A DVM Regrets Going to Vet School

[fromthebox]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Minnerbelle, My parents have been legally separated since 1999. My father will not sign the divorce paperwork because it is a tax break for him. Do you really think that this just means I don't like my father and that I deserve less aid for going it alone by choice rather than move in with him and pursue a degree in a subject which I had no interest?

As to the financial aid system, I don't believe I called it horrible. My response to DSmoody23 was pointing out that there are other types of financial hardship beside grant money running out or not covering everything. He suggested we try living on grants alone, I suggested he try holding down a job while in school and not qualifying for aid and I got pilloried. I think aid is important but that we are much too arbitrary about who qualifies and too lenient about what it can be used for. But if I'm going to be told "try living On a grant for once instead of off daddy's money if it's so easy you do it" I'm going to defend myself, as I most assuredly did not live off my parents.

 

[Wubbles]

The whole "not considered independent until you're 24" thing made me have to wait until I was 24 to start college. I was accepted to all the schools I applied to straight out of high school (nothing fancy, just state universities) but as soon as I got my financial aid offers it became clear, there was no way I could go to school because my parents made too much for me to qualify for any aid. "Too much" didn't mean we were living well-to-do...it was my mom and step-dad working overtime in blue-collar jobs to support 4 kids, a mortgage, 2 car payments, bills, etc. So I got a job, moved away from home, didn't receive any help from my parents, and waited it out until I was deemed officially "independent". Now I magically qualify for state grants and federal loans. 🙄
Yeah, I felt like crap seeing my high school friends graduate college in '08 while I was slaving away at Wal-Mart.....but now that I look back at it, I'm glad that I was forced to see what "real life" is like. So I'm getting a late start now but I'm way more mature than I was at 17/18 and I also have a clear idea of what I want in life compared to then.
The financial aid system is definitely not perfect, that's for sure. But if college is something that is important to somebody, they'll find a way to get there...even if it's having to wait or going part-time.

 

[Dsmoody23]

Minnerbelle, My parents have been legally separated since 1999. My father will not sign the divorce paperwork because it is a tax break for him. Do you really think that this just means I don't like my father and that I deserve less aid for going it alone by choice rather than move in with him and pursue a degree in a subject which I had no interest?

As to the financial aid system, I don't believe I called it horrible. My response to DSmoody23 was pointing out that there are other types of financial hardship beside grant money running out or not covering everything. He suggested we try living on grants alone, I suggested he try holding down a job while in school and not qualifying for aid and I got pilloried. I think aid is important but that we are much too arbitrary about who qualifies and too lenient about what it can be used for. But if I'm going to be told "try living On a grant for once instead of off daddy's money if it's so easy you do it" I'm going to defend myself, as I most assuredly did not live off my parents.

Those comments were made in response to another entirely different post.

The point was:

Financial aid makes it easier for a low income person to go to school. It doesn't make it easy by a long shot. Sometimes it simply makes it possible. I'd be 45 years old by the time I finished my degree if I was trying to squeak by, paying for single classes whenever there was enough money to afford it. Which would be benefiting absolutely no-one.

If you're not scamming, it's a pretty rough ride. They subsidize your tuition and books. The cutoff for a full grant is around 13,000 dollars in annual income, which is about 5,000 dollars below the lowest estimate of the poverty line.

And I've honestly never met anyone who was trying to run the system. The grants are paid directly into tuition, so it's not like they're handing you a blank check you can buy meth and iphones with. Equally, those grants become debts if you drop out or fail to maintain your GPA. It's an investment that the Department of Education makes in your future performance, and they fully expect to be repaid, one way or another.

 

[Armymutt25A]

The whole notion of a tuition cap is the product of incomplete thinking. Every vet school, except Western, is a public institution, and therefore answers to the state government. Believe it or not, but we don't pay the full cost of a veterinary education. In NC, the state gives each student a scholarship to the tune of about $40K. I was pleasantly surprised to find out that some of the costs associated with vet school had been eliminated in my decade away from academia. Among the purchases required for a new vet student in '98 was a microscope. Not exactly a cheap item, and definitely a pain in the ass to have to lug around.

I don't understand all the complaints about the cost of vet school. It's a personal choice, bottom line. No one is forcing you to go to school. Every choice involves costs and benefits - it's up to you to determine whether they balance out. It's a bit like someone getting a degree in basket weaving and then complaining that no one will pay them enough to pay back their loans and have a great life.

 

[StartingoverVet]

The whole notion of a tuition cap is the product of incomplete thinking. Every vet school, except Western, is a public institution, and therefore answers to the state government. Believe it or not, but we don't pay the full cost of a veterinary education.

This is quite a flawed notion (ignoring the fact that Penn, Tufts and others are private and although may get some funds from government, certainly don't answer to them).

It kind of depends on what you define as the "full cost". If you mean the full cost of running a research institution that has state of the art facilities then perhaps you are right. But honestly, if the schools mission were solely to provide the best vet education at the best price, I kind of doubt we would need a dozen biochem lecturers, and a dozen physiology lecturers, and ten nutrition lecturers, etc etc. Most (admittedly not all) schools exist for prestige and research, and the education part comes in a distant 3rd (or 4th to running the clinics here at Penn). THAT is where most of our money goes.

Now, that doesn't mean I see a tuition cap as a viable alternative. Just clarifying a common misconception about the cost of our education. If there were truly a push to make vet school more affordable, there is no doubt that it could be accomplished! Unfortunately, there is no will to do so. Nobody wants to downsize their fiefdom, nobody wants to make painful decisions, and as long as people continue to make the "personal choice" that armymutt mentions (attending vet school), nobody will!

