc.) relative to the larger "transfer population."

Fair enough. But, anytime anyone generalizes about community college students not pursuing medicine, I'll speak up. There are also a significant number of community college students taking medical school prerequisites at community colleges. As I said, before, I've been involved with community college premedical students for some time, and they are treated like garbage by some in the student body, sometimes.

I was interpreting what you meant by pasting the pie chart based on the lack of information you provided. Usually when people post these types of pie charts in the past, it was to argue how Asians are not URM and are in fact, doing better than their "White" counterparts, so I was just pointing that out. I'm not trying to argue semantics or who is less represented here.

I said that "Demographics stats are attached. Feel free to draw your own conclusions from that." You can't discuss general trends at UCD without looking at demographics. I prefer not discuss ethnic issues, at this point, anyways, so I left the chart there for those that are interested.

As much as I do enjoying discussing this topic, I have better things to do, today. I just want to add one or two things, though, as they relate to choice of major.

Here are the percentages of UCD students attaining employment in their preferred fields; keep in mind that this isn't finding employment in their field of study.

http://catalog.ucdavis.edu/PDF/ProportionOfUCDGraduates.pdf

Agricultural Sciences, 88%
Humanities, Arts and Cultural Studies, 61%
Biological Sciences, 67%
Human Sciences, 69%
Engineering, 86%
Mathematical and Physical Sciences, 88%
Environmental Sciences, 79%
Social Sciences, 67%



Here are the incomes of graduates in these fields:

You can say that the world needs liberal arts majors, and it does. But why would anyone pursue a 4 year graduate degree in social sciences to make 50 grand a year?

A lot of women are upset about these trends.

 

[sourdoughllama]

The upper division science classes I took at Davis (genetics, biochem, etc) were not curved more generously... the curve was still set at a C+/B-. Granted it was more than a few years ago, but I doubt it's any different now.

.

 

[sourdoughllama]

I had big boy calculus at UCLA, and the difference between it and Calculus for social and biological sciences is significant.

,.

 

[az43]

UCD and UCSD aren't considered equivalent, and won't be for a very long time (if this ranking trend persists). Prestige and popular opinion will usually override rankings and in most people's minds UCD and UCSD are two separate levels. Currently, it's: Cal/UCLA, then UCSD by itself, then UCSB/UCD/UCI, then UCR/UCSC, then Merced and it will stay that way for a looooong time.

I'm not sure about that. Aren't UCD and UCSD both tied for 3rd best UC campus? I know this is kinda drifting off from this threads topic but, I have a question regarding urm's. I'm a first generation college student and I'm of Mexican and Iranian decent. Does that make me a URM?

 

[sourdoughllama]

I'm not sure about that. Aren't UCD and UCSD both tied for 3rd best UC campus? I know this is kinda drifting off from this threads topic but, I have a question regarding urm's. I'm a first generation college student and I'm of Mexican and Iranian decent. Does that make me a URM?

I.

 

[MDforMee]

I'm not sure about that. Aren't UCD and UCSD both tied for 3rd best UC campus? I know this is kinda drifting off from this threads topic but, I have a question regarding urm's. I'm a first generation college student and I'm of Mexican and Iranian decent. Does that make me a URM?

The TAG requirements I posted for UCD vs UCSD should tell you a lot.

I'm not sure about the URM thing. Technically, Iranians are overrepresented, and Hispanics are underrepresented, so they should cancel each other out. Is your non-Iranian parent a white hispanic?

 

[TreadLightly]

The TAG requirements I posted for UCD vs UCSD should tell you a lot.

I'm not sure about the URM thing. Technically, Iranians are overrepresented, and Hispanics are underrepresented, so they should cancel each other out. Is your non-Iranian parent a white hispanic?

So if someone is half Native American and half white does that cancel out too? That's not how urm works.

 

[MDforMee]

So if someone is half Native American and half white does that cancel out too? That's not how urm works.

Great, here comes another argument.

 

[milkandcereal]

It says in the registrar's listing that the 17 series is at the same level of rigor as the 16 series.

I don't get your issue with this. If I'm majoring in biology and have no interest in "big boy calculus", why should I have to take it? 16/17 were definitely easier than the 21 series, without a doubt, but students shouldn't be penalized for taking a course that meets the major requirement. Calculus isn't required for most medical schools, so why should students (with no interest in math/calc) have to take a class full of engineers and chemists who live and breathe calculus?

