WashU vs Columbia

[adesua]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I'm fortunate to have been accepted to these 2 schools but as the decision date draws nearer, I still can't let go of the good things both schools have to offer. In the future, I hope to specialize in infectious diseases and conduct research in the field of microbiology.

Hopefully with your 2 cents I can pool together enough dollars to buy a decision. Please contribute.

Thanks

 

[BaylorLion]

Adesua, you must be an amazing candidate to get into the MSTPs at both of these schools! I bow down to your brilliance.

I would pick Wash U if I were you (and it kills me to say that, as a former Columbian). While Columbia probably is better known among laymen, I have heard nothing but the highest praise for Wash U's research and especially for their MSTP. From what I have heard, Wash U and UT Southwestern are the two best places to go to do an MD/PhD, because the classes are so large and they have so much money to spend on you. You're a relatively large portion of the class, and I believe these two schools primary focus is on the MD/PhD students. Everyone I've ever met who's worked or studied at Wash U has gone on and on about how they really go out of their way to make sure you are happy and get everything you need to do whatever research you are interested in. And there is a big disparity between the two schools' NIH funding.

They may have resolved this already, but back when I was talking to my bioethics professor at Columbia (who is a professor at the med school and sits on the adcom at P&S), he was telling me that Harvard and Columbia are in trouble with the NIH because they've been keeping their MSTP students for too long (upwards of 8-9 years, more like 10-12). Obviously, you don't want to rush this training - you want to get a real PhD - but you also don't want them to keep you as free labor (NIH pays your tuition and stipend) forever. If any of you out there are in the Harvard or Columbia programs and it's not actually this way, I apologize in advance - but this is what I've heard.

My personal vote is for Wash U. Their research plant is phenomenal, and I think it's a great place to be doing research AND to get a medical education. It's supposed to be really supportive - every Wash Med grad or former faculty I've ever met has raved about the place. It was real funny to see faculty members at other schools I interviewed at start singing love songs (not literally) to Wash U during our interviews - most, but not all, were former students or faculty members. Feel free to PM me or post here if you want to talk about it more... I don't think you can go wrong either way.

 

[Newquagmire]

Adesua, you must be an amazing candidate to get into the MSTPs at both of these schools! I bow down to your brilliance.

I would pick Wash U if I were you (and it kills me to say that, as a former Columbian). While Columbia probably is better known among laymen, I have heard nothing but the highest praise for Wash U's research and especially for their MSTP. From what I have heard, Wash U and UT Southwestern are the two best places to go to do an MD/PhD, because the classes are so large and they have so much money to spend on you. You're a relatively large portion of the class, and I believe these two schools primary focus is on the MD/PhD students. Everyone I've ever met who's worked or studied at Wash U has gone on and on about how they really go out of their way to make sure you are happy and get everything you need to do whatever research you are interested in. And there is a big disparity between the two schools' NIH funding.

They may have resolved this already, but back when I was talking to my bioethics professor at Columbia (who is a professor at the med school and sits on the adcom at P&S), he was telling me that Harvard and Columbia are in trouble with the NIH because they've been keeping their MSTP students for too long (upwards of 8-9 years, more like 10-12). Obviously, you don't want to rush this training - you want to get a real PhD - but you also don't want them to keep you as free labor (NIH pays your tuition and stipend) forever. If any of you out there are in the Harvard or Columbia programs and it's not actually this way, I apologize in advance - but this is what I've heard.

My personal vote is for Wash U. Their research plant is phenomenal, and I think it's a great place to be doing research AND to get a medical education. It's supposed to be really supportive - every Wash Med grad or former faculty I've ever met has raved about the place. It was real funny to see faculty members at other schools I interviewed at start singing love songs (not literally) to Wash U during our interviews - most, but not all, were former students or faculty members. Feel free to PM me or post here if you want to talk about it more... I don't think you can go wrong either way.

Erm... BaylorLion, are you an MSTP applicant? Firstly, the NIH does not pay for anybody's training indefinitely [if i remember correctly].

I think you are right about a couple things though. More than a few interviewers gave me funny looks when I said I didn't want to stay at WashU for med school. Adesua, consider where you want to live and what you want to do for the next decade. Is there a particular lab you want to work in? I do think you will receive more support and guidance at WashU. How important are these factors to you?

