TouroCOM - NY COMLEX I Pass Rate

hi, i went to their open house last week and asked them that same question. the director of admissions said that the results are still coming in.

if either of you find this out...could you be sure to post it, or if you by some miracle remember I asked PM me the data/info?

this seemed like an ideal fit for me (used to live in NY), but the posts are discouraging...sounds very disorganized. but on the other hand, I am a pretty independent learner...

how is the rotations situation? is it too soon to have any stats/sense for matching? I hope to settle/spend the rest of my life in NY, so I would love to establish roots during rotations/residency/internship/etc.

.

Wow.

,

DocHomer said:

I'll PM you.

Click to expand...

I'd like to know more about this situation...

.

,

sss349 said:

What would you like to know?

Click to expand...

I'd like to know which members of faculty are giving out false information, or if it is false information... would seem like another bad thing added to the list of bad things I've heard about this school (sorry for those who attend, I don't mean to insult).

Thomas Hearns said:

would seem like another bad thing added to the list of bad things I've heard about this school (sorry for those who attend, I don't mean to insult).

Click to expand...

Same. I so badly want this school to be good I love a mission statement that emphasizes under served urban populations

The pass rate is absolutely not 90%. I'm not sure how one could accurately calculate a pass rate at this point since at least 30 students opted to not sit for the boards for another year. Of the 94 students who took the boards, I'm pretty certain 82% passed.

90% is blatant misinformation.

New faculty have been hired to teach pharm, path, and immunology/microbiology and they are well qualified, dedicated, and talented teachers. Due largely to them, I believe the pass rate will go up, but our school still has a major problem in that the 2nd year basic sciences are eclipsed by this horrible Clinical Systems class. It consists almost entirely of Step 2 material and beyond (think internal medicine, pulmonology, cardiology board level teaching.) This may sound like a great opportunity to learn more, but it's such a massive volume of information not on Step 1 that we are tested on in detail. We are forced to learn very specialized clinical information before we have even finished the basic sciences. That class makes life hard at TouroCOM-NYC 2nd years in ways that few (if any) 2nd year medical students normally experience.

Wow, so ya'll had 30 students delay step 1?? What are they doing about 3rd year rotations?

,

I'm a 3rd year. I haven't heard anything about 30 of my classmates postponing boards for a year... just doesn't ring true for me. To my knowledge, a passing score has to be on record with admin by Nov 1st or students get pulled from rotations until they pass. I've heard about 15 people failed boards and had to retake. Admittedly that's just hearsay... the real # could be higher or lower. Personally, I took COMLEX late August for logistical reasons and passed w/ an above-average score.

Touro does have a host of problems, but I don't think this is one of them. The student body as a whole tends to overcome the roadblocks administration constantly throws up that make the educational pathway more difficult. If you come here, be ready for that. The rest will be up to you.

I'm a 2nd year and I can confirm that the pre-clinical dean presented data that only 94 of of the class of 2011 took the boards before starting clinical rotations. The pass rate for that group was 82%.

He sent out an email last week that he will be presenting on Nov 5th the complete data of the remaining students who were required to pass by Oct 15th. Rumor has it that the overall pass rate for 2011 is now 77% but we will find out for sure.

I genuinely feel that the pass rate (if true) is not reflective of the caliber of student at Touro-NYC but rather a combination of previously poor teaching and a 2nd year curriculum ridiculously over inundated with clinical information appropriate for 3rd and 4th year medical students and beyond.

.

Doc2BNYC said:

I'm not sure how one could accurately calculate a pass rate at this point since at least 30 students opted to not sit for the boards for another year .

Click to expand...

I agree they couldn't accurately calculate a pass rate yet, but it's definitely not true that "30 students opted to not sit for the boards for another year."

First of all, COCA requires that students pass COMLEX 1 before entering the 4th year, not the 3rd year. But Touro has its own policy which supercedes COCA's, which is that you've got to pass by 10/15. People may have taken boards a month or 2 later than average (as I did), but you can't put it off for a year, b/c after 11/1 you will be pulled from rotations until you pass.

Anyway, study hard and you should do well on the COMLEX. There were a lot of bumps on the road for 2011, and for you guys too. Hopefully the curriculum (and delivery) is getting better. It sounds like it is.

,

Pass rate for the class of 2011 as of Oct 15th - 78%

ouch. That truly sucks.

I'm a first year. If I remember correctly, when they told us that the pass rate was 90% they tagged on "for students who passed all their classes". And the curriculum used for the first year was taken almost directly from the California school. It's been changed extensively for us. I can say that I've also heard many negative things from 2nd and 3rd years, but I can not say that has been my experience.

DocHomer said:

I understand that any new school will have its share of problems, but not preparing students well enough for the boards should not be one of them. Touro has two other schools, so they should have the curriculum down by now. What is the point of franchising yourself if you can't implement the right things from the start? They should have already figured out what works.

Click to expand...

Well, remember that each Touro school is autonomous. I remember hearing this specifically at the interview for NV from the Dean of Students. Each school runs its own show, from start to finish, for the most part anyway.

