Arizona
Barry
California
Des Moines
New York
Ohio
Scholl
Temple

thanks

This thread has been brought up a few times. It is very difficult to determine and usually leads to more arguments than good. If you look back we had quite a discussion on this topic. But the heck with it, I'll give my stinky opinion but I'll use a tiered system.

Upper tier (in order)
CPMS-DMU
AZPOD***
Scholl
Temple

Lower Tier (in order)
NYCPM
OCPM
Barry
CSPM

***AZPOD is unproven. I set them as the second best school due to the structure of the curriculum alone. But they could easily go up or down after the votes are in. I think that they need at least 5 years to place them in any real order.

This thread has been brought up a few times. It is very difficult to determine and usually leads to more arguments than good. If you look back we had quite a discussion on this topic. But the heck with it, I'll give my stinky opinion but I'll use a tiered system.

Upper tier (in order)
CPMS-DMU
AZPOD***
Scholl
Temple

Lower Tier (in order)
NYCPM
OCPM
Barry
CSPM

***AZPOD is unproven. I set them as the second best school due to the structure of the curriculum alone. But they could easily go up or down after the votes are in. I think that they need at least 5 years to place them in any real order.

:thumbup: I agree. Maybe flip OCPM and NYCPM though.

:thumbup: I agree. Maybe flip OCPM and NYCPM though.

if you are basing your rankings purely on the first 2 years of basic sciences then i'd agree 100%. However, if you are looking at the overall quality after thr 4 yrs of schooling including the clinical rotations then i would put OCPM in top 4 and the rankings would be as follows:

1)Temple/DMU - both in the top
3)Scholl
4)OCPM
5)AZPOD
6)NYCPM
7)Barry
8)California

but then again this is just a subjective bias of course - it would be nice if schools released data about their board rates.

This thread has been brought up a few times. It is very difficult to determine and usually leads to more arguments than good. If you look back we had quite a discussion on this topic. But the heck with it, I'll give my stinky opinion but I'll use a tiered system.

Upper tier (in order)
CPMS-DMU
AZPOD***
Scholl
Temple

Lower Tier (in order)
NYCPM
OCPM
Barry
CSPM

***AZPOD is unproven. I set them as the second best school due to the structure of the curriculum alone. But they could easily go up or down after the votes are in. I think that they need at least 5 years to place them in any real order.


In my opinion the lower tier schools can not compare with the upper tier schools regardless of how many students plead for their school's reputation thus attempting to enhance and give more credibility to the education that they are receiving.

If the schools want to better their reputation, they need to do a little more than indoctrinate their students about the quality of education offered by their institution.

It's one thing to say

Yes, Mr. residency director "My school is so great and I'm so smart because of it, trust me."

It's entirely different to be able to say,
"you know what, dr. residency director, my education sucked eggs I don't know half of the things I think I should know and I wouldn't do it again with that place.... but if you are patient I am willing to learn more from you and work twice as hard to be less deficient, for my own sake as well as your program."

I think that one of the down falls of students applying to residency positions and really people in general is that they are afraid to admit their weaknesses. Instead they brag themselves up and down the block and masquerade as intellectual meat without fault....

There really isn't anything wrong with not knowing something and many times it's not your fault. Really.

it would be nice if schools released data about their board rates.

Another thing that we should do is stop having pass/fail board scores. Since curriculums differ at every school and a 3.5 gpa is different at one instution from another, board scores is the only way residencies or anyone can really compare students on an equal level. Its ridiculous that there isnt a specific score. Where is the motivation to study your rears off for boards? I think that would give some of the schools a little kick in the pants to "up" their standards. What do you guys think? Maybe some of the political gurus can enlighten us on the past student political debates regarding this subject such as Gusty and Krab.

This thread has been brought up a few times. It is very difficult to determine and usually leads to more arguments than good. If you look back we had quite a discussion on this topic. But the heck with it, I'll give my stinky opinion but I'll use a tiered system.

Upper tier (in order)
CPMS-DMU
AZPOD***
Scholl
Temple

Lower Tier (in order)
NYCPM
OCPM
Barry
CSPM

***AZPOD is unproven. I set them as the second best school due to the structure of the curriculum alone. But they could easily go up or down after the votes are in. I think that they need at least 5 years to place them in any real order.

I have to agree with Dr. Feelgood's rankings, but what I find interesting is that these rankings are consistent with almost everyone else. DMU, Scholl, AZPOD, and Temple most always seem to be in the upper tier, with OCPM, NYCPM, Barry, and CSPM being in the lower tier.

HMMM, isn't it interesting that the top tier schools are all apart of either allopathic or osteopathic schools, and the lower tier schools are not. This brings me back to my aforementioned point: PODIATRIC MEDICAL SCHOOLS NEED TO BE AFFILIATED WITH ALLOPATHIC OR OSTEOPATHIC SCHOOLS! I am a firm believer that we should maintain our heritage and unique status with the DPM degree, but we need to be trained along side MD's and DO's if we ever want to achieve equal status and gain better benefits, such as equal pay for equal work!

Just my two cents.

Another thing that we should do is stop having pass/fail board scores. Since curriculums differ at every school and a 3.5 gpa is different at one instution from another, board scores is the only way residencies or anyone can really compare students on an equal level. Its ridiculous that there isnt a specific score. Where is the motivation to study your rears off for boards? I think that would give some of the schools a little kick in the pants to "up" their standards. What do you guys think? Maybe some of the political gurus can enlighten us on the past student political debates regarding this subject such as Gusty and Krab.

I couldn't agree more. If anything, I'd rather have our classes pass/fail and receive actual graded scores on the board exams. GPAs can be very misleading especially with the level of inconsistency in the classes taught across the 8 schools. I think this will upgrade the quality and value of our basic sciences because it would force all the "lower tier" schools to kick it up a few notches. At the same time, this would be the only legit way that we can compare the level of one student from school "A" to another from school "B" after the first 2 years.

The top two schools are AZPOD and DMU. There is no question about this.

Due to the type of association each of these has with osteopathic medical schools, they are at the top and can be compared with no other podiatry schools fairly.

AZCOM (AZPOD's associate DO school) is the top DO program in the country due to residency placement, 100% board pass rate for the past 6 years (no other schools have even come close), and quality of education, which unfortunately comes out of the students' pockets (higher salaries for better faculty). AZPOD students take all of the same classes minus OMM classes. There's no doubt that the basic science years (I and II) are better at AZPOD than all other schools. However, CPMS (DMU) is doing well enough to score 100% or upper 90's on the boards for the past few years, and is an excellent institution, in this regards.

As far as clinical years (III and IV) go, I have it on good report that CPMS is problem-based with exceptional integration among the clinical faculty for rotations. AZPOD is much different and follows a more traditional MD/DO rotation pattern. Undoubtedly, CPMS's problem-based format is more effective and I think better, marginally.

I agree with Feelgood. It will be a couple of years before a full comparison can be made. Right now, AZPOD's basic science is marginally better and CPMS's clinical years are marginally better. Both are excellent schools and both are trendsetters!

AZPOD Rocks

Right now, AZPOD's basic science is marginally better and CPMS's clinical years are marginally better. [/QUOTE]

I appreciate your enthusiasm for your school and I agree that AZPOD is probably one of the best schools besides DMU, but I think I'd wait two more months until after boards to claim a better basic science cirriculum. :D My predicition is that the AZPOD students score above the national average, but I guess we will have to wait and see. By the way how is studying for boards going down there? I would think it would be a little harder with no upperclassmen to ask for advice.

Another thing that we should do is stop having pass/fail board scores. Since curriculums differ at every school and a 3.5 gpa is different at one instution from another, board scores is the only way residencies or anyone can really compare students on an equal level. Its ridiculous that there isnt a specific score. Where is the motivation to study your rears off for boards? I think that would give some of the schools a little kick in the pants to "up" their standards. What do you guys think? Maybe some of the political gurus can enlighten us on the past student political debates regarding this subject such as Gusty and Krab.

