UCLA vs. USC

[ooowee]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I apologize if this thread has already been created, but I just wanted to hear some current feedback on this comparison.

I've heard that USC has a more relaxed vibe with happier students and a better alumni base, whereas UCLA has a better reputation and is cheaper...

Overall though, which is a smarter choice for landing a job in L.A. (or elsewhere, as a second case) as a general dentist, without initial connections?

And in the case of specializing, which school is the better option? (More people come out specializing from UCLA, but it seems easier to do well at USC, i.e. higher GPA? Correct me if I'm wrong though.)



Also, it'd be awesome to hear about any other opinions on these two schools.

Thanks much in advance!

 

[Daurang]

GO TO THE CHEAPER SCHOOL! Debt is a b!tch on your wealth and lifestyle. Forget reputation because no patients really care.

 

[charlestweed]

UCLA:

- It is no longer a cheap school…but it is still a lot cheaper than USC
- Pass/Fail. Just pass every class, score 90+ on the NDBE, and you can become an orthodontist. Because of the P/F, there is no competition and the students are very friendly to their classmates.
- Great location. Westwood area is very safe. No need for an escort service, you can walk home late at night.
- Easy clinical requirements: 12 crowns, 3-4 endos, 4RPDs etc.

USC:

- Expensive.
- PBL program.
- Tough clinical requirements. Clinical Competency exams are very hard to pass and dental chair availability has been a huge problem.
- Problem with graduating on time.
- Great football program....but the team is not eligible to play in the bowl game for the next 2 years😱.

 

[dmitriyivanov]

UCLA:

- It is no longer a cheap school…but it is still a lot cheaper than USC
- Pass/Fail. Just pass every class, score 90+ on the NDBE, and you can become an orthodontist. Because of the P/F, there is no competition and the students are very friendly to their classmates.
- Great location. Westwood area is very safe. No need for an escort service, you can walk home late at night.
- Easy clinical requirements: 12 crowns, 3-4 endos, 4RPDs etc.

USC:

- Expensive.
- PBL program.
- Tough clinical requirements. Clinical Competency exams are very hard to pass and dental chair availability has been a huge problem.
- Problem with graduating on time.
- Great football program....but the team is not eligible to play in the bowl game for the next 2 years😱.

👍👍👍👍👍👍 Amen to that! Suckers

 

[New2Philly]

I've heard from some recent USC grads that it is really difficult to practice in So. Cal with the amount of debt that USC will give you right now; in that So. Cal. is extremely competitive and associates are making substantially less then in other parts of the country. Also, during my interview lunch a student told me that the class of 2010 revolted against the admin demanding better didactic instruction.
I don't want to bash USC, b/c there are some great students going there, it just can't compare to UCLA

 

[xhamburgersamx]

UCLA:

- It is no longer a cheap school…but it is still a lot cheaper than USC
- Pass/Fail. Just pass every class, score 90+ on the NDBE, and you can become an orthodontist. Because of the P/F, there is no competition and the students are very friendly to their classmates.
- Great location. Westwood area is very safe. No need for an escort service, you can walk home late at night.
- Easy clinical requirements: 12 crowns, 3-4 endos, 4RPDs etc.

USC:

- Expensive.
- PBL program.
- Tough clinical requirements. Clinical Competency exams are very hard to pass and dental chair availability has been a huge problem.
- Problem with graduating on time.
- Great football program....but the team is not eligible to play in the bowl game for the next 2 years😱.

Wow this is biased but one thing that sets USC apart is the clinical requirements. The comps are really that not that bad unless you are incompetent. But honestly, when you come out of USC, you are ready to work. UCLA students not so much, many of them do GPRs or AEGDs or go on to specialize. USC Does not baby you, some of the faculty are down right old school and will yell/scream at you until you get it right. No one is really going to baby you through their clinical program. BTW, all the pre-clinical sim lab work is done with requirements that get you ready for WREBs. For example, the WREB may have a 1.0mm max extension, but in order to pass at USC, a 0.5mm is required.

 

[ChubbyBaby]

you'd be a ***** to pick usc over ucla.

 

[senpai]

Wow this is biased but one thing that sets USC apart is the clinical requirements. The comps are really that not that bad unless you are incompetent. But honestly, when you come out of USC, you are ready to work. UCLA students not so much, many of them do GPRs or AEGDs or go on to specialize. USC Does not baby you, some of the faculty are down right old school and will yell/scream at you until you get it right. No one is really going to baby you through their clinical program. BTW, all the pre-clinical sim lab work is done with requirements that get you ready for WREBs. For example, the WREB may have a 1.0mm max extension, but in order to pass at USC, a 0.5mm is required.

So UCLA students go on to specialties, GPRs/AEGDs, etc. because they are crappy dentist coming out of school??? WTF???

I think the opposite is more true... You don't see alot of USC grads going on to specialty programs, GPRs/AEGDs because THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED academically (board scores, class rank, GPA, etc.) or clinically.

Everyone watch out when you go to your Endodontist or Orthodontist! He/she was probably the worst clinician in his/her class!!!


Oh, and having your faculty members yell/scream at you is a big plus also👍👍👍

 

[americanpierg]

I'm not familiar with either school, but going by what I see on this forum from the past 5+ years, I would have to go with UCLA.

USC just seems way too big, plus the fact that its crazy expensive. I don't see how people are more relaxed when their paying almost 70k a year in tuition alone. Everyone just seems to be fighting crazy hard to get into UCLA, while USC seems like they accept almost everyone (im not saying they accpet EVERYONE as they obviously dont but competition to get in doesnt seem anywhere as difficult as at UCLA).

