USC vs. Loyola Marymount University Post-Bacc Programs

[uaedent]

---

Members do not see this ad.

I have been accepted to both but now I am trying to decide between the two. They seem to be very different from one another. LMU is small and personal vs USC is a well known school but has large classes. LMU takes a year vs USC's 2 year program, LMU is cheaper vs USC. LMU is in a nicer neighborhood compared to USC in general. I want to stay at home in the LA area so I'm only picking from these two schools. Which option would give me the best chance at getting placed into a california med school afterwards (preferably in Los Angeles)? and does anyone have current experience with either one of the programs?

Thanks!

 

[Teach4us2MD]

I don't know how much I can help, I attend LMU for graduate school I was about to apply to the program and then I attended the Health Careers/Professional Schools Fair for undergrads and was not impressed with the attendees. The school did not have representation from ANY American medical schools (allo or osteo) and had an abundance of international medical schools and mid level programs (nursing, speech therapy etc). What worried me even more was the sheer amount of undergrads present with resumes and transcripts in hand.

At my undergrad which has a strong science department, the same fair had to be moved to a larger venue to accommodate the amount of schools (medical, dental, vet) interested in recruiting our students. So no matter how much I love LMU, it's small class sizes and their financial aid department, it worried me that the science department may not be perceived as strong due to the shortage of schools present and since there is not a lot of information about their post bac or it's success, my guess was that this may be indicative of its chances of preparing it's students for medical school.

Hope this helps.

 

[uaedent]

It definitely helps out to hear what the school is like from someone who currently attends. Right now I am trying to figure out how important a schools reputation is for post bac programs (i.e. USC-well known in comparison to LMU).

Meeting with both coordinators of LMU and USC, LMU said that they have a 90% placement rate and USC said that they have a rate roughly around 75-80% placement rate. Does LMUs rate seem too high?

Also USC only allows you to take 2 classes per semester with accompanying labs but LMU has a sample schedule of taking 3 classes per semester. Although I did well in my undergrad. does a 3 course per semester load seem too condensed?

-especially in the final semester which would consist of taking ochem II, bio II, physics II, plus volunteering and studying for the mcat vs USC: taking just ochem II, studying for the entrance exam and maybe some volunteer work as well.

Any thoughts?

 

[kitties4L]

Hi there,

I also was accepted to both programs and decided I'm going to attend LMU (pre dental). I would recommend asking to speak with a student currently in the post bac program. That's what really helped me make my decision. The reasons I went with LMU were basically:

1) The shorter time frame, which is good both for getting your prereqs done faster & the 3 courses helps show you can handle a heavy course load. Speaking with a current student it sounds manageable and like everyone in the post bac class was doing pretty well in the program. I believe many in his class even took a 4th class both semesters. Additionally, the student I spoke to still did well (4.0) while working a 5-10 hr / week job. I too am nervous about 3 science classes / semester since I didn't do any in undergrad, but if you look at it as a full time job (+ probably 5 or so hrs / week working/volunteering) and work hard, I'm sure it's doable.
2) Smaller class sizes. Speaking with the reps at USC, intro science lectures can bee 200-300 students, whereas at LMU the maximum lecture size I heard of was around 50-60, and labs are 10-15. That sets you up well for getting to know the professors for recommendations, research (if you stick around after year 1), etc. I've been out of school for 3 years so the small class size/interaction with professors that you get at LMU was a really big draw for me, as opposed to being thrown into giant lectures at USC with tons of undergrads who are all trying to beat the curve.
3) Cost. USC is twice the price, plus an extra year of living expenses. I'm trying to minimize the loans I take out before going into dental school.
4) Location. I live in the West Side so LMU is a lot closer. This wasn't a big factor but it's a nice perk.

After considering all that it wasn't really a tough decision. In terms of acceptance rate to med/dental school, the LMU program is pretty new, so perhaps that's why they don't have a ton of stats on acceptance. USC's program has obviously been around longer + may have some name recognition, I'm not sure. I went to a well known university for undergrad so I'm not that concerned with prestige in my post bac classes. I just wanted to do the cheapest 4 year school I could find, and the state schools in the area didn't really work for me. In the end I think it's less important where you take the classes as what kind of grades/test scores you get, so if you work hard at either program I'm sure you'll be fine.

Good luck in deciding!

 

[uaedent]

Thank you so much for the reply, I have been thinking about the same thing with LMU. I heard its more important how you do then where you do your postbacc as well. Most of the LMU students stay in California for their med and dent schools so Im thinking LMU might be the cheaper, quicker and better route than USC.

 

[drizzt3117]

I'd choose USC. Higher chance to be accepted there which would be almost certainly your best chance of staying in CA for med school.