This topic did come up in Orlando at the national conference, but I believe the discussion was tabled. I plan on bringing it up in August and I will be sure to let you know if the APMSA manages to take an official stance on the subject. I really hope everyone decides to get on board with this issue because I cannot think of a single good reason why we should remain the only medical profession (MD/DO) where how did doesn't matter as long as you pass.

How do residency directors gauge a student then? Isn't this really an advantage for lower-tiered students becuz, they just need to pass and no one knows they barely did. But it's also not much incentive, if this is the case, to studying hard or learning much as no matter how well you do as long as you pass you're into a decent residency. Or am I way off base here?

How do residency directors gauge a student then? Isn't this really an advantage for lower-tiered students becuz, they just need to pass and no one knows they barely did. But it's also not much incentive, if this is the case, to studying hard or learning much as no matter how well you do as long as you pass you're into a decent residency. Or am I way off base here?

In my opinion, it's an advantage and if you attend one of the better schools you are disadvantaged. Imagine having a 2.94gpa at a upper tier school and not being able to apply to certain residency programs while your less motivated cousin from a lower tier school with a 3.0 gets to apply and at least get considered. Grade inflation at any of the schools, to me, hurts the entire profession. This says nothing about the differences between a 3.2 upper tier and a 3.8 lower tier....

Plus won't that be fun picking up the intellectual slack from years of potential bad habits? Three years is a long time and then maybe some of you will better understand my POV!

Everyone will probably have to deal with these folks eventually, so I guess I shouldn't feel so alone. Fortunately, for me, I already know the deal.

In my opinion, it's an advantage and if you attend one of the better schools you are disadvantaged. Imagine having a 2.94gpa at a upper tier school and not being able to apply to certain residency programs while your less motivated cousin from a lower tier school with a 3.0 gets to apply and at least get considered. Grade inflation at any of the schools, to me, hurts the entire profession. This says nothing about the differences between a 3.2 upper tier and a 3.8 lower tier....

Plus won't that be fun picking up the intellectual slack from years of potential bad habits? Three years is a long time and then maybe some of you will better understand my POV!

Everyone will probably have to deal with these folks eventually, so I guess I shouldn't feel so alone. Fortunately, for me, I already know the deal.

Ok, so then all I need do is sqeak by in pod school and then get my MBA and rake in the cash, huh? :laugh:

Ok, so then all I need do is sqeak by in pod school and then get my MBA and rake in the cash, huh? :laugh:


In this profession, I find very little advantage of having a 4.0 compared to a 3.1 other than impressing mom and dad and your friends at the bar.

The 3.1 podiatrist will do the exact same medical things at the same price that the 4.0. Plus, the 3.1 could very well make more money since GPA in no way shape or form equates to earning potential in podiatry.

All you need is a degree and pass your boards. Then you're set.

And while the 4.0 student at upper tier school X busted their bunions and brains, be assured that there are plenty of students getting by and having fun in the process who will be just fine.

Maybe the 4.0 student from upper tier X put in all that work so that he could help all those less motivated student from other less known universitiesy get through residency?

Hehe.

How do residency directors gauge a student then? Isn't this really an advantage for lower-tiered students becuz, they just need to pass and no one knows they barely did. But it's also not much incentive, if this is the case, to studying hard or learning much as no matter how well you do as long as you pass you're into a decent residency. Or am I way off base here?

It is frustrating that people are able to eek by just barely passing boards, but hopefully this will change. As far as the problem with a 3.0 at an excellent school being equivalent to a 4.0 at a poor school most residency directors are aware of this. Each year programs come and visit our school to talk to students and even programs with GPA requirements comment on how they are willing to waive the requirement for students from certain schools. Really when you think about it your grades are only as important as getting you your externships. Once you have been accepted to do an externship at a program the playing field is essentially leveled and the program is yours to win or loose. That is why I love the fact that we are able to spend our entire fourth year externing at programs we may want to end up at. Each one month externship is basically an extended interview . If you had a great GPA (at a lousy school) but didn't learn much the residents and directors are going to see right through you. So even though it would be easier to just make board scores available to residencies they have found a way through the externship process to determine who they want at their program. This is the main reason why in other threads I have talked about how important it is to choose a school that has a challenging program AND allows you to spend as much time as possible during your fourth year out at programs. At DMU you spend a four month core at one program and then can spend the rest of the year visiting all the rest of the programs you plan on applying to. I don't care what grades you have, when you sit down to interview in December and that residency director has seen you in action for at least a month he/she knows whether or not you have what it takes and if they want you to come work with them for the next three years or not.

The top two schools are AZPOD and DMU. There is no question about this.

Due to the type of association each of these has with osteopathic medical schools, they are at the top and can be compared with no other podiatry schools fairly.

AZCOM (AZPOD's associate DO school) is the top DO program in the country due to residency placement, 100% board pass rate for the past 6 years (no other schools have even come close), and quality of education, which unfortunately comes out of the students' pockets (higher salaries for better faculty). AZPOD students take all of the same classes minus OMM classes. There's no doubt that the basic science years (I and II) are better at AZPOD than all other schools. However, CPMS (DMU) is doing well enough to score 100% or upper 90's on the boards for the past few years, and is an excellent institution, in this regards.

As far as clinical years (III and IV) go, I have it on good report that CPMS is problem-based with exceptional integration among the clinical faculty for rotations. AZPOD is much different and follows a more traditional MD/DO rotation pattern. Undoubtedly, CPMS's problem-based format is more effective and I think better, marginally.

I agree with Feelgood. It will be a couple of years before a full comparison can be made. Right now, AZPOD's basic science is marginally better and CPMS's clinical years are marginally better. Both are excellent schools and both are trendsetters!

AZPOD Rocks

With all due respect sir, AZPOD just recently opened up so it is still impossible assess their student's clinical performance or level on a national scale just yet. I am sure that they have an excellent curriculum but the clinical years have yet to be tested. Bare in mind that there are "older" schools who hold a very strong reputation in clinical performance: Scholl, Temple, Ohio, and DMU specifically. I do recognize that Arizona has a great setup and a very strong curriculum but you can't rank them on top of other schools who have a long continuous history of graduating some of the best DPMs in the country just yet.

With all due respect sir, AZPOD just recently opened up so it is still impossible assess their student's clinical performance or level on a national scale just yet. I am sure that they have an excellent curriculum but the clinical years have yet to be tested. Bare in mind that there are "older" schools who hold a very strong reputation in clinical performance: Scholl, Temple, Ohio, and DMU specifically. I do recognize that Arizona has a great setup and a very strong curriculum but you can't rank them on top of other schools who have a long continuous history of graduating some of the best DPMs in the country just yet.

I have no desire to offend you, or anyone else. The third years are just beginning their clinical rotations, so I can see why you would find me presumptuous for making such bold claims about their clinical stability.

About the first two years, no argument can be made. AZPOD students have taken all of the same curriculum as AZCOM students and done well. AZCOM has stronger basic science curriculum than any other affiliate school associated with podiatry schools.

However, the clinical rotations are set up based on AZCOM's rotation relationships and their quality is exceptional. This is why I make such bold statements. I do not doubt that other podiatric medical schools have produced individuals at the forefront of podiatry. AZPOD's outstanding program was made possible only through this. However, "some of the best DPM's in the country" got together and established a school which is solid from the get-go and which will be the model for all other podiatry schools in but a few years.

Saying these things does not slight your school at all. The newest member of our faculty is an Ohio graduate and completed the reputable 3-year INOVA residency (an absolutely amazing program). So, I recognize the determined efforts of each podiatry school to produce fine podiatrists.

AZPOD Rocks

The top two schools are AZPOD and DMU. There is no question about this.
Due to the type of association each of these has with osteopathic medical schools, they are at the top and can be compared with no other podiatry schools fairly.

AZCOM (AZPOD's associate DO school) is the top DO program in the country due to residency placement, 100% board pass rate for the past 6 years (no other schools have even come close), and quality of education, which unfortunately comes out of the students' pockets (higher salaries for better faculty). AZPOD students take all of the same classes minus OMM classes. There's no doubt that the basic science years (I and II) are better at AZPOD than all other schools. However, CPMS (DMU) is doing well enough to score 100% or upper 90's on the boards for the past few years, and is an excellent institution, in this regards.

