first two years with DO students vs just only podiatrist

SDN Members don't see this ad. (About Ads)

I was curious what are everyone thoughts on podiatric programs like western where the podiatric students take classes with the D.O. students for the first two year. advantage? disadvantage? I was wondering if anyone had any insight about this. Also I have been trying to navigate through the other school websites and I'm having a hard time figuring out if any other schools besides western does this. From browsing around I think at midwestern/AZPOD the podiatric students do their first two year with D.O. students as well. any other schools?

(the title should be first two years with DO students vs. just only with other podiatric students not podiatrist)

Hey, I personally see it as an advantage. Azpod and DMU also do this. Scholl is also on the same campus as the Rosalind Franklin medical school although I dont believe they take the same classes.

Advantages- you know you are getting the same education (or close to it) as the D.O. students. Also, you are able to meet a good deal of the future doctors and I think this gives you the opportunity to network. Part of the benefit here is that many doctors are unaware of how qualified a podiatrist is, so if they know we have a similar education I think they can learn more about who we are. I worked in the ambulatory surgical services at my local hospital and got to know an orthopedic surgeon who is extremely talented. He asked where I was planning on attending and when I said DMU was on my short list he got excited and said he graduated from there. Another advantage is that a lot of residencies will have more than just pod students. There is a chance some of those DO students you made connections with will end up in the same place. Also, if you are interested in holistic medicine, I imagine some of that will be talked about in lectures since there are DO students in the lectures.

Disadvantages- the DO students may act superior at times I bet, but you can always beat them on tests and let them know where you stand. Pod-only schools may relate more information to the scope of podiatry so you could miss out on some of that, however podiatrist absolutely need to be knowledgable about the body as a whole so I wouldn't worry about it.

The first two years are with DO students because the first two years are bookwork. After that 3rd year is clinic work and 4th year is a lot of externing I believe. Also, I recently found out that scholl allows you to begin clinical work after first year.

I dont see other schools as being a disadvantage though if they do not have a DO school as well. One of the most important things to me is the clinic I will be learning in. Its been stated on here many times that each school has perks and generally people seem to be happy wherever they end up. So if you can decide what factors are most important to you, it will be easier to decide what school may be for you.

Originally Posted by golfandmedicine

Hey, I personally see it as an advantage. Azpod and DMU also do this. Scholl is also on the same campus as the Rosalind Franklin medical school although I dont believe they take the same classes.

I believe Scholl has several courses they take along with their MD counterparts.

Originally Posted by golfandmedicine

Another advantage is that a lot of residencies will have more than just pod students.

Not sure what this means.

Originally Posted by golfandmedicine

The first two years are with DO students because the first two years are bookwork.

Not entirely... Second year includes podiatry courses such as LLA which the DO's won't take. At most, the basic science/clinic courses are the same.

Originally Posted by golfandmedicine

Scholl is also on the same campus as the Rosalind Franklin medical school although I dont believe they take the same classes.

We take essentials of clinical reasoning I & II, gross anatomy, pathology with the medical students at RFUMS. We sit in the same classes for these courses and take the same exams.

Also for ECR I & II we take the same workshops and work with the same patient actors as the medical students.

^^ thanks for correcting my statements, I had called scholl earlier this year and asked about this to the operator and she said she didnt think so. Although she sounded young and was not an admissions director just a phone operator. The admissions director I did talk to was extremely nice and sounded excited to have me on the phone which I really appreciated.

SuperFeisty - what I was getting at with the residency statement was that teaching hospitals will take on residents from different specialties so if you end up at the same teaching hospital as some of the DO students who are doing their residency as well it wouldnt hurt to already have a connection with them. Not sure how often this might actually happen though.

You never hear DO students bragging about taking courses with MD students...

thank you for everyones input

I don't see the benefit of having classes with other health profession students. I think it is more beneficial being with the other health professional students (MD, DO, PA) during the 3rd and 4th years. It was nice working along side them and learning from each other in the clinics while working up patients together. It is up to the student to spend the time learning the material...doesn't matter if DO/MD students are in the same class. You learn with or without them.

Originally Posted by Paulywog

I don't see the benefit of having classes with other health profession students. I think it is more beneficial being with the other health professional students (MD, DO, PA) during the 3rd and 4th years. It was nice working along side them and learning from each other in the clinics while working up patients together. It is up to the student to spend the time learning the material...doesn't matter if DO/MD students are in the same class. You learn with or without them.

is the curriculum essentially the same? I was just doing a quick comparison between western and temple and they don't seem all too similar, but I may just be confused because each school has different names for their classes.

http://prospective.westernu.edu/podiatry/curriculum
http://podiatry.temple.edu/pages/cur...urriculum.html

Originally Posted by andrew3

is the curriculum essentially the same? I was just doing a quick comparison between western and temple and they don't seem all too similar, but I may just be confused because each school has different names for their classes.

http://prospective.westernu.edu/podiatry/curriculum
http://podiatry.temple.edu/pages/cur...urriculum.html

It's not. Western adopted case-based learning and unifies multiple concepts into a single course while Temple uses the traditional approach of learning about each subject separately.

Originally Posted by Ferocity

It's not. Western adopted case-based learning and unifies multiple concepts into a single course while Temple uses the traditional approach of learning about each subject separately.

So western not technically better it just different than traditional. correct?

Originally Posted by dyk343

You never hear DO students bragging about taking courses with MD students...

True, but I hear them talking all the time about how many MD residency programs they are applying to!

Originally Posted by darazon

True, but I hear them talking all the time about how many MD residency programs they are applying to!

touche

But I still do not think it looks good for our profession to keep proclaiming "look we're legitimate we take courses with osteopathic students!"

Originally Posted by dyk343

You never hear DO students bragging about taking courses with MD students...

Why would they brag since DO and MD are the same cr...p

Originally Posted by Temperature101

Why would they brag since DO and MD are the same cr...p

I think that was the point he/she was making....

Originally Posted by shenanigans327

I think that was the point he/she was making....

With some obvious differences, but yes that was my point.

Originally Posted by dyk343

With some obvious differences, but yes that was my point.

So I know that you think that as podiatry students we should stop thinking so highly of taking classes with DO students. But aside from that what do you think of the different curriculum. (i.e. western vs temple)

Originally Posted by andrew3

So I know that you think that as podiatry students we should stop thinking so highly of taking classes with DO students. But aside from that what do you think of the different curriculum. (i.e. western vs temple)

I haven't attended more than one school so I cant really comment on on difference in curriculum nor can anyone else unless they have transferred. Its all about what you get from interviews and if you think the school is a good fit.

One would think that a student sitting in a podiatry only course would get more exposure to podiatry related symptoms/diseases/pathology. Thats a plus, right?

But then Boards part II comes around and a significant portion of it is general medicine. Sitting in a classroom that emphasizes general medicine would be superior, right?

In the end it doesn't matter. All the schools are accredited and all schools develop excellent practitioners. I just wish the red headed step child syndrome would go away.

(sorry red heads).