You say that schools should accept the MCAT...and pod schools need more applicants..But then you say that schools should increase MCAT/GPA standards which would allow even less people in
I did not say what is in bold nor did I mean to imply that. I think exactly the opposite, which is that until we can get enough residency spots to train the current number of podiatry students the number of students accepted should be limited. Although we have more applicants and graduates than we can train, we as podiatry students are still (comparatively speaking) a very small population.
In the meantime I do believe schools should increase the MCAT requirements as it would deter students from choosing podiatry as a "backup" while also allowing us to accept the applicants who perform the best. This also takes care of other students opinions of using our profession as a safety option.
You mock the PAT portion of the DAT...
Not intentionally and my apology. I'm not familiar with the DAT so I thought PAT stood for your version of the "new podiatry test" or Podiatry Aptitude Test.
I've never found a use for the physics section of the MCAT in my two years of pod school.
That's probably because you've never been asked what screw you would use to fix your osteotomy or defended what diagnostic test you used to diagnose a condition. I worked in the biomechanics lab and scrubbed on several complicated ankle/bunion correction procedures and must say that if you have no basic concepts of lever arms and torque as they apply to bones and tendons of the foot and ankle than you are doing yourself and the patient a disservice. In surgery you need to know what screws and plates are the best given your correction, what orientation to insert them, the list of physics knowledge goes on and on.
Do you know by what physics principal lag screws work? Well, you better because you're going to be using them a lot and know how to apply that principle in different surgical situations. The list goes on and on..from MRI to XR and CT, if you're not sure of how they work or what test's to use in what situation given a patients history (soft tissue vs. bone, etc) how are you going to know what to choose in those cases with no knowledge of physics? You're not going to have an attending over your shoulder every day to tell you what to do in every situation and if you can't apply basic science knowledge in a clinical setting you're essentially doing a job the same way a monkey would, by imitation.
The idea that podiatrists just want to chip, clip and charge is becoming extinct and that's great for the profession. But the way we got the ball rolling is proving we had the knowledge to use the more advanced diagnostic tests to our advantage to make the right diagnosis or if need be, referrals. If I could tell you the number of vascular surgeons get referrals from podiatrists with "claudication" as the indication, when the patient doesn't even walk or clearly has nerve pathology I'd be here all day. Do you know why patients claudicate? Not if you have no physics knowedge. If you didn't know vascular physics and Bernoulli's principles, you'd be asking for ABI's on chronic diabetics all day with no idea why they are going to be falsely elevated anyway. Why is this important? Because you could easily same money, time, or even a patient's limb if you knew what other tests to order based on your own knowledge.
Ever not feel a pedal pulse and then be asked to use a doppler? Ever then put it 90 degrees to the dorsalis pedis artery or direct it distally and wonder why you hear a faint "swish" or don't hear anything at all? Well, it's because you're listening to the venous flow and if you knew anything about physics you would not only know how to use a doppler correctly, you would save your self the embarassment of telling your attending (or worse the patient) they have PVD only to then be sent to a vascular lab to have them explain to your patient that you didn't know how to use that simple probe.
Now, if you want to be that dude ordering the wrong tests on your patients because you don't know (for a physics example) how hard vessels affect diagnostic tests, or furthermore, what test would be better for that patient because you lack the basic science knowledge, go for it. As I said, you're not going to have an attending over your shoulder every day telling you what to do.
I have no problem with schools accepting these other tests.
I'm do. If you want to be a vet or a dentist or pharmacist that's fine, but based on curriculum comparisons pre and post graduate I don't think they come close to DPM/DO/MD.
Podiatry has low applicant numbers
Perhaps compared to other professions, but not compared to the number of residency spots available (which was more my point)
If taking DAT/GRE gets more solid applicants into the profession, why not accept those additional tests?
You're jumping around to conclusions and I'm not sure where you're getting them from. I'm curious to know why you think taking the DAT/GRE makes you a "more solid applicant"? IMO performing well on the MCAT gets more solid applicants into the profession.
And if we're going to make everyone take the same test, podiatry should just make their own AT to fund some of their political organizations.
No, my point is if you make the applicants take a podiatry specific AT, knowing a majority are already taking the MCAT, you're not going to make any money. You may have less applicants, but you don't have better applicants because now you're taking a whole other exam to which we have no comparison. Furthermore, who gets the money? That's a whole other battle not worth starting.
You're right, it would be looked down on for a while, but podiatry is headed in the right direction
I think you over-estimate the practicality and profitability of this idea. I agree podiatry is heading in the right direction, but that's because we're becoming more standardized with the medical school curriculum (MCAT, 3 year residency, etc) and you're suggesting quite the opposite.
