UCLA vs Duke

[InsultedViper]

Unfortunately I'm not talking about the March Madness basketball tournament, though they would be fun to watch play! ...

Disclaimer: I always told myself I was annoyed by people who create these "versus" threads (I've always lurked SDN without creating an account). I always said if you're bright enough to get into some top schools, then you're bright enough to make your own decision, and creating these types of threads is just "show-offish." But now, I'm struggling with a very fortunate "hard-decision" and thought I would appeal to the largest doctor/medical student community on the internet in hopes of getting some insight (especially from current medical students or alumni from either Duke or UCLA med). Also, I did do an SDN search, and there was a previous thread on this topic from 2008 - 3 years is a long time!

So I'm currently residing in Oregon, but I've grown up and went to school in Southern California. Just this week I was accepted to these two programs. My decision would ultimately come down to these two (though I am on a waiting list at another school I like very much).

I know a lot of things will come down to personal opinion (Los Angeles vs. Durham), small-town versus big city, my own impression of the curriculum, and the students etc.

Location. I think UCLA has the preferred location, and a better price. Curriculum. Duke has an innovative curriculum (third-year is a devoted to a research program). Do I look at Duke's curriculum as an advantage or a disadvantage (One less year of having to be "stuck" in lecture, or one "less" year of pre-clinical, and having a harder time to prepare for the Step 1 Boards?)

Price. UCLA has a better price tag (though financial aid packages from both schools have yet to come in).

Clinical Experience. I think perhaps I'd like to know about the clinical experiences at both schools. Can current students talk about how their rotations went? Rankings. Duke does have UCLA beat in terms of US News World and News rankings (though I believe UCLA has a better-rated hospital system). Would anyone at the intern/residency level be able to comment on whether or not one school affords a better chance of getting into a specific residency? Are they considered "equals" or is a Duke student considered to be on the same caliber as a UCLA student? Does this matter?

Match Lists. I'll have to spend more time evaluating the Match Lists, but I wish I could find a perspective to make the choice "easier." I loved the students at both. I'm not sure what kind of medicine I want to practice. Duke's curriculum can be viewed as great, or intense and "paying $$$ to do research work" instead of learning - as some have said to me. It's hard for me to "turn down" a higher-ranked school (should it be?). I have professional connections in both cities. I do not have a significant other (my feminine charm has never been high enough to attract boys).

Thanks for any perspectives and insights you can share. I'd love to hear opinions from anyone, but especially ones from those who have either had to make this choice or graduated/attends one of the schools. Or, if it was you - what would you pick?

Thanks SDN community, I appreciate it!

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[rakababy]

Go to UCLA. Is one year of basic science at Duke enough time to prep for Step 1? If you really want a year of research I'd suggest looking into a Howard Hughes fellowship.
Just a suggestion

 

[mdeast]

I've heard that Duke tends to have a slightly intense culture at the medical school because of the shortened pre-clinical curriculum and moving immediately to your clerkships your second year. I'm also pretty sure this means no MS1 summer. The sheer thought of that scares me. I'm very much looking forward to some down-time this summer. It also gives you some opportunities to pursue research and explore specialties you're interested in long before you enter clinics.

Do you take your board at the end of second year? or first year? It's nice to have the research year built in (or time to do another degree)....but the one year to prepare the material you need to know for boards is troublesome. In the end, you'll be fine and adjust to it. But sometimes more time isn't necessarily a bad thing. Especially considering the weight of Step 1 scores in determining your next "step" after med school.

I'd personally choose UCLA for the better city (Durham vs. LA) and the slightly more traditional curriculum.

 

[Cster0905]

I have lived in both Chapel Hill (next door to Durham) and Los Angeles while attending both UCLA and Duke.

Unless Duke offers you money, it's hard to justify its expense versus UCLA's when UCLA is, both historically and currently, an elite medical school. UCLA is among those few publics (along with Michigan, UCSF, UNC, UCSD) that are top-tier medical schools and, subsequently, an amazing steal financially. UCLA has one of the world's best hospitals (not to mention a broad healthcare system) in an amazingly diverse city. My point: you'll receive great didactic instruction and clinical exposure from a brand name school - while accruing a fraction of the debt you would at Duke.

The only big difference that jumps out to me is the facilities at UCLA are not as nice as those at Duke. That's a small issue, however, since you'll only be in the classroom for two years and the new Ronald Reagan Medical Center is ABSURD.