Plus USC's football team is gonna become crap for the next decade or so. Multiple years of loss scholarships and bowl bans? Good luck passing that by your recruits. I'd give them 7 years (2+ 5 post ban) before they make it into another bowl game.

 

[476515678234896]

USC v UCLA? seriously?

they're not even in the same league (at the DS level)

 

[libratl]

Pick UCLA, if you have the choice to go to both.

USC offers better clinical education right out of dental school, with its tedious clinical requirements and comps. However, I don't see an advantage in the long run. I think within 5 years out of graduation (or even less) dental grads of all school more or less normalize to similar clinical skills anyways.

If you are specializing, don't go to USC. Not because of PBL or not. This is due to the fact that you may not complete requirement on time, hence you risk your hard earned residency spot being given away. Eg. I feel more stress trying to graduating on time than the whole OMFS application/matching process.

 

[ChubbyBaby]

Not because of PBL or not.

I actually think PBL is an enormous waste of time. Another reason not to go to USC.

 

[Oracle DMD]

if they cost even close to the same, i'd go to USC. pascal magne is there, and if you can get into his esthietics workshop, you will be sick at esthetic cases. (or at least have a substantial head start) UCLA is a little gassed up IMO

 

[Oracle DMD]

USC v UCLA? seriously?

they're not even in the same league (at the DS level)

this is nonsense. there isn't a whole lot that seperates dental schools i the first place, but pre-dents and UC's tout fictional reputations all too often. USC and UCLA are in the EXACT same league, unless you're getting in state tuition....which is the only upside to UCLA (a big one, but through no other leverage than being subsidized by the state)

 

[Oracle DMD]

you'd be a ***** to pick usc over ucla.

a brilliant arguement.

 

[Oracle DMD]

I've heard from some recent USC grads that it is really difficult to practice in So. Cal with the amount of debt that USC will give you right now; in that So. Cal. is extremely competitive and associates are making substantially less then in other parts of the country. Also, during my interview lunch a student told me that the class of 2010 revolted against the admin demanding better didactic instruction.
I don't want to bash USC, b/c there are some great students going there, it just can't compare to UCLA

with the new income based repayment programs, practicing wherever you want is a real possibility...check it out.
http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/IBRPlan.jsp

and correct me if i'm wrong but i think usc's 4th year is a shorter/cheaper year as well.

 

[New2Philly]

with the new income based repayment programs, practicing wherever you want is a real possibility...check it out.
http://studentaid.ed.gov/PORTALSWebApp/students/english/IBRPlan.jsp

and correct me if i'm wrong but i think usc's 4th year is a shorter/cheaper year as well.

Thank you. I am pretty sure that these grads were just blowing steam with how much loans they have, and how little assoc are being paid (according to them)....

 

[armorshell]

Thank you. I am pretty sure that these grads were just blowing steam with how much loans they have, and how little assoc are being paid (according to them)....

Not really. Finding decent work in areas as saturated as SoCal or the Bay area is no joke, and all the California schools furnish their students with incredible debts.

IBR is new and seems neat, but I recommend anyone who's thinking it will be their savior really break it down with their financial aid staff. I was very excited about what it had to offer until I did so. Turns out it's actually not a very attractive option.

 

[Oracle DMD]

Not really. Finding decent work in areas as saturated as SoCal or the Bay area is no joke, and all the California schools furnish their students with incredible debts.

IBR is new and seems neat, but I recommend anyone who's thinking it will be their savior really break it down with their financial aid staff. I was very excited about what it had to offer until I did so. Turns out it's actually not a very attractive option.

can you tell me a little more about what you found out and why it isn't as attractive as it might seem? if you wanna work on socal, why can't you buy an existing practice? the stats we are all hearing is that there are more dentist are retiring this year, than graduating from dschool, so why is it so hard to find a practice to buy?

 

[armorshell]

can you tell me a little more about what you found out and why it isn't as attractive as it might seem? if you wanna work on socal, why can't you buy an existing practice? the stats we are all hearing is that there are more dentist are retiring this year, than graduating from dschool, so why is it so hard to find a practice to buy?

Buying a practice directly out of school is a dangerous and frightening prospect for a new grad. The majority (not everyone, but the majority), have little to no experience with the patient and staff management required to flawlessly work in, let alone run a private practice right out the gate. Most dental graduates, while competent, are slow as molasses.

Not to mention that the "more dentists retiring than graduating" was a statistic thrown around before the recession, and apparently people are sticking around in practices that they would have sold off years ago because of how bad things are.

Maybe in a few years here the best way to pick up a practice will be to wait for the owner to keel over while prepping a crown and swoop in and buy the practice from the bereaved.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

can you tell me a little more about what you found out and why it isn't as attractive as it might seem? if you wanna work on socal, why can't you buy an existing practice? the stats we are all hearing is that there are more dentist are retiring this year, than graduating from dschool, so why is it so hard to find a practice to buy?

THis is the cliff notes version I am aware of.

If you are on a 25 year plan and have something like $300,000 in debt and decide to do the standard 15% of your income payback, you will probably will have paid back more money in the long run. The concept is simple, when you are in your 15-25 years in practice, your will have maximized your skill and thus your income earning potential. Thus, 15% of your income will surpass the amount you owe if you were on a standard 25 year payment. If this occurs, you can still proceed with the loan forgiveness program or just decide to pay off all the loans immediately. the only issue with paying back everything in the later years is that your initial 15% of income earning in the very early years or repayment were only paying back the INTEREST on the loans and not the principle balance...THUS you still have an incredible balance in the high 200-300K range. Work out the numbers and details of the program.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

So UCLA students go on to specialties, GPRs/AEGDs, etc. because they are crappy dentist coming out of school??? WTF???

