<p>what's the UCLA premed acceptance rate???</p>
<p>:)))))))))))</p>
<p>wat? I think the undergrad acceptance rate is ~1/4. I don't think you are actually accepted into pre-med, you just kind of do it.</p>
<p>yeah i mean what percent of the premeds get into med school?</p>
<p>According to this website, about 50% of those who apply. The 700+ who apply are probably fewer than the number who start out as "premed."
UCLA</a> Career Center</p>
<p>why is it lower than berkeley's when berkeley is considered "harder?"</p>
<p>It's probably not. Berkeley's statistics are self-reported.</p>
<p>I believe it's around 50% for regular students, and 86% for honors students.</p>
<p>I would hope so considering the quality of students that get reagents at UCLA.</p>
<p>Is regents really that rare?</p>
<p>UCLA</a> Financial Aid Office-Scholarship Office</p>
<p>It says "up to 100" are given out each year. How many of those 100 end up in premed? Who knows. 30? 50? So the 86% figure (if it's true) is really only applicable to a small fraction of UCLA's 700+ premed applicant pool.</p>
<p>Whoa. Had no idea they were so rare. (Is that 100 awarded, or 100 actually paid? e.g. does the 100 include students who don't end up choosing UCLA?)</p>
<p>I'm not sure how informative placement percentages are. My take is that larger colleges will have lower placement rates for reasons unrelated to quality of premed education. Consider: The only other UC campuses whose rates I found easily were UCSD Professional</a> & Graduate School: Pre-Medical Data which shows a roughly 50% rate like UCLA, and UCSB, which lists the med schools its graduates went to (96 total matriculants for 2007) which translates to a 62% rate when compared to the AAMC list of total applicants (155 for UCSB for 2007) UCSB is, on average, less selective in admissions than UCLA and UCSD, yet produces higher med school placement rates. The question is, why?</p>
<p>What I see is a much smaller number of applicants from UCSB, translating into a higher success rate, even though a smaller percentage of the student body as a whole is continuing to medical school. I suspect that this phenomenon is probably widespread: the more students from a given university apply to medical school, the lower the acceptance ratio will be. The four universities producing the largest numbers of med school applicants in 2007 were UCLA: 780, Berkeley: 730, UT Austin: 693, and UMich: 660. Even at a 50% admissions rate those schools produce a lot of med students, but it's perhaps understandable that they also produce a larger percentage of applicants who don't succeed in gaining admission. The colleges I've seen which boast the highest placement rates are small LAC's which claim placement rates above 90%. But does that mean they prepare their students better, or only that they do a better job of diverting the less promising ones into other career paths, so they simply don't apply to med school?</p>
<p>Certainly the "diverting" is much larger at the large state schools than small LACs. The question is to what extent is this from pre-selection of more talented students.</p>
<p>"Divert" was probably a poor choice of words. I suspect that a higher percentage of big school freshmen who identify as "pre med" end up not applying to medical school later on, for various individual reasons. Perhaps a better word for what I'm talking about is "discourage" - along the lines of your discussion with Sakky two years ago: <a href="http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/pre-med-topics/149508-berkeley-good-place-pursue-pre-med-3.html%5B/url%5D">http://talk.collegeconfidential.com/pre-med-topics/149508-berkeley-good-place-pursue-pre-med-3.html</a> I suspect that something along the lines of what you two were discussing at Johns Hopkins arises at many smaller colleges, to a greater or lesser degree of overtness: the pre med advising process lets the med school candidates whose chances are low know what the odds are and, with varying degrees of insistence, urges them to look elsewhere. I imagine that the large universities are far less diligent about discouraging the less promising candidates from applying to med school, and actively steering them in other directions; hence the larger number (and percentage) of unsuccessful applicants.</p>
<p>Ah. Makes sense.</p>
<p>"So the 86% figure (if it's true) is really only applicable to a small fraction of UCLA's 700+ premed applicant pool."</p>
<p>The 86% figure is out of the honor student pool, not the recepients of the Regents Scholar Award. The former is much larger, from what I understand, roughly 300 graduate with honors. Not sure if these are all premeds, but I can check.</p>
<p>What are the criteria for graduating with honors?</p>
<p>^ Looks like there are two ways: you must either complete 11 honors courses (44 units) with B or above (plan A), or complete 9 honors courses (36 units) with B or above AND do a reasearch project/thesis paper (plan B). The first is sufficient for a "college honors", whereas the second will also get you a "departmental honors".</p>
<p>The above is my understanding based on their website:
UCLA</a> Honors Programs Academics</p>
<p>Here's some data from '05 (stats are for allopathic schools). Also, keep in mind that numbers are higher (86%) for honors students:</p>
<p>UCLA</a> Career Center</p>