If all else fails, flip a coin.

 

[Neuronix]

Firstly, the NIH does not pay for anybody's training indefinitely [if i remember correctly].

Nah, it's the PI or department or program who finds money for you for the thesis years in their lab. You come with some funding, but not for an extended thesis project. The NIH pays for 6 years (not even the full amount for those years), and usually that breaks down to 3 - 4 med school years and 2 - 3 grad school years. Note, you can get out of many med schools in 3 or just over 3 years by eliminating fourth year which is all electives anyways.

So anyway, my advice to the op is to consider all the factors and make up their mind. In my experience, what is said on here doesn't really sway people. I could never live in St. Louis for 7-8 years, so it would be an easy choice for me. Then again, I know people who would never want to live in NYC. It's big, expensive, crowded, and Columbia isn't even in a good area. Either way I think you're going to get solid training.

 

[Habari]

if location is not an issue for you [it was for me], washU has a much more extensive infectious disease group than columbia. columbia does have a few great people [more in virology than micro], but not nearly as varied and deep as washU's departments. washU also has a phenomenal immuno department through which many fruitful collaborations can come about [columbia's is lacking]. despite the strength of washU's research and mstp program, it would have been a tough call for me [favoring columbia] given that columbia is in nyc. washU is in a good location, relatively, but it was not for me. if you find the locations to be equal or don't mind the stlouis location, then i would say washU given your research interests.

 

[BaylorLion]

Hey Newquagmire - always cool to see another Baylor person (at least I think you're going to Baylor next year).

I was applying MSTP and then withdrew halfway into the cycle when I realized I didn't have the love for research all the other applicants I was meeting at interviews had. It was cool that most of the schools were pretty accomdating of the switch to MD application only. Just wasn't for me.

Yeah, NIH doesn't support anyone indefinitely - don't want any 20 year MSTP students - but my thought was that it was fairly easy to extend an NIH training grant for an individual, at least for a year or two, if you could prove they were spending it doing important work for their career? At the very least, if PI's do have to pay for you, even if you're not free labor, you're cheap labor...

My main point remains that I have heard nothing but good things about Wash U. People on SDN like to bash their "number-whoring," but I think that if it wasn't a very good school, those applicants with the very high numbers wouldn't choose it no matter how much money was thrown at them. I've heard they're really, really supportive for researchers and that they have a lot of really interesting, novel stuff going on for you to get involved with. It says something when faculty at other med schools (including the afore-mentioned prof at Columbia) speak about Wash U as though it's heaven on earth (which it MAY be for science people).

 

[astrisize]

Well, my vote is for Wash U...why?

#1 Brian and Andrew
#2 St. Louis is cheap, easy to live in, and still has lots of fun city stuff (yeah, it's certainly not even comparable to NYC but still)
#3 Great ID
#4 (the best reason) SUPER COOL people in your entering class (guess where I'm going.... 🙂 )

WashU 😍

 

[MumbleJumble]

Continuing astrisize's list:
#5 nice midwestern people
#6 budweiser gives discounted kegs to washu students (and 2nd yrs buy kegs for 1st yrs after tests)
#7 barnes jewish and childrens
#8 MANY SUPER COOL PEOPLE next year (astrisize is cooler than me though)

but even with these reasons, just go with your gut.
good luck!

-steve

 

[jjmack]

since i went to wash u undergrad and work at columbia med now I have seen a lot of both schools. In the end I think people here already explained the main differences really well. In my mind it comes down to how important is location to you? If you want to be in a big city with excitment then it's columbia. If you want stronger research wash u.

 

[astrisize]

#8 MANY SUPER COOL PEOPLE next year (astrisize is cooler than me though)

See how intelligent your classmates would be? 😀

 

[adesua]

Thanks for the feedback everybody.
I decided to go to Wash U.

Wash U here I come. Wheee.....!!!!

 

[astrisize]

GREAT!!! I guess I'll be seeing you soon! 🙂

 

[ManchotPi]

--

 

[Newquagmire]

Hey adesua! I'll be seeing you there too (but you already knew that as I run into every other day or so). Astricize, I'm glad you chose WashU! I hope all the other fun people from the revisit go; I'm looking forward to it.

off topic: your icon rocks my socks. penguins are sweet action.