I think the opposite is more true... You don't see alot of USC grads going on to specialty programs, GPRs/AEGDs because THEY ARE NOT QUALIFIED academically (board scores, class rank, GPA, etc.) or clinically.

Everyone watch out when you go to your Endodontist or Orthodontist! He/she was probably the worst clinician in his/her class!!!


Oh, and having your faculty members yell/scream at you is a big plus also👍👍👍

I don't see or you don't see?

There are a lot of grads going on to specialty programs and that is their choice and not something the general USC population desires to pursue. It's known that the academic pre-qualifcations (UNDERGRAD) of UCLA students is SUPERIOR to USC students but that OBVIOUSLY doesn't translate directly in terms of clinical or even life skill IQ.

There are some really, really smart people at USC that excel academically but these students are some of the worst or most stressed out clinical students. I'm sure UCLA is just the same. But anyway, you are right about endo/ortho.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

if they cost even close to the same, i'd go to USC. pascal magne is there, and if you can get into his esthietics workshop, you will be sick at esthetic cases. (or at least have a substantial head start) UCLA is a little gassed up IMO

If you get into his study group, you will learn sooooooo much and so many new techniques that he pioneered and learned from europe and aroudn the world. Many people don't even know some of these bonding techniques that Mange teaches exist

 

[Oracle DMD]

THis is the cliff notes version I am aware of.

If you are on a 25 year plan and have something like $300,000 in debt and decide to do the standard 15% of your income payback, you will probably will have paid back more money in the long run. The concept is simple, when you are in your 15-25 years in practice, your will have maximized your skill and thus your income earning potential. Thus, 15% of your income will surpass the amount you owe if you were on a standard 25 year payment. If this occurs, you can still proceed with the loan forgiveness program or just decide to pay off all the loans immediately. the only issue with paying back everything in the later years is that your initial 15% of income earning in the very early years or repayment were only paying back the INTEREST on the loans and not the principle balance...THUS you still have an incredible balance in the high 200-300K range. Work out the numbers and details of the program.

with IBR, when your income doesn't cover the interest, the govt pays the rest (for up to 3 years) and the payments never get larger than the payments of the 10yr repayment plan. what it does do is give you a lot of relief for your 1st 5 years out of school. you can also pay off the loan as soon as you want so its not like you have to stay on that payment schedule. i can't find anything wrong w/ it.

 

[jay47]

Only one thing should come to mind when making this decision (according to ADA 2008-2009 Survey of Dental Education Tuition, Admission and Attrition Volume 2):

UCLA = $156,584 over a 10 year plan @6.8 interest= $1801.97 per month

USC = $282,647 over a 10 year plan @6.8% interest = $3252.71 per month

What can you do with an extra $1450.74 per month ($17408.88 per year)?

You can talk about faculty, "prestige", students, etc...but all of those are subjective. The cost of attendance is not- it is set in stone. I didn't even factor in cost of living.

 

[Oracle DMD]

Only one thing should come to mind when making this decision (according to ADA 2008-2009 Survey of Dental Education Tuition, Admission and Attrition Volume 2):

UCLA = $156,584 over a 10 year plan @6.8 interest= $1801.97 per month

USC = $282,647 over a 10 year plan @6.8% interest = $3252.71 per month

What can you do with an extra $1450.74 per month ($17408.88 per year)?

You can talk about faculty, "prestige", students, etc...but all of those are subjective. The cost of attendance is not- it is set in stone. I didn't even factor in cost of living.

nobody debates this. the cost of attendance aside, the edge goes to USC in my book. cost of living should be about the same. maybe a bit more for UCLA (beverly hills) vs USC (south central)

 

[xhamburgersamx]

with IBR, when your income doesn't cover the interest, the govt pays the rest (for up to 3 years) and the payments never get larger than the payments of the 10yr repayment plan. what it does do is give you a lot of relief for your 1st 5 years out of school. you can also pay off the loan as soon as you want so its not like you have to stay on that payment schedule. i can't find anything wrong w/ it.

If you get on IBR, the best plan is to just pay as alittle as possible for 25 years and let the gov't forgive the rest. The reason behind this is that you will be payign off only interest for some years before you even touch the balance. There's no point in trying to kill the remaining balance if you can get away from it. In the long run on a standard 25 year payment, you will have paid a huge amount in interest payment only. Thus, it's best to either try to kill off all the loans traditionally or go long on IBR

 

[americanpierg]

If you get on IBR, the best plan is to just pay as alittle as possible for 25 years and let the gov't forgive the rest. The reason behind this is that you will be payign off only interest for some years before you even touch the balance. There's no point in trying to kill the remaining balance if you can get away from it. In the long run on a standard 25 year payment, you will have paid a huge amount in interest payment only. Thus, it's best to either try to kill off all the loans traditionally or go long on IBR

the only way to pay "as little as possible" on the income based repayment plan is to limit your income to "as little as possible" which i dont even have to tell you is a dumb idea lol. The IBR plan was NOT meant to be used by dental graduates who will be pulling close to/ more than 6 digits a year in income. You will be paying more than you would on the standard repayment plan per year (but less overall). The IBR plan was meant for those who make very little, which is also why they are required for students who have defaulted on their students loans but want to consolidate their student loans without any waiting period. This is also why the government is willing to forgive the remainder of your loans after 20 or whatever years it was. As a dentist, you will not have any outstanding loans remaining after 20 or so years with the income based plan...lol. It may be smart to start with an income based plan right out of school and switch to the standard one later on, unless you just want to pay off your loans as soon as possible.