As for the curriculum, I know several people at Duke Med who hated it. Obviously it works for some people but it's a radical shift from the more traditional approach to med school. Personally, I think it's entirely too rushed and perhaps a bit unnecessary if you don't have strong research intentions that match with the 3rd year. Many of my friends at UCLA Med enjoyed using their summers to travel abroad to do work or to conduct research, etc. Not sure this flexibility is built in at Duke (a statement of ignorance, not declaration).

As for where to live, I know most people are going to give the advantage to Los Angeles but I absolutely love North Carolina, specifically the triangle area. I'm a UNC guy through and through and I generally think Chapel Hill > Durham but Durham is undergoing an amazing revitalization. Awesome restaurants. Still affordable. The crime problem is getting better. There is an energy to this part of NC that is great for young people and it is no way old school Southern.

California is my second home, however. UCLA is in one the best parts of the city and there are plenty of housing options in and around Westwood. Los Angeles comes at higher price, though - for everything (I'd say 2-3X Durham). Also, life in Durham is a bit more quiet and comfortable than the bustle of LA. Depends on what you like, though. I love both equally as they offer very different lifestyles.

Congrats on your success. Were I in your position, unless you are prepared to shoulder some amazing debt or you've been offered money, my choice would easily be UCLA. Cheaper in the longer run and, despite USNWR rankings, I'm not convinced Duke does or has anything better.

 

[RB93]

Congrats on your choices! I am also deciding between these schools, though my choice will probably come down to other schools. I think one thing to keep in mind is to definitely look at financial aid packages - UCs have at least $30K "fees" that are likely to continue increasing (I think just a few years ago it was significantly less - does anyone know?). It sounds like you're OOS, so you'd probably tack on $12K for one year. They also have little grant assistance it appears, so Duke may actually be a better deal financially (especially if you're able to get some of their merit scholarships). But that being said, I personally would prefer UCLA's location, and in terms of stressed out/relaxed vibes, I definitely got pretty opposite feelings at the two schools. The first year curriculum seems pretty intense and there's three weeks off after the first year I believe (?). UCLA mentioned that they encourage students to take 5 years, though I don't think the majority necessarily do. Anyway you can't go wrong - I just wanted to point out that the $$ might not be as different as you think, particularly given cost of living. But both are great choices!

 

[Cster0905]

Congrats on your choices! I am also deciding between these schools, though my choice will probably come down to other schools. I think one thing to keep in mind is to definitely look at financial aid packages - UCs have at least $30K "fees" that are likely to continue increasing (I think just a few years ago it was significantly less - does anyone know?). It sounds like you're OOS, so you'd probably tack on $12K for one year. They also have little grant assistance it appears, so Duke may actually be a better deal financially (especially if you're able to get some of their merit scholarships). But that being said, I personally would prefer UCLA's location, and in terms of stressed out/relaxed vibes, I definitely got pretty opposite feelings at the two schools. The first year curriculum seems pretty intense and there's three weeks off after the first year I believe (?). UCLA mentioned that they encourage students to take 5 years, though I don't think the majority necessarily do. Anyway you can't go wrong - I just wanted to point out that the $$ might not be as different as you think, particularly given cost of living. But both are great choices!

The OOS angle is a good point.

I know the UCs are considering fixed OOS fees. That is, accepted OOS students have to pay OOS tuition their entire time at school, regardless if they at any point meet residency requirements. As of right now, though, you can still qualify as IS after one year.

The OOS angle certainly changes the picture, especially with cost of living. I would look into residency requirements and allowances.

 

[InsultedViper]

Do you take your board at the end of second year? or first year? It's nice to have the research year built in (or time to do another degree)....but the one year to prepare the material you need to know for boards is troublesome. In the end, you'll be fine and adjust to it. But sometimes more time isn't necessarily a bad thing. Especially considering the weight of Step 1 scores in determining your next "step" after med school.

Hi mdeast! Thanks for such wonderful insight. From my understanding from my interview day, since the third-year is so flexible (options of dual degree, research program, international health projects), you can sort of schedule your own time to study and take the exam, either at the start of the third year, the middle, or the end.

Congrats on your success. Were I in your position, unless you are prepared to shoulder some amazing debt or you've been offered money, my choice would easily be UCLA. Cheaper in the longer run and, despite USNWR rankings, I'm not convinced Duke does or has anything better.

