I was browsing through the medical department at Harvard, Princeton, and the likes and not even a single Ivy League has an audiology program. Why is that?
Audiology & the Ivy Leagues
- Thread starter AuDboy
- Start date
Ten bucks says they get Speech-Language Pathology before they get Audiology.
- Joined
- Feb 27, 2011
- Messages
- 2
- Reaction score
- 0
http://www.masseyeandear.org/research/ent/eaton-peabody/
An affiliate of Harvard...though not a university program
An affiliate of Harvard...though not a university program
Eaton-Peabody is part of Havard and MIT, which have a joint PhD program in Speech and Hearing Bioscience and Technology http://web.mit.edu/shbt/. Students in this program have the option of getting a CCC-SLP through the MGH program in the process. There has been a push to do the same with audiology through Northeastern, but there have been issues with funding so far.
I interviewed for this program this past weekend, and am really hoping that if I get in, they can pull the AuD thing together!
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 0
Looks awesome! Hope you get in!!!!
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2009
- Messages
- 4
- Reaction score
- 0
Columbia used to have an audiology program, but it doesn't have one anymore.
I'm curious...are there any schools out there that are trying to start up an AuD program? Most likely a school that already has an SLP program. I'm getting the impression the demand for AuD programs is going to increase...applications were at all time high this year but it could've been the recession as well :shrugs:.
I would imagine that it would take time for a new AuD program to climb its way up the rankings so even if an Ivy starts up a program..it would take awhile for it to be considered strong despite it being an "Ivy". If that makes sense?
I think Columbia is the only Ivy that has even an SLP program...its not particularly highly ranked, I wonder why that is the case. Its in NYC and has a huge endowment. It attracts a lot of people for other things like law school and med school etc. Their teaching program is top notch.
I would imagine that it would take time for a new AuD program to climb its way up the rankings so even if an Ivy starts up a program..it would take awhile for it to be considered strong despite it being an "Ivy". If that makes sense?
I think Columbia is the only Ivy that has even an SLP program...its not particularly highly ranked, I wonder why that is the case. Its in NYC and has a huge endowment. It attracts a lot of people for other things like law school and med school etc. Their teaching program is top notch.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
When it comes to Audiology less schools is going to lead to better quality.
We have way too many audiology schools in this country! Remove some programs, increase the standards for admission, and put out better quality applicants and this will also help increase the pay by increasing the need.
Until we as a profession remove hearing aid dealers and raise our education standards we will continue to often make less than any other doctoral profession and less than speech language pathologists.
We have way too many audiology schools in this country! Remove some programs, increase the standards for admission, and put out better quality applicants and this will also help increase the pay by increasing the need.
Until we as a profession remove hearing aid dealers and raise our education standards we will continue to often make less than any other doctoral profession and less than speech language pathologists.
It was pretty difficult to get into the programs I applied to... We all work at being qualified and programs certainly don't accept everyone. Top AuD programs have an acceptance rate of 15%..before digging into the wait list. Its the same percentage at other top programs for nursing etc. I believe standards are high at most AuD programs because they all want the best possible students. Of course there are some that will take just about anyone...but we can say the same for OT, PT, SLP as well etc.
There are a few states that don't even have audiology programs. Shouldn't each state have at least one program to provide support to the surrounding community?
I think it would also help with exposure and that is what the profession lacks. I believe greater pay will come further along the line because more and more people will demand for it. At the program I will attend in the fall, most people have more than one job offer when they are done with school...places of work have to be competitive for the employees they want and the place to start is pay.
Also, I'm pretty sure there are fewer Audiology programs as opposed to PT, OT, MD, SLP etc...and the demand for audiologists will continue to grow with the baby boomer population and the population growth as a whole. So why call for less AuD programs? Plus more exposure to Audiology will make grad programs more competitive...that's why there are more and more applicants each year (despite a recession).
I do agree about the hearing aid dispensers, however. But disagree about everything else. I'm always down for a good debate
. Also, I'm curious what you mean by "not" being a qualified applicant.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
It was pretty difficult to get into the programs I applied to... We all work at being qualified and programs certainly don't accept everyone. Top AuD programs have an acceptance rate of 15%..before digging into the wait list. Its the same percentage at other top programs for nursing etc. I believe standards are high at most AuD programs because they all want the best possible students. Of course there are some that will take just about anyone...but we can say the same for OT, PT, SLP as well etc.
There are a few states that don't even have audiology programs. Shouldn't each state have at least one program to provide support to the surrounding community?
I think it would also help with exposure and that is what the profession lacks. I believe greater pay will come further along the line because more and more people will demand for it. At the program I will attend in the fall, most people have more than one job offer when they are done with school...places of work have to be competitive for the employees they want and the place to start is pay.
