<p>@Cue7: Thanks for the advice! </p>
<p>@Louis: I know what you mean (although definitely not to the same extent.) I had to go to a three-day seminar on careers in medicine and it was pretty much people telling me how hard it was to get in, get through, etc. etc. and how “tired” they were. Boo.</p>
<p>Just to put a few things in perspective here:</p>
<ol>
<li><p>Yes, people actually do graduate from the University of Chicago undergrad and go to great med schools. As others have said, it’s not easy, but it’s not exactly impossible. But that goes without saying (except for the fact that I said it.)</p></li>
<li><p>I would attribute a high “pre-med” disillusionment rate to the fact that many people I know say they are pre-med in a halfhearted kind of way that 17-year-olds who don’t know what they want to do with their lives say in order to draw praise from others and deny their indecisiveness. Some of my friends here thought they might want to be doctors until they realized that doctors needed to know a lot of science and deal with screaming babies/blood/old people. So I wouldn’t necessarily think that Chicago is doing something malicious here… it’s just natural that people change their minds.</p></li>
</ol>
<p>unalove - to respond to your points sequentially:</p>
<p>1.) Yes, Chicago students do go to great medical schools. I’m not contesting that, I just think a smaller percentage of Chicago pre-meds go to great medical schools in comparison to the placement found at Chicago’s peer schools. (Similarly, I think Chicago does a poorer job than say, Yale or Brown in pre-law placement, but that’s another topic for another day.)</p>
<p>If you go to Chicago, sure, you can still go to a great medical school, and to get into ANY top medical school is a huge crapshoot. I’m just saying, by going to Chicago over one of Chicago’s peers, you certainly are NOT doing yourself any favors. I’m quite sure that Dartmouth, Brown, Yale, Stanford, etc. have a significantly better success rate in placing their grads into top medical school. </p>
<p>2.) Yes, attrition in the pre-med population is natural, and can be expected in any group of 18-20 years old who really don’t know what they want to do. At the same time, from what other posters have said and from what I remember, the pre-med advising at Chicago tends to be more negative than positive. At other schools, I get the sense the pre-med advisor says “You want to go to medical school? Great! This is a big decision, so here’s a lot of information about it, be prepared to work hard, I’ll support you, and good luck to you whether you stay a pre-med or not!”. At Chicago, the response is: “You want to go to medical school? Are you sure? You know that’s really hard to do…”. This is an exxageration of course, but as others in this thread have stated, Chicago is hardly a positive, supportive environment to pursue this sort of enterprise. </p>
<p>Bottom-line: If you’re intent on going to a top medical school, Chicago undergrad may not align neatly with that goal.</p>
<p>from what i’ve heard, they really dumbed down gen chem either this year or last year.</p>
<p>Unless they do that with O-chem, life isn’t going to get much better for U of C premeds. I’ve re-connected with some college friends who are doctors now, and they STILL specifically say that Chem wasn’t great, but O-Chem at Chicago was HELL. I mean, these are people doing their residencies in surgery, and they STILL have horrific memories about O-Chem at Chicago.</p>
<p>Those sorts of comments speak volumes.</p>
<p>Cue7: I admire you for the balanced way you are expressing yourself. Thanks!</p>
<p>My kid’s medical school dream foundered on the shoals of O-Chem after navigating GenChem and Bio pretty placidly. The CCIHP advisors were NOT supportive – just as described above. If I had read Cue7’s post at this time last year, I might have encouraged him to stick it out. But it’s probably all for the best – he went from doing stuff he hated, with no intellectual engagement (O-Chem), to doing stuff he loved, and it made a lot of difference in what he was getting out of college.</p>
<p>hmmm… so if i didn’t take gen chem this year (freshman), would it be better for me to take it over this summer, or take it during the academic year w/ orgo over the summer? Judging from the comments in this thread, it seems like it would be more advantageous for me to take organic chemistry over the summer instead.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>In general no, not without a good reason (according to the premed aficionados on cc). Med schools recognize that summer courses are shorter (and generally easier), and you are only taking one at a time. They would much rather see you take a science courses along with your regular curriculum.</p>