Thanks for your amazing insight! It really helped me. I think I am sort of leaning towards UCLA. But there is this beckoning call at Duke to become leaders and innovators in medicine, and I think that sort of appeals to the sense of purpose that drove me into medicine in the first place.

The OOS angle is a good point.


The OOS angle certainly changes the picture, especially with cost of living. I would look into residency requirements and allowances.

I should clarify, though right now I am staying in Oregon, I *am* a California resident (and did my undergraduate work at UCLA). I loved the professional and network connections I made at UCLA as an undergrad (which I can continue to foster as a MedStudent), but I simultaneously have a desire to venture off and try something new. But, while UC tuition rates have been on the rise, I would qualify for In-State tuition.

 

[drizzt3117]

Despite the fact that I've generally been pretty happy with how things have gone in med school, one of my regrets during med school apps was not applying to Duke, simply because I've been spending a lot of time doing research in med school and it would have been nice to have a lot of free time set aside for that. Keep in mind, though, that you don't really have an extra year, but more like 6 mo once you've taken step 1, which is still very nice.

That said, I liked UCLA a lot and it ended up finishing #2 in the grand scheme of things to where I wound up, which has certainly led to a bit of second guessing, as LA is a fabulous school with great opportunities. I've heard from some people that the clinical years there are "easy" buy IMO they are really what you make of them.

This is a really tough choice, I wouldn't really worry about the rankings here, as theyre really not too impt, both schools have top depts in many areas. If I had to make this decision right this moment, I'd probably choose LA bc I miss CA and want to end up there, but it'd be a tough decision.

 

[InsultedViper]

Despite the fact that I've generally been pretty happy with how things have gone in med school, one of my regrets during med school apps was not applying to Duke, simply because I've been spending a lot of time doing research in med school and it would have been nice to have a lot of free time set aside for that. Keep in mind, though, that you don't really have an extra year, but more like 6 mo once you've taken step 1, which is still very nice.

That said, I liked UCLA a lot and it ended up finishing #2 in the grand scheme of things to where I wound up, which has certainly led to a bit of second guessing, as LA is a fabulous school with great opportunities. I've heard from some people that the clinical years there are "easy" buy IMO they are really what you make of them.

This is a really tough choice, I wouldn't really worry about the rankings here, as theyre really not too impt, both schools have top depts in many areas. If I had to make this decision right this moment, I'd probably choose LA bc I miss CA and want to end up there, but it'd be a tough decision.

Hi Drizzt. Where did you end up for Medical School, out of curiosity?

 

[drizzt3117]

Ill pm you, it's not a secret but I don't want to derail your thread too much.

 

[evy]

It sounds like you have some awesome choices, which is great! If you love Cali and want to stay in Cali for residency, being at a Cali school will be a HUGE advantage. For everyone trying to get into the UC (especially UCSF) programs, being out of state (especially far away), makes this a lot harder. The UC systems are considered insular (their residency programs take hugely from their own, so they are relatively more competitive for OOS people, though absolutely possible). In short, if Cali is where you want to be long-term, UCLA is your best bet and I would say this is true if you are comparing to ANY other medical school in the East. This is from talking to 4th year med students and residents/fellows from several top 10 schools in the East. Even top students complain about the rough chances of matching into competitive programs in Cali, compared to similar programs in the East, when they are OOS.

That said, I do want to clear up a few questions about Duke that some people have mentioned.

1) Length of third year: It's research year is 12 months or 10 months, your choice. There are 12 calendar months set aside for third year. Most fellowships (Howard Hughes, etc.) REQUIRE a 12-month commitment so the school gives you 12 months. If you choose not to do a fellowship, you can choose to have a 10-month 3rd year and do whatever you want for the other 2 months. Some choose to have 2 months of vacation, some choose to use that time to study for Step 1, some choose to start 4th year early so they can have 2 months off DURING fourth year for interviews, fun, etc.

2) "Research" for third year: Despite a common, common misconception, no one mandates that third year is basic science research. It's better to think of it as a year which you must... "submit a paper." About a quarter of the class leaves Duke to do research elsewhere or second degrees during their third year. At least 1/10 of the class will get a second degree (MBA, MPH, Masters in Global Health, Masters in Informatics, MPP, etc. you want it, they'll approve it). Research can be anything from basic science to clinical/translational to medical humanities. If you do a second degree, the master's thesis will count. The current/incoming Chief Resident of Pediatrics was a Duke grad who did his third year in history of medicine. Obviously, it has not hurt him. If you want to be a slacker, you can always finish your project early and just turn in your thesis or manuscript when it's due. The rest of the time is yours to own. If you have a funded fellowship (NIH, HHMI, etc.) or are doing a degree program, this isn't an option, obviously, and frankly, very few students do this because they do take their third year seriously (and hope they'll get a rockin' letter out of it). However, I wanted to mention it to illustrate how flexible the third year really is.