 

[MDforMee]

I don't get your issue with this. If I'm majoring in biology and have no interest in "big boy calculus", why should I have to take it? 16/17 were definitely easier than the 21 series, without a doubt, but students shouldn't be penalized for taking a course that meets the major requirement. Calculus isn't required for most medical schools, so why should students (with no interest in math/calc) have to take a class full of engineers and chemists who live and breathe calculus?

UCD states that the 16/17 series is easier than the 21 series.

Therefore, grade comparisons can't be made between students taking 16 or 17 and 21.

That's my problem with hard vs easy majors, hard vs easy Universities, and so on when it comes to using GPA for admissions purposes. I'm not sure where you're getting that I told you to take anything.

Do you think that an A- in 16 or 17 should be equal to an A- in 21?

 

[indianjatt]

+1 "Calculus for Life Science Majors" at UCLA might as well had been "remedial AP Calc" - ridiculous. I took Calc for engineering and MDforMee is correct, the life science math courses are UCLA are embarrassingly easy.

I will stand by the comment that 3.8 vs 3.3 is ridiculous though. A 3.3 shows you have difficulty understanding material regardless of which school you attend. So if you're pulling a 3.3 at Cal/UCLA you're not gonna be getting 3.8 at any UC. If you argue 3.9/4.0 UCD vs 3.7/3.8 UCLA/Cal I can buy that.



UCD and UCSD aren't considered equivalent, and won't be for a very long time (if this ranking trend persists). Prestige and popular opinion will usually override rankings and in most people's minds UCD and UCSD are two separate levels. Currently, it's: Cal/UCLA, then UCSD by itself, then UCSB/UCD/UCI, then UCR/UCSC, then Merced and it will stay that way for a looooong time.

I'd just like to point out that CA does a lot of things poorly but the UC system is amazing in terms of state-funded higher education and pretty much unmatched by any other state

I don't want to argue with you bro, but what's your reasoning for your stratified ranking scheme? SD is not much better than UCD. Sure they have a stronger bio sci program, but Davis has one of the best vet programs, agricultural programs, marine bio programs, and may other programs are definitely on the rise.

 

[sourdoughllama]

I don't want to argue with you bro, but what's your reasoning for your stratified ranking scheme? SD is not much better than UCD. Sure they have a stronger bio sci program, but Davis has one of the best vet programs, agricultural programs, marine bio programs, and may other programs are definitely on the rise.

.

 

[mcloaf]

I don't want to argue with you bro, but what's your reasoning for your stratified ranking scheme? SD is not much better than UCD. Sure they have a stronger bio sci program, but Davis has one of the best vet programs, agricultural programs, marine bio programs, and may other programs are definitely on the rise.

As someone not from California, that list is pretty much spot on as far as how the UCs are regarded by outsiders.

 

[sinombre]

Technically the "official" rankings are the same, according to a magazine sold next to tabloids in supermarkets.

 

[MDforMee]

I think that I'm the only UC Davis student here that can be impartial and agree that its reputation and academic rigor isn't on par with UCLA, UCB, and to a lesser but still significant extent UCSD. 🙁

That aside, I'm trying to help change this by helping change UCD's reputation (and students, of course) in what ways I can. If this stuff bothers you, too, try and change it, yourself. Sitting here complaining about it won't solve anything. Don't hate, participate.

 

[MDforMee]

I thought that there'd be a line out of the door for responses to my last post, by now. You Davis people aren't going to throw rocks at me or anything, are you?

 

[az43]

The TAG requirements I posted for UCD vs UCSD should tell you a lot.

I'm not sure about the URM thing. Technically, Iranians are overrepresented, and Hispanics are underrepresented, so they should cancel each other out. Is your non-Iranian parent a white hispanic?

My father is a hispanic immigrant.

 

[sinombre]

I thought that there'd be a line out of the door for responses to my last post, by now. You Davis people aren't going to throw rocks at me or anything, are you?

I think you're kidding yourself if you think you're impartial, and I think it's strange that you're convinced that there's some sort of epidemic of underperforming students there. I can only speak to my experiences... I thoroughly enjoyed my time there, felt adequately challenged by the lower and upper division science courses I took, had a number of great clinical and research opportunities, and felt prepared when I started medical school last year. It seems to me that all of those things matter a whole lot more than whatever differences in rigor (which are impossible to quantify in any meaningful way) there are between Davis and the other UCs.