 

[Oracle DMD]

the only way to pay "as little as possible" on the income based repayment plan is to limit your income to "as little as possible" which i dont even have to tell you is a dumb idea lol. The IBR plan was NOT meant to be used by dental graduates who will be pulling close to/ more than 6 digits a year in income. You will be paying more than you would on the standard repayment plan per year (but less overall). The IBR plan was meant for those who make very little, which is also why they are required for students who have defaulted on their students loans but want to consolidate their student loans without any waiting period. This is also why the government is willing to forgive the remainder of your loans after 20 or whatever years it was. As a dentist, you will not have any outstanding loans remaining after 20 or so years with the income based plan...lol. It may be smart to start with an income based plan right out of school and switch to the standard one later on, unless you just want to pay off your loans as soon as possible.

you're crazy. IBR is way less than standard repayment if you go to private school, and IBR accounts for dependants and your discretionary income. even if i'm making 120k and my wife making 60k (spouse income counts too) our payment would be less than the standard. if i had kids, my payment would be even less.

i dont care what this program was intended for, we can use it. keeping huge payments low until you can afford larger ones, allows you to practice how you want, where you want.


use a calculator. http://www.ibrinfo.org/calculator.php

 

[xhamburgersamx]

you're crazy. IBR is way less than standard repayment if you go to private school, and IBR accounts for dependants and your discretionary income. even if i'm making 120k and my wife making 60k (spouse income counts too) our payment would be less than the standard. if i had kids, my payment would be even less.

i dont care what this program was intended for, we can use it. keeping huge payments low until you can afford larger ones, allows you to practice how you want, where you want.


use a calculator. http://www.ibrinfo.org/calculator.php

I think you're still slightly confused on what i meant earlier. If you do include your wife's income then you will be paying more per year. By year 5 or so, you will have caught up on the standard 10 year monthly payments and you'll begin paying those. So basically at year 5 per se, you will have barely touched the principle balance on your loan assuming it is very large. Therefore, in the long run you pay more than if you were on the traditional payment plan. The only real benefit to IBR is that it really allows people to survive and live in the early years of working instead of devoting sometimes up to 30-40% of income to loan payment.

 

[charlestweed]

There are some really, really smart people at USC that excel academically but these students are some of the worst or most stressed out clinical students.

I really admire these top students at USC. In 4 short years, they managed to fulfill the school’s tough requirements (my wife went to USC….I know the clinical requirements are insanely tough there) on time, got good grade in every class, and got matched to a residency program. I don’t think I could accomplish all of these if I were a student at USC.

I'm sure UCLA is just the same.

No, it’s not the same at UCLA because of the P/F. As I mentioned earlier, just pass every class, score 90+ on the board and you can become a specialist.

 

[charlestweed]

Forget about the IBR program. It only promotes laziness and irresponsibility. Move to the less competitive areas, work 6 days/week and pay off the student loans as soon as possible. When you take out student loans for your education, you are responsible to pay them all back, principle +interest. You shouldn't expect the government to pay the interest for you. You are smart and you have your DDS. You can do a lot with this degree. Why do you continue to rely on the government for help even after you graduate from dental school?

 

[Oracle DMD]

I think you're still slightly confused on what i meant earlier. If you do include your wife's income then you will be paying more per year. By year 5 or so, you will have caught up on the standard 10 year monthly payments and you'll begin paying those. So basically at year 5 per se, you will have barely touched the principle balance on your loan assuming it is very large. Therefore, in the long run you pay more than if you were on the traditional payment plan. The only real benefit to IBR is that it really allows people to survive and live in the early years of working instead of devoting sometimes up to 30-40% of income to loan payment.

the whole point of IBR is that your payments will always be affordable. if you use the calculator, you'd see what i mean. and if you want to pay it off faster, you can. the govt pays the interest untill you can handle the payment.

Forget about the IBR program. It only promotes laziness and irresponsibility. Move to the less competitive areas, work 6 days/week and pay off the student loans as soon as possible. When you take out student loans for your education, you are responsible to pay them all back, principle +interest. You shouldn’t expect the government to pay the interest for you. You are smart and you have your DDS. You can do a lot with this degree. Why do you continue to rely on the government for help even after you graduate from dental school?

laziness and irresponsibility? is that what you do when you avoid taxes by writing off buisness expenses? is that what you are telling you're colleagues when they take advantage of absolutley legal ways to manage their finances? no? why not? then stop with the trite advice. its nonsense.

 

[jay47]

Forget about the IBR program. It only promotes laziness and irresponsibility. Move to the less competitive areas, work 6 days/week and pay off the student loans as soon as possible. When you take out student loans for your education, you are responsible to pay them all back, principle +interest. You shouldn’t expect the government to pay the interest for you. You are smart and you have your DDS. You can do a lot with this degree. Why do you continue to rely on the government for help even after you graduate from dental school?

If you go to UCLA you'll owe $150,000 less too.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

the whole point of IBR is that your payments will always be affordable. if you use the calculator, you'd see what i mean. and if you want to pay it off faster, you can. the govt pays the interest untill you can handle the payment.

.