As far as clinical years (III and IV) go, I have it on good report that CPMS is problem-based with exceptional integration among the clinical faculty for rotations. AZPOD is much different and follows a more traditional MD/DO rotation pattern. Undoubtedly, CPMS's problem-based format is more effective and I think better, marginally.

I agree with Feelgood. It will be a couple of years before a full comparison can be made. Right now, AZPOD's basic science is marginally better and CPMS's clinical years are marginally better. Both are excellent schools and both are trendsetters!

AZPOD Rocks

Well, ofcourse there is a question about this! You guys haven't even graduated a class as of yet. You have no established reputation with residency programs. Listen folks, curriculum is not the end all be all! Clinical training truly makes us the doctors we are. Don't get me wrong, our knowledge is important, but one of the finest physicians that I know is a graduate of St. George's in Grenada. AZPod folks really need to not put the horse before the carriage and wait a couple of years until classes have graduated and performed in the real world.

Right now, AZPOD's basic science is marginally better and CPMS's clinical years are marginally better.

By the way how is studying for boards going down there? I would think it would be a little harder with no upperclassmen to ask for advice.[/QUOTE]

They are preparing for the USMLE and including lower extremity, too. All of the upper classmen in the DO program are helping them. Each is capable of taking and passing the USMLE but, of course, they won't be given the opportunity. Their pass rate will be 100% on the NBPME. The results will be in very soon to confirm my prediction. If I am wrong, laugh away! :)

AZPOD Rocks

I love stirring up the dust!

By the way, each class (year) has lost several students due to failure... due to difficulty of course curriculum. I sincerely hope I am not one of them (I am honestly fearful)! However, several podiatry schools, which will remain nameless, have graciously recruited those who were kicked out of AZPOD. Some of you will be able to ask them yourself about AZPOD when they get there for Fall commencement.

AZPOD Rocks

ANY school will get you where you want to go (simply, an opportunity to take the boards) -- some just help prepare you better. But in the end, YOU must do the work no matter where you go. How bad do YOU want it? At every and any institution, there are those who do well and succeed and those who do not and fail.

Much of this depends on your work ethic and what you bring to the table. The ranking stuff is for the birds. Certainly schools can point you in the right direction but will NOT do the work FOR you. Harvard grads are eating out of dumpsters in some cases, while community college grads and college dropouts like Bill Gates own half the world.

[QUOTE=capo]ANY school will get you where you want to go (simply, an opportunity to take the boards) -- some just help prepare you better. But in the end, YOU must do the work no matter where you go. How bad do YOU want it? At every and any institution, there are those who do well and succeed and those who do not and fail. Certainly schools can point you in the right direction but will NOT do the work FOR you.[QUOTE]

Excellent points!!!

I love stirring up the dust!

By the way, each class (year) has lost several students due to failure... due to difficulty of course curriculum. I sincerely hope I am not one of them (I am honestly fearful)! However, several podiatry schools, which will remain nameless, have graciously recruited those who were kicked out of AZPOD. Some of you will be able to ask them yourself about AZPOD when they get there for Fall commencement.

AZPOD Rocks

I don't look at those failed students as badges proving your worth but maybe scars proving your insufficency.

I don't look at those failed students as badges proving your worth but maybe scars proving your insufficency.

I don't look at failed students as badges of worth, either. I do think they indicate an extremely challenging program. Certainly not inadequacy as your post indicates. If you substitute the word "inefficiency" for "insufficiency," I agree with your post entirely. It was inefficient to accept students with lower academic criteria who would just fail out. It has hurt the institution because of less tuition money coming in but, more importantly, hurt the students because of the high price of time and money they invested into something they weren't suited to complete from the beginning.

The now second years had higher mean stats upon entrance and had a much lower failure rate. This coming year has even higher stats and I hope this will translate into fewer failures in the program. The average GPA of those accepted for August is 3.5 and a 27 on the MCAT. Hopefully, this will resolve the issues that had so many students failing.

AZPOD Rocks

I do not think the "lower" tiered schools prepare students bettor or worse for the boards. I think it all starts with whom they accept.

The schools that accept all with a pulse and do not kick them out even after several failures or many chances to pass the same class these are the schools and students that will have problems passing the boards.

I still agree it is best to go to a better school than not.

as for the political side of things...

The APMSA meetings are really "political" and it seems to me from my year of observations (2 metings) that people are more concerned with themselves and what is in their best interest (singularly) than what would be best for the advancement of the profession.

So if some one brings up this topic but does not have the backing of certain people the issue will be tabled and never discussed or voted against.

It is sad and difficult to make progress there but we try.

I agree that board scores should be numbered like the MD/DOs do then the interviews could be more personal.

as for the political side of things...

The APMSA meetings are really "political" and it seems to me from my year of observations (2 metings) that people are more concerned with themselves and what is in their best interest (singularly) than what would be best for the advancement of the profession.

So if some one brings up this topic but does not have the backing of certain people the issue will be tabled and never discussed or voted against.

It is sad and difficult to make progress there but we try.

I agree that board scores should be numbered like the MD/DOs do then the interviews could be more personal.

I can definately agree with that observation. Unfortunately what is slowing down our progress is our very own. Many politics are involved and too many "bad apples" are concerned for their own good instead of the benefit of the profession as a whole. To me, the loss of Dr. Gerard Yu in my opinion was a major set-back because not only was he a great man in our profession but in fact one of the few who actually cared to progress this profession forward.

I sadly see this trend transcending to our very own student bodies. I can't speak on behalf of every school but I'll speak from my own experience. Unfortunately, I see alot of people involved with student activities and research and all that great "resume building" stuff not for the benefit of the student body, or the profession, but rather for the mere sake of promoting themselves on a CV or resume prior to externships and rotations. Once these personal agendas are attained, everything is forgotten and the torch is passed on to the next egotistical candidate who will again continue this cycle of building a CV for personal agendas with no intentions to really leave a mark for this profession at all...

of course, I don't want to sound like a pessimist or "whiskers" as these politics and selfish attitudes exist in every profession - but unfortunately with our already small profession (15,000 pods), these problems become more visible and magnified.

I hope with our new higher standards in training and opportunities, our future APMA and professional leaders can learn from the mistakes of our predescesors and work collectively for the benefit of our great profession. We have many challenges ahead of us as furture professoinals but I believe our generation can definately build something special with opportunities in research, and collaboration with other great physicians for the benefit of medicine.

How do residency directors gauge a student then? Isn't this really an advantage for lower-tiered students becuz, they just need to pass and no one knows they barely did. But it's also not much incentive, if this is the case, to studying hard or learning much as no matter how well you do as long as you pass you're into a decent residency. Or am I way off base here?

For most programs, residency directors gauge students by their performance during their rotation at the program. The point of a clerkship is two fold: 1) students get to see the program and 2) programs get to see potential residents. You'll find that most programs choose residents from their clerkship pool. This is not always the case (especially if a program doesn't really like anyone that rotated there) but a program would much rather pick someone based on a month rather than a piece of paper and an interview.

I agree that accepting higher level students will make schools appear better. But what impresses me and makes me say that schools is great is how do they carry their lower students. CPMS has the same stats as the rest of the country 3.3 and a 22, but they get everyone across the finish line. That means that they aren't "cutting the fat" if you will. The curriculum is taught in a manner that everyone is elevated to a higher educational standard. That is a mark of a solid institution and say that our lost colleagues are scars not badges. I cannot say that I know what the MCAT and GPA was for all of the students that failed CPMS. I have mentioned before that according to the CPMS self studies that Dr Yoho does every year, physical science scores, NOT overall MCAT or GPA scores, is the best predictor of a student passing or failing at CPMS.The other two "common" traits of a student who struggles is a non-traditional male student.

To get back to my point, isn't the best school in the country the one that has such good curriculum that everyone succeeds?

