2018-2019 University of Pennsylvania Perelman School of Medicine

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Yeah I feel like if you already sent a letter to show them that you are still interested and would change your plans to attend Penn if accepted it’s not necessary to contact again. I’m guessing that they are going to fill any demographic holes left from decision day, and will see who would fit and if they have shown a strong interest in penn, they will reach out.

Members don't see this ad.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
So I scanned the last 2 years of the Secondaries' thread for Penn and 1 person each year reported getting off the WL.
Then again not everyone posts on SDN. I think according to the AAMC MSAR, it's more like 15.
 
Current students: silly question but they give us iPads when we matriculate correct? Any sense on which kind of iPad it will be? Trying to figure out whether I'll need to buy a new tablet/laptop.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Current students: silly question but they give us iPads when we matriculate correct? Any sense on which kind of iPad it will be? Trying to figure out whether I'll need to buy a new tablet/laptop.
Yup we get an iPad at matriculation, but tbh most people said they barely use it. I’d still get a proper laptop for Microsoft Office - I cant imagine trying to use Excel or PowerPoint on an iPad, but that’s just me.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
I thought the FAQ said they were seeking to begin May 15th but it just says May-June. My bad. Idk why I thought they gave us a date. Here’s to hoping we all get some calls!
 
Has anyone gotten any information about setting up their penn email?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Did anyone else get another background check email?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Now that results are out, what are your guys' thoughts on "applying as a couple"? Should I mention this? My SO is applying to a Penn PhD program.
 
Just got the email that the class is full. At least they told us!
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
I also received an email that the class was full yesterday and that they regret that they can't offer everyone a spot
Can any others confirm whether this is the case? I didn't receive a class is full email.
 
When it asks if you or your family have experienced economic challenges, does that include if your parents grew up in poverty? Or is it just meaning about you when with them?

I would assume you and your family together as a unit. If the circumstances they grew up in are different from yours, that would have little relevance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Interesting drama at penn after a WSJ editorial by the former dean of education Dr Goldfarb:

Take Two Aspirin and Call Me by My Pronouns

At ‘woke’ medical schools, curricula are increasingly focused on social justice rather than treating illness.

By Stanley Goldfarb
Sept. 12, 2019 5:54 pm ET

Dr. Goldfarb is a former associate dean of curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania’s Perelman School of Medicine.

The American College of Physicians says its mission is to promote the “quality and effectiveness of health care,” but it’s stepped out of its lane recently with sweeping statements on gun control. And that isn’t the only recent foray into politics by medical professionals. During my term as associate dean of curriculum at the University of Pennsylvania’s medical school, I was chastised by a faculty member for not including a program on climate change in the course of study. As the Journal reported last month, such programs are spreading across medical schools nationwide.
Why have medical schools become a target for inculcating social policy when the stated purpose of medical education since Hippocrates has been to develop individuals who know how to cure patients?
A new wave of educational specialists is increasingly influencing medical education. They emphasize “social justice” that relates to health care only tangentially. This approach is the result of a progressive mind-set that abhors hierarchy of any kind and the social elitism associated with the medical profession in particular.
These educators focus on eliminating health disparities and ensuring that the next generation of physicians is well-equipped to deal with cultural diversity, which are worthwhile goals. But teaching these issues is coming at the expense of rigorous training in medical science. The prospect of this “new,” politicized medical education should worry all Americans.