 

[Armymutt25A]

I don't think that education in the form that most people think of it has ever been the main mission of any university in history. The best summation I've heard is that they exist to create and disseminate knowledge. Note that create has primacy in the description. We had a lecturer the other day talk about careers in academia. Basically, the faculty divides its time between teaching, research, and clinics. So, you don't have a dozen lecturers, you have a dozen people who spend their time either creating knowledge or bringing in money for the university in the hospital (while most likely also creating knowledge) when not teaching. You could certainly educate vets for less money, but at what cost? Our student services dept consists of 5 personnel. Each animal unit is managed by 1 person. The library has a staff of 3. Those are the only people not involved in actively bringing money into the school in the form of research grants. We could cut out the technology and go back to the classroom of the 90s. How many of you would go for writing out all of your notes again and no Power Point? I didn't learn as much, as fast, as I do now, when I had to focus mostly on writing down information. I now have the slides in front of me and can actively listen and make short notes. How long do you think it takes for the school to recoup the cost of a $4 million technology suite for the school?

It's hard to wrap your head around it when dealing with such a large and complex model. It's easier to use something smaller. I'm a scuba instructor. My shop charges a little more than the competition, and a lot more than a shop closer to the beach. We do things a little different to give you a better value. Everyone ends up with the same certificate at the end, but generally our students are better trained and more competent, comfortable, and confident in the water.

 

[nyanko]

I would hope that most people are aware that faculty members do much more than just teach.

 

[LetItSnow]

I don't understand all the complaints about the cost of vet school. It's a personal choice, bottom line. No one is forcing you to go to school.

I think that's overly simplistic. "Complaints" - hopefully managed constructively - are an important way for students to exert influence into the tuition picture.

For instance, I don't think it's out of line for me to argue that it is unfair to increase the vet tuition by far, far more than the undergrad increase; purely because the undergrad increase is capped and so the cost gets moved over to the professional schools. You call that a 'complaint', I call that giving feedback to the university that I think the burden of increase ought to be equally shared. (Though frankly, I suspect the university agreed with this one anyway.)

Or, when the school requires me to pay an extra $14,400 over the next four years in health insurance costs because they won't waiver me with another carrier because the other carrier doesn't fall into the right category (member-based instead of employer-based); I think that's a valid complaint, and one that NEEDS to be made else the school will never move from their policy. Complaints like that are what help us exert some influence on the school to control costs.

It sounds like you're suggesting that we should just shut up, pay our tuition, and never utter a word about the cost; if we don't like it, we should go away. Most of these institutions are public, and as such deserve input from both within and without. Both as a taxpayer and a student I have every right to make suggestions about how I think tuition should be controlled at my school.

 

[StartingoverVet]

I don't think that education in the form that most people think of it has ever been the main mission of any university in history. The best summation I've heard is that they exist to create and disseminate knowledge. Note that create has primacy in the description. We had a lecturer the other day talk about careers in academia. Basically, the faculty divides its time between teaching, research, and clinics. So, you don't have a dozen lecturers, you have a dozen people who spend their time either creating knowledge or bringing in money for the university in the hospital (while most likely also creating knowledge) when not teaching. You could certainly educate vets for less money, but at what cost? Our student services dept consists of 5 personnel. Each animal unit is managed by 1 person. The library has a staff of 3. Those are the only people not involved in actively bringing money into the school in the form of research grants. We could cut out the technology and go back to the classroom of the 90s. How many of you would go for writing out all of your notes again and no Power Point? I didn't learn as much, as fast, as I do now, when I had to focus mostly on writing down information. I now have the slides in front of me and can actively listen and make short notes. How long do you think it takes for the school to recoup the cost of a $4 million technology suite for the school?

It's hard to wrap your head around it when dealing with such a large and complex model. It's easier to use something smaller. I'm a scuba instructor. My shop charges a little more than the competition, and a lot more than a shop closer to the beach. We do things a little different to give you a better value. Everyone ends up with the same certificate at the end, but generally our students are better trained and more competent, comfortable, and confident in the water.

You are confusing the issue. There is the cost to achieve the goals of the institution and the costs to educate vets. They are not the same, even if there is overlap. Why should vet students bear the brunt of the cost of the "educational" institution that is mainly benefiting society.

To the degree that vet schools need to create and disseminate knowledge beyond their students, then those who benefit from that knowledge need to bear that cost.

The use of technology is really a different issue (although I would argue, you overstate the benefits). Clearly those are costs to fine tune the education process.

Of course I am aware that the faculty spends time in research, I mentioned in my post, but how many researchers does it take to educate a lightbulb, I mean a student? The institution gains prestige by adding as many top researchers as possible.... does that mean it is in the student's benefit? Sometimes yes, but many times no. Either way, it is a very expensive way to go about the process.

ED: Final point ....I went to a top research institution in my field undergrad.....I can say that I honestly so no added benefit learning there compared to others who went to non-research liberal arts colleges. Where's the benefit? The school is great, has a great reputation, but in the end the learning process is secondary to the research... same is true at most vet schools, so you have to ask yourself, how much of the faculty is there for the benefit of the student? How much for the benefit of the school? How much for the benefit of society at large? Then maybe you can answer who should pay for those faculty!

 

[Ben and Me]

The research department that I'm familiar with is completely self-sufficient thru grants, etc.

It isn't the first 3 years of veterinary school that are driving up the cost of our education.

The real expense comes in educating 4th year students, where the teacher:student ratio needs to be more like 5:1 than 125:1. Additionally, academic hospitals are increasingly competing with tertiary care private practices (many of which are owned and run by former students)...which can often offer lower costs and better customer service to clients.

I had to call around to 3 places in Raleigh before vet school to price out a surgery for a client. Cheapest option: Surgical referral center with 2 surgeons on staff. Lower overhead, better customer service (you know you're getting the same doctor every time you visit). NCSU was 2nd cheapest, followed by large tertiary private practice.