I agree that accepting higher level students will make schools appear better. But what impresses me and makes me say that schools is great is how do they carry their lower students. CPMS has the same stats as the rest of the country 3.3 and a 22, but they get everyone across the finish line. That means that they aren't "cutting the fat" if you will. The curriculum is taught in a manner that everyone is elevated to a higher educational standard. That is a mark of a solid institution and say that our lost colleagues are scars not badges. I cannot say that I know what the MCAT and GPA was for all of the students that failed CPMS. I have mentioned before that according to the CPMS self studies that Dr Yoho does every year, physical science scores, NOT overall MCAT or GPA scores, is the best predictor of a student passing or failing at CPMS.The other two "common" traits of a student who struggles is a non-traditional male student.

To get back to my point, isn't the best school in the country the one that has such good curriculum that everyone succeeds?

Very soon, I will have a master's degree in education so have somewhat of a background in the area you are bringing up.

Don't start out thinking that I disagree with you, because I don't. I believe that being able to reach and teach even the poor students is the mark of an excellent faculty geared towards true education (i.e. - true communication of the material). So, I agree in that sense.

However, take a look at the top MD programs in the country and you will see that the SCIENCE of medicine is taught to such a level that those without excellent undergraduate experience would not be able to cope, much less excel. There are some people who do not belong in medicine based on their inability to master the SCIENCE of medicine. This is an absolute must if you are going to be placed into such a position of responsibility!

That being said, I don't have any doubts that the ART of medicine is taught better by faculty who make sure even the least of students is able to succeed. Just by this very act, they are teaching this ART. These are people who truly care about others, that know how to interact with others in a motivational way, and who have developed such an art themselves.

The best school of medicine (podiatric or otherwise) would include a set of faculty who are triumphant at teaching both the ART and the SCIENCE of medicine to their students.

AZPOD Rocks

Very soon, I will have a master's degree in education so have somewhat of a background in the area you are bringing up.

Don't start out thinking that I disagree with you, because I don't. I believe that being able to reach and teach even the poor students is the mark of an excellent faculty geared towards true education (i.e. - true communication of the material). So, I agree in that sense.

However, take a look at the top MD programs in the country and you will see that the SCIENCE of medicine is taught to such a level that those without excellent undergraduate experience would not be able to cope, much less excel. There are some people who do not belong in medicine based on their inability to master the SCIENCE of medicine. This is an absolute must if you are going to be placed into such a position of responsibility!

That being said, I don't have any doubts that the ART of medicine is taught better by faculty who make sure even the least of students is able to succeed. Just by this very act, they are teaching this ART. These are people who truly care about others, that know how to interact with others in a motivational way, and who have developed such an art themselves.

The best school of medicine (podiatric or otherwise) would include a set of faculty who are triumphant at teaching both the ART and the SCIENCE of medicine to their students.

AZPOD Rocks


Well put!!!
:thumbup:

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings :) . Good luck. :luck:

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings :) . Good luck. :luck:

Uh oh, the can has been reopened yet again. :laugh:

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings :) . Good luck. :luck:


Schools 1-4 on one piece of paper..... and 5-8 on a used napkin?


If I am to rank them again, I'd be certain to place 1-4 on one post and then make a separate post for 5-8. Like this...

1. DMU
1. Temple
1. AZ
1. Scholl

__________________________________________________ ____________

The Great Ether Zone Divide...

$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
__________________________________________________ _______________

Schools 1-4 on one piece of paper..... and 5-8 on a used napkin?

If I am to rank them again, I'd be certain to place 1-4 on one post and then make a separate post for 5-8. Like this...

1. DMU
1. Temple
1. AZ
1. Scholl
__________________________________________________ ______________
Then another great ether zone divide
$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$ $$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$$
__________________________________________________ _______________

Then the others...

8. barry
8. Cali
8. ocpm
8. nycpm

Very soon, I will have a master's degree in education so have somewhat of a background in the area you are bringing up.

Don't start out thinking that I disagree with you, because I don't. I believe that being able to reach and teach even the poor students is the mark of an excellent faculty geared towards true education (i.e. - true communication of the material). So, I agree in that sense.

However, take a look at the top MD programs in the country and you will see that the SCIENCE of medicine is taught to such a level that those without excellent undergraduate experience would not be able to cope, much less excel. There are some people who do not belong in medicine based on their inability to master the SCIENCE of medicine. This is an absolute must if you are going to be placed into such a position of responsibility!

That being said, I don't have any doubts that the ART of medicine is taught better by faculty who make sure even the least of students is able to succeed. Just by this very act, they are teaching this ART. These are people who truly care about others, that know how to interact with others in a motivational way, and who have developed such an art themselves.

The best school of medicine (podiatric or otherwise) would include a set of faculty who are triumphant at teaching both the ART and the SCIENCE of medicine to their students.

AZPOD Rocks

I agree that this is very well put. I also do not disagree that as a profession we need to increase our level of expectations. I have personally been discussing the issue of CPMS only accepting the MCAT score (I've been pushing my will upon those in admissions :D ). I think that if we started, that the other top programs will follow. With the big boys on board, applicants can then start asking the question, "Why do the top programs only accept the MCAT and the lower schools accept anything?"

Gusty, if you are reading this, I think this is a great issue to bring up to Yoho. I don't know about bring the resolution to the student body, unless Yoho would like to see if it is supported.

I agree that this is very well put. I also do not disagree that as a profession we need to increase our level of expectations. I have personally been discussing the issue of CPMS only accepting the MCAT score (I've been pushing my will upon those in admissions :D ). I think that if we started, that the other top programs will follow. With the big boys on board, applicants can then start asking the question, "Why do the top programs only accept the MCAT and the lower schools accept anything?"

Gusty, if you are reading this, I think this is a great issue to bring up to Yoho. I don't know about bring the resolution to the student body, unless Yoho would like to see if it is supported.

Funny you should bring this issue up. I was just telling Hodson about how I plan on presenting a resolution at the fall APMSA meeting to see if we can make this an across the board action for all schools. Ultimately this is not something that can be decided upon by the student body at a state level, but we certainly can continue to let it be known we want the change to occur. If the resolution passes at the House of Delegates meeting we will be able to return to our deans with the message that all podiatric medical students are in agreement that there needs to be a standard in admissions testing. I will definitely keep you posted on how things turn out.

Funny you should bring this issue up. I was just telling Hodson about how I plan on presenting a resolution at the fall APMSA meeting to see if we can make this an across the board action for all schools. Ultimately this is not something that can be decided upon by the student body at a state level, but we certainly can continue to let it be known we want the change to occur. If the resolution passes at the House of Delegates meeting we will be able to return to our deans with the message that all podiatric medical students are in agreement that there needs to be a standard in admissions testing. I will definitely keep you posted on how things turn out.

I've been working on our admissions counselor (no names) and she is whole heartly behind a change, but of course the decisions is Yoho's.

AZPOD's director of admissions let me know that AZPOD will probably not accept anything other than the MCAT next year and will probably set a higher GPA application requirement due to the quality of admitted students' stats this year.

AZPOD Rocks

AZPOD's director of admissions let me know that AZPOD will probably not accept anything other than the MCAT next year and will probably set a higher GPA application requirement due to the quality of admitted students' stats this year.

AZPOD Rocks

:thumbup:

I agree that this is very well put. I also do not disagree that as a profession we need to increase our level of expectations. I have personally been discussing the issue of CPMS only accepting the MCAT score (I've been pushing my will upon those in admissions :D ). I think that if we started, that the other top programs will follow. With the big boys on board, applicants can then start asking the question, "Why do the top programs only accept the MCAT and the lower schools accept anything?"

Gusty, if you are reading this, I think this is a great issue to bring up to Yoho. I don't know about bring the resolution to the student body, unless Yoho would like to see if it is supported.

All podiatry schools should hold and maintain a similar standard - we're too small of a profession to allow for parity within "top" and "not so top" schools. I agree that MCATs should be minimum requirements with minimum scores of 23.

The main thing is that we need a standard maintained and upheld by all the schools and more emphasis should be given to the board scores as we've previously mentioned and discussed. I think if strong standards are maintained, the quality of the application pool with increase which of course improves the quality of the matriculating classes.

