UCLA/Caltech MSTP

[docahk]

Hi All,
I got my first interview at the UCLA/Caltech program. Anybody interview at this place before? Also, There are more slots in the UCLA/UCLA m.d./ph.d. then are in the UCLA/Caltech m.d./ph.d., does that make the UCLA/Caltech program more competitive than the UCLA/UCLA one? I called up the office, but the woman says no because they are both in the same program. I am nervous, it's my first interview, and it's also my number one choice.
Thanks for any advice. docahk

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[tedrik]

A couple years ago I spoke with one of the faculty on the admissions committee at UCLA and she said that applying to the UCLA/Caltech program doesn't hurt your chances. She actually said that she doesn't understand why anyone wouldn't apply for the joint program because there is really no downside to it. You aren't committing to anything at this stage, but you are possibly expanding your options for doing your PhD. So if anything, this has made you look like you have done your homework and you realize the benefits of applying for the joint program.

You sound a bit stressed though. Don't worry so much, if you've already gotten an interview then I'm sure you are a great candidate. Btw, I am waiting to hear from them too, would you mind telling me when you were complete/invited?

thanks and good luck!

 

[Habari]

i was accepted to this program a couple years back. at the time, there were 2 slots (i think it is the case now as well) to do ones phd at caltech. if, in your first two years, you find someone at ucla that you'd like to work with, you may do so, and a classmate who was accepted to the ucla/ucla program may elect to go to caltech (to maintain 2 students there).

they end up accepting about 6 students to fill the 2 slots at caltech (people withdraw their acceptance for other programs). the ucla/caltech program is undoubtedly more competitive than the ucla/ucla program, but that doesn't make it 'better'. they have very different scientific offerings, and many consider the distance/disconnection from the main mstp program to be a disadvantage. in addition, i think the first ucla/caltech mstp class will be graduating this year (+/- 1 year) so it is unclear how they will fair (i wouldn't worry too much about this). caltech is an amazing place to do ones phd, i just didn't think it was the best environment in which to be an mstp candidate (purely my personal opinion). it is definately a great option to have, nevertheless.

 

[docahk]

Hey, in response to your question, this program's application was the first I had in the mail completed: 8/15/04. And I got a response from them for interview about two weeks ago. Rest assured, I am not your star candidate. My gpa(bio-engineering) and mcat are average, but my research is strong with publications (PNAS, second author, among others). Undoubtedly, my low mcat and gpa was the reason for some rejections (weill tri-institutuional m.d. ph.d.--bastards) Thanks for your advice. docahk

A couple years ago I spoke with one of the faculty on the admissions committee at UCLA and she said that applying to the UCLA/Caltech program doesn't hurt your chances. She actually said that she doesn't understand why anyone wouldn't apply for the joint program because there is really no downside to it. You aren't committing to anything at this stage, but you are possibly expanding your options for doing your PhD. So if anything, this has made you look like you have done your homework and you realize the benefits of applying for the joint program.

You sound a bit stressed though. Don't worry so much, if you've already gotten an interview then I'm sure you are a great candidate. Btw, I am waiting to hear from them too, would you mind telling me when you were complete/invited?

thanks and good luck!

 

[docahk]

Hi Habari, do you have any advice when speaking with Patterson (caltech), do you think it 's a good idea to brush up on his research? I have three lab books all in my own writing from when I did research at UCSF, these thick tome's full of gels and data look pretty impressive by girth, but thtey are sloppy, do you think I should bring them to my interview at UCLA/Caltech program? Thanks, docahk

i was accepted to this program a couple years back. at the time, there were 2 slots (i think it is the case now as well) to do ones phd at caltech. if, in your first two years, you find someone at ucla that you'd like to work with, you may do so, and a classmate who was accepted to the ucla/ucla program may elect to go to caltech (to maintain 2 students there).

they end up accepting about 6 students to fill the 2 slots at caltech (people withdraw their acceptance for other programs). the ucla/caltech program is undoubtedly more competitive than the ucla/ucla program, but that doesn't make it 'better'. they have very different scientific offerings, and many consider the distance/disconnection from the main mstp program to be a disadvantage. in addition, i think the first ucla/caltech mstp class will be graduating this year (+/- 1 year) so it is unclear how they will fair (i wouldn't worry too much about this). caltech is an amazing place to do ones phd, i just didn't think it was the best environment in which to be an mstp candidate (purely my personal opinion). it is definately a great option to have, nevertheless.

 

[Habari]

don't bring any of your lab books. would be poor form.

i happened to know something about his research just because i was considering working in that area when i applied (not the case now), it may have helped, who knows. otherwise i would know your own research well, and be able to explain why caltech is uniquely suited for your needs. expressing that it is your top choice, if it is, would be helpful. otherwise don't stress, and don't put all your emotional energies into an acceptance to that program (not you personally, but anyone). they usually initially accept students with extremely high grades/mcats, or those that for some reason or another are uniquely suited to being at caltech. they also don't always get the candidates they want, so the prospects on a waitlist aren't bad.

