Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you pick Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD over UVA, W&M and VT?

Yes. My DD will be going to UCLA. Wouldn’t even tour W & M. Awful tour at UVA and LA more exciting and dynamic than Charlottesville. We are OOS for all.

My DD will be going to UCLA and we are OOS. Got accepted to UVA, VT, and W&M (Monroe Scholar). Tours at those schools were okay and she knows they are good school. She just wasn't excited about them. She looooved the tour of UCLA and is excited for the change of scenery. She is majoring in Biology (plans to go to medical school), and is impressed with the classes and research opportunities UCLA will offer.

I got my chemistry PhD at UCLA and was a TA to hundreds of premeds. I think this is a really, really bad choice. Unless things have changed radically, all of the premed science classes are horribly impacted so many students struggle to get into needed labs until their 5th or 6th year, so then they are taking them unconnected to the corresponding coursework. (Be prepared to pay for a 5th year.) The science faculty are also wholly focused on research so undergrad teaching is a hot mess (and that's being kind) and the premeds are viciously competitive with rampant cheating. There are also ongoing budget shortages so kids with labs late in the week often can't complete the required lab because of lack of supplies (the stockroom runs out) and then those students get lower grades since they can't complete the work. With completely checked out faculty, undergrads have to rely on instruction from TAs, but the best grad students find other funding, so the bottom of the barrel grad students (brand new or very limited English) end up teaching the premeds. It's a really terrible environment. It is a really pretty campus and great weather. But that doesn't fix the awful.

The 14CL, 30BL and 30CL lab classes were especially bad, but 30A, 30B and 30C were also pretty awful.

Also, my understanding is that many schools love to preference their own undergrads for med school (e.g., U or Arizona) but UCLA has a negative preference for its own undergrads so it's harder to get into med school put of UCLA than from other undergrads.

Sounds bad. Would any of the other UCs or Virginia schools be better?

I'm the PhD who put in this comment and will say that two of my close grad school friends were from Berkeley and William and Mary. They both said that their experiences were nothing like UCLA and they were both shocked at its subpar premed education.

I think you just need to do more research beyond taking a shiny campus tour, and also to appreciate that current undergrads have nothing to compare their experience to so you need to be a bit critical of what you hear. Ask lots of questions. Don't just rely on rankings.

Thanks for that perspective--do you think the same is true for all majors? My kid is at UCLA for CS even though I discouraged him from going since he got into UIUC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you pick Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD over UVA, W&M and VT?

Yes. My DD will be going to UCLA. Wouldn’t even tour W & M. Awful tour at UVA and LA more exciting and dynamic than Charlottesville. We are OOS for all.

My DD will be going to UCLA and we are OOS. Got accepted to UVA, VT, and W&M (Monroe Scholar). Tours at those schools were okay and she knows they are good school. She just wasn't excited about them. She looooved the tour of UCLA and is excited for the change of scenery. She is majoring in Biology (plans to go to medical school), and is impressed with the classes and research opportunities UCLA will offer.

I got my chemistry PhD at UCLA and was a TA to hundreds of premeds. I think this is a really, really bad choice. Unless things have changed radically, all of the premed science classes are horribly impacted so many students struggle to get into needed labs until their 5th or 6th year, so then they are taking them unconnected to the corresponding coursework. (Be prepared to pay for a 5th year.) The science faculty are also wholly focused on research so undergrad teaching is a hot mess (and that's being kind) and the premeds are viciously competitive with rampant cheating. There are also ongoing budget shortages so kids with labs late in the week often can't complete the required lab because of lack of supplies (the stockroom runs out) and then those students get lower grades since they can't complete the work. With completely checked out faculty, undergrads have to rely on instruction from TAs, but the best grad students find other funding, so the bottom of the barrel grad students (brand new or very limited English) end up teaching the premeds. It's a really terrible environment. It is a really pretty campus and great weather. But that doesn't fix the awful.

The 14CL, 30BL and 30CL lab classes were especially bad, but 30A, 30B and 30C were also pretty awful.

Also, my understanding is that many schools love to preference their own undergrads for med school (e.g., U or Arizona) but UCLA has a negative preference for its own undergrads so it's harder to get into med school put of UCLA than from other undergrads.

Sounds bad. Would any of the other UCs or Virginia schools be better?

I'm the PhD who put in this comment and will say that two of my close grad school friends were from Berkeley and William and Mary. They both said that their experiences were nothing like UCLA and they were both shocked at its subpar premed education.

I think you just need to do more research beyond taking a shiny campus tour, and also to appreciate that current undergrads have nothing to compare their experience to so you need to be a bit critical of what you hear. Ask lots of questions. Don't just rely on rankings.

Thanks for that perspective--do you think the same is true for all majors? My kid is at UCLA for CS even though I discouraged him from going since he got into UIUC.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you pick Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD over UVA, W&M and VT?

Yes. My DD will be going to UCLA. Wouldn’t even tour W & M. Awful tour at UVA and LA more exciting and dynamic than Charlottesville. We are OOS for all.

My DD will be going to UCLA and we are OOS. Got accepted to UVA, VT, and W&M (Monroe Scholar). Tours at those schools were okay and she knows they are good school. She just wasn't excited about them. She looooved the tour of UCLA and is excited for the change of scenery. She is majoring in Biology (plans to go to medical school), and is impressed with the classes and research opportunities UCLA will offer.

