Welcome to College Confidential!

The leading college-bound community on the web

Sign Up For Free

Join for FREE, and start talking with other members, weighing in on community discussions, and more.

Also, by registering and logging in you'll see fewer ads and pesky welcome messages (like this one!)

As a CC member, you can:

  • Reply to threads, and start your own.
  • Post reviews of your campus visits.
  • Find hundreds of pages of informative articles.
  • Search from over 3 million scholarships.

I need help in deciding whether to go to UCLA or not...

2

Replies to: I need help in deciding whether to go to UCLA or not...

  • TonyLTH12TonyLTH12 Registered User Posts: 783 Member
    Thanks for the links.
    One of the faculty member pointed out that this year Pacific (95% I think) beated out UCSF in passing the licensing from the board.

    One question I have always wonder is do the rankings take into account that one progam is accelerated while the other is traditional?
  • CyberDragoonCyberDragoon Registered User Posts: 102 Junior Member
    The rankings are generated by sending survays to the deans, other administrators, and/or faculty at accredited degree programs or schools. They rank the school based on the quality of its programs. Some math is done and then a score if given. I think they take into account the totality of the school's programs not just that particular one.

    Also you have to consider which school has good residency programs things. Which would get you into a better residency. "only UC and USC currently
    offer accredited pharmacyresidency and fellowshiptraining program" though the a lot of grads will probably have to take their residency outside of their school and state.

    http://www.ucop.edu/healthaffairs/REFORMATTED%20PHARMACY.pdf

    From the acceptances to applications ratio UCSF is slightly more competetative. UOP has a larger class size too. 200 to the 122 of UCSF. Is this better or worse?

    Technically if you go to UOP you'll save money cause there are fewer years. However, you won't get a BS or BA degree.

    In the end it really depends on how strongly you want to be a pharmacist. If you are certain then UOP is probably the way to go. However, if you are unsure then you should go elsewhere. Undergrad preformance is very important for grad school and so UCLA would be better for research oppurtunities and etc.

    Personally I am unsure and don't believe I can commit right now. That's one of the reasons I prefer UCLA. With UCLA if I decide a few years from now I wanna be an engineer or a doctor it would be a lot easier to get into a good grad school with a UCLA degree than a UOP degree. If I got to UOP I'm practically forced into becoming a pharmacist. Hahaha. I need to figure out what I wanna do for the rest of my life.
  • SYDBSYDB Registered User Posts: 82 Junior Member
    go to UOP if ur SURE you wanna do pharmacy. if you're even thinking of med or dent or anything else then id go with UCLA
  • pharmgeniuspharmgenius Registered User Posts: 7 New Member
    I graduated from UCLA last year. I currently attend UCSF pharmacy school. As a former UCLA student, I can tell you that I was fully prepared for the admissions process. I was a biochem major but also took courses meant for the engineering undergrads. I managed to receive my B.S. in three years. UCLA has a great learning environment. UCSF is ranked very highly for pharmacy and the academic focus is wonderful.
    It's true that at UOP you will be able to receive your degree in five years. However, have you considered research opportunities? UCLA's great professors coupled with ground breaking research make it an ideal environment for hungry minds. My gpa/pcat scores weren't anything remarkable. I got in because of my dedication and passion for science.
    Don't go to UOP because you want an easy ride to becoming a pharmacist. I gaurantee that you will be able to get into fabulous pharmacy schools from UCLA. UCLA has a very strong pre-med program as well.
    In my opinion, UOP is not worth giving up the college experience. I took a look at their website and their program just doesn't compare. UCLA has research programs that are shaping the world. It has wonderful professors who broaden your minds and make you see things like you've never seen them before. As far as the competition is concerned, have you ever taken into consideration that the people who applied against you to UOP just aren't up to par? The stats required to get into the five year program are low. Getting into UCLA is an accomplishment. Don't give up UCLA for UOP.
    I don't know about the 75% acceptance rate. However, I can tell you that many of my friends who applied got in as well.
  • CyberDragoonCyberDragoon Registered User Posts: 102 Junior Member
    As much as I prefer UCLA over UOP I think their admit reqs for the pharm 5 year is fairly good.