Among the top 10 schools, a significant number of students will take a year off. You can ask each school what their numbers look like. Stanford leads the pack with more than 50% graduating in 5 years (and I think the number is actually much greater, but don't know for sure). If you don't care about 4 vs. 5 years, then this doesn't matter. If you are sure that you want to take an extra year to do some serious research, then maybe built-in time is great. If you are interested in second degrees, then maybe built-in time is great. If you prefer a traditional schedule, then Duke's curriculum is probably not helpful. I would say this is a much more personal decision based on how your career track will work and in how many years you'd like to graduate. Even a Duke, I think 1/3 of the class will take an additional year. Some choose to get a second degree after doing a year of research, some are getting 2-year degrees (e.g. MBA), some want to do 2 years of research, etc. etc. Again, personal decision.

3) Step 1: Students take Step 1 during their third year after their first clerkship year (so MS2). There are pros and cons to this set-up. The cons are that there is not school-mandated time to study for the boards. At other schools, everyone takes it the summer/spring before starting 3rd year clerkships so it feels very structured; you have 6 weeks and you take the exam with the rest of your classmates. Yay! At Duke, you figure out when to take Step 1 during third year on your own so this takes time management skills and discipline on your part. Many take it early, before starting their research project. Others study for months part-time (while doing their research), then take a few weeks off for dedicated study (they get the OK from their research mentor), and take it. It turns out that for some people, it's absolutely awesome. I won't lie--it is harder if you have a 12-month funded fellowship or doing a degree program, e.g. some other program mandating your time. However... most people who get funding from the HHMI, NIH, or Doris Duke are pretty talented so it seems like it balances out in the end and they all turn out all right. =)

The pros of taking it during your third year is the potential "flexibility" (e.g. if you really wanted to study 6 months, you can; but again, this is based on scheduling on your part, as mentioned before). Another pro is having clinical experience for the Step 1. The Step 1, despite being a basic science exam, is becoming increasingly clinical. Nearly all questions are presented in vignette form. There are a few schools where the students take Step 1 AFTER their first clinical year and I think it's a huge advantage. It's much easier to understand and remember clinical outcomes, drugs, etc. after you've actually seen it or done it on the wards.

4) One year of basic science? First year is busy and exam-heavy. If you don't like test-taking then... well... that's going to be rough almost anywhere, I think, though possibly rougher at Duke because we have a very fast-paced exam schedule (usually every 2 weeks). There are schools that focus on PBL and have lots of small group activity and participation (we have small groups and participation grades, too), but they would be lying if they tried to convince you that your grades are determined by participation. The deciding factor will probably boil down to exams anywhere. That said, like many other schools, Duke's basic science curriculum is completely pass/fail so that should take the pressure off.

For the non-science majors and anyone else who doesn't care much for basic science classes, getting it over in one year is pretty efficient and I personally loved it. We have classmates who are totally into public health, who never cared about basic science stuff, and who enjoyed hitting the wards early, getting a MPH in third year, etc. The real bummer, though, is for people who would enjoy a slower pace of learning. The curriculum goes fast and it benefits people who's learning style is quick. My classmates who were especially frustrated with first year tended to complain that there was not enough repetition (sounds stupid, but repetition is helpful; remember how many times you learned miosis?) and not enough integrative review. These were the students who wished for more time to review the lectures over on their own, etc. It's a very, very fair complaint and if you identify yourself as this type of learner, then a more paced curriculum may be for you. Again, this should be based on personal preference. First year is pass/fail and passing is not made to be hard (never graded on a curve). Despite a scary test schedule, grading is lenient at Duke.

Oh, you get 3-4 weeks of vacation between first and second year. Not a lot, I know, but you do get a break. Also, you start second year with at least 2 weeks of "preparation for clerkship" classes that are super chill pass/fail seminar-type stuff.