The calculator doesn't take into consideration a lot of factors. The most important being year 10 or so the 15% will exceed the normal payment...You still don't understand that concept...lol

When you make 200k and your wife 80k, 15% of that is a lot. You'll end up paying off the loans anyways in less than 25 years but you paid more because you weren't taking off any principle balance in the first couple of years. 8% interest of 300k is a lot more than 8% of 250,000

Since both you and your wife work, why not just pay it off earlier?

 

[charlestweed]

laziness and irresponsibility? is that what you do when you avoid taxes by writing off buisness expenses? is that what you are telling you're colleagues when they take advantage of absolutley legal ways to manage their finances? no? why not? then stop with the trite advice. its nonsense.

Then go ahead,let the IBR program help you, move to Southern Cal, work 3-4 days/week (because it’s hard to find full time associate jobs here), and be miserable for the next 20-30 years. There is no such thing as good debt. Debts are bad.

Because my wife and I had a very high mininum monthly payment ($5,500 per month….our combined student loans were more than $450k), we couldn’t afford to be lazy….we worked 7 days/week (yes, on Sunday too) and drove as far as 60 miles each way. Many of our colleagues had advised us to consolidate our loans and stretch the repayment period to 30 years but we didn’t follow their advice and we continued to work really hard. We paid off our student loans in 5 years. Our business loans for the 2 offices were paid off a year later.

Now we are debt free (except for the home mortgage). The current recession and the decline in our office collection don’t really bother us. We can take vacation anytime we want to. The only way you can become your own boss is when you are debt free. Don’t let the bank control your life.

 

[ooowee]

Thanks all for the advice. 🙂

I was just wondering, how difficult is it to pass the classes at UCLA? And is it really true that you just have to pass every class at UCLA and score 90+ on the NDBE to specialize?

Also, if UCLA's clinical requirements aren't that tough, could you say that you come out of UCLA as a less competent dentist (in the case that you might choose to not specialize)?

(This may be a stupid question, but...) lastly, in terms of getting hired right out of dental school, what do employers value the most out of the three: dental school reputation, clinical skills, or alumni connection?

 

[Oracle DMD]

The calculator doesn't take into consideration a lot of factors. The most important being year 10 or so the 15% will exceed the normal payment...You still don't understand that concept...lol

When you make 200k and your wife 80k, 15% of that is a lot. You'll end up paying off the loans anyways in less than 25 years but you paid more because you weren't taking off any principle balance in the first couple of years. 8% interest of 300k is a lot more than 8% of 250,000

Since both you and your wife work, why not just pay it off earlier?

of course i get it. but the payments NEVER exceed the cost of the standard 10year repayment. so if you make a ton, it caps out at that payment, and by then i'll want to pay off the debt anyways. the whole benefit of IBR is that your high school debt doesn't have to dictate where/how you practice. this is of particular interest to USC grads, for which i brought it up. anyways, back on topic eh?

 

[xhamburgersamx]

Thanks all for the advice. 🙂

I was just wondering, how difficult is it to pass the classes at UCLA? And is it really true that you just have to pass every class at UCLA and score 90+ on the NDBE to specialize?

Also, if UCLA's clinical requirements aren't that tough, could you say that you come out of UCLA as a less competent dentist (in the case that you might choose to not specialize)?

(This may be a stupid question, but...) lastly, in terms of getting hired right out of dental school, what do employers value the most out of the three: dental school reputation, clinical skills, or alumni connection?

If UCLA is still doing their "Pass" and "Pass +" or pass in top 25% then it is still going to be very competitive there. Most, I'd like to say majority of students at UCLA are very high achieving in terms of studying and getting high grades. These are the reasons why they have gained admission to UCLA (high GPA, high DAT). It doesn't matter if the system is pass/no pass; the bottom line is the school is going to be competitive and people are going to try extremely hard to get into the top 25%. At USC, even though the grading system is A/B/C/D/F, it is far more relaxed and less stressful. I guess most of the time, no one really knows what their studying because of PBL but, the advantage of that is no one can really prepare therefore if you consider yourself dumber, you can still do well. 90% on part 1 is pretty tough by the way.

I also wouldn't say UCLA clinical requirements are easy. They just require much less in terms of overall number of requirements and competency tests. I don't know how lenient they are with any procedure but USC is very strict most of the time. Obviously, you will get/find some faculty that will carry you through the procedure but on the general, USC is known to be tougher.

 

[senpai]

If UCLA is still doing their "Pass" and "Pass +" or pass in top 25% then it is still going to be very competitive there. Most, I'd like to say majority of students at UCLA are very high achieving in terms of studying and getting high grades. These are the reasons why they have gained admission to UCLA (high GPA, high DAT). It doesn't matter if the system is pass/no pass; the bottom line is the school is going to be competitive and people are going to try extremely hard to get into the top 25%. At USC, even though the grading system is A/B/C/D/F, it is far more relaxed and less stressful. I guess most of the time, no one really knows what their studying because of PBL but, the advantage of that is no one can really prepare therefore if you consider yourself dumber, you can still do well. 90% on part 1 is pretty tough by the way.

I also wouldn't say UCLA clinical requirements are easy. They just require much less in terms of overall number of requirements and competency tests. I don't know how lenient they are with any procedure but USC is very strict most of the time. Obviously, you will get/find some faculty that will carry you through the procedure but on the general, USC is known to be tougher.