If a student is not a admitted to DMU for example as a figure of speech, due to academic reasons - his GPA is too low and his MCATs are horrible - hypothetically of course, I would rather have this student go back to re-take the MCATs and improve his GPA (post bac courses) to show that a) he is a serious student...b) he is passionate enough about pursuing a career in our profession...and c) he is competent enough to maintain our high expectations. To me, this would be most ideal rather than having that student apply and get accepted to a "lower tier" school with very mediocre stats, only to fail out in less than a year because he/she believed the false propaganda of the admissions committee in thinking that he/she is a competent "podiatric medical student". That is why I feel that strong admissions standards should be maintained everywhere and if programs can't maintain a standard level of expectations then they should not be accredited by the CPME.

I think a minimum overall GPA of 2.75, sci. GPA min. of 3.0 or better AND a min. MCAT of 24, would exclude many appilcants as do some med schools and thus -- upgrade immediately the applicant pool. No one w/ less than these numbers, would even be considered for an interview at ANY school.

But of course this is dreaming and wishful thinking and this'll never happen, as some schools need $ so bad that a 2.5 overall and 2.5 sci. GPA, w/ a 18 MCAT could probably get it. :(

I think a minimum overall GPA of 2.75, sci. GPA min. of 3.0 or better AND a min. MCAT of 24, would exclude many appilcants as do some med schools and thus -- upgrade immediately the applicant pool. No one w/ less than these numbers, would even be considered for an interview at ANY school.

But of course this is dreaming and wishful thinking and this'll never happen, as some schools need $ so bad that a 2.5 overall and 2.5 sci. GPA, w/ a 18 MCAT could probably get it. :(

We may not see ONE drastic, all-encompassing change BUT one by one, as the schools change, drastic changes will occur! Before too long (give it a decade or slightly more), we may see this reach to all of the schools.

Hmmm, that sounds good to me seeing as how I'm a newbie and it will be about 7 years before I'm done... :) Hopefully by then, we will have a nationwide scope of practice, etc.

AZPOD Rocks

All podiatry schools should hold and maintain a similar standard - we're too small of a profession to allow for parity within "top" and "not so top" schools. I agree that MCATs should be minimum requirements with minimum scores of 23.

The main thing is that we need a standard maintained and upheld by all the schools and more emphasis should be given to the board scores as we've previously mentioned and discussed. I think if strong standards are maintained, the quality of the application pool with increase which of course improves the quality of the matriculating classes.

If a student is not a admitted to DMU for example as a figure of speech, due to academic reasons - his GPA is too low and his MCATs are horrible - hypothetically of course, I would rather have this student go back to re-take the MCATs and improve his GPA (post bac courses) to show that a) he is a serious student...b) he is passionate enough about pursuing a career in our profession...and c) he is competent enough to maintain our high expectations. To me, this would be most ideal rather than having that student apply and get accepted to a "lower tier" school with very mediocre stats, only to fail out in less than a year because he/she believed the false propaganda of the admissions committee in thinking that he/she is a competent "podiatric medical student". That is why I feel that strong admissions standards should be maintained everywhere and if programs can't maintain a standard level of expectations then they should not be accredited by the CPME.

:thumbup:

All podiatry schools should hold and maintain a similar standard - we're too small of a profession to allow for parity within "top" and "not so top" schools. I agree that MCATs should be minimum requirements with minimum scores of 23.

The main thing is that we need a standard maintained and upheld by all the schools and more emphasis should be given to the board scores as we've previously mentioned and discussed. I think if strong standards are maintained, the quality of the application pool with increase which of course improves the quality of the matriculating classes.

If a student is not a admitted to DMU for example as a figure of speech, due to academic reasons - his GPA is too low and his MCATs are horrible - hypothetically of course, I would rather have this student go back to re-take the MCATs and improve his GPA (post bac courses) to show that a) he is a serious student...b) he is passionate enough about pursuing a career in our profession...and c) he is competent enough to maintain our high expectations. To me, this would be most ideal rather than having that student apply and get accepted to a "lower tier" school with very mediocre stats, only to fail out in less than a year because he/she believed the false propaganda of the admissions committee in thinking that he/she is a competent "podiatric medical student". That is why I feel that strong admissions standards should be maintained everywhere and if programs can't maintain a standard level of expectations then they should not be accredited by the CPME.


I am 100% behind your comments. One thing that would change this (even though I am beating that dead horse) is changes to the board scores. One score them don't' make them pass/fail, and two, release the pass rates. This information would effect residency placement and also public embarrass the colleges to make the changes necessary.

Podman, this next song on my cowbell is for you!!! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

I am 100% behind your comments. One thing that would change this (even though I am beating that dead horse) is changes to the board scores. One score them don't' make them pass/fail, and two, release the pass rates. This information would effect residency placement and also public embarrass the colleges to make the changes necessary.

Podman, this next song on my cowbell is for you!!! :clap: :clap: :clap: :clap:

SWEEEEET!!! This day can't get any better than this - i didn't get my ass pimped at clinic and i made it on Feelgood's Cowbell...

I think i can speak on behalf of all the 2008 class when i say, you owe us a song on your cowbell after boards :thumbup:

I have a feeling that some administrators wouldn't be the least bit embarassed by poor board scores. How do I know, because they don't seem the least bit embarassed by the education that they are providing. In fact, if the students are not understanding the material, the answer is simple, the students, by and large are lazy@!

"nuttin wong wit dis pwogwam!" We gots to wurk on deir shord derm memre fur boords dough and complane dat de Q's R 2 hard bcuz we gots da bast pwogwam.

If I go to a "lower tier" pod school would that effect me dramatically in the future in regards to residency and job?

If I go to a "lower tier" pod school would that effect me dramatically in the future in regards to residency and job?

Depends on what you make out of this school...If you are going there and doing minimal work just to pass without really learning, understanding, or applying the material in clinical situations then you're not going to do well...

If you are serious and dedicated and are self-motivated/driven, then you'll do fine and will match a great residency. Lower tier or Upper tier, you still have to put in the time, work, and effort. At the end of the day, you will earn your DPM just like everyone else and its upto you to learn and absorb the information taught. Of course, going to a an "top tier" school does make the learning environment alot easier but again, you still have to put in the time and effort of course.

Depends on what you make out of this school...If you are going there and doing minimal work just to pass without really learning, understanding, or applying the material in clinical situations then you're not going to do well...

If you are serious and dedicated and are self-motivated/driven, then you'll do fine and will match a great residency. Lower tier or Upper tier, you still have to put in the time, work, and effort. At the end of the day, you will earn your DPM just like everyone else and its upto you to learn and absorb the information taught. Of course, going to a an "top tier" school does make the learning environment alot easier but again, you still have to put in the time and effort of course.


If you were to compare DMU to CSPM, how are they different? Teachers are better? Students are smarter? More funding for school materials?

If you were to compare DMU to CSPM, how are they different? Teachers are better? Students are smarter? More funding for school materials?

Well I'm not a student at either schools but I can tell you that in terms of structure, organization, and part I board schools - DMU is the clear advantage. Perhaps, one of our DMU posters can explain or elaborate on this point further.

However, that being said, this does not mean that you can't succeed in CSPM. You still can do well given that you invest the time and effort in your studies. I'm sure every school has an advantage in some form or another so its upto you to make the most out of this and learn as much as you can. Of course, given the choice between DMU and CSPM, I would probably go with DMU because it would provide a better environment to succeed - therefore, a better advantage of course.

If you were to compare DMU to CSPM, how are they different? Teachers are better? Students are smarter? More funding for school materials?

Besides better board scores and a better curriculum with DO students, you should also look into how the fourth year is structured. Ultimately besides a getting a great education while in school, landing a great residency is what we all want right? At DMU the fourth year is set up in a way that allows you to spend at least a full month at each of the programs you may want to apply for. We do a four month core externship at a residency program that we get to choose. Then we can choose as many more one month externships as we want at any program that we may want to end up at. To me there really is no better advantage when it comes time to sit down for an interview and you've spent a month at that program getting to know the residents and attendings. Unless of course you didn't pay attention the first three years then you could be in trouble. I guess what I am saying is that if I had to choose between two programs and one of them allowed me to basically have a one month interview at each of the residencies I wanted it would be a pretty easy decision.