Also, I'm pretty sure there are fewer Audiology programs as opposed to PT, OT, MD, SLP etc...and the demand for audiologists will continue to grow with the baby boomer population and the population growth as a whole. So why call for less AuD programs? Plus more exposure to Audiology will make grad programs more competitive...that's why there are more and more applicants each year (despite a recession).
I do agree about the hearing aid dispensers, however. But disagree about everything else. I'm always down for a good debate
My state has 5 programs and it's not a large state. I also supervise students and have been to several different states and met hundreds of audiologists. I can tell you our profession needs a harder science curriculum. A job offer is not a yardstick for measurement of the success of profession. I could have several jobs tomorrow if I applied, but the pay would be low and the respect low. Our profession still has the stigma of being a profession for women who want some office work with time off to have kids and a family. Audiology unfortunately is still often viewed as a part time career. We have some horrible growing pains as a new doctoral level profession, but ours are worse than physical therapy or other allied health professions. We have a sea of master's level audiologists who are paid the same as the newly minted Au.D's and most places are not going to pay you more for the Au.D. vs. the MA. Physical therapy has a higher salary for DPT's and it's still worth doing the 8 years of schooling. Most people do not feel the same about the Au.D.. I know personally I was a pre-med person who chose audiology because I liked the counseling aspect and the longer times with pt interactions. We were told we'd make around mid 60's per year and then after a few years would be in the mid 70's to 80's in most settings. That has not happened. Most of the folks in my class are making high 40's low 50's to stay in my state and we are overworked. I make the most out of my class and I put in over 50 hours per week in the office.
We need to require more pre-med hard science courses instead of just hearing and speech courses. I also worked in a university setting and i saw what kind of applicants came in and who was chosen. I'd take the bio major with a 3.0 GPA over a communication sciences major with a 4.0.
Yes the career of audiologist is getting out there more, but that's more to do with the hearing aid companies do more advertising and our national organizations doing the same. Until we remove some of the surplus of audiologists from the field and remove hearing aid dispensers (who are taking our patients and often times destroying their perception of what amplification can actually do!) our salaries will not rise. They will remain stagnant and your brighter individuals will go for other programs.
Don't get me wrong. I love audiology and I'm a great audiologist. I have the highest pt satisfaction rating for the hospital I work in, but still the pay is a tough pill to swallow. Loving something and being good at it is great, but if you can't pay your bills on your salary it's time to leave. That's where I am right now.
After reading your second comment, I'm more inclined to agree with you on some things. I'm someone who has just finished my undergraduate curriculum and I was pretty surprised about the lack of biology pre-reqs for the degree...and I still had to take several biology classes. I think it's primarily because undergrad programs tend to be more SLP based thus more "theory" based. I can't tell you how many undergrad classes on language development I've taken....a lot. Thankfully my undergraduate program offers more audiology and neuroscience classes than most so I will be more prepared coming into graduate school (hopefully).
I agree that the pre-reqs for audiology should be more intensive especially in this day and age. Audiology is becoming increasingly medically-based because of CIs.
Wow..FIVE schools in your state? There are only three on the west coast where I'm from...I wonder if that makes a difference with things?
I agree about hearing aid dispensers...its an issue in WA state because their certification letters are so similar to the "AuD". I do also have concerns about pay. I want to be an educational audiologist before going the PhD route doing the research I'm passionate about..that's my dream. But pay is so low for those in educational audiology and while I never got into the field for the money..I have to pay off the minimum 50k in loans I'm anticipating when I'm done with school. I still intend on doing educational audiology but I will have to work at a better paying job when I'm done with school to put a dent in my loans first. Greater pay is in our future, I do believe that. Also, what is your opinion on private practice? I heard that's where the money is at. My aunt owns two in upstate NY and makes a very good salary.
I hope things change for you EarDoc..it sounds like you are very good at what you do and a strong advocate for better opportunities for the AuD. We all need to be greater advocates for our profession (or in my case, future).
But what is your opinion on the increase of applicants? Don't you believe that will spur the demand for more programs? I really think less programs will cause greater issues in the field because I think the role of hearing aid dispenser will increase because AuD programs will turning out less audiologists as a whole....despite an increase in population. More pre-reqs yes but less programs? No.
I agree that the pre-reqs for audiology should be more intensive especially in this day and age. Audiology is becoming increasingly medically-based because of CIs.
Wow..FIVE schools in your state? There are only three on the west coast where I'm from...I wonder if that makes a difference with things?
