Johns Hopkins vs UCLA pre med

saif235
Thu, 06 Apr 2017 06:28:01 +0000

(current student)

I’m from California and have some anecdotal experience with UCLA.

So first of all let’s clear up a bit of a misconception. Hopkins is no more difficult or stressful than UCLA - especially for premeds. Large, highly ranked state schools like LA tend to have more of a weedout culture in their lower level STEM classes (almost all of which you need to take in some form for premed requirements). If you take UC Berkeley as an analogue for UCLA (because I could find some anecdotal data), the Biology department has the lowest average GPA (around a 2.7). That implies that classes are curved to a B-/C+ - you would need to do very well in those classes to maintain the ideal premed GPA (3.5+). Anecdotally, Hopkins GPAs for intro STEM classes are comparable - if not better - than their counterparts at Berkeley - and by extension at UCLA. That’s not to say that you can’t do well at UCLA, but the idea that Hopkins is any more stressful than UCLA is not realistic - especially for premeds.

Now to answer your question I’m going to go ahead and assume that your family can reasonably afford Hopkins with the amount of aid you have - if not, go to UCLA no question. Making that assumption, it really depends on how much of a go-getter you are. Hopkins offers a lot of opportunities that are “within easy reach” whereas similar opportunities at a school like UCLA will be more competitive.
The biggest example is research. Hopkins overflows with research opportunities for undergrads in almost every field - you will have no trouble finding a research position as a Hopkins undergrad if you’re willing to put in the smallest bit of effort to email some professors and read a couple of papers. Some majors (Molecular and Cellular Biology and Neuroscience being the most notable) even require you to conduct research for a year to graduate. Many students are also able to conduct research at Hopkins med, allowing them to interact with physicians, med students, and - for the utilitarian in you - get influential rec letters from “Hopkins Doctors”.
Research opportunities definitely exists at schools like UCLA. However, Hopkins has a larger research budget and much fewer undergrads. Thus research positions at UCLA are extremely competitive whereas a majority of Hopkins students conduct research - and those who don’t typically didn’t want to do research.
Another example is premed advising. At Hopkins, premed advising is reasonably personal. While the student / advisor ration is relatively high, it is possible for you to maintain a good relationship with your advisor (which is helpful when they write your rec letter). However UCLA has significantly more students resulting in an extremely high student / advisor ration and a much less personal advising experience.

Now are these differences worth the tuition difference between Hopkins and UCLA? That really depends on you. Both are great schools, and - in the grand scheme - you can’t really go wrong with this choice.

Good luck!