I got my chemistry PhD at UCLA and was a TA to hundreds of premeds. I think this is a really, really bad choice. Unless things have changed radically, all of the premed science classes are horribly impacted so many students struggle to get into needed labs until their 5th or 6th year, so then they are taking them unconnected to the corresponding coursework. (Be prepared to pay for a 5th year.) The science faculty are also wholly focused on research so undergrad teaching is a hot mess (and that's being kind) and the premeds are viciously competitive with rampant cheating. There are also ongoing budget shortages so kids with labs late in the week often can't complete the required lab because of lack of supplies (the stockroom runs out) and then those students get lower grades since they can't complete the work. With completely checked out faculty, undergrads have to rely on instruction from TAs, but the best grad students find other funding, so the bottom of the barrel grad students (brand new or very limited English) end up teaching the premeds. It's a really terrible environment. It is a really pretty campus and great weather. But that doesn't fix the awful.

The 14CL, 30BL and 30CL lab classes were especially bad, but 30A, 30B and 30C were also pretty awful.

Also, my understanding is that many schools love to preference their own undergrads for med school (e.g., U or Arizona) but UCLA has a negative preference for its own undergrads so it's harder to get into med school put of UCLA than from other undergrads.

Sounds bad. Would any of the other UCs or Virginia schools be better?

I'm the PhD who put in this comment and will say that two of my close grad school friends were from Berkeley and William and Mary. They both said that their experiences were nothing like UCLA and they were both shocked at its subpar premed education.

I think you just need to do more research beyond taking a shiny campus tour, and also to appreciate that current undergrads have nothing to compare their experience to so you need to be a bit critical of what you hear. Ask lots of questions. Don't just rely on rankings.

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you pick Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD over UVA, W&M and VT?

Yes. My DD will be going to UCLA. Wouldn’t even tour W & M. Awful tour at UVA and LA more exciting and dynamic than Charlottesville. We are OOS for all.

My DD will be going to UCLA and we are OOS. Got accepted to UVA, VT, and W&M (Monroe Scholar). Tours at those schools were okay and she knows they are good school. She just wasn't excited about them. She looooved the tour of UCLA and is excited for the change of scenery. She is majoring in Biology (plans to go to medical school), and is impressed with the classes and research opportunities UCLA will offer.

I got my chemistry PhD at UCLA and was a TA to hundreds of premeds. I think this is a really, really bad choice. Unless things have changed radically, all of the premed science classes are horribly impacted so many students struggle to get into needed labs until their 5th or 6th year, so then they are taking them unconnected to the corresponding coursework. (Be prepared to pay for a 5th year.) The science faculty are also wholly focused on research so undergrad teaching is a hot mess (and that's being kind) and the premeds are viciously competitive with rampant cheating. There are also ongoing budget shortages so kids with labs late in the week often can't complete the required lab because of lack of supplies (the stockroom runs out) and then those students get lower grades since they can't complete the work. With completely checked out faculty, undergrads have to rely on instruction from TAs, but the best grad students find other funding, so the bottom of the barrel grad students (brand new or very limited English) end up teaching the premeds. It's a really terrible environment. It is a really pretty campus and great weather. But that doesn't fix the awful.

The 14CL, 30BL and 30CL lab classes were especially bad, but 30A, 30B and 30C were also pretty awful.

Also, my understanding is that many schools love to preference their own undergrads for med school (e.g., U or Arizona) but UCLA has a negative preference for its own undergrads so it's harder to get into med school put of UCLA than from other undergrads.

Sounds bad. Would any of the other UCs or Virginia schools be better?

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:

Anonymous wrote:Would you pick Berkeley, UCLA, UCSD over UVA, W&M and VT?

Yes. My DD will be going to UCLA. Wouldn’t even tour W & M. Awful tour at UVA and LA more exciting and dynamic than Charlottesville. We are OOS for all.

My DD will be going to UCLA and we are OOS. Got accepted to UVA, VT, and W&M (Monroe Scholar). Tours at those schools were okay and she knows they are good school. She just wasn't excited about them. She looooved the tour of UCLA and is excited for the change of scenery. She is majoring in Biology (plans to go to medical school), and is impressed with the classes and research opportunities UCLA will offer.

I got my chemistry PhD at UCLA and was a TA to hundreds of premeds. I think this is a really, really bad choice. Unless things have changed radically, all of the premed science classes are horribly impacted so many students struggle to get into needed labs until their 5th or 6th year, so then they are taking them unconnected to the corresponding coursework. (Be prepared to pay for a 5th year.) The science faculty are also wholly focused on research so undergrad teaching is a hot mess (and that's being kind) and the premeds are viciously competitive with rampant cheating. There are also ongoing budget shortages so kids with labs late in the week often can't complete the required lab because of lack of supplies (the stockroom runs out) and then those students get lower grades since they can't complete the work. With completely checked out faculty, undergrads have to rely on instruction from TAs, but the best grad students find other funding, so the bottom of the barrel grad students (brand new or very limited English) end up teaching the premeds. It's a really terrible environment. It is a really pretty campus and great weather. But that doesn't fix the awful.

The 14CL, 30BL and 30CL lab classes were especially bad, but 30A, 30B and 30C were also pretty awful.

Also, my understanding is that many schools love to preference their own undergrads for med school (e.g., U or Arizona) but UCLA has a negative preference for its own undergrads so it's harder to get into med school put of UCLA than from other undergrads.

Sounds bad. Would any of the other UCs or Virginia schools be better?

Va is less than half the size of the UC’s and more focused on undergrads. There are downsides to the mega size schools definitely not reflected in the current rankings.