Big Decisions - Pre-Med - Baylor vs UTD (Austin, Plano: sale, school)

[calgirlinnc]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

I’m sorry.

I was trying to be nice, hoping you might explain, but since you are going to be snarky, never mind.

I think your previous comment is very narrow minded. I believe wholeheartedly that this country and its young people would benefit immensely from an increase in trade schools and young people attending them instead of the over abundance of 22 year olds with useless liberal arts degrees that train them for nothing and prepare them for even less. Just 2 to 3 years ago the news was full of stories of college graduates who could not get a job. Moreover, we have been told that we need to bring in people from other countries to fill jobs that our citizens cannot do.

Traditional four year colleges are wonderful institutions in many ways, but let's not pretend that they are the only way to help young adults mature and develop necessary skills and habits. If anything, American four year colleges are more renowned for their ridiculous over the top party atmosphere. Drinking, drugs, casual sex, the Greek system, all nighters, freshman courses taught by newly minted grad students, an atmosphere devoted to supporting big name football or basketball teams...How does this help young people grow and mature?

I agreed with your previous statement that there is something broken with our advanced educational system. Colleges and universities jack up their rates because the federal government guarantees the loans. Parents or students pony up absurd amounts of money because we've all been conditioned to think a four year university is the only way to get ahead. Everyone feels nostalgic about the "college experience", which in many cases is the alcohol fueled four year party referenced above.

Students in trade schools can develop into hard working responsible adults as much as, if not more than, their peers attending four year schools. We need to start by being less snobby about bachelor degrees vs. technical degrees.

While it is true that certain professions absolutely require a four year degree, more students would benefit from technical and career training. They would get to work earlier, which does far more to shape work habits and character than 4 years spent at State Party U. And they would spend less money doing so.

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by platon20

The prestige/quality of undergrad IMO has almost no bearing on what med schools you get accepted to.

I went to Johns Hopkins for med school. We had a lot of people from Harvard there, but we also had a lot of people from colleges I had never heard of before. It quickly became apparent to me that the undergrads at Harvard would have gotten accepted to Hopkins even if they went to a local state university; and it was also apparent to me that the folks at Hopkins from the "no-name" undergrad schools were superstars that could have gone to Harvard.

I agree that vis a vis allopathic medicine the "prestige" of ones undergrad is trivial in long term value. IMO quality is a different matter. It seems to me that if we took two cadres of 500 of equal ability and 500 went off to study pre-medish tracks at Harvard, Stanford etc. and the other 500 went to community college and finished their degrees online at say Arkansas Tech or Menlo College the former would do better as a group in terms of actually getting into medical schools.

The logic is the classes at better colleges are tougher in great part because the students are better the yield being that more kids are pushed harder yielding more kids with better MCAT scores.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that BS-Bio at Arkansas Tech is on par with BS-Bio at Harvard or Baylor for that matter.

[UnfairPark]

Originally Posted by calgirlinnc

I was trying to be nice, hoping you might explain, but since you are going to be snarky, never mind.

I think your previous comment is very narrow minded. I believe wholeheartedly that this country and its young people would benefit immensely from an increase in trade schools and young people attending them instead of the over abundance of 22 year olds with useless liberal arts degrees that train them for nothing and prepare them for even less. Just 2 to 3 years ago the news was full of stories of college graduates who could not get a job. Moreover, we have been told that we need to bring in people from other countries to fill jobs that our citizens cannot do.

Traditional four year colleges are wonderful institutions in many ways, but let's not pretend that they are the only way to help young adults mature and develop necessary skills and habits. If anything, American four year colleges are more renowned for their ridiculous over the top party atmosphere. Drinking, drugs, casual sex, the Greek system, all nighters, freshman courses taught by newly minted grad students, an atmosphere devoted to supporting big name football or basketball teams...How does this help young people grow and mature?

I agreed with your previous statement that there is something broken with our advanced educational system. Colleges and universities jack up their rates because the federal government guarantees the loans. Parents or students pony up absurd amounts of money because we've all been conditioned to think a four year university is the only way to get ahead. Everyone feels nostalgic about the "college experience", which in many cases is the alcohol fueled four year party referenced above.

Students in trade schools can develop into hard working responsible adults as much as, if not more than, their peers attending four year schools. We need to start by being less snobby about bachelor degrees vs. technical degrees.

While it is true that certain professions absolutely require a four year degree, more students would benefit from technical and career training. They would get to work earlier, which does far more to shape work habits and character than 4 years spent at State Party U. And they would spend less money doing so.

I was by no means being snarky but seriously meant that unfortunately we don’t agree.