That client went to the cheapest option...which I'd imagine is the case in many other areas as well. The vet schools are no longer the "only game in town" and are losing caseload as a result...which our tuition dollars are subsidizing.

 

[Minnerbelle]

ED: Final point ....I went to a top research institution in my field undergrad.....I can say that I honestly so no added benefit learning there compared to others who went to non-research liberal arts colleges. Where's the benefit? The school is great, has a great reputation, but in the end the learning process is secondary to the research... same is true at most vet schools, so you have to ask yourself, how much of the faculty is there for the benefit of the student? How much for the benefit of the school? How much for the benefit of society at large? Then maybe you can answer who should pay for those faculty!

Don't mean to put words in your mouth if this is not what you were trying to say, but I don't think a non-research liberal arts college is necessarily a cheaper model for "educating" a student. The cost per student per year for the liberal arts college I attended back in 2008 was over $80k (half of that was subsidized for each student by the school's endowment + alum donations). I would say that yes, the faculty were there to focus on teaching, but that when you have an institution that runs solely for 2400 or so undergrads with a low student/faculty ratio, there's going to be a higher cost per student. I would imagine that it wouldn't be all that different for a vet school on a similar model. We would still need a hefty number of professors to teach, and I'm not sure each of them would be able to adequately teach enough for a 100% teaching appointment... so we might as well have them serve another service where they would generate alternative sources of income other than tuition.

 

[nyanko]

To the degree that vet schools need to create and disseminate knowledge beyond their students, then those who benefit from that knowledge need to bear that cost.

Most veterinary research is going to benefit the field of veterinary medicine. I feel like it's very shortsighted to act like this does not include the students. Additionally, a good deal of the actual research is funded not by the institution, but by outside grants. The researchers are mostly bringing money in.

Of course I am aware that the faculty spends time in research, I mentioned in my post, but how many researchers does it take to educate a lightbulb, I mean a student? The institution gains prestige by adding as many top researchers as possible.... does that mean it is in the student's benefit? Sometimes yes, but many times no. Either way, it is a very expensive way to go about the process.

This doesn't make sense. A prolific, prestigious researcher does bring in money so yes, it is to the student's benefit.

so you have to ask yourself, how much of the faculty is there for the benefit of the student? How much for the benefit of the school? How much for the benefit of society at large? Then maybe you can answer who should pay for those faculty!

I'm sorry SOV, but this is a ridiculous and mildly insulting thing to say. Maybe it doesn't benefit you in some fields, but I would absolutely rather be taught by those actively engaged in clinical and research activities than someone just getting paid to teach. You know what type of professors have no practical experience within their fields? Law school professors. And we all know how good that situation is.

 

[sunnex3]

I'm pretty sure the entire point of financial aid is to ensure that virtually anyone can go to school, especially if they can't afford it. Potential and future contribution to society isn't best predicted by how much money your parents make.

Your impression that financial aid is some kind of handout is ridiculous. The vast majority of financial aid is in the form of loans that are paid back at a higher amount than they were borrowed at.

Moreso, I think it would be a fun experiment for you to see if you can coast through the next year of your studies using only grant and scholarship money. Where I live, in Pennsylvania, a full Pell grant, PHEAA grant and educational assistance grants will total you out around 5500 dollars. Starting in-state tuition for the cheapest state school is 7900, before books and fees. Then you have to find a way to live and eat while taking 12+ credits a semester and staying above a 3.0.

If it's so easy, you do it.

Financial aid grants and loans are the single, solitary way that lower income citizens get a shot at improving their financial situation through education.

Calling it 'socialism' indicates that you don't understand what socialism is, and that you have a marginal (if that) understanding of the financial aid system .

dsmoody i totally agree with you there.

sorry, but i worked my butt off in college even though i had maxed out my scholarship and grant opportunities through my school AND maxed out my federal loans. on top of that, i maxed out my work study while being a full time student and pulled off great grades. i take offense to anyone who sas that financial aid is a HANDOUT. i'm already deep in debt from undergrad even before i start vet school.

 

[Bill59]

It isn't the first 3 years of veterinary school that are driving up the cost of our education.

The real expense comes in educating 4th year students, where the teacher:student ratio needs to be more like 5:1 than 125:1.

That's an excellent point. That's why if you want to run a vet school to make money, you don't have teaching hospitals; for example, Western (Ca), Island schools. Hiring someone to lecture in a classroom is relatively cheap, they don't even need to be full time. And it's mostly fixed cost, not variable cost, so it doesn't cost much more to have 150 students compared to 50 students.

What's expensive is running teaching hospitals, with all the specialists and fancy equipment like MRIs and equine surgery suites. As the financial pressure on schools increases, we will probably see more and more schools scale back on teaching hospitals.

The big question though, is how does this affect the quality of education.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

The quality of veterinary education is pretty mediocre in the first place today because the DVM degree lacks any focus on obtaining proficiency in any one area and at the very high cost of 8 yrs of time and tuition. Recent attempts to correct this with the educational symposium (NAVMEC) reached the wrong conclusions on still maintaining multispecies clinical expertise as a goal of the DVM program, an outdated notion that needs to be killed, burned and buried.

Educational quality of the DVM program must be measured as to how well it meets the demands of the customer using veterinary services and not what academics in veterinary medicine determine to be the "ideal" or the "best" according to their preferences. It must be focused on current market demands and not what has worked in the past.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Educational quality of the DVM program must be measured as to how well it meets the demands of the customer using veterinary services and not what academics in veterinary medicine determine to be the "ideal" or the "best" according to their preferences. It must be focused on current market demands and not what has worked in the past.

How would the demands of vet services customers be measured exactly to span the entire profession? And how would that be reflected in changes to the curriculum outside of limited licensure?

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

What's expensive is running teaching hospitals, with all the specialists and fancy equipment like MRIs and equine surgery suites.