Facts:
You have no idea what you are talking about in regards to grading at UCLA... UCLA is strictly Pass/Marginal Pass/No Pass. They do have an internal system that awards the top 10%, not 25% (don't know where you came up with that number, there has never every been an 25% standard in the history of UCLA??), in each class known as EPR. THIS SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY INTERNAL AND IT IS SCHOOL POLICY THAT THEY ARE NOT RELEASED. They do not go on your transcript nor are they released to any ADCOM. It is strictly a pat on the back and an internal way to recognize exceptional performance in a particular area. Because of this system and knowing that being in the top 10% has no effect on admissions to residency programs, students help each other out a ton and it is a really friendly atmosphere. The curriculum prepares you such that most students score 90+ on the boards and about 60% of every class gets in to a specialty. You can't argue with 16/16 matching in to ortho this last year from UCLA, 10/11? into OMFS, 100% who applied matched into pedo, same for perio, endo, etc., etc.

My personal opinion:
Even if you are right that USC students are more skilled clinicians than UCLA students (which I would probably still disagree with), I would still prefer to go to the worst clinical dental school in the United States in the middle of nowhere if it cost significantly less, work my butt off and get into a good GPR or AEGD. I would argue that even the 'worst' clinical dental school in the US, whatever it may be, still provides descent enough training that with working hard in dental school and completing an GPR/AEGD if necessary, the individual would be just as competent of dentist as he who attends the 'best' clinical dental school and goes straight into private practice. Moral of the story, I've heard from several GP's that you learn more in 6 months of practicing than you do in 4 years of dental school. Having a great foundation is great, but becoming a great clinician takes more than just passing the clinical requirements at any dental school...

 

[armorshell]

Facts:
However, the curriculum is extremely intense and for how hard you work to pass the classes at UCLA you could easily be in the top 10% at any other school with a standard grading/class ranking system.

That's a fairly strong statement. Have you been through a lot of other dental school curricula? How do you know what it takes to be in the top 10% at any dental school other than your own?

It's pretty elitist to think that the doofiest gomer at UCLA who manages to crank out barely passing grades in all their classes would be an academic juggernaut at any other school just because they rank.

Wait a sec, I thought all schools with ranking systems were supposedly MORE competitive because of having a ranking system? So even though all of us who are/were ranked are apparently tearing each others throats out for every decimal point on a test grade, we're such *****ic plebeians that ANYONE from UCLA could wipe the floor with us?

 

[Tommy43087]

Facts:
You have no idea what you are talking about in regards to grading at UCLA... UCLA is strictly Pass/Marginal Pass/No Pass. They do have an internal system that awards the top 10%, not 25% (don't know where you came up with that number, there has never every been an 25% standard in the history of UCLA??), in each class known as EPR. THIS SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY INTERNAL AND IT IS SCHOOL POLICY THAT THEY ARE NOT RELEASED. They do not go on your transcript nor are they released to any ADCOM. It is strictly a pat on the back and an internal way to recognize exceptional performance in a particular area. Because of this system and knowing that being in the top 10% has no effect on admissions to residency programs, students help each other out a ton and it is a really friendly atmosphere. However, the curriculum is extremely intense and for how hard you work to pass the classes at UCLA you could easily be in the top 10% at any other school with a standard grading/class ranking system. So what's the benefit of going to UCLA??? The curriculum prepares you such that most students score 90+ on the boards and about 60% of every class gets in to a specialty. You can't argue with 16/16 matching in to ortho this last year from UCLA, 10/11? into OMFS, 100% who applied matched into pedo, same for perio, endo, etc., etc.

My personal opinion:
Even if you are right that USC students are more skilled clinicians than UCLA students (which I would probably still disagree with), I would still prefer to go to the worst clinical dental school in the United States in the middle of nowhere if it cost significantly less, work my butt off and get into a good GPR or AEGD. I would argue that even the 'worst' clinical dental school in the US, whatever it may be, still provides descent enough training that with working hard in dental school and completing an GPR/AEGD if necessary, the individual would be just as competent of dentist as he who attends the 'best' clinical dental school and goes straight into private practice. Moral of the story, I've heard from several GP's that you learn more in 6 months of practicing than you do in 4 years of dental school. Having a great foundation is great, but becoming a great clinician takes more than just passing the clinical requirements at any dental school...

lol @ your biased point of view... and i know people @ UCLA and USC (both alumni and students), both agree that USC pumps out more clinically skilled dentists. I personally believe no matter what school you go to you have the opportunity to specialize if you work hard enough so you dictate the path from the beginning. Whereas, (from what i heard) an AEGD or GPR is necessary upon graduation out of a school like UCLA, but at USC you will definitely be competent enough, clinically, to practice right out of school. This is something you cannot dictate yourself, this solely depends on the institution you are attending. And if you really think about it the money you lose doing a residency (if you wanna do general) can account for some of the money that everyone complains about in regards to USC being more expensive.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

Facts:
You have no idea what you are talking about in regards to grading at UCLA... UCLA is strictly Pass/Marginal Pass/No Pass. They do have an internal system that awards the top 10%, not 25% (don't know where you came up with that number, there has never every been an 25% standard in the history of UCLA??), in each class known as EPR. THIS SYSTEM IS COMPLETELY INTERNAL AND IT IS SCHOOL POLICY THAT THEY ARE NOT RELEASED. They do not go on your transcript nor are they released to any ADCOM. It is strictly a pat on the back and an internal way to recognize exceptional performance in a particular area. Because of this system and knowing that being in the top 10% has no effect on admissions to residency programs, students help each other out a ton and it is a really friendly atmosphere. However, the curriculum is extremely intense and for how hard you work to pass the classes at UCLA you could easily be in the top 10% at any other school with a standard grading/class ranking system. So what's the benefit of going to UCLA??? The curriculum prepares you such that most students score 90+ on the boards and about 60% of every class gets in to a specialty. You can't argue with 16/16 matching in to ortho this last year from UCLA, 10/11? into OMFS, 100% who applied matched into pedo, same for perio, endo, etc., etc.