 

[brrenters]

I thought that there'd be a line out of the door for responses to my last post, by now. You Davis people aren't going to throw rocks at me or anything, are you?

flame bating over college rankings and perceived academic rigor? someone smoke this homie out plz

 

[milkandcereal]

UCD states that the 16/17 series is easier than the 21 series.

Therefore, grade comparisons can't be made between students taking 16 or 17 and 21.

That's my problem with hard vs easy majors, hard vs easy Universities, and so on when it comes to using GPA for admissions purposes. I'm not sure where you're getting that I told you to take anything.

Do you think that an A- in 16 or 17 should be equal to an A- in 21?

I don't think a student who received an A- in 17 necessarily has the same level of calculus mastery as a student who received an A- in 21, but I also don't think either A- should be worth any more or less than the other.

 

[SunsFun]

Let's forget about this meaningless trivia discussed on last several pages and focus on what really matters. Which school has hotter girls?

 

[MDforMee]

I think you're kidding yourself if you think you're impartial, and I think it's strange that you're convinced that there's some sort of epidemic of underperforming students there. I can only speak to my experiences... I thoroughly enjoyed my time there, felt adequately challenged by the lower and upper division science courses I took, had a number of great clinical and research opportunities, and felt prepared when I started medical school last year. It seems to me that all of those things matter a whole lot more than whatever differences in rigor (which are impossible to quantify in any meaningful way) there are between Davis and the other UCs.

Epidemic? Have you even heard of the UCD Pre-Health Alliance? It's what became of the ARC (American River College, a community college)/UCD AMSA chapter.

http://www.ucdprehealth.org/about/

Their mission statement is:
"The UC Davis Pre-Health Student Alliance’s objective is to introduce and support academic, admission, and preparatory opportunities for all students interested in health professions with a focus on those underrepresented in healthcare (with regard to gender, economic, social, educational, linguistic, cultural, racial, and ethnic background). We target universities, community colleges and high schools throughout the United States. The UC Davis Pre-Health Student Alliance aims to impact health education, increase diversity amongst the healthcare workforce, and inspire future leaders of healthcare through hosting the largest national pre-health professions conference."

Some of their clubs include:

• Pre-Med AMSA at UC Davis
• Pre-SOMA at UC Davis
• Kappa Gamma Delta at UC Davis
• Sigma Mu Delta at UC Davis
• FAHC (Filipino Association for Health Careers) at UC Davis
• MAPS (Minority Association of Pre-Med Students) at UC Davis
• SAMA (Students Advocating Medical Awareness)

Many of these organizations target women, underrepresented minorities in medicine, and various other ethnic/cultural/sex based groups.

You'll notice that their mission statement says "... economic, social, educational..." and so on. Uhh, community college students from the Sacramento area are who I've been working with or involved with for a very long time. A lot of the time, they're intimidated by these large groups and don't know how to become involved.

A big problem, I've found, is that at the point where community college students transition to the University they often have a difficult time. It's sad that some community colleges aren't as rigorous as the University, but that's just the way that it is. With the open door policy of UCD's TAG, this makes things even harder for some students, because they're admitted after only a year of coursework in liberal arts at a community college, and this does not prepare them for science majors.

I have the experience and expertise to help students like these. I do not see a benefit to large groups like the ones mentioned, above, if their focus isn't on community outreach. All groups aren't the same, but in my experience, it's not supposed to be helping yourself get into medical school, it's about helping other people. Sorry, guys.

Today, for instance, I'm getting a background check at Sierra College to start tutoring and providing transfer guidance, there. Afterwards, I'm driving to Sacramento City College to introduce myself to their Chemistry for health science class at the request of the instructor.

Long story short, you all can sit here and play the reputation game, and complain about the fact that UCD's classes are easier than other UCs, that they admit twice as many students (percentage wise), that the impacted majors there are easy, etc etc and I'll keep sitting here showing you hard data and statistics proving this to be true. I've done so repeatedly in this thread.

I still fail to see UCD students getting the short end of the stick. I attended 5 Northern California community colleges, moving around the state working odd jobs and sleeping on friends couches. I was the first in my family to attend college. Thinking I'd never get into UCD, something that had always been a goal of mine, I went to CSU Sacramento. I didn't want to feel that I hadn't tried my hardest or done by best, which apparently I wasn't since I was receiving a 4.0, so I returned to community college and transferred to UCLA. I'm currently doing a masters that many think is a waste of time. I'm only doing it to be the best doctor that I can be, and because it interests me.