But they must make a hell of a lot of money off the fourth years. They are essentially endless free technicians/assistants/janitors/etc. Not only that, but they actually pay the hospital to work (tuition)!

I know, I know it's more complicated than that. But honestly, so much of the support comes from the students, and I think they are under-appreciated. There is no way any veterinary teaching hospital could run if they had to replace all the students with paid assistants/techs.

 

[justavet]

But honestly, so much of the support comes from the students.

Are you speakign from specific numebrs and if so where'd you find them?

I've been trying to figure this one out. How do we know how much money comes from students vs state vs research vs gifts? I don't think my school ever explicitly told me, and it never occurred to me to ask. But I think it needs to be looked at; if you want to know what's important follow the money, right?

 

[breenie]

That's an excellent point. That's why if you want to run a vet school to make money, you don't have teaching hospitals; for example, Western (Ca), Island schools. Hiring someone to lecture in a classroom is relatively cheap, they don't even need to be full time. And it's mostly fixed cost, not variable cost, so it doesn't cost much more to have 150 students compared to 50 students.

What's expensive is running teaching hospitals, with all the specialists and fancy equipment like MRIs and equine surgery suites. As the financial pressure on schools increases, we will probably see more and more schools scale back on teaching hospitals.

The big question though, is how does this affect the quality of education.

But aren't a lot of schools scaling UP!? Purdue is building a new small animal hospital, Kansas has new stuff (right?), Auburn is building new... I think there are a few others who are doing massive upgrades/remodels. What's going on here?

 

[Trilt]

But aren't a lot of schools scaling UP!? Purdue is building a new small animal hospital, Kansas has new stuff (right?), Auburn is building new... I think there are a few others who are doing massive upgrades/remodels. What's going on here?

Brand new teaching hospital here at NC State...

Are you speakign from specific numebrs and if so where'd you find them?

I think she was talking about how many man hours are provided for free (actually, that students pay to do) during the fourth year... assuming a class size of 80 students, times 40 hours a week (and the average is probably more, actually, even including internships away from the hospital). That would be 3600 hours of work... even paid only minimum wage (in NC), that'd be $24,000 of work per week provided by students.

 

[Bill59]

There is no way any veterinary teaching hospital could run if they had to replace all the students with paid assistants/techs.

I'm gonna disagree on that one. Give me a couple of good techs instead of students and I could see twice as many cases as I do now with students ... and I would be out of the hospital by 5 pm every day. I've worked in a private specialty practice and in vet teaching hospitals and the efficiency is night and day in favor of private practice.

 

[Bill59]

But aren't a lot of schools scaling UP!?

Yes, they are also scaling up on tuition. A lot of the established schools are building bigger hospitals because that's how they've always done things. Also fundraising is easier you have a new building to name after someone.

I just don't think the current curve of ever increasing tuition is sustainable. At some point that's going to have to stop. So the schools are going to have to rethink how they do things because they are NOT going to get more state funding. Taxpayers are simply not in the mood -- despite tax rates being the lowest in 50 years.

 

[LetItSnow]

I just don't think the current curve of ever increasing tuition is sustainable.

It's sustainable for quite a while - so long as you are ok with your vet school population moving more and more to the wealthy end of the population and the overall quality of student eroding as the applicant pool gets reduced.

I'm dubious about the "give me a couple of good techs" conclusion. You might very well be more efficient with a few good techs (I'll buy that part of your argument, especially if you're speaking from experience); but efficiency - as important as it is - isn't everything. If you can lower your costs significantly enough (by, say, employing a workforce that actually pays you to be there), you can be relatively inefficient and still come out ahead of where you would have been with the smaller, paid (but more efficient) workforce.

I'm not saying you're necessarily wrong: I am saying that I'm not ready to buy your argument based on efficiency alone. I've been in the business world for the better part of 20 years and I can think of a half a dozen major projects where we've consciously opted for an inefficient process simply because the cost of (or loss from) the inefficiency didn't outweigh the cost to do it "right". That's not at all an unusual situation.

So the schools are going to have to rethink how they do things because they are NOT going to get more state funding. Taxpayers are simply not in the mood -- despite tax rates being the lowest in 50 years.

True that.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I'm gonna disagree on that one. Give me a couple of good techs instead of students and I could see twice as many cases as I do now with students ... and I would be out of the hospital by 5 pm every day. I've worked in a private specialty practice and in vet teaching hospitals and the efficiency is night and day in favor of private practice.

I see your point, but I highly doubt that techs will be prepared to work the number of hours that students do, or pull 24-36 non-stop shifts, etc.

The difference is that in private practice, there is a higher percentage of outpatients. Therefore, less manpower required.

Sure, it would be more efficient with a few techs versus a bunch of students, but how much money does the average private practice, even a specialty practice, take in versus a large teaching hospital? Teaching hospitals additionally have large numbers of surgeries and very bad, chronic disease cases that need intense monitoring. I agree, sometimes having students around can slow the work considerably (no offense at all to you guys - we do like teaching you), but considering the amount of inpatients, the extremely complicated diagnostic needs, the intake number, etc.....I think having them as a "workforce" is necessary for teaching hospitals.

 

[Armymutt25A]

The quality of veterinary education is pretty mediocre in the first place today because the DVM degree lacks any focus on obtaining proficiency in any one area and at the very high cost of 8 yrs of time and tuition. Recent attempts to correct this with the educational symposium (NAVMEC) reached the wrong conclusions on still maintaining multispecies clinical expertise as a goal of the DVM program, an outdated notion that needs to be killed, burned and buried.

Educational quality of the DVM program must be measured as to how well it meets the demands of the customer using veterinary services and not what academics in veterinary medicine determine to be the "ideal" or the "best" according to their preferences. It must be focused on current market demands and not what has worked in the past.