<p>OTOH, if the difference is a C during the year and an A in the summer…:</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>A poster on cc earned a C+ in organic and was still accepted to med school…</p>
<p>well, given my schedule, im going to have to take either gen chem or o-chem over the summer. in this case, which one would be more advantageous for me to take during summer quarter?</p>
<p>whoa whoa whoa!! Hang on. Cue7, you’re implying 2 things have utterly confused me:</p>
<ol>
<li>Pre-med is the must be major, or even a preferred major for med school.</li>
<li>Med school only makes you into a doctor and not a medical researcher.</li>
</ol>
<p>The first is definately not true. A solid degree in any of the sciences with strong research experience and personal background are sufficient for a shot at it. </p>
<p>The second is not true either as far as I know. Many biomedical researchers, including geneticists and that whole group, choose to get a medical PhD to pursue a career in research. </p>
<p>Sorry for replying so late, but please clarify. Thanks!</p>
<p>OK so this is probably a really really naive question…
but say that I want to do research in the medical sciences, with a PhD in a related field instead of a MD from a med school. I don’t need pre-med, do I?</p>
<p>Very interesting.</p>
<p>On the one hand, we have Cue7, who appears to have made a career the past year bashing UofC’s ability to place kids into top med and law schools, using personal experiences that are going on 20 years old, together with minor supporting data from some current pre-med drop outs. </p>
<p>On the other hand, we have a number of current students who say the going is fine. </p>
<p>Keeping in mind that the drop out rate EVERYWHERE from “pre-med” aspirations is high, we have no data that UofC is better or worse than anywhere else, just a few nay-sayers. </p>
<p>But since folks seem to rely so much on random anecdotal data points, let me add one. </p>
<p>D, who graduated June 08, was pre-med, immuno and spanish majors. She chose to compete with those science majors, and took honors gen chem and honors ochem, including the non-required 3rd quarter. Lowest grade? “A”.</p>
<p>So don’t be intimidated by the nay-sayers. For many students, it is tough to be a good pre-med. That’s true everywhere, not just UofC. And for many, it is doable.</p>
<p>Newmassdad:</p>
<p>We’ had the same back and forth in posts before. It’s frustrating that you bend my assertions to the extreme. In this thread, I’ve made contentions such as: “Chicago probably doesn’t place as well as Brown or Dartmouth.” How, exactly, is this “bashing” Chicago? I was careful to state that if you want an outstanding liberal arts education and good med school placement, Chicago is a great choice. I made sure to qualify this contention, though, by mentioning that Chicago probably doesn’t offer the BEST atmosphere to MAXIMIZE ones chances.</p>
<p>Following my posts, a few students disagreed with my argument and stated that no, they were doing fine as Chicago pre-meds, thank you very much. On the other hand, as you pointed out, a few current Chicago students mentioned that my posts (utilizing information from the mid-90s) really rung true. I just doubt that many of the same complaints exist at more grade-inflated, pre-med friendly schools (such as Brown and Dart, and to the extent a school can be “pre-med friendly”). Maybe these complaints do ring true at these places, but I think my points were fair observations. </p>
<p>On another note, I completely agree that a lack of hard evidence exists regarding Chicago’s med school placement. Do you know why this is the case? Because Chicago guards this information very carefully. At other schools, they list a LOT of pre-law pre-med stats right on line, available to the public. Chicago doesn’t do this. </p>
<p>So, with this lack of evidence in mind, what’s the best course of action to take on a discussion board? Simply remain silent, or to provide an argument supported by the observations and anecdotes I saw during my time at Chicago? </p>
<p>I’m unclear as to why you think I’m constantly “bashing” Chicago. I spent four years as an undergrad there, received a superb education, and, to be blunt, I have a definite stake in the matter in terms of seeing Chicago flourish. I would like nothing more than to say that yes, Chicago’s pre-law and pre-med placement puts Princeton and Harvard to shame, and I’m proud of Chicago’s flawless pre-professional placement. These assertions, however, would absolutely fly in the face of what I saw when I was at Chicago. </p>