If I can help students benefit from my experience, I'll do it. To me, it sounds like a lot of you need a reality check, though. You sound out of touch with the real world, frankly, and I am really starting to wonder if any of you have done things like I have to gain an appreciation for things that you work hard for... such as being a CNA in long term care, working fast food jobs, working day labor, and things of that nature. In short, it sounds to me like you can't appreciate what you have, and that you'd be willing to ignore the truth in favor of what little advantage you seem to think you'll gain by perpetuating the ease of academics at UCD blindness if it'll help you sound 2% better on paper.

 

[Jennyfishy]

Now I have no idea what's going on... UCD alums, including myself, are saying they felt the academic environment and opportunities offered by our school were far more than enough to be prepared for medical school and do well despite reputations and perceived differences in rigor between our school/classes within the school and other "better schools." Even though I took "easy calculus" vs "big boy calculus" that has no impact on my gaining acceptance to a good med school. I did well in a major I enjoyed, was involved, and took classes that were challenging in their own way without requiring difficult mathmatic calculations.

What are we even debating anymore? I think I've been trolled...

 

[sinombre]

Epidemic? Have you even heard of the UCD Pre-Health Alliance? It's what became of the ARC (American River College, a community college)/UCD AMSA chapter.

http://www.ucdprehealth.org/about/

Their mission statement is:
"The UC Davis Pre-Health Student Alliance’s objective is to introduce and support academic, admission, and preparatory opportunities for all students interested in health professions with a focus on those underrepresented in healthcare (with regard to gender, economic, social, educational, linguistic, cultural, racial, and ethnic background). We target universities, community colleges and high schools throughout the United States. The UC Davis Pre-Health Student Alliance aims to impact health education, increase diversity amongst the healthcare workforce, and inspire future leaders of healthcare through hosting the largest national pre-health professions conference."

Some of their clubs include:

• Pre-Med AMSA at UC Davis
• Pre-SOMA at UC Davis
• Kappa Gamma Delta at UC Davis
• Sigma Mu Delta at UC Davis
• FAHC (Filipino Association for Health Careers) at UC Davis
• MAPS (Minority Association of Pre-Med Students) at UC Davis
• SAMA (Students Advocating Medical Awareness)

Many of these organizations target women, underrepresented minorities in medicine, and various other ethnic/cultural/sex based groups.

You'll notice that their mission statement says "... economic, social, educational..." and so on. Uhh, community college students from the Sacramento area are who I've been working with or involved with for a very long time. A lot of the time, they're intimidated by these large groups and don't know how to become involved.

A big problem, I've found, is that at the point where community college students transition to the University they often have a difficult time. It's sad that some community colleges aren't as rigorous as the University, but that's just the way that it is. With the open door policy of UCD's TAG, this makes things even harder for some students, because they're admitted after only a year of coursework in liberal arts at a community college, and this does not prepare them for science majors.

I have the experience and expertise to help students like these. I do not see a benefit to large groups like the ones mentioned, above, if their focus isn't on community outreach. All groups aren't the same, but in my experience, it's not supposed to be helping yourself get into medical school, it's about helping other people. Sorry, guys.

Today, for instance, I'm getting a background check at Sierra College to start tutoring and providing transfer guidance, there. Afterwards, I'm driving to Sacramento City College to introduce myself to their Chemistry for health science class at the request of the instructor.

Long story short, you all can sit here and play the reputation game, and complain about the fact that UCD's classes are easier than other UCs, that they admit twice as many students (percentage wise), that the impacted majors there are easy, etc etc and I'll keep sitting here showing you hard data and statistics proving this to be true. I've done so repeatedly in this thread.

I still fail to see UCD students getting the short end of the stick. I attended 5 Northern California community colleges, moving around the state working odd jobs and sleeping on friends couches. I was the first in my family to attend college. Thinking I'd never get into UCD, something that had always been a goal of mine, I went to CSU Sacramento. I didn't want to feel that I hadn't tried my hardest or done by best, which apparently I wasn't since I was receiving a 4.0, so I returned to community college and transferred to UCLA. I'm currently doing a masters that many think is a waste of time. I'm only doing it to be the best doctor that I can be, and because it interests me.

