I'm going to have to disagree. I'd much prefer to have my degree and use that as a way into non-clinical jobs if unmatched as opposed to 1-3 years of medical school debt and the blemish of being dismissed and no diploma or show for it.
I concur
100000000% agree. I'm more than willing to accept a higher attrition rate for MS1 and 2 than let someone get mired in four years of med school debt and never be a doctor. It's cruelty to allow people to do this.
Preclinical course failure is a bar that varies wildly between schools, and therefore cannot be the most reliable metric of who makes a good doctor. And don't forget about the complete nonsense that is the COMLEX PE. Acting school rejects who grade 3 of the 4 components of that exam should not be the gatekeepers of medicine.
Can't comment in full right now, cuz I have to take my son to work. But not everyone is entitled to be a doctor
This was never my assertion. I'm saying YOU admitted them, seemingly for a reason, to your school so I think more care should be taken before wantonly destroying someone's life. My initial point was I'd rather be unmatched with a degree in hand than dismissed, so let the residency selection process or residency itself decide who is truly unfit. Pre-clinical coursework is a far cry from the actual practice of medicine so that's mighty arrogant of you to think you can make that distinction so early on and then brag on here about how many you let go. Particularly when mere months prior you were welcoming them to your school as a qualified applicant. Your m.o. sounds suspiciously similar to what the Caribbean schools are doing.
I agree with Roxas, the ultimate reason students are kicked is because the schools are afraid they won't match. If you could match with 5 failed classes and repeated boards, I imagine there would be many DO schools willing to keep taking your tuition money. Its when you look like your in danger of not being able to complete in 6 years (i.e. no more fed money) or will not match thus discouraging future students from coming that this becomes a real issue.
Dumping 10%+ of third year students is fairly horrendous. I have to imagine that has more to do with failing boards and counting that as a third year loss rather than actual clinical failures.
If 10% of your class is failing boards enough times to warrant dismissal (I'd guess most have a 3 strike rule, although mine is 2) then the school is admitting too many academically weak students or doing a piss-poor job of preparing their students (or both). Either way they need to change the playbook.
No argument here
That's what LOAs are for
too real, I am dying over here. I could totally see my admin doing this. 🤣
Here is the sad voice of experience, not authority. There are simply too many students who do NOT seek out help when they are flailing and floundering, because they view this as a loss of face, a sign of weakness or they're afraid that somehow PDs will find out about thier mental health issues and deny them and won't invite or rank them.
Yes, exactly!
The good news is your school will definitely make it a priority to tell you to take care of your mental health, while simultaneously going out of their way to do things that destroy your mental health.
I've yet to see a shred of evidence that it's about the human wreckage or being merciful at all. Sounds like your dean realized (like every other school admin) that they want to doctor their numbers to look as good as possible and the best way to do that is get suspected trouble makers out. They don't care whether it's 1st year or 4th year, or how many Teslas in debt that can buy.
You've never taught, I see. And spare us the "we as bad as the Caribs!" hysteria. We're not failing out 50% of the Class and then having only half of the survivors go on to residency. If we got even remotely close to that COCA would shut us down.
The numbers aren't there yet (insert Mathew McConaughey meme) but it's trending that way and the attitude is clearly the same. I would be delighted to be shown I'm wrong, but I won't hold my breath.
Of course, but a 20 year old who couldn't get into acting school and has 0 qualifications can decide if someone is fit to be a doctor?
If you can't follow a simple script for a clinical encounter, why should you be a doctor?
The actors grade the history and physical. No one double checks it.
The actors have a rubric that you, as the testee have to follow. Sounds simple to me.
You mean no one will double check if you fail a domain based on an actor's scoring? Seems sketch, considering how often our SPs don't give us credit for something we explicitly did (and is seen on the video that we did). At my school when we have graded SP encounters, if anyone fails the faculty will review the videos to make sure that the SPs graded correctly.
I pretty well remember emailing someone from AACOM asking about why the residency match rate data presented by AACOM was school-specific but anonymous (I am thinking of this thread: One school only placed 91.91% of grads into residency) and I recall being told that if they had required schools to be identified then they wouldn't give the data or would fudge the numbers. I looked for the post where I talked about this and the email where I asked them though, and couldn't find either, so maybe I made it up. But I think it happened...
there's no physician (watching the camera) doing part of the grading?
It is my understanding that the SP alone grades 3/4 of the encounter, and the camera is to only help watch for any sort of academic dishonesty.