To reach a level that would match the proficiency of someone in a single species while at the same time matching the public perception of a veterinarian would require an exponentially greater amount of education. Veterinarians are generalists, even as specialists. Let's say we start breaking the education down into different species. Now you've got a graduate who is an expert on swine, but isn't qualified to work on a dog. Say that the swine market dries up in an area. Now you have a DVM who either can't work or has to move. Focusing on current market demands is not the best plan. Preparing for future markets is. Trying to get vet med and human med at the same level is a fool's errand. You'd take two years of anatomy to accomplish what we do in a semester if you wanted to get to the level of familiarity that a physician has with a human body. It's not feasible. I personally find the idea of graduating with some knowledge of several species to be more attractive. After spending the last 5 years as an officer, I've seen the value of having knowledge across a wide spectrum of specialties within one's field.

 

[Dsmoody23]

After spending the last 5 years as an officer, I've seen the value of having knowledge across a wide spectrum of specialties within one's field.

In case no-one was aware, Armymutt25 is in the Army.

 

[twelvetigers]

In case no one was aware, dsmoody is a smartass.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Dsmoody brings a lounge quality to the prevet forum

 

[twelvetigers]

But that's like the green bean juice going over into my mashed potatoes. I like them both (here and there), but separately.

 

[libster06]

I've worked in a private specialty practice and in vet teaching hospitals and the efficiency is night and day in favor of private practice.

Derr... that's why it's a teaching hospital. Of course it's going to be inefficient, and slow and less than ideal than a hospital in which all the doctors have been at it for 25 years. That's what its there for. If we all got put into cookie cutter small animal practices where they saw mainly dogs and cats and did mostly only spays, neuters, and dentals (ie: the job I worked this summer), there would be a lot more efficiency gained in a shorter time span, given that the cases weren't as complicated as the referral cases seen at teaching hospitals.

Not to mention specialty practice frickin spoils you. I was out by 5 too everyday, which NEVER happens in regular private practice.

But that's like the green bean juice going over into my mashed potatoes. I like them both (here and there), but separately.

Gross.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

Armymutt25A, the current education is based on 40-50 yrs ago when the existing knowledge basis was much smaller and needed knowledge basis for success in practice was also much smaller. It worked then but does not work now as the level of expertise expected and that will be paid for by the customer using a veterinarian's services is much higher.

For knowledge to be effective in an economy it must be specialized. That is basic economics 101 since at least the Industrial Revolution. Specialized knowledge exists in individuals who now must cooperate in group effort for the most part to be productive. You should know that from being in the Army as there is the infantry, artillery, armored cavalry in combat arms. On the Army healthcare side, we had the Nurse Corps, Veterinary Corps, Dental Corps, Medical Corps (MDs), the Medical Service Corps with multiple other health and environmental specialists.

The advanced economy of the 21st century is built upon the "knowledge worker" who posesses specialized knowledge in order to be effective. The idea that 3 years of general education across multiple species and one year of roundabout clinical training across multiple species prepares anyone adequately for the present or future is just another figment of the veterinary academics teaching you at NCSU who are employed there because they are super-specialized even beyond an area of practice like food animal or companion animal or are a scientific specialist in physiology or immunology. Their argument is both sophistry and ignores the economic reality of the current world.

When I speak of customers, I am talking about the people who actually use the services of a veterinarian or would hire a veterinarian . And the reality is that what a pet owner wants and needs from veterinary services is vastly different from what would be required from a veterinarian in food animal practice or working in biomedical research or public health. There is no way the current curriculum or proposed NAVMEC curriculum even comes close to satisfying these different customer's needs for veterinary services. The "one size fits all" model is no longer viable.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

I am not the only veterinarian who thinks this way. Even the Dean Emeritus of UTenn, Michael Blackwell thought similarly. Vet students might want to check out these articles:

Beyond Philosophical Differences: The Future Training of Veterinarians.
Michael Blackwell
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education; 28 (3) 2001

Professing Change
Peter Eyre (Dean Emeritus of Virginia Maryland)
JVME 28(1) 2001

Engineering Veterinary Education
Peter Eyre
JVME 29(4) 2002

Veterinary Education: time to abandon the cult of coverage
R.E.W. Halliwell (professor emeritus of clinical studies at Edinburgh)
Canadian Vet. Journal Vol 40, June 1999; pp408-410

 

[CorporateFatCat]

When I speak of customers, I am talking about the people who actually use the services of a veterinarian or would hire a veterinarian . And the reality is that what a pet owner wants and needs from veterinary services is vastly different from what would be required from a veterinarian in food animal practice or working in biomedical research or public health. There is no way the current curriculum or proposed NAVMEC curriculum even comes close to satisfying these different customer's needs for veterinary services. The "one size fits all" model is no longer viable.

Shouldn't we be taught to practice the highest standards of medicine? If we were to learn just what the customer wants, I'm afraid the quality of medicine will suffer greatly. Sure, it's disappointing to learn in such an ideal environment and then have to scale things down for "real life" practices. I would just be sad to think the profession will stop moving forward because our clients only want what's cheapest. I understand that money is the problem, you don't have to tell me that. As medical professionals, it will be our job to provide the best medicine to our patients.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

Professing Change
Peter Eyre (Dean Emeritus of Virginia Maryland)
JVME 28(1) 2001

Engineering Veterinary Education
Peter Eyre
JVME 29(4) 2002

I gotta admit. I heart Eyre (I went to Virginia-Maryland and have met him several times). He's an insightful individual and a very sincere person.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

