I was accepted to these universities; I am thinking of adopting a pre-med track with a psychology major. There is a small chance I may study physics. I am also valuing the prestige of schools a lot. For example, although Vanderbilt has a smaller acceptance rate, my friends and family keep telling me that Berkeley is much more of a prestigious university. I am truly having trouble choosing between these. Larger classes are okay for me, I don’t think it would cause a problem. I genuinely need some insights; if you could help me, I will frankly be grateful.
For undergrad, these are probably about even academically: Berkeley has the best academic rep, but Vandy and Georgetown have smaller classes and better academic support – typical when comparing big public research universities and much smaller private universities. All three are prestigious at the undergrad level.
But for you, I think it’s much smarter to think about academic, environmental and social fit than to base your decision on prestige – especially when these are all amply prestigious and relative peers for undergrad. Cost is important as well – unless your family has money to burn, saving during your undergrad years will help you pay for med school.
1 Like
OP, you are correct. Berkeley is more prestigious than both Vandy and Georgetown. I checked out on the schools which have the most number of representatives at the top medical schools in the nation (Harvard, Johns Hopkins, UCSF, Stanford, Yale and so on), and Berkeley has always been in the top 10 while both Vandy and Georgetown weren’t even in the top 15. For example, Berkeley has the most premeds at Johns Hopkins Med School after JHU. The same scenario as at Stanford Med and Tulane Med where Berkeley is the 2nd most represented premed at those two med schools. Also, Berkeley premeds are the most represented at UCSF, UCLA Med, UC Davis Med and #4 at Harvard Med and #5 at Yale Med.
That said, if you’re planning on going to medical school, school prestige doesn’t really count a lot. It does in some ways, but it really doesn’t define the premed applicant in as much as it does for MBA or Law. Also, medical schools are pretty expensive. I think you should also consider the cost of attending undergrad (premed) and see if it wouldn’t prohibit you from pursuing med school later after your premed.
Do those numbers account for school size (or better yet, for the number of medical school applicants)?
Berkeley is much larger (with ~31K undergrads, compared to ~7600 for Georgetown and ~6900 for Vanderbilt).
All 3 are academically strong and prestigious. I agree that net cost probably should be a major factor if you’re serious about med school.
1 Like
Berkeley’s freshman class, each year by itself, has more students than the entire undergraduate body of either Vanderbilt or Georgetown. Berkeley also has a reputation—you see it mentioned constantly on these boards, fairly or unfairly—of being difficult to get the classes you want, resulting in longer times to graduate for some in STEM. Both Georgetown and Vanderbilt also have their own medical schools, which siphons away their pre-med graduates (especially Georgetown which has an accelerated internal admission program for medical school). Berkeley is a very highly regarded university nationally and internationally for its various departments, but it is a debatable point whether that fully translates to the undergraduate experience, given that there will also be an army of graduate teaching assistants, many large classes, and a large bureaucracy to navigate.
1 Like
Berkeley’s reputation is based on its graduate and professional schools. At the undergraduate level, I don’t think Berkeley is all that different from other big state flagships. I’d go for the more personal attention available at Vanderbilt or Georgetown. Don’t worry about prestige.
1 Like
It depends on where you are and in what circles you ask. I know a lot of people in my field that would look at Georgetown and Vanderbilt with ultimate respect. Berkeley for our analysts and quant models and the other two schools to lead the teams. In science it’s Berkeley and probably in academia. But the no brainer type advice is just not accurate in all areas. Personal reference points and field of study drive a lot of perceived prestige.
Also college is not just about classes and job hunts. It’s an experience and the vandy gtown vs UCB is totally different in almost every way. Not better or worse. Just different.
For my son a few years ago UCBs political climate was also a factor in his decision making. Not that Gtown is any bastion of conservative thought. Vandys rep is a little more southern vibe as well.
1 Like
There’s absolutely no sense in doing that, @tk21769. Not everyone at Cal is premed.
I respect your opinion, @simba9, but I think that’s oversimplification, and I have to disagree with you on that. I think Berkeley is NOT an = of State Us like University of Arizona or University of Georgia, or University of North Dakota or the University of Arkansas.
I think there’s only quite a few state universities that can make a solid argument to be an equal of Berkeley, and these are:
Michigan
Virginia
UNC-CH
UCLA
CofW&M
and to some extent, UofWashington, UT-Austin, Georgia Tech and CU Boulder.
^ UW-Madison and UIUC instead of CU.
No, not everyone at Cal is premed. However, I would expect a strong school with ~31K undergraduates to generate many more premeds than strong schools with only ~7600 or ~6900 undergraduates. Accordingly, graduate/professional school outcome rankings typically do normalize by school size (or in some cases by the number of majors). Examples:
http://www.inside-higher-ed.com/wp-content/uploads/2013/04/wsj_college_092503.pdf
https://www.nsf.gov/statistics/infbrief/nsf13323/
https://www.historians.org/publications-and-directories/perspectives-on-history/september-2005/privileging-history-trends-in-the-undergraduate-origins-of-history-phds
(In the second study, compare Berkeley’s positions in Table 2 and Table 4; in the third study, compare its positions in Table 1 and Table 2)
For some purposes (like measuring industry/social impact) it may make more sense to use the raw numbers. If you’re trying to compare the likelihood of desired post-graduate outcomes, it probably makes more sense to adjust for population sizes. Even then, the comparison may be confounded by factors unrelated to undergraduate program quality.
Now, even after adjusting for population sizes, perhaps Berkeley does have better alumni per capita representation than Georgetown or Vanderbilt at “top” med schools. I’ve seen one such study that does suggest that (unfortunately, the CC terms of service apparently don’t allow me to link it here). However, AFAIK, nobody has done a comparison that fully accounts for the number of applicants, the number of acceptances, and their credentials (GPA, MCAT scores, etc.) So, as far as I can tell, nobody really knows if a Berkeley applicant is any more or less likely to get into Harvard/Yale med (/ Stanford law, etc.) than a Georgetown or Vanderbilt applicant with similar credentials.
1 Like
Random thought/question—if (1) admission to Cal system is driven far more by numbers than a holistic approach, and (2) admission to medical school is driven far more by numbers than holistic review of a resume, then it stands to reason that kids from Cal might do better on average in admissions to medical school. It is not necessarily that Cal MADE them better applicants, it is that as a group they have characteristics that will make them good applicants (ie, good test takers and driven to produce high GPAs).