<p>Hello,
I will be an incoming freshman next year and I plan on going Pre-Med. I think I have a fair shot at getting accepted to both schools but I'm having trouble convincing my parents that USC will be a better match for me since the class sizes are smaller and because they really try to help you prepare for medical school over there. I've been going to public school for twelve years so I'm very familiar with the system but I think it's finally time to move on to private schools for a change.
Do you have any inputs on which school will prepare me better for med school?
Please avoid any bias and try to list some sources as I will have to show them to my parents to prove my argument.
Thanks!</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>Really? Says who?</p>
<p>USC has smaller classes, but they are still large.</p>
<p>General chemistry class size for fall 2012:
[USC</a> CHEM 105aLg](<a href=“http://web-app.usc.edu/soc/20123/chem]USC”>302 Found): lectures 160-219, labs 13-18
[UCLA</a> CHEM 20A/20AH/20L](<a href=“http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/crsredir.aspx?termsel=12F&subareasel=CHEM]UCLA”>http://www.registrar.ucla.edu/schedule/crsredir.aspx?termsel=12F&subareasel=CHEM): lectures 327-362 (honors lecture 12), discussions 27-32 (honors discussions 5-7), labs 14-20</p>
<p>Pre-meds should consider cost in order to minimize debt and save money for expensive medical school.</p>
<p>Why do you think that USC “really tries to prepare you for medical school”? What do you think they actually do? Pre-med pre-req classes are large. At one time they had TAs teaching those classes (not sure if they still do). When my brother was pre-med at USC he complained (loudly) that his pre-reqs were all taught by TAs.</p>
<p>What are your parents’ objections?</p>
<p>If it’s about money, they are absolutely right: Going into debt as an undergrad and then going further into debt for medical school is a bad idea. I’m assuming you are a CA resident. If so, medical school will probably cost you close to $300k because there are so few in-state seats in California medical schools. Nearly all pre-meds in CA have to look at attending private med school or OOS school at twice the cost of your typical in-state school. Add on another $200k for college and you will be spending a significant part of your adult life paying off your debt. </p>
<p>Assuming money isn’t the issue, than I’m with the other respondents - there isn’t much difference between pre-med at either of these schools. Not enough to justify the price difference anyway. If you were talking about a LAC, then at least your money is buying a significantly different experience. But it still isn’t worth it if it requires you to take on a lot of debt.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UCLA’s one of the richest public schools in the nation. It’s probably unlike any public school you’ve been affiliated with. All that public really means for it is that it has to accept more California residents, and its focused largely on public goods (socio-economic diversity by virtue of Pell grant recipients, etc.) that most of its elite peers aren’t; also, there might be some bureaucracy, but i don’t think i dealt with it.</p>
<p>Aside from those things, it’s essentially a private school. These things can be noted in low admissions rate, competitiveness of applicants, awards by professors, etc. </p>
<p>Other things you should take note of is UCLAMC has the best hospital on the west coast, which is like a 15 min walk from South Campus (where your classes would be.) That could be very useful for internships.</p>
<p>Lastly, realize that many change their major. UCLA offers a wealth of opportunities for students looking to change their major. USC does too, but i don’t think it provides a much better option in virtue of being a private university.</p>
<p>*Quote:
I’ve been going to public school for twelve years so I’m very familiar with the system…
*</p>
<p>There is no comparison between the K-12 public school system and the UC college system. None at all.</p>
<p>but I think it’s finally time to move on to private schools for a change.</p>
<p>That is a naive position. Again, UCLA isn’t anything like your K-12 situation. As for moving on to private schools for a change…if your parents aren’t willing to pay for USC, this is a non-issue. If they won’t pay what they’re expected to pay there will be no way for you to attend.</p>
<p>People seem to draw this artificial quality line between private and public universities. There are a LOT of crappy private universities, and a lot of really good public universities. Like the others, I really don’t think it will make much a difference pre-med academics wise if you go to UCLA vs. USC. In fact, had I the choice, I’d choose UCLA.</p>
<p>My vote is that you go to USC. You get what you say you want, and you free up a spot at UCLA for someone who really wants to be there. Win-win!!</p>