I agree about hearing aid dispensers...its an issue in WA state because their certification letters are so similar to the "AuD". I do also have concerns about pay. I want to be an educational audiologist before going the PhD route doing the research I'm passionate about..that's my dream. But pay is so low for those in educational audiology and while I never got into the field for the money..I have to pay off the minimum 50k in loans I'm anticipating when I'm done with school. I still intend on doing educational audiology but I will have to work at a better paying job when I'm done with school to put a dent in my loans first. Greater pay is in our future, I do believe that. Also, what is your opinion on private practice? I heard that's where the money is at. My aunt owns two in upstate NY and makes a very good salary.
I hope things change for you EarDoc..it sounds like you are very good at what you do and a strong advocate for better opportunities for the AuD. We all need to be greater advocates for our profession (or in my case, future).
But what is your opinion on the increase of applicants? Don't you believe that will spur the demand for more programs? I really think less programs will cause greater issues in the field because I think the role of hearing aid dispenser will increase because AuD programs will turning out less audiologists as a whole....despite an increase in population. More pre-reqs yes but less programs? No.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
We are in total agreement about changing the undergraduate curriculum. I know my undergraduate school required me to take a minor in communication disorders. I took about 10 courses. 2 of them were audiology related. A hearing science course and a basic Audiology course. Both courses were taken by seniors who had already applied for speech and then several decided too late that they liked audiology. As a member of the staff at that university I was very passionate about exposing students to audiology in their freshmen and sophomore years to let them know what else is out there besides speech. I also pushed for a pre-audiology tract, but didn't get that. I had hoped as the ACAE started running more programs that we'd move from the ASHA model of education where it's all speech (don't even get me started on ASHA) and more towards a AAA approach to education that offers more audiology influence. Getting people out of all speech courses will not be the silver bullet though. Audiology and speech for that matter have a huge science component to their profession. Most fear it rather than embrace it. You have no idea how many ototoxicity presentations I've sat through at conferences and you can tell who had a good science background and who didn't. The majority of the room has glazed eyes and are nodding off to sleep and the hard science majors are loving it. Same with hearing aid seminars for new products. Most of the audiologists are interested in 1. how to fit it, and 2. how much it costs while the smaller majority ask the questions of "how do you know it works" and "how did you test it". Until we change our curriculum and requirements to get audiology students we will continue to have the "tell me what I need to know" audiologists and less of the "tell me how it works" audiologists that we need to make our profession grow in prestige and skill set.
As for the discussion on hearing aid dealers. They need to go and they needed to go in the 1980's, but we didn't have the clout to oust them. They after all in most states have had dispensing rights longer than an audiologist. In the old days (1970's) in most states an audiologist did the testing then sent you down the street to the hearing aid dealer to buy your hearing aids! It's a difficult thing to take away their dispensing rights since they had them first, but it can be done and more importantly it needs to be done!
This type of thing happens all the time. How many other professions have had their scope of practice narrowed through legislation? This would would be an easy one since most of the dealers have no formal instruction on disorders of the ear or medical scope of practice. Several do not have continuing education. They need to set a sunset date on hearing aid dispensers and word that if you do not have your full dispensing licensure by said date you are not eligible. This would do a couple things 1. it would remove a lot of nefarious characters from the dispensing world and 2. it would increase the demand for audiology services and patients would be going to better skilled individuals. It's a win/win situation. Better care and better market penetration.
I applaud you for wanting to do educational audiology and also for wanting to get your PhD. Both are great goals! I love educational audiology and do a lot of pro bono work for schools in my area. They know to pick up the phone and call and if I can help I will. Educational audiology is one of the most lacking areas of our scope of practice. The pay sucks, the driving is awful (you will be in charge of often times several counties and always on the road), and often times the support for what you do is not there by the school boards, by the teachers, or a lot of times by the parents of the students you are helping. It's a needed service though as we learn more about auditory processing disorders and how large of an impact unilateral hearing loss actually has on students in their auditory development. Your fear about paying those loans back is a very well founded one. That's the dilemma I am in now. Yes private practice or working in industry often leads to the highest pay check, and trust me I could move to a large city and sell hearing aids like they were watches and make boat loads of cash, but it's not what I went into this field for. I went into this field for the diagnostics and the large scope of practice. I love hearing aids, but do not want my job to be hearing eval and hearing aid fitting all day long. I love pediatrics and I love hospital based audiology, but unfortunately hospital audiology doesn't pay a living wage most of the time unless you go the VA route and well then I lose out on the pediatric patients. It's quite upsetting to love something so much yet you can't pay your bills on your own while doing it. I don't want you to think it's all about money. None of us went into this field because we thought we'd be rich, but at the end of the day the paycheck has to be worth the education and years involved in getting the education and you have to be able to pay your bills.