Also just an FYI, it has recently come to my attention (thanks Feelgood) that DMU will only be accepting MCAT scores for admissions beginning in January of 2007. I think this is a reflection on the increasing competition for seats at the program and will result in an even more competitive applicant pool. You can become a great podiatrist no matter where you go, but it is certainly a decision that still deserves a great deal of thought so that you can give yourself every chance to succeed.

Great news!

I ended up picking DMU because for me I thought it would be the best school. As EVERYONE has said before it's what fits for you. I think I would have liked the location of almost every other school for one reason or another but I'm not going to spend almost a couple hundred thousand to enjoy the scenery and nightlife etc. I'm going there to learn. With that said, what was presented to me on interview day at DMU made me believe that this was the best place to do that.

It's the same at every school in the end really. The best things you get from your school are the memories....however. High School: you really get a GPA and an ACT or SAT score. College:(for us) you get a GPA and MCAT, GRE, DAT score (hopefully just MCAT after a while) and finally Pod school: you get a GPA and pretty much some type of standardized test score as in boards but pass/fail method but usually some type of "test" to get into residency.

From that, where do you think you would enjoy the most and make the best memories, if you try hard enough you can do all the others wherever you are.

One thing that impresses me about CPMS (DMU) is that they are always renovating. I am one who believes in the saying "if you are not growing (improving), you are dying." Many of the other schools are finally updating their facilities. CPMS doesn't build a brand new building every year instead the never stop improving. Two years ago they finished the new student center, library, and auditorium. Last year it was lecture hall 2 (for the DOs), the new surgical class room and lab, and most of the offices. This year it is Lecture hall 3 (DPMs), the clinic and the anatomy labs. In the future they are building more class rooms and I have heard a few rumors that some of the research facilities might be next.

I would say that Des Moines is not a huge city. But honestly, do you have time to go out and party or catch a MLB game? No. Do you have the money? Probably not. For what it is worth Des Moines offers a safe city that is nice on the pocket book. It has be discussed before, many of the apartments around the campus run for about $500-$800 and many of them include heat and electricity. I don't think that any other school has housing that is close to that.

Are the number of applicants supposed to increase this year? Or is it supposed to be about the same as last year's?

Applications have been on the rise. In 2001, there were ~400 applicants, in 2005 that number jumped to ~700.

For more stats, go to http://www.aacpm.org/html/statistics/stats_applicants.asp

Are the number of applicants supposed to increase this year? Or is it supposed to be about the same as last year's?
Applications to ALL medical professions will rise w/ this economy. It's a stable career and unfortunately, even business majors look this way when economy tanks.

Thus for the forseeable future apps will go up, irregardless of the fact that many people don't even want to do this job, but need a secure future. Their mom and dad's will push them this way for money and prestige, even if THEY really don't want it. Just watch the future of healthcare unfold.

Applications to ALL medical professions will rise w/ this economy. It's a stable career and unfortunately, even business majors look this way when economy tanks.

Thus for the forseeable future apps will go up, irregardless of the fact that many people don't even want to do this job, but need a secure future. Their mom and dad's will push them this way for money and prestige, even if THEY really don't want it. Just watch the future of healthcare unfold.

Interesting you used business majors as an example and the economy. The past 2 years have been great for American economy but, conversely, applications to MBA programs across the country have seen a drastic reduction in their applicant pool over the past few years. It would make sense that some of these are looking to the health professions.

AZPOD Rocks

Are the number of applicants supposed to increase this year? Or is it supposed to be about the same as last year's?

It's only going to get harder every year. Apply apply apply now!! Submit yourself to the Pod's will :p

It's only going to get harder every year. Apply apply apply now!! Submit yourself to the Pod's will :p

I hope it really does get harder - we need a uniform standard for sure. My only fear is that some schools (particularily lower tier ones) would see this as an opportunity to cash in on a few extra seats and end up accepting a ridiculous amount of unqualified students.

I hope it really does get harder - we need a uniform standard for sure. My only fear is that some schools (particularily lower tier ones) would see this as an opportunity to cash in on a few extra seats and end up accepting a ridiculous amount of unqualified students.

I agree! :thumbup: Too many applicants below 3.0s are getting in, which I believe deminishes some respect for the profession. I know there are some ppl out there with low GPAs that would make great doctors but this is extremely rare. All health professional schools have high standards, why not Pod schools too?

It's a great profession that I hope to soon be going into. I have yet to apply (applying this Sept) but I want to see some competition so that I know that if I do get into one of the top tier schools, all of my hard work would have been worth it and not see some slacker who partied thru undergrad be in the same professional school as me and give the profession a bad name.

I agree! :thumbup: Too many applicants below 3.0s are getting in, which I believe deminishes some respect for the profession. I know there are some ppl out there with low GPAs that would make great doctors but this is extremely rare. All health professional schools have high standards, why not Pod schools too?

It's a great profession that I hope to soon be going into. I have yet to apply (applying this Sept) but I want to see some competition so that I know that if I do get into one of the top tier schools, all of my hard work would have been worth it and not see some slacker who partied thru undergrad be in the same professional school as me and give the profession a bad name.

Some will grantedly argue with me on this, which thing I don't want but please respect my OPINION. I think NO schools ought to admit students with lower than a 3.0 GPA (science or cumulative).

Just my thoughts!

AZPOD Rocks

I respect your opinion and see where you're coming from, but I'll go ahead and throw in my two cents for the sake of healthy debate! Although I agree with everyone hoping for higher admissions standards for pod schools and hope that all schools start making applicants submit MCAT scores, I think that some great applicants could get passed by if a minimum GPA of 3.0 were set. I think the GPA and MCAT should balance; for example, if an applicant has a below-average GPA, then they should have an above-average MCAT and vice-versa. There are always situations of applicants having extenuating circumstances and I think it'd be a shame to eliminate them without looking at the rest of their application. Just my thoughts!

I respect your opinion and see where you're coming from, but I'll go ahead and throw in my two cents for the sake of healthy debate! Although I agree with everyone hoping for higher admissions standards for pod schools and hope that all schools start making applicants submit MCAT scores, I think that some great applicants could get passed by if a minimum GPA of 3.0 were set. I think the GPA and MCAT should balance; for example, if an applicant has a below-average GPA, then they should have an above-average MCAT and vice-versa. There are always situations of applicants having extenuating circumstances and I think it'd be a shame to eliminate them without looking at the rest of their application. Just my thoughts!
I think that if you REALLY want pods as a career, then you could always retake or take additional courses to boost your GPA by taking post-bacc. classes. This would take longer but it'd show your desire, to do whatever it takes to get your GPA up.

If you want something bad enough, you should have to prove it and work for it. If you do, you'll certainly value it more -- if it's earned not given to you.

I think that if you REALLY want pods as a career, then you could always retake or take additional courses to boost your GPA by taking post-bacc. classes. This would take longer but it'd show your desire, to do whatever it takes to get your GPA up.

If you want something bad enough, you should have to prove it and work for it. If you do, you'll certainly value it more -- if it's earned not given to you.
This, my friend, is EXACTLY what I am talking about! I believe students ought to be ready and a GPA below 3.0 is not ready. I know about academic transgressions and how much it takes to "repent." :) My undergrad GPA was a 3.5 because I really messed up in the first year. Post freshman year, it was about a 3.9 but 3 years of this only brought it up to 3.5. If someone had a horrendous GPA and, later, pulls awesome grades in a post-bac program, I think they should be able to apply even if the cumulative is below 3.0.

Again, this is just my biased opinion so please don't take it to heart too much! :)

AZPOD Rocks

This, my friend, is EXACTLY what I am talking about! I believe students ought to be ready and a GPA below 3.0 is not ready. I know about academic transgressions and how much it takes to "repent." :) My undergrad GPA was a 3.5 because I really messed up in the first year. Post freshman year, it was about a 3.9 but 3 years of this only brought it up to 3.5. If someone had a horrendous GPA and, later, pulls awesome grades in a post-bac program, I think they should be able to apply even if the cumulative is below 3.0.