<p>If you choose to attend USC and your scores are supportive, you may be given the option of joining the freshman science honors program aka fsh. Fsh classes are also open to people not in the program on a subject to subject basis by application. These classes are the same as their respective general ones, for freshman year, chemistry and biology but the classes are much much smaller. For example, I’m a Chem engineering freshman who was invited to and applied and accepted to honors chemistry, CHEM 115a. There are 71 people in the class. Most or at least many people in the fsh program are pre-med students. I would highly recommend USC if you were able to get into this program.</p>
<p>@mom2college, I don’t know when this was, but all the Chem and bio classes that I’ve heard of and taken have been taught by professors, only discussion and lab sessions have been run by TAs.</p>
<p>^^
This was a long time ago, which is why I said that I don’t know if that still happens.</p>
<p>The bigger point is that the OP seems to assume that somehow private is better and that he’s going to get a lot of extra help at USC, which is a large private with large classes. When he’s taking his pre-med pre-reqs at USC he’s going to face a large number of grade-hounds (as he would at UCLA) all gunning for the limited number of As awarded in those weeder classes. </p>
<p>If he’s a top student, strong in the sciences in high school, then that’s what is really going to make the difference in those classes. Those with a strong high school science foundation have a huge headstart when taking the pre-med pre-reqs in college.</p>
<p>Frankly, I don’t care which one he goes to. The end result will likely be the same. However, if his parents won’t pay more for USC, then the discussion will be moot.</p>
<p>It will also be moot if the OP does not get into both.</p>
<p>Note that UCLA appears to be slightly more selective than USC – a recent previous year post listing admission and matriculation of students (by number, not name) at a southern California high school indicated there were a lot more “admitted to USC, rejected by UCLA” students than the other way around. But neither can be considered a safety for anyone.</p>
<p>Well I have a 4.0 UC unweighted gpa and the acceptance rate at ucla is 71% for applicants with similar academic achievement so I’m going off the assumption that I have a good chance at getting into both although I do agree with the person above who said I will have a higher chance getting into USC.
My marks in life sciences are of course great, otherwise I wouldn’t want to go pre-med. (I got an 800 in bio m and I enjoy volunteering at the Ronald Reagan hospital). I’m just afraid that at ucla the competition is too great for me to be able to excel in all my courses since some of them base grade distribution off of a bell curve. I can’t say that USC doesn’t as well but from what I’ve heard the students aren’t as aggressive over there.</p>
<p>To be honest, UCLA was initially my dream school. I’m very familiar with the campus, live within proximity to it, and have spent a lot of time at the hospital and in the surrounding area. Maybe I just need some reassurance here.</p>
<p>since UCLA has a med school, it stands to reason that UCLA is a better feeder school. If you were going into dentistry, I might suggest USC.</p>
<p>Frankly, there are many schools that are just as good for pre-med: most of the UCs, etc.</p>
<p>^^^</p>
<p>???</p>
<p>USC has a med school as well…Keck</p>
<p>“since UCLA has a med school, it stands to reason that UCLA is a better feeder school.”</p>
<p>This ‘feeder school’ stuff is mythology in CA. There are roughly 108 spaces for an incoming medical school class at UCLA as I recall. (This is off the top of my head so the numbers may be a bit off but the ratios aren’t). There are more than 8,000 applicants for those seats. There is no ‘feeder’ from UCLA to it’s medical school. California residents who are pre-med almost always have to look OOS for medical school seats. If you are one of the exceptions, you are very fortunate. I suggest you check how many UCLA applicants there were for UCLA med school seats and what percent of the class come from UCLA. Nearly all of them are from CA, since they admit very few from OOS, but the applicants come from all over CA including all the other UCs and Berkeley, as well as the CA resident pre-meds who are studying elsewhere in the country.</p>
<p>Anecdotal support: Nephew- a CA resident- graduated from USC with a 4.0 and 36 MCAT and all the requisite experience: Applied to every medical school in CA. Not one single offer of admission in state, although he had a number from OOS (and just graduated at the top of his medical school class). My sister was upset by all the rejections - which is what lead me to check out the stats so she could put the rejection into context.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>UCLA comes pretty close. It takes like 20% or so of its med. school applicants from its own students (Yale and Harvard law take around 30% from their own students.)</p>
<p>@mom2collegekids</p>
<p>USC’s med school is at a different location than the undergrad campus, about 10 miles away, so it’s more difficult to intern there especially if you don’t have a car.</p>