geez i don't know where to start.....lemme see
bucktooth: your assessment is partially correct. Yes it is correct that ucla almost always gets higher board avg than usc. But you have to look at the reason why. UCLA tends to accept people with higher GPA and DAT avg than USC students. UCLA also takes less # of students per year. Basically, they end up with a small class comprised of hard-core gunners (book smart people). This is good as the board avg will obiviously be high. Look at harvard....they accept under 50 people, but their board avg is always high (i heard this years avg was 94.5). Is it because Harvard's prog is so superior that it cannot be compared to any other program in teh country? Absolutely not. They accept people with a history of extremely high academic acheivements and these people usually end up doing well on boards. As someone who studied and did well on part I boards, I can ASSURE you that what you learn in school doesn't really reflect how well you will do on boards. If you are a motivated student, 4 or 5 months of hard studying will be all that's needed to do in boards.....end of story.
Gavin: Malamed is def a character. Unfortunately, due to the new PBL curriculum, we haven't had any formal lectures with the guy. He did conduct our anesthesia rotation our second year and that's about all the contact I've had with him on personal level. He also conducts an IV sedation team ( he selects 8 juniors every year) which is supposed to be really cool, but unfortunarly, I wasn't able to get into the selective due to some BS circumstances, but that's another story.....in conclusion, the guy know his **** and has a sense of humor......but he tends to like pretty females rather than loud mouth male figures like myself.....
Shawnone: The reason I say clinical training isn't the PBL strong point is that due to the change in curriculum from traditional to PBL, there also has been some changes in faculty personnel as well as teaching curriculum. Thus during this chaotic shift, my class 2005 got a bit behind in terms of pre-clinic schedule. But this delay is already being addressed for class of 2006. But the general consensus from the seniors who are traidiotnal students is that their pre-clinical training was a bit more rigorous than ours. However, again, I expect the clinical training to improve over time. Remember, PBL is still a new program and school is still trying to adjust to it.....BUt on teh bright side, the patient pool at usc seems to be pretty good. A few of my friends are having a hard time finding pts but that hasn't been the case for me. Granted most of my pts aren't very good cases, (even if they are, they can't afford all the tx), I have enuf pts to keep me busy.
and whoever asked about the financial situation. USC is expensive.....period. I am on FULL loans and I've basically lost track of how much I am borrowing. I really don't know what else to tell you other than that. THis is why UCLA is so attractive and competitive. It's basically 50% in cost to what USC is.....and that's why UCLA tends to be more selective in who they choose....because they can be. THey are reputable school at a bargain price tuition.
I am tired now......I was at school for 17 hours and I have a long day tomorrow.....