5) Clerkship curriculum: This is really tough to compare across schools because students are only familiar with their own curriculum and have no idea how it works elsewhere. There's also more disinformation about clinical curriculum than information, so I would be careful about listening to rumor mills here. Essentially, you want to look for a curriculum that is supportive to students (so you have a quality of life) and maybe some time to do stuff that you enjoy/explore specialties. The curriculum at Duke is changing so I can't speak definitely on what you'll see in 2 years. The core clerkships are: Medicine (inpatient, 2 sites, 8wk), Surgery (inpatient, 3 services, 8wk), Fam Med (4), Psych (4), OB/GYN (6), Peds (6), Radiology/Neurology (new, ?wk). You also will get at least 2 selectives, which are 2-week electives of your choice graded pass/fail. The rest of the year is graded honors, high pass, pass, fail. Shelf exams generally are worth 10-20% of your grade (compared to other schools this is very small) and are also graded very leniently. No requirements to score >X0% on your shelf to qualify for honors or anything like that.

Alright, hope that's helpful. Wanted to clear up some of the misconceptions, too. Good luck to anyone who's trying to decide!

 

[snookiez]

I have friends who go to both, and the major difference besides the above is the type of student who goes to each. You are absolutely right in that duke selects for innovators and movers in the field, and what better way to make connections in this area than to have these very people be your classmates, teachers, advisors? It's all about who you know in the end.

The people in LA have very honestly told me that comfort was the end factor, and when I hang out with them, they are, indeed, a very different creature than on the east. They are very "california" and they are more focused on purely doing their own thing. It's a UC after all- the mindset pervades even into the grad schools.

Generalizations, I know, but this is just from my personal observation hanging out with people from both schools . If I were you, I'd definitely be 50:50 but with a slight lean towards duke b/c of that intangible idea of fit. Both sides seemed very happy, however, so you can do no wrong!

 

[Wermz]

UCLA. SoCal baby.

 

[Pyrex]

Duke all the way, for sure. You are very awesome if you got Duke via initial acceptance. I would not pass up that opportunity. The whole California system seems to be tight on money and Duke is a private school with far more financial resources for its students than UCLA. THat definitely works well when you consider that Duke has an exceptional curriculum that motivates their students to become involved in research, etc.

 

[JokerMD]

id go to duke. i like how they get all the basic sciences out of the way early and give you a nice block of dedicated research time (which you will greatly appreciate once you realize its practically impossible to do research and classes at the same time)

 

[CattleBruiser]

I'd say go to Duke. Unless you want to do residency and settle down in CA for the rest of your life I'd say go to Duke. Very tight connections with the NE med powerhouses (Hopkins/Harvard/etc) at Duke. Only downside is Durham vs LA, but that is more of a personal thing. Based on the schools only, I'd go w/Duke. Come visit Durham and see if you like it enough to be a Dukie.

 

[Lccjblu]

Unless you really like research and want to get your ass whooped during the first year due to the structure of hte curriculum, I would go to UCLA.
I've talked to multiple duke med students (**not all, so this may not be the perception by ALL), but they all complain about the condensed basic sciences being too hectic. What's the worst part about it, they say, is that they have a very shaky anatomy bg because they breeze it so quickly. The attendings "make fun" of them for knowing so little (however light-hearted it may be).

As for residency matching, I'm pretty sure if you succeed at either school you will have a great shot at matching where you want to. They are both very good schools.

 

[wildlifeiskey]

Interestingly enough I'm facing the same choice! I've been doing a lot of research and talking to a few students at both programs, so maybe we should connect via PM and I can share where some of my thought processes come from

I feel a little bipolar hour to hour and day to day

In the end, I think the defining question will be "do you want to end up doing residency of California?" If the answer is an unequivocal yes, or even a, "yes I'd like to" - then go to UCLA. If, you want to try something new, and the aspects of Duke appeal to you go to Duke - just do that if you're okay with knowing you might end up (more likely than not) on the East coast and not back in your native California ...

 

[drizzt3117]

Unless you really like research and want to get your ass whooped during the first year due to the structure of hte curriculum, I would go to UCLA.
I've talked to multiple duke med students (**not all, so this may not be the perception by ALL), but they all complain about the condensed basic sciences being too hectic. What's the worst part about it, they say, is that they have a very shaky anatomy bg because they breeze it so quickly. The attendings "make fun" of them for knowing so little (however light-hearted it may be).

As for residency matching, I'm pretty sure if you succeed at either school you will have a great shot at matching where you want to. They are both very good schools.

That happens at every single med school.

"What's this?"

"Umm...no idea."

"It's the tibia."

"Oh."

"..."