SmokD said:

I'm a first year. If I remember correctly, when they told us that the pass rate was 90% they tagged on "for students who passed all their classes". And the curriculum used for the first year was taken almost directly from the California school. It's been changed extensively for us. I can say that I've also heard many negative things from 2nd and 3rd years, but I can not say that has been my experience.

Click to expand...

The power of statistics.....it can make any number look good

DocHomer said:

Regardless of whether it is autonomous or not, what I'm saying is that they are still affiliated institutions that have the benefit of learning from each other. This stuff shouldn't be happening in NY.

Click to expand...

I think the biggest problem was that students who failed even 4 courses were allowed to move on to the next year instead of being kicked out like other institutions. They were also the ones who happened to fail boards. Touro is changing certain things in their policy to improve board scores in the future. This includes a cutoff of 16 for physical and biological sciences combined in the MCAT, identifying struggling students earlier and getting them resources sooner, and possibly "highly suggesting" students who were not ready for boards to take off a year and do research and study for them during that year off.

Biology101 said:

The power of statistics.....it can make any number look good

Click to expand...

Seriously, why are you so bitter about Touro? You really have nothing better to do than say bad things about a school that you're not even attending?

,

,

snurpy said:

I think the biggest problem was that students who failed even 4 courses were allowed to move on to the next year instead of being kicked out like other institutions. They were also the ones who happened to fail boards. Touro is changing certain things in their policy to improve board scores in the future. This includes a cutoff of 16 for physical and biological sciences combined in the MCAT, identifying struggling students earlier and getting them resources sooner, and possibly "highly suggesting" students who were not ready for boards to take off a year and do research and study for them during that year off.

Click to expand...

The problem probably exists more with the remediation policies being too lenient. Touro pushed these students along. Also, I'm not sure if it's the case for 2013, but 2011 and 2012 had one cumulative grade for biochemistry, physiology and histology (BSFOM) and a student was only required to remediate if he/she had a failing average overall in BSFOM. I would like to know how many students actually failed an individual subject, were not required to remediate, and then went on to do poorly on a section. There are people who matriculated despite failing physio, biochem, and histology without remediation. It is absurd to think that someone could progress despite failing a class as significant as physiology.

Beyond that, the idea isn't anything earth shattering. Should anyone be surprised that students who failed subjects didn't pass the boards? There aren't any mysteries here.

The focus should be to streamline curriculum and teach to the boards, not write impossible test questions and then curve out the bottom of the class.

Also, the proposed elimination of the verbal reasoning section as an admission criteria with cut off of 18 in the sciences was forwarded to increase underrepresented minorities in the school. I'm not sure that there's data demonstrating minorities do poorly in verbal reasoning to begin with and beyond that, the implication is bordering on offensive - underrepresented minorities don't comprehend English well enough to get in?

I personally know of students who have been failing a class for the entire year and still not getting any of the promised help.

It's also already been pointed out: is passing enough? I want to do very well on the boards along with my classmates so that we have the option to go into more competitive residencies.

Overall, the data (trends, correlations, etc.) as presented is nonsense. So much has changed since 2011's first year and it's such a small, limited data set to ever claim meaningful trends. 2011 had it hard and the fact that 78% of them pulled through is a testament to them in my opinion.

Doc2BNYC said:

The problem probably exists more with the remediation policies being too lenient. Touro pushed these students along. Also, I'm not sure if it's the case for 2013, but 2011 and 2012 had one cumulative grade for biochemistry, physiology and histology (BSFOM) and a student was only required to remediate if he/she had a failing average overall in BSFOM. I would like to know how many students actually failed an individual subject, were not required to remediate, and then went on to do poorly on a section. There are people who matriculated despite failing physio, biochem, and histology without remediation. It is absurd to think that someone could progress despite failing a class as significant as physiology.

Beyond that, the idea isn't anything earth shattering. Should anyone be surprised that students who failed subjects didn't pass the boards? There aren't any mysteries here.

The focus should be to streamline curriculum and teach to the boards, not write impossible test questions and then curve out the bottom of the class.

Also, the proposed elimination of the verbal reasoning section as an admission criteria with cut off of 18 in the sciences was forwarded to increase underrepresented minorities in the school. I'm not sure that there's data demonstrating minorities do poorly in verbal reasoning to begin with and beyond that, the implication is bordering on offensive - underrepresented minorities don't comprehend English well enough to get in?

I personally know of students who have been failing a class for the entire year and still not getting any of the promised help.

It's also already been pointed out: is passing enough? I want to do very well on the boards along with my classmates so that we have the option to go into more competitive residencies.

Overall, the data (trends, correlations, etc.) as presented is nonsense. So much has changed since 2011's first year and it's such a small, limited data set to ever claim meaningful trends. 2011 had it hard and the fact that 78% of them pulled through is a testament to them in my opinion.

Click to expand...

Why don't all schools do this? It would seem the most efficient way to teach the curriculum. Medical school is not like undergrad, each person (hopefully) in medical school IS going to take the board exam - in undergrad not everyone is taking the MCAT.