My personal opinion:
Even if you are right that USC students are more skilled clinicians than UCLA students (which I would probably still disagree with), I would still prefer to go to the worst clinical dental school in the United States in the middle of nowhere if it cost significantly less, work my butt off and get into a good GPR or AEGD. I would argue that even the 'worst' clinical dental school in the US, whatever it may be, still provides descent enough training that with working hard in dental school and completing an GPR/AEGD if necessary, the individual would be just as competent of dentist as he who attends the 'best' clinical dental school and goes straight into private practice. Moral of the story, I've heard from several GP's that you learn more in 6 months of practicing than you do in 4 years of dental school. Having a great foundation is great, but becoming a great clinician takes more than just passing the clinical requirements at any dental school...

Seemingly all these high achieving students are attending UCLA, every one of them wants to be within this "elitist" group (10%). How does that not encourage competition. Even though USC does not rank students, there is still a ranking system and there seems to play a factor when you are getting a letter of recommendation from the Dean. The same probably happens at UCLA where a professor in any such class can mention the 10% ranking. In the end, everyone is competing to get into the best residency program. Will you be happy if you helped someone get into the residency program that YOU wanted to attend. Am I wrong here?


When the NDBE goes to pass/no pass, we'll see what happens to UCLA"s match percentage.

 

[senpai]

That's a fairly strong statement. Have you been through a lot of other dental school curricula? How do you know what it takes to be in the top 10% at any dental school other than your own?

It's pretty elitist to think that the doofiest gomer at UCLA who manages to crank out barely passing grades in all their classes would be an academic juggernaut at any other school just because they rank.

Wait a sec, I thought all schools with ranking systems were supposedly MORE competitive because of having a ranking system? So even though all of us who are/were ranked are apparently tearing each others throats out for every decimal point on a test grade, we're such *****ic plebeians that ANYONE from UCLA could wipe the floor with us?

Looking over my post, that statement was a pretty bad generalization and I would probably have deleted that part had you not called me out on it lol
I go to P/NP school on the other side of the country, have 2 older siblings, one who went to UCLA, the other to a standard grading scale school at the same time, both got into competitive specialties...
To re-phrase what I was trying to say, from my personal observation, the feeling I got from my older siblings and their circle of friends was that my sibling who attended UCLA and their circle of friends had to put in more time to pass and do well academically at UCLA than my other sibling and circle of friends who attended a standard grading dental school who all finished in the top 10%. That's just my experience...
I really do believe that anyone who get's into a specialty is of an elite group, to finish top 10% or go through an extremely difficult curriculum and score 90+ on the boards is a major accomplishment and I think both students are of similar caliber...

In regards to the competitiveness, I think my post made it pretty clear that I believe that the atmosphere at UCLA ISN'T COMPETITIVE like Hamburger was claiming it to be, extremely difficult yes but competitive no. I would agree that at certain schools the competition between certain classmates may be extremely fierce. The competition at UCLA is in getting in, not during dental school...After that your all in for an A**-whooping together...

Of course I've heard of horror stories of the competition of some students at other schools and anyone who can not only survive but thrive and be at the top in that situation is an absolute stud in my book, but I still don't think that it is a very good generalization that every school with a ranking system is like that either... I think we can both agree that there is no easy way into a specialty nor any back door way in to getting into a specialty, it's hard work and lots of challenges/road blocks which come in different forms for different situations...

 

[xhamburgersamx]

Looking over my post, that statement was a pretty bad generalization and I would probably have deleted that part had you not called me out on it lol
I go to P/NP school on the other side of the country, have 2 older siblings, one who went to UCLA, the other to a standard grading scale school at the same time, both got into competitive specialties...
To re-phrase what I was trying to say, from my personal observation, the feeling I got from my older siblings and their circle of friends was that my sibling who attended UCLA and their circle of friends had to put in more time to pass and do well academically at UCLA than my other sibling and circle of friends who attended a standard grading dental school who all finished in the top 10%. That's just my experience...
I really do believe that anyone who get's into a specialty is of an elite group, to finish top 10% or go through an extremely difficult curriculum and score 90+ on the boards is a major accomplishment and I think both students are of similar caliber...

In regards to the competitiveness, I think my post made it pretty clear that I believe that the atmosphere at UCLA ISN'T COMPETITIVE like Hamburger was claiming it to be, extremely difficult yes but competitive no. I would agree that at certain schools the competition between certain classmates may be extremely fierce. The competition at UCLA is in getting in, not during dental school...After that your all in for an A**-whooping together...

Of course I've heard of horror stories of the competition of some students at other schools and anyone who can not only survive but thrive and be at the top in that situation is an absolute stud in my book, but I still don't think that it is a very good generalization that every school with a ranking system is like that either... I think we can both agree that there is no easy way into a specialty nor any back door way in to getting into a specialty, it's hard work and lots of challenges/road blocks which come in different forms for different situations...

YOU don't know how competitive it is at UCLA. You don't attend that school. Your brother is probably in a highly achieving clique at UCLA and did well within his circle of friends. That has no gauge of how competitive it is within the entire class. Clique vs. Clique occurs all the time. I've stepped foot in UCLA, hell I even volunteered there for a year and I know a lot of the students there. Basically, it's study or you fail. There are too many exams, they force you to study and thus if you can pass you will have a very decent knowledge to score well on part 1.