If I can help students benefit from my experience, I'll do it. To me, it sounds like a lot of you need a reality check, though. You sound out of touch with the real world, frankly, and I am really starting to wonder if any of you have done things like I have to gain an appreciation for things that you work hard for... such as being a CNA in long term care, working fast food jobs, working day labor, and things of that nature. In short, it sounds to me like you can't appreciate what you have, and that you'd be willing to ignore the truth in favor of what little advantage you seem to think you'll gain by perpetuating the ease of academics at UCD blindness if it'll help you sound 2% better on paper.

None of this has anything to do with what you replied to.

My points:

-I went to Davis (which I chose over Cal for personal reasons, which don't apply to the OP).
-I was challenged, and did well.
-I enjoyed my time as an undergrad.
-I had a good amount of clinical/research experiences.
-I felt the "rigor" of the classes I took prepared me for medical school.
-I was a successful applicant and have done well during first year.

At the end of the day, the OP won't be shooting him/herself in the foot by choosing either school. To be clear, I am not advocating choosing Davis over Cal, I'm just providing an anecdotal experience as someone who did and was successful.

 

[MDforMee]

None of this has anything to do with what you replied to.

My points:

-I went to Davis (which I chose over Cal for personal reasons, which don't apply to the OP).
-I was challenged, and did well.
-I enjoyed my time as an undergrad.
-I had a good amount of clinical/research experiences.
-I felt the "rigor" of the classes I took prepared me for medical school.
-I was a successful applicant and have done well during first year.

At the end of the day, the OP won't be shooting him/herself in the foot by choosing either school. To be clear, I am not advocating choosing Davis over Cal, I'm just providing an anecdotal experience as someone who did and was successful.

I addressed your accusation about thinking its strange to help transfers and undergrads, thank you.

If you don't want my opinions on other issues, I'd advise against accusing me of anything else.

 

[sinombre]

I addressed your accusation about thinking its strange to help transfers and undergrads, thank you.

If you don't want my opinions on other issues, I'd advise against accusing me of anything else.

I think it's great that you're helping transfer students. I just think we're talking about completely different issues. I'm saying that Davis as an institution provided me with the opportunities to succeed in getting where I wanted to go, and you're focusing on problems with transfer students. One thing we might disagree on is the supposed rigor of the pre-med classes at Davis. I went through them and was prepared for medical school, and so I feel confident in saying that the differences in rigor between Davis and Cal or UCLA (which again are impossible to quantify) are irrelevant to the OP.

 

[AlbinoHawk DO]

+1 "Calculus for Life Science Majors" at UCLA might as well had been "remedial AP Calc" - ridiculous. I took Calc for engineering and MDforMee is correct, the life science math courses are UCLA are embarrassingly easy.

I will stand by the comment that 3.8 vs 3.3 is ridiculous though. A 3.3 shows you have difficulty understanding material regardless of which school you attend. So if you're pulling a 3.3 at Cal/UCLA you're not gonna be getting 3.8 at any UC. If you argue 3.9/4.0 UCD vs 3.7/3.8 UCLA/Cal I can buy that.



UCD and UCSD aren't considered equivalent, and won't be for a very long time (if this ranking trend persists). Prestige and popular opinion will usually override rankings and in most people's minds UCD and UCSD are two separate levels. Currently, it's: Cal/UCLA, then UCSD by itself, then UCSB/UCD/UCI, then UCR/UCSC, then Merced and it will stay that way for a looooong time.

I'd just like to point out that CA does a lot of things poorly but the UC system is amazing in terms of state-funded higher education and pretty much unmatched by any other state

Where are you getting these popular opinion rankings? Never heard of it that way. It has always been stanford/Berkeley then USC/UCLA, which are the colleges for rich kids that couldn't make it into cal or Stanford, so they go to the college that takes them for their parent's money.

 

[milkandcereal]

Where are you getting these popular opinion rankings? Never heard of it that way. It has always been stanford/Berkeley then USC/UCLA, which are the colleges for rich kids that couldn't make it into cal or Stanford, so they go to the college that takes them for their parent's money.

I think he was just talking about the UC's, not the private schools you mentioned. When I was applying for colleges in HS, I definitely remember the "rankings" the way he said them. Seemed to be a pretty common opinion at my school.