The examination grades are out from our 2nd year behavior med class, we had only one examination for the class, average 48 before the tremendous curve. Ops there you go. Tourocom preparing their students for failure.

The instructor just came on the staff and is a good friend of the dean.

Let the truth be told.

nice

dudechiefboss said:

Why don't all schools do this? It would seem the most efficient way to teach the curriculum. Medical school is not like undergrad, each person (hopefully) in medical school IS going to take the board exam - in undergrad not everyone is taking the MCAT.

Click to expand...

Not every school teaches to the boards. As a doctor you will be required to know more than what is on your step 1s. Schools should not just prepare you for the boards but also to be a doctor in general.

interview the other day, talked to dean. most recent class had 137 students, 22 failed, which puts pass rate at 84%... not very good when other schools are hitting 100%

ejay1518 said:

Not every school teaches to the boards. As a doctor you will be required to know more than what is on your step 1s. Schools should not just prepare you for the boards but also to be a doctor in general.

Click to expand...

I fully agree, but preparing students for the boards is priority number one. Only after students are confident in their school preparing them, the school can then begin to teach students the finer points/art of medicine. A student will never be a physician if he/she can not pass the boards.

I think Touro has tremendous potential and I am confident the school will become an excellent institution. Every school's system is not perfect, and Touro needs additional time to modify their approach. Good luck to everyone in the current application cycle.

UNE does not teach to the boards either. Pass rate for c/o 2010 was 96%.

You don't have to teach to the boards to have a good pass rate.

Disclaimer: not saying UNE isn't without problems, but you can't blame everything on one reported class. Lots of students don't even go to class and do quite well.

,

sss349 said:

Agreed. However a school should also not take out 12 hours a week teaching you something that is NOT on the boards either, while 9 is devoted to the subjects that will be.
And I wouldn't complain if the system was working but it's not- 78% pass rate and around 20 students who were pulled from rotations this year

Click to expand...

I am not the biggest fan of that class but some of the material is definitely on the boards such as EKG interpretation, renal diseases, management of hypokalemia / hyperkalemia, etc. The impression I get from that class is that it tries to prepare you for your clerkship years and that you don't appear as a total ***** in front of your attending. Perhaps I am wrong.

Now as for path, pharm & imunology the professors are realy good and do provide a lot of help in trying to help students understand the material and do well.

Kevon said:

I am not sure what the big deal is here. My undergrad was chock full of professors like this. As long as the curve is fair, what is there to complain about?

Click to expand...

I agree that while yes, with a fair curve, as a student you have nothing to complain about--if my Linear Circuits and Signals class in undergrad didn't have a hefty curve...along with my diff eq course...and pretty much every single engineering class I took...my gpa would have greatly suffered, even more so than it already did! However, thankfully since I am not going into engineering and because a lot of that information is unnecessary for me to retain in the long run, any of my 50-60-70 pt scores on exams didn't matter--I will never need to call upon that knowledge. However, I think tourobot's point here was that by curving an average of 48 in medical school, when we are learning for our career, for our exams that will enable us to ultimately pursue that career--then there is an issue. In undergrad, where we mostly trudged through pointless BS, it didn't matter. I will never need to know how to wire a thermistor again. I won't need to know how to perform Laplacian transformations on the waveform equation, or any other equation for that matter (KILL ME.). I will need to know what entails renal failure. I will need to know that you manipulate differently depending on the region of the spine. Now it does matter...all of it. So professors should not allow these students to be "curved" when they do not know more than half of the required knowledge to pass their boards and become a physician. But that's just my 2 cents

Have you considered that only half the material on the exam is necessary to know for boards and the other half is "extra" stuff to know? In that case perhaps a 48 isn't bad at all. It absolutely depends on the exam's content.

ShyRem said:

Have you considered that only half the material on the exam is necessary to know for boards and the other half is "extra" stuff to know? In that case perhaps a 48 isn't bad at all. It absolutely depends on the exam's content.

Click to expand...

That is a very valid point. However, we have to hope that particular 48% was entirely or at least adequately enough corresponding to the half that pertains to the material on the boards. In which case, the only way for such a system to be successful and representative would be to have the test divided into 2 parts; A = the % you really need to ace (boards pertaining), and B being the portion that "isn't that important"... Either way, I wouldn't want my doctor knowing only 48% of "required knowledge," that's for sure. I do realize that no doctor will ever know everything there is to know...but they need to start off strong with a solid foundation. My/tourobot's point was that the preparation must be sufficient enough for us to pass our boards--a student receiving a "passing" 48 in most/all of the subjects will almost definitely ensure a failed board exam. Thankfully the boards are there to ensure that that the student's knowledge IS adequate enough to be a competent physician. The school, however, must first be sure that their student is prepared enough to take those boards. To give us false hope via a generous curve or the like would be very wrong.

you will learn there is a lot that is "very wrong" about medical education.

ShyRem said:

you will learn there is a lot that is "very wrong" about medical education.

Click to expand...

Very true. Just a strange education system overall.