Again, this is just my biased opinion so please don't take it to heart too much! :)

AZPOD Rocks

If you're talking about cumulative GPA, then I can see that a bit more than science GPA. Personally, I was taking a full-time load of all science courses during post-bacc for my pre-reqs when I had an illness in the family and had a bad semester. I re-took the classes and took additional classes, but it still affected my science GPA so that it was still slightly lower than 3.0. I'd always been a great student, but even great students aren't immune to problems. I agree that the better students generally have better GPAs, but evaluation of candidates shouldn't be one-dimensional. It's much more difficult to mainain a high GPA while taking all science courses, working full-time, and being a caregiver for an ill family member than if you were just the typical undergrad student. Just some food for thought.

just in case someone didn't read this.

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings . Good luck.

If you're talking about cumulative GPA, then I can see that a bit more than science GPA. Personally, I was taking a full-time load of all science courses during post-bacc for my pre-reqs when I had an illness in the family and had a bad semester. I re-took the classes and took additional classes, but it still affected my science GPA so that it was still slightly lower than 3.0. I'd always been a great student, but even great students aren't immune to problems. I agree that the better students generally have better GPAs, but evaluation of candidates shouldn't be one-dimensional. It's much more difficult to mainain a high GPA while taking all science courses, working full-time, and being a caregiver for an ill family member than if you were just the typical undergrad student. Just some food for thought.
Yes, but here's the thing. When you become a doc you won't be forgiven by patients, lawyers, etc. for family problems or extenuating circumstances in your life -- affecting patient care.

So in the same way, admissions folks take that into "some" consideration. But they also realize in the real world, you won't be given additional sympathy for personal experiences that may interrupt your ability to be/do your best. I'm not being contentious, just stating why adcomms may look for GPA's rather than hear stories of how hard people had it during undergrad. Certainly everyone can (and often does) give them a personal sob story.

I'm not saying they're right either -- only stating the fact that MD/DO/DPM etc., programs do look for the better academic students. All the volunteer work in the world WON'T make a good doc, nor will it make up for a student who can't pass boards and get licensed -- despite a ton of extra-curricular activities.

It is nevertheless admirable to see your heart and desire and I wish you luck. You certainly have paid your dues in other ways I'm sure. Hopefully, the adcomms will feel the same or have already done so. Best of luck. :)

just in case someone didn't read this.

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings . Good luck.

The top 3 are how I would rank them, not so much the rest.

just in case someone didn't read this.

official Podiatry School Rankings:

1.DMUCPMS
2.SCPM
3.TUSPM
4.AZPOD
5.OCPM
6.NYCPM
7.BUGMS
8.CSPM

enjoy the rankings . Good luck.

Where does it say that this is the OFFICIAL ranking of the Pod schools??

I ended up picking DMU because for me I thought it would be the best school. As EVERYONE has said before it's what fits for you. I think I would have liked the location of almost every other school for one reason or another but I'm not going to spend almost a couple hundred thousand to enjoy the scenery and nightlife etc. I'm going there to learn. With that said, what was presented to me on interview day at DMU made me believe that this was the best place to do that.

It's the same at every school in the end really. The best things you get from your school are the memories....however. High School: you really get a GPA and an ACT or SAT score. College:(for us) you get a GPA and MCAT, GRE, DAT score (hopefully just MCAT after a while) and finally Pod school: you get a GPA and pretty much some type of standardized test score as in boards but pass/fail method but usually some type of "test" to get into residency.

From that, where do you think you would enjoy the most and make the best memories, if you try hard enough you can do all the others wherever you are.

Couldn't have said it better myself.

So I totally know ranking is lame, but I'm bored so Im going to share my opinion. Note: This is not an official ranking!!!!

1. Scholl/Iowa
2. Temple
3. Arizona
4. OH
5. Barry
6. New York
7. California

I was fascinated with being in warm weather when I applied, so I actually applied to both California and Barry. However, I got into Scholl right away which was my number one choice so I didn't go to any other interviews. However, at my interview someone recommended that I should go to the Iowa interview because they felt it was the most comparable to Scholl. I think Arizona will be rising in the next few years so rankings are always due to change. Even though I would be interested to see the Podiatry schools ranked. I always look at the medical school rankings and have wondered what the official ranks are.

I know that we have discussed this ranking to death but I was looking at another thread. If we are ranking Temple so high then why are they interviewing students that applied June 23 for the incoming class? If they have much left in way of prestige and leadership, you would think that they would not associate with the lower tier in an apparent attempt to pad their pockets with more tuition. Seriously, admission needs to change across the board.

P.S. These applicants must be a bit strange to think that they can apply a month or two before school and get into the top programs.

I know that we have discussed this ranking to death but I was looking at another thread. If we are ranking Temple so high then why are they interviewing students that applied June 23 for the incoming class? If they have much left in way of prestige and leadership, you would think that they would not associate with the lower tier in an apparent attempt to pad their pockets with more tuition. Seriously, admission needs to change across the board.

P.S. These applicants must be a bit strange to think that they can apply a month or two before school and get into the top programs.

:thumbup:I have not brought it up before because I really believe that the fact that Scholl and Temple have some of the same faculty as the MD students is great, but it is sort pointless if you don't take the same exams. To take a class side by side with other med students and then not be held to the same standard when it comes time to take a test... not only is that ridiculous, but an insult to the profession. Just my two cents though.

:thumbup:I have not brought it up before because I really believe that the fact that Scholl and Temple have some of the same faculty as the MD students is great, but it is sort pointless if you don't take the same exams. To take a class side by side with other med students and then not be held to the same standard when it comes time to take a test... not only is that ridiculous, but an insult to the profession. Just my two cents though.

I'm a 2nd year at Scholl. In the classes we share with the MD students, we take the same exams as they do. Same grading scale, same exams, same everything.

...Seriously, admission needs to change across the board...These applicants must be a bit strange to think that they can apply a month or two before school and get into the top programs.

There will always be some last-minute shifting around to fill the number of spots at some schools. Unfortunately, there probably isn't an alternate list of 100 people available to choose from. If there are schools still interviewing applicants this late in the year, then there are probably too many seats in that class. Of course there is always that "trickle-down" problem. There are still people on DO waiting lists, for example, who applied for DPM as a "fallback," who will be accepted in the DO programs in the next couple of weeks and give up the DPM slot. Many schools need that tuition just to survive and will settle for any warm body available. Yes, that's probably not a great thing in the long run, but higher education is as much about "money" as any other business. I would venture a guess that the same thing happens in a number of MBA schools as well. The bottom line will always be "profit," even from a "non-profit" entity. I doubt that there's anything you can ever do about that. Schools that need the loans of 150 new DPMs to survive will keep filling 150 seats.

:thumbup:I have not brought it up before because I really believe that the fact that Scholl and Temple have some of the same faculty as the MD students is great, but it is sort pointless if you don't take the same exams. To take a class side by side with other med students and then not be held to the same standard when it comes time to take a test... not only is that ridiculous, but an insult to the profession. Just my two cents though.

DPM and MD students at TUSPM will not be able to sit the same classroom and take the exams together simultaneously for the basic science courses any time soon. The main reason is that the DPM and MD classrooms are in two different locations.

As for your assumption that TUSPM and Scholl students are not upheld to the same standard as the MD students on the basic science exams is rather interesting considering you do not even attend either of these schools. With exception to the TUSPM anatomy courses (Gross Anatomy, Lower Extremity Anatomy) and microbiology course, the remaining basic science courses are taught by Temple MD faculty only. In regards to the exam questions and the level of exam difficulty between the MD and DPM exams, they are pretty much identical. This is pretty evident by comparing the exams of the DPM course with the corresponding MD course. When I was a TUSPM student, the Pathology course director would compare the DPM class average with the MD class average for the Pathology course annually since the DPM and MD students would take the Pathology course simultaneously. Of course, things may have changed at TUSPM since I have graduated, especially with the new changes in the Temple MD curriculum.