<p>Moreover, as much as Chicago has changed, there certainly seem to be students that find some merit to my statements. While admissions rates can change quickly, the ethos of a school oftentimes changes more gradually. I still think Chicago’s principal goal as an undergrad institution is to prepare students to be scholars (i.e. to get PhDs). Such a goal could (and probably does) differentiate Chicago from its peers with less of a purely academic bent (Brown, Dart, etc.). </p>
<p>I have no problem with vigorous debate on a message board, but I think you unjustifiably skew the arguments I try to make. I try to be as balanced as possible in my arguments about Chicago. If someone asks about going to a PhD program, I can’t think of a better school than Chicago undergrad to facilitate this goal. For pre-law or pre-med, I simply can’t offer as rosy a picture. Overall, however, I hardly think this makes me a Chicago “basher.” Rather, I’m trying to instigate as informed a discussion as possible when Chicago ITSELF refuses to disclose information on this matter. Trust me, I’ve contacted the pre-law and pre-med advisers and said that, as an alum, I’d appreciate whatever info they can provide to interested alums. Guess what? They haven’t even e-mailed or call me back to deny my request. </p>
<p>If there’s something wrong, then, with my method of approach, let me know. Calling my line of argumentation “Chicago bashing,” however, seems misguided and needlessly provocative.</p>
<p>Cue7,</p>
<p>Your track record speaks for itself. </p>
<p>How someone can be so persistent in negative comments with NO data, just a collection of anecdotal observations, some trending towards twenty years old, and then take offense when the behavior is called “bashing” is beyond me. </p>
<p>FWIW, most informed adults don’t “instigate as informed a discussion as possible” with "I just don’t know if I would recommend Chicago over its close peers (Brown, Columbia, Duke, Dartmouth, etc.) for a student INTENT on becoming a doctor and INTENT on going to a top top medical school. "</p>
<p>Rather than encourage discussion, you sure hurried to put your stake in the ground even before the discussion got off the ground! Curious way to foster discussion, in my neck of the woods.</p>
<p>But since we’re getting waaay beyond the bounds of true data, I think I’ll step out of this discussion. I have no desire to compare my circle of friends to yours, especially since yours seem to have had such are hard time getting into the post grad programs of their choice…</p>
<p>Hey guys, could one of you just answer one question for me?</p>
<p>I want to go into medical school, but have no intention of becoming a doctor or getting an MD, but want to go for a PhD in molecular genetics or a related field in order to pursue research. Certainly, pre-med at UChicago (which I still interpret as the main “bashing” of this thread) is not on my list of interests. How would you say UChicago fairs at putting someone into a top top medical school as a whole (not just pre-med majors)? I intend to major in bio with a concentration in Genetics of Biochem. How is UChicago’s bio program at that?</p>
<p>Thanks :)</p>
<p>Oh, and feathers.o’four, I’m fairly certain pre-med is not the best major for med school.</p>
<p>If your goal is to pursue a PhD in the biological sciences, UofC is a good place. </p>
<ul>
<li><p>PhD programs tend to be less grade centric than professional school, especially if you’ve had undergrad research experience and a prof that will go to bat for you.</p></li>
<li><p>Because UofC’s med school and its labs are adjacent to the rest of the campus (indeed, a 5 minute walk from my D’s first year dorm!), your opportunities for research experience are excellent. </p></li>
<li><p>Although as major in some science discipline, you will be in classes to some extent with pre-meds, depending on your major, most of the time you’d be on a different track. and you’d be judged by different standards in grad school admissions anyway. </p></li>
</ul>
<p>Many of UofC’s basic medical science departments are not top 10 tier (more like top 20 or 30, with exceptions of course), these rankings should have no impact on your grad school prospects.</p>
<p>There is no pre-med major at Chicago. What everyone is referring to by “pre-med” is taking the prereqs for getting into med school.</p>
<p>seadog.overseas: Not many people know about this, but UChicago’s genetics and evolution departments are ranked #1 in the nation. In fact, UChicago is known for genetics and evolution.</p>