The one thing I know is true is that UCLA students spend way too much time studying books instead of practicing in pre-clinical simulation. When it comes to 3rd year clinic, a lot of these students are horrendous and their hands skills not up to par. You don't need to know any clinical ddentistry to get matched into a residency program. All that matters is grades, part 1, LOR and interview and this is where UCLA suffers.

 

[senpai]

YOU don't know how competitive it is at UCLA. You don't attend that school. Your brother is probably in a highly achieving clique at UCLA and did well within his circle of friends. That has no gauge of how competitive it is within the entire class. Clique vs. Clique occurs all the time. I've stepped foot in UCLA, hell I even volunteered there for a year and I know a lot of the students there. Basically, it's study or you fail. There are too many exams, they force you to study and thus if you can pass you will have a very decent knowledge to score well on part 1.

The one thing I know is true is that UCLA students spend way too much time studying books instead of practicing in pre-clinical simulation. When it comes to 3rd year clinic, a lot of these students are horrendous and their hands skills not up to par. You don't need to know any clinical ddentistry to get matched into a residency program. All that matters is grades, part 1, LOR and interview and this is where UCLA suffers.

If UCLA intimidates you that much then it is probably not a good place for you.
Very interesting as well that you are able to criticize a 3rd years work considering you're a pre-dent and have zero training in clinical dentistry...

This thread is becoming very unproductive...
To the OP, good luck making a decision and please take anything any of us say with a grain of salt...it is much better to talk to real students and faculty at the respective schools then on a forum...

To summarize the arguments:

USC
Arguments for Pro's: Good clinical training, excellent training in general dentistry
Arguments for Con's: extremely expensive, concerns about the curriculum (PBL, etc.)

UCLA
Arguments for Pro's: Cheaper, excellent track-record of students specializing, prepared well for NBDE Part I & II
Arguments for Con's: not as stringent clinical requirements, not as many patients available, intense curriculum, lots of gunners

These are just the arguments, not saying I agree with them, but this is what people are arguing... Can we atleast agree on this???

 

[nitrolegs]

If UCLA intimidates you that much then it is probably not a good place for you.
Very interesting as well that you are able to criticize a 3rd years work considering you're a pre-dent and have zero training in clinical dentistry...

This thread is becoming very unproductive...
To the OP, good luck making a decision and please take anything any of us say with a grain of salt...it is much better to talk to real students and faculty at the respective schools then on a forum...

To summarize the arguments:

USC
Arguments for Pro's: Good clinical training, excellent training in general dentistry
Arguments for Con's: extremely expensive, concerns about the curriculum (PBL, etc.)

UCLA
Arguments for Pro's: Cheaper, excellent track-record of students specializing, prepared well for NBDE Part I & II
Arguments for Con's: not as stringent clinical requirements, not as many patients available, intense curriculum, lots of gunners

These are just the arguments, not saying I agree with them, but this is what people are arguing... Can we atleast agree on this???

also, don't forget that USC is in the sh*thole of LA. i think everybody can agree on this.

 

[xhamburgersamx]

If UCLA intimidates you that much then it is probably not a good place for you.
Very interesting as well that you are able to criticize a 3rd years work considering you're a pre-dent and have zero training in clinical dentistry...

This thread is becoming very unproductive...
To the OP, good luck making a decision and please take anything any of us say with a grain of salt...it is much better to talk to real students and faculty at the respective schools then on a forum...

To summarize the arguments:

USC
Arguments for Pro's: Good clinical training, excellent training in general dentistry
Arguments for Con's: extremely expensive, concerns about the curriculum (PBL, etc.)

UCLA
Arguments for Pro's: Cheaper, excellent track-record of students specializing, prepared well for NBDE Part I & II
Arguments for Con's: not as stringent clinical requirements, not as many patients available, intense curriculum, lots of gunners

These are just the arguments, not saying I agree with them, but this is what people are arguing... Can we atleast agree on this???

Pretty good summary. I think that's pretty fair analysis of both schools
I'm not a pre-dent btw, I'm a D3 I just never bothered to change my status.
Without caring about the education, the cheaper school is always the better option. =

 

[americanpierg]

I argue a lot on this forum, and Ive come to realize that NO ONE will ever change what they already think. No matter how much you argue, someone who thinks USC >>> UCLA (or vice versa) will never think differently, even if you make a very compelling and valid point. UCLA grads will always be smarter than USC grads, USC grads will always be more "clinically superior" than all UCLA grads. Everyone has a side and a 10 paragraph post won't change any of that.

xhamburgersamx is obviously a hardcore ucla supporter... a little too hardcore if you ask me, but tommy43087 is attending usc so he obviously wont admit ucla is better at anything.

it becomes nice when an objective point of view pops in, say a notre dame fan who say both schools suck 😛

 

[Tommy43087]

xhamburgersamx is obviously a hardcore ucla supporter... a little too hardcore if you ask me, but tommy43087 is attending usc so he obviously wont admit ucla is better at anything.

I think xhamburgersamx goes to USC??

I think the didactic curriculum at UCLA is superior to USC, but the two schools are different. I was in UCLA's volunteer program and i have been to USC's dental building many times so i've met many random students at both schools and been exposed to both schools somewhat. I also personally know people from both schools. I personally liked USC better, didnt even apply to UCLA...

Bottom line:

Which school would I wanna go to: USC

Which do I honestly think is a better school overall: Probably UCLA in a sense of being easier to specialize, etc.