As for course grading, I think that TUSPM students are graded more harsher than the Temple MD students. TUSPM students class grade is a numerical grade (0-100) based on a weighted average of the course exams and/or practicals. If the course grade is below 70, the student will fail the course. On the other hand, the Temple MD student's course grades are based on Honors, High Pass, Pass, Fail system. Hence, if the Temple MD student were to get a course average of 65 and the class average was 65, the Temple MD student would get a Pass for the course. On the other hand, if TUSPM student were to get a course average of 65 and the class average was 65, then that TUSPM student (along with 1/2 of the class) would have failed the course. I know that the example is rather dramatic but it does make a point.

By the way, doesn't this posting sound familiar, krabmas?

I'm a 2nd year at Scholl. In the classes we share with the MD students, we take the same exams as they do. Same grading scale, same exams, same everything.

I am glad to hear that Scholl does take the same exams. I was told by a older doc this was not the case and I hadn't had the opportunity to ask a current student if things had changed. Thanks for the update!

I am glad to hear that Scholl does take the same exams. I was told by a older doc this was not the case and I hadn't had the opportunity to ask a current student if things had changed. Thanks for the update!

From what has been stated, they only take anatomy with the MDs.

DPM and MD students at TUSPM will not be able to sit the same classroom and take the exams together simultaneously for the basic science courses any time soon. The main reason is that the DPM and MD classrooms are in two different locations.

As for your assumption that TUSPM and Scholl students are not upheld to the same standard as the MD students on the basic science exams is rather interesting considering you do not even attend either of these schools. With exception to the TUSPM anatomy courses (Gross Anatomy, Lower Extremity Anatomy) and microbiology course, the remaining basic science courses are taught by Temple MD faculty only. In regards to the exam questions and the level of exam difficulty between the MD and DPM exams, they are pretty much identical. This is pretty evident by comparing the exams of the DPM course with the corresponding MD course. When I was a TUSPM student, the Pathology course director would compare the DPM class average with the MD class average for the Pathology course annually since the DPM and MD students would take the Pathology course simultaneously. Of course, things may have changed at TUSPM since I have graduated, especially with the new changes in the Temple MD curriculum.

As for course grading, I think that TUSPM students are graded more harsher than the Temple MD students. TUSPM students class grade is a numerical grade (0-100) based on a weighted average of the course exams and/or practicals. If the course grade is below 70, the student will fail the course. On the other hand, the Temple MD student's course grades are based on Honors, High Pass, Pass, Fail system. Hence, if the Temple MD student were to get a course average of 65 and the class average was 65, the Temple MD student would get a Pass for the course. On the other hand, if TUSPM student were to get a course average of 65 and the class average was 65, then that TUSPM student (along with 1/2 of the class) would have failed the course. I know that the example is rather dramatic but it does make a point.

By the way, doesn't this posting sound familiar, krabmas?

I'm not going to comment on the testing b/c I don't take the tests at Temple, but you never took the tests at the Temple Medical so you can't say they are the same. Just b/c a professors says you guys are out performing my MDs doesn't mean the guy is B.S.ing you to motivate the class. Now that being said, I am a huge huge fan of Lamont and now that the pathology department at TU Pod is great. I'm just playing devils advocate.

I do know that Temple's applications are up this year. It is the only school that increased. With that being said one of three things must be happening.

1) Temple is greedy and does not give a rats behind about the future of podiatry so they accept anyone and everyone to fill the class size.

2) People are during down TU for other schools b/c they are slipping.

3) They lie to applicants and have them file in to interviews for spots that are already taken.

I think that they are still trying to fill their class says a lot about where TU is heading.

I'm not going to comment on the testing b/c I don't take the tests at Temple, but you never took the tests at the Temple Medical so you can't say they are the same. Just b/c a professors says you guys are out performing my MDs doesn't mean the guy is B.S.ing you to motivate the class. Now that being said, I am a huge huge fan of Lamont and now that the pathology department at TU Pod is great. I'm just playing devils advocate.

I do know that Temple's applications are up this year. It is the only school that increased. With that being said one of three things must be happening.

1) Temple is greedy and does not give a rats behind about the future of podiatry so they accept anyone and everyone to fill the class size.

2) People are during down TU for other schools b/c they are slipping.

3) They lie to applicants and have them file in to interviews for spots that are already taken.

I think that they are still trying to fill their class says a lot about where TU is heading.

Well, as I said, I have actually seen Temple MD exams. They are readily available as back exams at Temple MD library for students to utilize for review. My classmates and I have utilized these Temple MD back exams to prepare for the TUSPM exams. So, I know for a fact that the exam content and level of difficulty were pretty much the same between MD and DPM basic science courses given in the same year. As I said, things may have changed at TUSPM since I have graduated in 2002. The reason why I say this is that Temple MD converted their traditional basic science curriculum to an organ system based curriculum in the Fall 2005 and TUSPM still utilizes the traditional basic science curriculum.

As for TUSPM admissions, I have no idea what is going with TUSPM admission these days. So, I don't know if the stuff that you wrote about TUSPM admissions are true or not. It is also possible that the TUSPM number of applicants may be increased due to other reasons that you have not listed. :)

From what has been stated, they only take anatomy with the MDs.

No, I'm sorry. That's all we took with them the first year of classes. We also take Interprofessional Teams and Intro to Clinical Medicine (that I know of), but I believe there are other classes in our next two years. I will check up on that. But obviously, we are all held to the exact same high standard as our MD colleagues.

No, I'm sorry. That's all we took with them the first year of classes. We also take Interprofessional Teams and Intro to Clinical Medicine (that I know of), but I believe there are other classes in our next two years. I will check up on that. But obviously, we are all held to the exact same high standard as our MD colleagues.

I agree that you are held to a high standard even w/o the classes being integrated.

P.S. Come on Interprofressional Teams, is their really a high standard? Isn't that just advanced Hugging and Snuggling or the PC version Advanced "Team Building".

As for TUSPM admissions, I have no idea what is going with TUSPM admission these days. So, I don't know if the stuff that you wrote about TUSPM admissions are true or not. It is also possible that the TUSPM number of applicants may be increased due to other reasons that you have not listed. :)

From what I've seen their applicants are up but their class size is down. A weird situation that concerns me. Again, I'm not trying to bag any of the podiatric schools, I'm playing devils advocate. I think that students and alumni from those schools should be aware of the situations and push the administration to make the necessary changes. That is my concern with TUSPM is that they have been on top so long the have become complacent, and are now slipping.

From what I've seen their applicants are up but their class size is down. A weird situation that concerns me. Again, I'm not trying to bag any of the podiatric schools, I'm playing devils advocate. I think that students and alumni from those schools should be aware of the situations and push the administration to make the necessary changes. That is my concern with TUSPM is that they have been on top so long the have become complacent, and are now slipping.
Feelgood,

You have been on one for the past few days, much to my amusement! You are normally not so vehement in your responses. I wonder if it is just "that time of the month." :laugh:

AZPOD Rocks

It is. I'm suffering from PMS. Post Medical-boards Syndrome.

It is. I'm suffering from PMS. Post Medical-boards Syndrome.
I thought it was your jealousy about Kid Rock marrying Pam Anderson. :laugh:

It is. I'm suffering from PMS. Post Medical-boards Syndrome.

Or is the wifey get on ya about the little one. Is it here yet?

All of these reasons are true, but the one thing that stands out the most is no one has executed Richard Simmons yet. Damn that Sweatin to the Oldies!

All of these reasons are true, but the one thing that stands out the most is no one has executed Richard Simmons yet. Damn that Sweatin to the Oldies!

I thought I heard that Chuck Norris was supposed to challenge him to a dance of that would banish him to the eight dimension of hell. Either Norris or Hyle Kaffner, I can't rememeber which

I heard both in a crazy double elimination dance off.

I heard both in a crazy double elimination dance off.

Pretty sure that either way we won't have to see those flaming shorts ever again!

Speaking of ol Richard,
http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=WQ-Q3vy0MoA&search=whos%20line%20is%20it%20simmons