<p>I want to start off as a pre-med in college to see if I like it, and I was wondering if UCLA or Texas would have a better pre-med program in terms of this:</p>
<p>-Ability to do research/get internships at the medical school (huge factor for me)
-Which one is less competitive/easier to get grades at...I know it's hard everywhere, but if someone has any idea about this, please comment. I heard that UCLA is cutthroat for pre-med, so I am somewhat worried about that.
-How many grads get into the top med schools (i.e. Stanford, HMS, etc.)
-Which is better for business and engineering since there's a decent chance I won't do medicine?
-Non academic factors such as social life, college town, etc.</p>
<p>I would (and tried), but I only found one comparing these two in particular, but in that thread they just said to go to UT because they're instate. The two are both OOS for me with UT being cheaper, so can anyone comment on these two? It seems UT is off the radar to Bruins at least.</p>
<p>For Pre-Meds attending top universities like Texas and UCLA, what's important isn't so much where you go, but rather how well you do once you get there. The people with the highest gpa's and MCATs will get more offers to Med School.</p>
<p>you dont find any comparing these two in particular because how the eff do you expect ucla people to know about ut outside of any sports competitions? what you do is search stuff about ucla premed where there have been infinite threads about already (and for every two things that come up in your search, you inescapably see some really stupid threads like "ucla vs ucb vs ucsd premed plz fight cuz i no kno how to search!") and search stuff about texas premed and then compare</p>
<p>but threads like these are still better than those really really bitter reject threads where they come in boasting of their self-entitlement and cant come to terms about how they just werent good enough so they lash out at anything else they can grab at including lies to boost their egos that are already way above reality</p>
but threads like these are still better than those really really bitter reject threads where they come in boasting of their self-entitlement and cant come to terms about how they just werent good enough so they lash out at anything else they can grab at including lies to boost their egos that are already way above reality
It's because the majority of them, as you alluded to, didn't do their research about what it takes to get accepted prior to applying.</p>
<p>I may not be a med student, but I know plenty of med students and am engaged to one. You are also, in MY experience, a bit off the mark. It seems to me that the GPA and MCAT is a green/yellow/red flag for most schools. The higher the GPA and MCAT, the more schools will green flag you before they more on to ECs, LORs, etc.</p>
<p>However, while a 3.4 is enough to green flag you to many schools, it will not green flag you at UCSF, UCLA, WUSTL, etc. The thing is, you need BOTH high GPA/MCAT AND awesome extracurriculars to get into the stratosphere of medical schools because admission is that tough. </p>
<p>And while high scores won't guarantee squat, you need at least the high scores to get past the first gate.</p>
<p>ditto to UCLAri...GPA and MCAT is a given - you need to have a solid gpa and mcat score.</p>
<p>Everything else is what sets you off from other applicants. A student with a good GPA and MCAT but mediocre ECs probably isn't that much better off than a student with mediocre GPA and MCAT but good ECs. You really need both and then some to stand out. (prestige of a school probably won't help either if you're gpa/mcat isn't good)</p>
<p>This might give you an idea of the med schools UCLA grads get into (though its from 2005..most recent one I see on that site).</p>