Corporate FatCat;
The point I make about talking to customers being different is not centered solely on medical standards or finances. I too abhor the "race to the bottom" mentality that I see creeping in to small animal veterinary practice. What I mean is figuring out what other "non tangible" valuation factors, (for lack of a better term), that influence why the customer(ie employer)pays a veterinarian to provide services versus another veterinarian or even a non veterinarian. Again successfully marketing the veterinary profession depends on understanding what valuation our customers(employers) make about our services, both in the clinical realm and non clinical realms. The clinical realm of veterinary medicine is under assault currently from chiropractic to expanding the definition of animal husbandry to include teeth floating and reproductive services. Veterinary school keep trumpeting non clinical avenues but they really have not looked at what those non clinical employers want. For example, someone with a BS/MS in Food science is better qualified for jobs in the food safety area than any DVM period. I know this from personal experience as doing sanitary inspections of food plants in the Army in the Veterinary Corp. Our warrant officers often had years of experience as enlisted food inspectors and then had BS and often MS degrees in food science. Their level of knowledge in the area dwarfed every DVMs without additional training/education in the area. Again, trying to train you to do a little bit of everything inevitably leads to broad based mediocrity. Its a point that is brought up in most of the articles I have cited. Excellence earns profits.

WTF: Dr Eyre has been busy writing some excellent letters to JAVMA this year about his misgivings on the NAVMEC conclusions. He has been trying to improve veterinary education since the late 1980s when the PEW Report was first being debated in academia. There are few like him who understand how much veterinary medicine must abandon old ways and innovate in order to remain relevant.

 

[2CatMatt]

@JosephKnechtDVM,

What are your thoughts on the move to tracking students in the 2nd or 3rd year that many schools are beginning to implement? Is this in response to some of the concerns you posed? Do you think it will have any effect? As a pre-vet still deciding on which schools to apply to, I'm curious whether those vets who went to a school with tracking feel like it gave them better preparation for the specific field they were entering.

 

[WhtsThFrequency]

I'm curious whether those vets who went to a school with tracking feel like it gave them better preparation for the specific field they were entering.

Yes. I'm extremely happy I tracked, and I think it gave my residency application a lot more weight because I had extra opportunities in both classroom and clinical settings (e.g. only had to take one small animal surg rotation, and was able to take pathology rotations instead, etc).

 

[alliecat44]

There are many occasions on this forum where I've stood on my soapbox favoring tracking. This is yet another one of them. 🙂

I think Joseph is completely correct on all counts here--and to whomever implied that learning about multiple species all four years in some way makes you a more excellent doctor...no, no it really doesn't. Sure, it's interesting (to a point) to learn stuff about species you'll never work on....but that interest level in no way justifies all of the stuff you are NOT learning about the species you will be working on.

All for tracking over here, and even limited licensure (gasp!). 🙂

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

Tracking or declaring a major in a specific area of concentration is overdue by over twenty years. I have the proceedings of the Ninth Symposium on Veterinary Education (1987) where the topic of information overload and specializing was extensively discussed. This symposium led to the Pew National Veterinary Education Program and the report "Future Directions for Veterinary Education" in 1989 which stated that tracking or majoring in an area of veterinary medicine was a necessity. The current NAVMEC recommendations still keep multispecies expertise as part of their objectives.

Specializing/tracking/differentiating your veterinary education based on your interests/career plans is just plain economic common sense. If you have no aptitude/interest in an area of veterinary medicine, you waste your time (and education dollars) trying to learn about it in order to be the omnicompetent veterinarian of the "ideal veterinarian". Better to spend the time/money achieving excellence in an area that the market will pay for.
This is my number one regret about veterinary school in that the education I obtained did not provide the path/knowledge to achieve excellence in an area that would have built on my particular strengths and led to a more successful career. I have the veterinary equivalent of a "liberal arts" degree , a broad based education but with not enough depth of knowledge to be employed in some fields without an additional degree in that field. This is the reason why veterinarians(with the current DVM) have fewer opportunities in non-clinical fields.

 

[Bill59]

Derr... that's why it's a teaching hospital. .

Yeah, that's my point. Students are there to learn. It's a myth that teaching hospitals need students to run the hospital.

 

[Bill59]

I gotta admit. I heart Eyre (I went to Virginia-Maryland and have met him several times). He's an insightful individual and a very sincere person.

He's involved in the new school at Tennessee. It'll be interesting to see how that works out.

 

[nyanko]

On the tracking discussion, I still feel that it's important to be exposed to a lot of different species and specialties early on in the veterinary education, if for no other reason than you still have to actually figure out what your affinity really is. There are plenty of people who don't change their minds from application time, that is true. But having the basics presented within a broad scope encourages, to me, finding exactly what your niche within the field happens to be.

I find myself considering avenues that I never would have thought to consider coming in to vet school (for instance, I was very neurosciences-phobic coming in and now neurology is an area I'm strongly considering both clinically and research-wise).

I do think the funnel approach makes a whole lot of sense, though, and I'm glad that I do go to a school that tracks in the last 2 years of the curriculum and am ultimately in support of further specialization.

 

[Armymutt25A]

Corporate FatCat;
The point I make about talking to customers being different is not centered solely on medical standards or finances. I too abhor the "race to the bottom" mentality that I see creeping in to small animal veterinary practice. What I mean is figuring out what other "non tangible" valuation factors, (for lack of a better term), that influence why the customer(ie employer)pays a veterinarian to provide services versus another veterinarian or even a non veterinarian. Again successfully marketing the veterinary profession depends on understanding what valuation our customers(employers) make about our services, both in the clinical realm and non clinical realms. The clinical realm of veterinary medicine is under assault currently from chiropractic to expanding the definition of animal husbandry to include teeth floating and reproductive services. Veterinary school keep trumpeting non clinical avenues but they really have not looked at what those non clinical employers want. For example, someone with a BS/MS in Food science is better qualified for jobs in the food safety area than any DVM period. I know this from personal experience as doing sanitary inspections of food plants in the Army in the Veterinary Corp. Our warrant officers often had years of experience as enlisted food inspectors and then had BS and often MS degrees in food science. Their level of knowledge in the area dwarfed every DVMs without additional training/education in the area. Again, trying to train you to do a little bit of everything inevitably leads to broad based mediocrity. Its a point that is brought up in most of the articles I have cited. Excellence earns profits.