[UnfairPark]

Originally Posted by EDS_

I agree that vis a vis allopathic medicine the "prestige" of ones undergrad is trivial in long term value. IMO quality is a different matter. It seems to me that if we took two cadres of 500 of equal ability and 500 went off to study pre-medish tracks at Harvard, Stanford etc. and the other 500 went to community college and finished their degrees online at say Arkansas Tech or Menlo College the former would do better as a group in terms of actually getting into medical schools.

The logic is the classes at better colleges are tougher in great part because the students are better the yield being that more kids are pushed harder yielding more kids with better MCAT scores.

I don't think anyone is going to argue that BS-Bio at Arkansas Tech is on par with BS-Bio at Harvard or Baylor for that matter.

Absolutely. No one can argue that main strength of any selective college is its ability to gather a diverse group of gifted peers and distinguished faculty.

[calgirlinnc]

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

I was by no means being snarky but seriously meant that unfortunately we don’t agree.

So let me get this straight. Your belief is that every single young American would be better off by attending a 4 year university, not because of the academic education, but because of the opportunity for personal growth.

Originally Posted by UnfairPark

Absolutely. No one can argue that main strength of any selective college is its ability to gather a diverse group of gifted peers and distinguished faculty.

At selective universities, there can be a trickle down effect. Professors teach graduate students who teach freshmen and sophomores. Professors must publish or research. Top professors teach very few classes. At less prestigious schools, students may have more opportunities to be taught by a Ph.D.

[TeamLynn]

If he got in both those places, he should also be looking at Austin College in Sherman for pre-med.
All in all I'd go debt free as that could open up some alternatives for med-school.
Med school debt can be crazy, but starting it debt free might allow him/her to attend a dream school or the chance to.

[iloveplano]

Originally Posted by iloveplano

EDS_ He has opted Neuroscience as major in all three colleges.

Thank you all for your input. Is taking Neuroscience a good option? Or is he narrowing down his options if he diverts from the Pre-Med path in future for any reason?

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by TeamLynn

If he got in both those places, he should also be looking at Austin College in Sherman for pre-med.
All in all I'd go debt free as that could open up some alternatives for med-school.
Med school debt can be crazy, but starting it debt free might allow him/her to attend a dream school or the chance to.

I'm a big fan of Austin College for pre-med but all in it's likely more expensive than any of the options the OP mentioned. Although at least in the past they sometimes offered merit monies.

[iloveplano]

Originally Posted by EDS_

I'm a big fan of Austin College for pre-med but all in it's likely more expensive than any of the options the OP mentioned. Although at least in the past they sometimes offered merit monies.

Never gave a thought about Austin College. What is great about it?

[EDS_]

Originally Posted by iloveplano

Thank you all for your input. Is taking Neuroscience a good option? Or is he narrowing down his options if he diverts from the Pre-Med path in future for any reason?

I'm not qualified to answer that with any degree of precision, really only offer random thoughts.

1). You'd need to get with an advisor who really knows his/her stuff to find out which neuroscience pathways fit well with medical school. Viewing UT Austin's neuroscience options some look like they require enough chem, bio, math etc. to meet med. school minimums some clearly do not.

One problem with becoming an MD is that most of the statistically efficient pathways to get into medical school are narrow and specific and any plan change could be a bit painful.

Most any of the more attractive STEM paths to medical school that also offer great bailout options (engineering, math, computer science etc.) have two key drawbacks vis a vis medical school.
A). Nearly none offer enough bio., chemistry, anatomy etc. without taking additional classes. For example my son wanted to study biomedical engineering until he found out that it would have been nearly impossible to finish his degree and the extra hours needed for med. school reqs. in four years.
B). These pathways are statistically less likely to lead to a medical school slot (I realize there are self-selection issues at play).

A few examples:
1). My son finished his undergrad in 4 years went straight to medical school with no gaps. Let's time him at X.
2). My daughter earned two engineering degrees from A&M in four years but needed an extra year to finish her medical school prerequisites (FWiiW she beings medical school in the fall). That's X+1 and she was lucky.
3). One of my son's friends earned a BS in applied mathematics and decided the he wanted to go to medical school. Ultimately he earned a masters in biology which took two years. He did get into medical school BTW. That's X+2.
4). A friend here in town earned a history degree. Then needed two years in order to complete medical school prerequisites and then had a wasted year because the only admit he got was deferred one year. That's X+3.
Given that docs. have compressed working lives those "lost" years are very expensive.

_________________________

It's tough but most of the students who actually get into medical school don't hedge much in undergrad. Every year UTSW's inbound student profile shows the most common BSs are bio, chemistry, bio. chem and other life sciences including neuroscience accounting for about 85% of admits.