Hi Habari, do you have any advice when speaking with Patterson (caltech), do you think it 's a good idea to brush up on his research? I have three lab books all in my own writing from when I did research at UCSF, these thick tome's full of gels and data look pretty impressive by girth, but thtey are sloppy, do you think I should bring them to my interview at UCLA/Caltech program? Thanks, docahk

 

[docahk]

Hi Habari,
I was thinking of bringing to my interview a printed copy of my group meeting slides that show my work in a neat visual format. whaddya think?
docahk.

don't bring any of your lab books. would be poor form.

i happened to know something about his research just because i was considering working in that area when i applied (not the case now), it may have helped, who knows. otherwise i would know your own research well, and be able to explain why caltech is uniquely suited for your needs. expressing that it is your top choice, if it is, would be helpful. otherwise don't stress, and don't put all your emotional energies into an acceptance to that program (not you personally, but anyone). they usually initially accept students with extremely high grades/mcats, or those that for some reason or another are uniquely suited to being at caltech. they also don't always get the candidates they want, so the prospects on a waitlist aren't bad.

 

[Habari]

if you'd like. i wouldn't, and it shouldn't be necessary. your interview though -

 

[doctorvenkman]

Hey all,

I'm a first year MSTP student at UCLA and I'd be happy to answer any questions anyone has. To all applicants: try not to stress, pace yourselves, and I'm sure you'll all do fine.

Cheers,
Ezra

 

[tedrik]

Hey doctorvenkman,

thanks for coming on here and offering your help, that's very cool of you! Last year my friend was applying to UCLA and he said that they were making major changes in the curriculum and I was wondering how this has all worked out. Are the students happy? Do things seem to be organized?

Thanks a lot!

 

[doctorvenkman]

Hi Tedrik,

The medical school curriculum was rearranged last year per the PBL trend that's sweeping the country. I find it difficult to judge because this is the only medical school I know, but things are incredibly organized, and everyone seems to like it. All materials, handouts, slides, etc are on a webserver, so everything is easily available. I have to say that's pretty sweet. The new curriculum is organized by "block", not by course, with "threads" transcending across blocks. For example, Block I(which just ended, yay) was Foundations of Medicine, and Block II is Cardiac, Renal, and Respiratory Medicine. "Threads" are analagous to courses, so there's a physiology thread, a histology thread, etc. Each thread is featured(to varying degrees) in all blocks though, so in Block I we hardly had any anatomy at all, but lots of histology.

Hope this helps....let me know if there's any other questions you've got.

Hey doctorvenkman,

thanks for coming on here and offering your help, that's very cool of you! Last year my friend was applying to UCLA and he said that they were making major changes in the curriculum and I was wondering how this has all worked out. Are the students happy? Do things seem to be organized?

Thanks a lot!

 

[clockitnow]

Are admissions decisions at UCLA made on a rolling basis? I talked to the office and they said no, but I am still worried about being at a disadvantage if I interview in January instead of October. Please advise ASAP.

 

[doctorvenkman]

The short answer is I don't know. I don't want to make any assumptions about anything the admissions office does. I'm happy to advise on things that I do know (a little) about: medicine at UCLA, research at UCLA, the atmosphere here, Los Angeles, etc, etc.

Are admissions decisions at UCLA made on a rolling basis? I talked to the office and they said no, but I am still worried about being at a disadvantage if I interview in January instead of October. Please advise ASAP.

 

[Habari]

the medical admissions are made on a rolling basis, and some candidates are contacted for mstp positions earlier on. most offers to students who matriculate are made well past january.

 

[clockitnow]

Thanks guys, I talked to tha admissions office a second time and they reassured me that I was at no disadvantage interviewing later. So no one else needs to worry.

 

[TJK]

The short answer is I don't know. I don't want to make any assumptions about anything the admissions office does. I'm happy to advise on things that I do know (a little) about: medicine at UCLA, research at UCLA, the atmosphere here, Los Angeles, etc, etc.

Hi doctorvenkman,

I have a question regarding the faculty I can choose for my interview. My research in on the visual system but I would like to work on neuropharmacology in the future. Therefore, should I choose the faculty who work on the visual system to interview me (which would be at my advantage since I have strong background knowledge in this area) or should I choose the people who work on neuropharmacology for my interview (which would mean I need to do some more background reading)? Your reply is much appreciated.

 

[pseudoknot]

Therefore, should I choose the faculty who work on the visual system to interview me (which would be at my advantage since I have strong background knowledge in this area) or should I choose the people who work on neuropharmacology for my interview (which would mean I need to do some more background reading)? Your reply is much appreciated.

You should choose to speak to profs with whom you might want to work; they will only expect you to know YOUR area of research, and to listen with great interest about theirs. None of the (admitted) MD/PhD and PhD students I know did much research into their interviewer's work (not to the extent of reading their papers anyway).

 

[doctorvenkman]

I agree. You should be able explain your work to any faculty member, whether or not they're in your field. This is one of the major parts of the MSTP interview. Choose your interviewers based on whom you might want to work with.

You should choose to speak to profs with whom you might want to work; they will only expect you to know YOUR area of research, and to listen with great interest about theirs. None of the (admitted) MD/PhD and PhD students I know did much research into their interviewer's work (not to the extent of reading their papers anyway).

 

[TJK]

Thanks venkman and benjamin for your replies!

 

[Stanley]

Hi seasoned MSTPers,

Are the advices of choosing faculty for interviews based on one's interests in graduate research rather than on one's current research applicable to other universities as well (particulary U of Wash in St. Louis)?

Thank you in advance for your replies.