Of course the warrant have the expertise beyond that of a VCO - that's their job! Warrant Officer equals technical expert at one job. VCO equals capable of doing many jobs. I came form the Signal Corp, where we have 3 types of warrants. When asked a question outside of his narrow field of specialization, he usually knows about as much as a 2LT. He's just better able to BS the answer due to experience in the Army. I don't think that is where we should go with vet med. To expect someone to come out of a 4 year program and be an expert is unrealistic. To expect a student to pick a specialty on day one of school is equally unrealistic. No one comes out of school as an expert in anything, no matter what a piece of paper says. From your citation of the various branches, surely you understand that there are sub-specialties within them. A light infantryman is not going to have the same level of experience with a Bradley as a guy in a mech unit. I could take the best cannoneer in the 82nd and stick him in a Paladin. He'll get it to work eventually, but not at the same speed as a guy who's been working with them for years. I've seen what happens with you take a guy who spent his life in 3rd ID and make him the CSM of an airborne battalion.

Since you were a VCO, then you know the rules about pointing out problems. What's your solution? Who decides how to not flood the market with small animal vets? From a purely Army stand point, what do you do with an officer who only knows cattle? You can only spend so much time in CA - can't really think of any other place where vets see cattle. Can't stick him in the VTF - no service members bringing in a cow. So now, you have a CPT who's choice is staff for life or discharge. Can't really put him into the command pipeline - how's he going to evaluate providers at the VTF or the TOE units if he doesn't know dogs?

I don't think the vet profession can go the way of everyone's a specialist. Clients ask equine vets about their dogs and cats. Without the broad base of knowledge, you end up looking like an incompetent to clients who expect a vet to know about all animals. It's hard enough to get people to realize that vets do more than just provide medical care to animals - do you think they are going to understand when a vet can only take care of one species? You have to have a balance, and while I think the current pushing of internships and residencies and board certification is a little overboard, I think we are pretty much where the public expects us to be. The days where you can take off your graduation gown and hang out a shingle are long gone, but taking away the breadth of experience one gains in the current model is invaluable.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

ArmyMutt25A, I have pointed out articles in the previous post that point out tracking as the logical solution. These are from the deans who have been educatiing and running the institutions and realize that the current "generalist" model no longer meets societal needs for ever increasing higher levels of expertise that is expected of a graduate of a professional school. Peter Eyre and other tend to suggest a total 6 yr program that includes a basic science core of 2-3 yrs and then majoring in an area of concentration like companion animal or food animal or maybe biomedical/lab animal for the final 3 yrs. You are reasoning from the perspective that a veterinarian has to know about all species in order to retain the identity of a veterinarian. Again, that functioned well in the past when the expected level of expertise was lower and the needed knowledge base was much smaller. That reasoning is invalid now and will be in the future because as our knowledge advances it becomes more specialized. It is a basic economic fact. To continue to believe that all veterinarians should be trained in all aspects of animal medicine makes as much sense as saying every graduate of an engineering school needs to be familiar with the basics of civil, mechanical, chemical, electrical, mining and aerospace engineering because the industry they work in might change or go under and they then could just switch to another field of engineering. It is not that easy. I have talked to two veterinarians (1970s era) who switched from large animal to small animal. One was on the academic track in equine surgery and when she decided to leave that life she was legally able to practice on small animals but did not have the depth of knowledge needed and had to apprentice herself to an experienced SA vet in order to become an effective SA vet. Similar story for a LA vet in Montana who mainly did cattle and then sold his practice when he moved to a larger MT city to start a practice with his new wife a recent graduate. He had to teach himself as well as rely on his wife for help in small animal medicine. As you have just started NCSU, you do not have the critical experience to evaluate the education you will get until you start applying it and then learn what your quality and depth of knowledge is. Also if you do not contunually use and apply the knowledge in a field, you tend to lose the use of it. "Use it or lose it"

The veterinary corps in the Army is now part of the Public Health Command and thus no longer has a separate command structure that VCOs can advance upward. Also as part of the PHC, some of the veterinary corps roles are being civilianized at the local installation level especially in providing animal medcine to servicemember's pets and also military working dogs. The air force veterinary corps went though a similar transition in the early 1980's which ended up with Vet Corps being the only provider of animal medicine services to Dept of Defense. So there will probably be fewer veterinarians in the military if the trend continues because public health/food inspection can be done by others again with greater depth of knowledge than a DVM without the requisite training in that area. These things are happening now. Adapt to the world or become irrelevant. And do not believe everything they tell you in veterinary school.

 

[Armymutt25A]

You keep saying that the Army is replacing green suiters with civilians in DVM positions, but I have yet to see the evidence. Outside of the VTF, there's no room for civilians. They don't jump out of planes and they aren't a part of TOE units. I also don't believe you'll get a civilian DVM to spend a year deployed for less than you would a soldier. Likewise, even under the PHC, specific battalions are going to remain designated as VM, commanded by a DVM. All the available information points to the VC transitioning in a manner similar to the transformation into the BDE combat team that the non-medical part of the Army did a few years ago. You don't find artillery officers commanding infantry battalions. The AF has no requirement for a vet command, as their doctrine operates in a completely different environment. Remember that everything was focused toward fighting the Warsaw Pact from bases that we already had. Now they just piggyback off the Army for the basic services.
You seem to think that I believe anything I'm told. I take this as a personal attack on my integrity. The fact is that I wouldn't be alive if I was the type of person to take information at face value. I may be new in the vet game, but it doesn't take a wizard to realize the value of a broad based education. I don't know anything about engineering, but I'm willing to bet that there are a lot more jobs available to a EE than a bovine vet. You aren't comparing the two at the appropriate echelon. After a quick search, I've found at least 5 areas of specialization for an electrical engineer. You can't get a degree in them, but you can focus your curriculum around them, just as you can with the current model of vet school.