    * High school GPA of 3.6 (on a 4.0 scale) and
    * Either a combined SAT Critical Reading and Math score of 1250 (with at least a 550 in Critical Reading and Math), or an ACT Composite of 27.

    I don't think that's all that bad. The only problem is that they don't require an SAT II in something like bio or chem whereas UCLA requires at least 3.

    Has anyone looked UOP's research oppurtunities? UCLA is generally considered a good research school so how does UOP compare?
  • skylineskyline Registered User Posts: 60 Junior Member
    erm, can't say much about that.
    but i was chatting to some of pharmacists at a recent family meet (have tons of 'em there), and the ones who graduated from uop and ucsf say that uop pharm training is a little more inclined towards retail, while sf preps you a lot for clinical work and research. of course, you can do whatever you wish (all my uop relations are currently working at hospitals, haha), but that's just a comparsion.
  • TonyLTH12TonyLTH12 Registered User Posts: 783 Member
    Thank You all for your inputs. I am going to choose UCLA :)
  • lavalitalavalita Registered User Posts: 85 Junior Member
    I hope this doesn't sound arrogant, but..

    It sounds like UCLA has not only better but also broader opportunities for education. If you're thinking about engineering at all, UCLA is the better choice. If you're thinking about doing research, UCLA is the better choice. The UC's are major research universities after all, and UCLA grads have a very high entrance rate into health grad schools. You will probably have an easier time doing research in any field of your choice coming out of UCLA, rather than, as skyline says, working at a pharmacy. Besides, UCLA has that cool nanotech research center with Stanford and UCB :p <3The only reason I can see why UOP is preferable is possibly smaller classes, but really once you get into your major, your classes will be small at UCLA too.

    One last note, when I visited UOP two years ago...it really gave me that community college feel. Maybe, it was just that one weekend. Overall, however, I believe UCLA will provide a more fulfilling college experience.
  • TonyLTH12TonyLTH12 Registered User Posts: 783 Member
    Your post basically sum up my thoughts and conclusion.
  • bookfreak89bookfreak89 Registered User Posts: 763 Member
    I agree with lavalita. UCLA has a variety of opportunities to conduct research and partake in small classes. When I visited UCLA, our tour guides were each doing research in the microbio/immunology field. One of them was also considering attending pharmacy because she knows she has been prepared for it. However, one of my friends visited UOP and she said that the campus seems like it was a community college and the people didn't seem to hold intelligent conversations. This wasn't what he was looking for. He wanted to be able to learn from his peers as well as receive an excellent undergrad education. So, all in all, I believe that UCLA will better prepare you for anything you want to pursue during your post-undergrad.
  • TonyLTH12TonyLTH12 Registered User Posts: 783 Member
    Hey, do you know whether it is possible to go straight to a school of public health for a masters degree?
    I know I will defintely minor in public health.
  • jyancyjyancy Registered User Posts: 775 Member
    Despite all the opportunities, there's still a chance/luck factor that goes along with your applications for specialty/graduate schools. Guaranteed spots are hard to pass up.

    ("75% of UCLA applicants attend UCSF."- That cannot be true- it is too ridiculously high for any school.)
  • CyberDragoonCyberDragoon Registered User Posts: 102 Junior Member
    I don't know if that statistic is correct. I have a printed out copy and that's what it says. I got it from the UCLA Career Center. However, I can't find it anymore. I'm entierly open to the possiblity that it was a typo and they have since removed it.
  • flopsyflopsy Registered User Posts: 8,368 Senior Member
    I think a more realistic percentage is 7.5% of UCLA applicants attending UCSF. :rolleyes:
  • TonyLTH12TonyLTH12 Registered User Posts: 783 Member
    now that is truly hard to get in. Does anyone know the admit rate for UCLA's school of Public Health for UCLA undergraduates?
2
This discussion has been closed.