The traditional American model of medical training, which has been emulated around the world, emphasizes a scientific approach to treatment and subjects students to rigorous classroom instruction. Students didn’t encounter patients until they had some fundamental knowledge of disease processes and knew how to interpret symptoms. They were expected to appreciate medical advances and be able to incorporate them into their eventual fields of practice. Medical education was demanding and occasionally led to student failure, but it produced a technically proficient and responsible physician corps for the U.S.
The traditional American model first came under attack by progressive sociologists of the 1960s and ’70s, who condemned medicine as a failing enterprise because increased spending hadn’t led to breakthroughs in cancer treatment and other fields. The influential critic Ivan Illich called the medical industry an instrument of “pain, sickness, and death,” and sought to reorder the field toward an egalitarian social purpose. These ideas were long kept out of the mainstream of medical education, but the tide of recent political culture has brought them in.
As concerns about social justice have taken over undergraduate education, graduate schools have raced to develop curricula that will steep future educators in the same ideology. Today a master’s degree in education is often what it takes to qualify for key administrative roles on medical-school faculties. The zeitgeist of sociology and social work have become the driving force in medical education. The goal of today’s educators is to produce legions of primary care physicians who engage in what is termed “population health.”
This fits perfectly with the current administrator-rich, policy-heavy, form-over-function approach at every level of American education. Theories of learning with virtually no experimental basis for their impact on society and professions now prevail. Students are taught in the tradition of educational theorist Étienne Wenger, who emphasized “communal learning” rather than individual mastery of crucial information.
Where will all this lead? Medical school bureaucracies have become bloated, as they have in every other sphere of education. Curricula will increasingly focus on climate change, social inequities, gun violence, bias and other progressive causes only tangentially related to treating illness. And so will many of your doctors in coming years.
Meanwhile, oncologists, cardiologists, surgeons and other medical specialists are in short supply. The specialists who are produced must master more crucial material even though less and less of their medical-school education is devoted to basic scientific knowledge. If this country needs more gun control and climate change activists, medical schools are not the right place to produce them.
 
Corrupting Medical Education
The reaction to Dr. Goldfarb’s op-ed proves his point.


By The Editorial Board
Sept. 15, 2019 4:09 pm ET

Left-wing medical Twitter —yes, there is such a thing—piled on with virtue signaling that distorted Dr. Goldfarb’s argument. He didn’t write that doctors shouldn’t have opinions about political issues. He wrote that those issues shouldn’t interfere with the scientific and clinical training essential to producing doctors who can serve patients.
The most disappointing response came from Penn medical school, which sprinted for political cover. Dean J. Larry Jameson and Senior Vice Dean Suzanne Rose sent a letter to students and faculty that is a case study in progressive correctness:
“Please know that the views expressed by Dr. Goldfarb in this column reflect his personal opinions and do not reflect the values of the Perelman School of Medicine,” the letter said. “We deeply value inclusion and diversity as fundamental to effective health care delivery, creativity, discovery, and life-long learning. We are committed to ensuring a rigorous and comprehensive medical education that includes examination of the many social and cultural issues that influence health, from violence within communities to changes in the environment around us.”
Maybe we should begin to wonder about the quality of the doctors who graduate from Penn. Patients want an accurate diagnosis, not a lecture on social justice or climate change. Thanks to Dr. Goldfarb for having the courage to call out the politicization of medical education that should worry all Americans.
 
Corrupting Medical Education
The reaction to Dr. Goldfarb’s op-ed proves his point.


By The Editorial Board
Sept. 15, 2019 4:09 pm ET

Left-wing medical Twitter —yes, there is such a thing—piled on with virtue signaling that distorted Dr. Goldfarb’s argument. He didn’t write that doctors shouldn’t have opinions about political issues. He wrote that those issues shouldn’t interfere with the scientific and clinical training essential to producing doctors who can serve patients.
The most disappointing response came from Penn medical school, which sprinted for political cover. Dean J. Larry Jameson and Senior Vice Dean Suzanne Rose sent a letter to students and faculty that is a case study in progressive correctness:
“Please know that the views expressed by Dr. Goldfarb in this column reflect his personal opinions and do not reflect the values of the Perelman School of Medicine,” the letter said. “We deeply value inclusion and diversity as fundamental to effective health care delivery, creativity, discovery, and life-long learning. We are committed to ensuring a rigorous and comprehensive medical education that includes examination of the many social and cultural issues that influence health, from violence within communities to changes in the environment around us.”
Maybe we should begin to wonder about the quality of the doctors who graduate from Penn. Patients want an accurate diagnosis, not a lecture on social justice or climate change. Thanks to Dr. Goldfarb for having the courage to call out the politicization of medical education that should worry all Americans.

Post this in the medical student forum. I'd be curious to see the kind of discussion it stimulates.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
Top