 

[Lab Vet]

This is an interesting discussion (regarding specialization, tracking, etc.) and I appreciate the variety of perspectives that have been shared.

Having not attending veterinary school as of yet, I'm not in a position to comment as to whether or not the current organization structure of a DVM curriculum best prepares students for the complex professional demands that they'll face upon graduation.

As I'm fairly certain of the path I'd like to take post-graduation (lab animal), I also recognize that people change their minds upon exposure to different fields. That's what school (especially at the introductory level) is all about. I think it's a bit unrealistic to expect a student at 21 years old to know, beyond doubt, exactly what they want to do for the duration of their professional career. For some, this may be exactly how their career progresses. They set a goal, attend veterinary school, and follow the exact plan they had set for themselves when they were 20. This trajectory is not, however, true for all- and I would venture to say likely not true for most (this certainly hasn't been the case with my career).

Although I support tracking and the opportunities it presents for students to obtain additional, specialized exposure to their chosen field of interest (at least at the time), I also recognize the chief importance of having a broad understanding of one's field. Although I'm not yet a clinician, I can speak from experience in other realms of science. Specialization without context can be a dangerous road to travel- not only from a technical standpoint, but also for lack of appreciation for the work your colleagues (in different areas of vet med, or any other discipline for that matter) perform. I don't mean lack of appreciation in terms of 'you don't think they perform good/important work,' rather, I mean that you don't necessarily see the commonality between your area of specialization and theirs. It reminds me of students on these boards who don't enjoy/want to take classes unrelated to vet med- like humanities and social sciences area a waste of time. All students are busy in their academic endeavors, especially those aiming to attend professional school. However, being so myopic that you can't appreciate stepping out of the science box and learning things about completely different disciplines can't be a good thing. A generalist education makes us all well rounded.

Again, I may be a bit out of my league here as I haven't yet attended (nor been accepted to vet school). However, can someone comment on what's flawed about the internship/residency program here in the US and abroad? Isn't this the way that specialization within vet med is typically obtained? Is the hesitation re: pursuing a residency related to the high debt load/low salary level associated with becoming a resident directly out of school? I always assumed that vet school was a generalist education, and that residencies were required to gain any specialization that a student sought.

As for me, I'm torn between pursuing tracking vs. non-tracking programs. I intend to apply to a split of both next year. On the one hand, I see the value in it for the reasons I stated above. On the other, I'm very much a 'forest' rather than 'leaves on a tree' kind of thinker. I want to gain exposure in fields that I'll likely never pursue personally (i.e. small animal emergency, food supply practice, etc.). Lab animal medicine is often described as 'the ultimate mixed animal practice, ' and this is certainly what I experienced during graduate school. Although the majority of biomedical research is conducted in rodent models, what about new directions of research being conducted in every major vertebrate clade, not to mention invertebrates. Who knows whether or not I'll be dealing with a cow for a research project one day? If that day comes, I'd like to have the confidence to say that I've at least been exposed and have a decent appreciation for the work a bovine practitioner performs.

Hope that I didn't step on anyone's toes here- that wasn't my intention. Just adding my 2 cents, and looking for some feedback on my thoughts/concerns.

 

[JosephKnechtDVM]

It has been a very interesting discussion and I have tried to provide some alternate viewpoints even from former veterinary school deans. I found one more that also discusses the need to change from a generalist model of education and licensing:

Reflections on the Future of Veterinary Medical Education
Keith Prasse (Dean Emeritus of UGA College of Veterinary Medicine)
Journal of Veterinary Medical Education 36(3) 2009

I believe the crux of the matter is that the "identity" of the generalist veterinarian has a very strong hold over the profession that prevents it from looking outside of itself and also understanding how the rules of economics and knowledge apply to itself. The scope of that problem would require another thread and a lot more outside reading integrating the problems of the veterinary profession with economic and management science. If anyone wants a reading list of papers and some good reading on management/economics that have influenced me, I will be glad to respond. However, for the next two weeks I will be away from regular internet access attending to some family issues.

 

[alliecat44]

After a quick search, I've found at least 5 areas of specialization for an electrical engineer. You can't get a degree in them, but you can focus your curriculum around them, just as you can with the current model of vet school.

Ummm, NO YOU CAN'T at many of the vet schools. Just FYI.

(Including the one that I attended, and I wasted countless hours and about $45K--before interest--studying species that absolutely will never apply to my career. And missed out on TONS of information on the species I WILL be working with. Not all of us are lucky enough to go to NCSU.)

 

[Armymutt25A]

Ummm, NO YOU CAN'T at many of the vet schools. Just FYI.

(Including the one that I attended, and I wasted countless hours and about $45K--before interest--studying species that absolutely will never apply to my career. And missed out on TONS of information on the species I WILL be working with. Not all of us are lucky enough to go to NCSU.)

Seems to me that if you view it as a waste, then you probably shouldn't have attended that program. Before I invest such a large amount of time and money, I'd damn sure check out the program to see if it matched my goals.

 

[alliecat44]

Seems to me that if you view it as a waste, then you probably shouldn't have attended that program. Before I invest such a large amount of time and money, I'd damn sure check out the program to see if it matched my goals.

What about your argument about being able to switch areas mid-career? Hmmm? you think that's better....

And also, FYI, not all of us have a choice where we go--sometimes we have to go where we're accepted. I was glad to get into any avma-accredited school after four application attempts.

I'm just letting YOU know that the vast majority of vet schools out there still do NOT offer the option of tracking.