UCLA vs UCSD for Neuroscience

<p>I now have to choose where to go. Does anyone have any suggestions? I hear UCSD is better for Neuroscience but I know UCLA is more prestigious. Of course, prestige is a stupid reason to choose a college, but what do you guys think is best for this major? Thanks...</p>

<p>You should go with UCLA.</p>

<p>Well, the thing is, do you know much about the curriculum at both institutions? If anything, both schools will have similar core classes - organic chemistry, calculus, inorganic chemistry, physics, life sciences, etc. along with upper-division courses. I think UCSD has specifically neurobiology whereas UCLA has neuroscience (it also has psychobiology). The differences at the upper-division level will be minute in terms of the professors and instruction. The curves for classes though will be slightly different. </p>

<p>Both schools are amazing. For example, UCSD has the world-famous Salk Institute. If you visit UCLA, you'll notice the concentrate and string of research institutions dedicated to neuroscience research... bri.ucla.edu etc </p>

<p>Bottom line: In case you absolutely must pursue an obscure professor in neuroengineering or in another field or Ramachandran's consciousness whatever at 'SD -- go where you feel more comfortable or happier. There isn't a life-hinging difference on attending one school for neuro over the other. Both are strong in biological sciences as well as neuro-related fields.</p>

<p>UCSD does have excellent biological science programs.
UCSD Bio (including neuroscience) > UCLA Biology (Neuroscience)
Right from good ole wiki
"According to US News and World Report rankings of graduate programs, the UC San Diego biology program is ranked """"2nd""""" in neuroscience and neurobiology, 6th in genetics and genomics, and 10th in cell biology."
2nd in the entire country!!!!!!</p>

<p>grad school has nothing to do with undergrad.</p>

<p>OK great what difference does that make to you? It's more related to research, PhD programs, etc... it's not like this will completely trickle-down and make the difference between being excellent at neuroscience at UCSD or UCLA - for one thing, they're both excellent schools already.</p>

<p>Well I think what I'm trying to say is which school would be better for me when I apply to a med school such as Harvard, Johns Hopkins, etc.</p>

<p>I've actually been reading the data for both schools on medical school admissions. UCLA has the most people applying to medical school in the country, and its admissions rate is slightly higher if not on par to the national average ( ~50% of people get into a medical school vs. 49% average). UCSD has a lot of people apply as well, but they don't actually hit the national average (46% was the last number they have in data). The reason why these numbers are so comparatively low (compared to Cornell's 81% rate) is that, as a public school, there are no restrictions on who gets to apply and who doesn't. At Cornell, apparently they won't give you a letter of recommendation from their pre-medical committee if you don't have the qualifications to get into a school, or write a bad one. UCLA and UCSD allow everyone.</p>

<p>UCLA is definitely a good place to find research, since its number 2 in terms of research funding. It's also close to the best hospital in the West which is good for finding hospital volunteering and shadowing. Your undergraduate degree doesn't necessarily have to come from a school that has prestige on the graduate level, it really doesn't trickle down. UCSD is, of course, still an equally great school, and it does have places like the Veterans Hospital right next to campus as well. Still, it would be better to make a decision by visiting the campuses for yourself.</p>

<p>UCLA has the most pre-med applicants in the United States. You have been warned. :rolleyes:</p>

<p>Yeah dude. TONS OF PRE-MEDS AT UCLA. I will tell you to go to UCSD just becaues UCLA doesn't need anymore premeds. But then again UCSD probably has tons too. Neurosci, undergrad, doesn't really matter much actually. UCLA med however PWNS UCSD. Don't get me wrong, UCSD is an awesome med school, and I wouldn't mind going there, but I'd choose LA over SD in a heartbeat in that sense. Haha. Bottom line, go with what you think feels right, academically they are ALMOST the same.</p>

<p>Did you apply to Cal?</p>

<p>Yes, I applied to Cal...will find out next week but I'm not too interested in Berkeley.</p>

<p>toxic waste: I don't think your statement is true. Undergraduates benefit highly from the graduates who are often the TA's of many of the undergraduate classes. Next, many professors teach both at the undergraduate and graduate levels. Therefore,graduate and undergraduate programs are highly interconnected, and this makes it reasonable to consider the graduate quality of the university when considering the undergraduate quality.
kutibah: UCLA is not that much better than UCSD, overall. Sure, UCLA has the name recognition and the prestige factor, but don't overlook or discredit UCSD too much. UCSD owns the other UCs when it comes to science, since that is its major area of focus as a university. Ultimately, it is up for you to decide what you want(prestige and intense competition = UCLA vs. Top notch(but not as prestigious) and chilled atmosphere = UCSD). Personally, even if I did get into LA, I would still go to SD. UCLA is a bit too crazy/ overwhelming for my personal preference. Premeds are a dime a dozen, and therefore, it's going to be tough to get the necessary recognition you need to get great letters of rec. and research opportunities. (Unless, of course, you're some kind of super-genius!) Anyways, SD, I believe, provides a less competitive yet great academic environment. Sure, there are plenty of premeds at SD, but premeds are not as cut-throat as they are at UCLA. In other words, it's easier to be a top-dog at SD than it is at LA.
The acceptance rate of SD grads to med school is a bit (emphasis on "bit") lower than UCLA's but that is simply the result of the fact that ppl in LA probably study and work at least twice as hard to get into med school. Lastly, Congratulations getting accepted to the world's most popular university!
On the other hand, I feel sorry for you because of the fact that you have to make an extremely difficult decision in less than two months.</p>

<p>Easiest path to med school is to go to UCR and get into one of the 24 spots that are offered every year to the UCR/UCLA med school. It greatly increases your chances of getting into med school.</p>

<p>Berkeley has higher name recognition than either of them; keep that in mind. You also have UCSF, the state's best med school, twenty minutes away. You will have be dealing with less premeds but a higher level of competition than SD.</p>

<p>State's best med school is Stanford.</p>

<p>Berkeley competition is surprisingly fiercer than UCLA's. Keep that in mind when you consider that the average medical school admit has a 3.7 College GPA. </p>

<p>To Jason, we are again talking about UNDERGRADUATE education, not graduate. Graduate school UCSD is the best for biology hands down. However, that doesn't necessarily translate to undergraduate prestige. Prestige should not be considered when talking about a bachelor's, especially when that degree is only used to get into Pre-Med.</p>

<p>Hmm....my decision now seems even more tough =(</p>

<p>ucla's UNDERGRADUATE (NOT GRADUATE which is completely different) neuroscience program is better than SD's. I've heard it's one of the tougher life science majors wherever you go</p>

USNews.com:</a> America's Best Graduate Schools 2008: Top Medical Schools - Research
USNews.com:</a> America's Best Graduate Schools 2008: Top Medical Schools - Primary Care
SF ranks higher both research and primary care</p>

<p>Graduate and undergraduate would logically have some correlation, it would be loose, but it is still there.</p>

<p>GSIs do do a lot of the teaching</p>