Good luck in your future in audiology! From the sounds of things you are already thinking about things that most students in your level don't even know are out there!
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
The increase in applicants has less to do with getting the name of audiology out there and more to do with budget reasons. See audiology programs are often small consisting of 6-10 students per year. This requires usually having a few different audiology faculty members on staff to teach these students and provide a clinical atmosphere, which are very expensive to provide. Small programs like this often get cut, so in order to appease the budge shortfalls many schools have loosened their admission requirements and increased the number of seats to let more students in to get more tuition dollars and help fill budget holes. This is more of the reason behind the increase in students in programs and it unfortunately has less to do with propelling the field of audiology.
As for this hurting our field by lessening the number of programs? Nah it won't happen. There are already too many audiologists being churned out in my state to compete for the few jobs that are here. If you remove hearing aid dealers and remove the surplus of audiologists you drive up the demand for the services and thus you drive up the pay for services by the places employing audiologists. It's what has happened with nursing. A shortage occurred and now they are paying out much better pay to get and retain nurses. This happens with every field that hits the front pages of the best career of this year. Engineering saw it. Biotechnology saw it. Nursing saw it. Audiology is seeing it. The job market ebbs and flows like this. If you cut programs and increase admission standards you have more resources to give to those students in their training and can provide a richer education and thus turn out more sophisticated applicants into the workplace.
If you think Audiology school was difficult to get into go talk to a pre-optometry or pre-dentistry classmate. Trust me I know both programs very well and there are about 500 applicants to every 1 seat available in a graduate program.
I've been on the other end of this. Making decent money, hating what I do. The grass is always greener!
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
Very true.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 0
This is very true. I attend a fairly presitgious audiology program, and our program is not at risk of getting cut - in fact it's a flagship program at our university, but our school is experiencing budget problems like every other school. There is a lot of pressure from higher-up to boost enrollment. Because of that, our program is opening more seats and accepting more students. I don't think they've changed their admission requirements, but my suspicion is they may make some exceptions. There are some people in my program who probably should not have been accepted, and honestly there are some people-really just one person-who I think is going to make audiologists look bad in general and lower the reputation of our graduates. Once a student enrolls, there are a series of grievance procedures that departments must follow so it can be difficult to weed people out. Additionally, it's financially beneficial to the university for the department to keep students, and in order to meet ASHA standards for certification, a program needs to have lower than 20% attrition.
So basically as you can tell this is an area of personal irritation for me (sorry for venting) and I totally agree that there needs to be higher admission requirements and more science requirements for AuD programs, and probably less new audiologists churned out in general.
I can see both sides of the issue, TheEarDoc. But if we cut programs..how can we support the demand for Audiology? The demand for services are increasing by the day due to all those baby boomers and their age-related HL (including my own mother)...not just to mention the population growth. If there aren't enough programs, there won't be enough Audiologists to support the demand...so people will have to rely more on HA dispensers. I'd rather have more programs training AuDs, they may not be picture perfect but it will get more people out there to the place of hearing aid dispensers..and to foster greater awareness of the audiology field.
I believe it will become increasingly more competitive to get into AuD programs....but not because of programs changing their standards but because of the applicant pool. I was amazed at the profiles of accepted applicants at the UW this year (where I'm an undergrad) and knowing that was a big factor in me deciding to stay there. Good grades won't just get you in anymore. Its having significant research experience, volunteer experience and having high GRE scores (not always of course but average GRE scores are going up). Its the same theme with getting into undergraduate schools these days. More applicants for less spots so those applicants have to find ways to be more competitive. More and more people are applying as a whole. Same thing for AuD programs. Audiology is still a relatively new field...you can't compare it to other health professions quite yet. I'm happy to be part of the push to bring it up to speed.
I believe it will become increasingly more competitive to get into AuD programs....but not because of programs changing their standards but because of the applicant pool. I was amazed at the profiles of accepted applicants at the UW this year (where I'm an undergrad) and knowing that was a big factor in me deciding to stay there. Good grades won't just get you in anymore. Its having significant research experience, volunteer experience and having high GRE scores (not always of course but average GRE scores are going up). Its the same theme with getting into undergraduate schools these days. More applicants for less spots so those applicants have to find ways to be more competitive. More and more people are applying as a whole. Same thing for AuD programs. Audiology is still a relatively new field...you can't compare it to other health professions quite yet. I'm happy to be part of the push to bring it up to speed
.- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 0
My best friend just graduate from dental school last year and is now in the process of completing a residency in AEGD (Advanced Education in General Dentistry). I remember that back when he was admitted the admissions committee told him that a little over 2000 applicants were competing for approx. 80 seats in his program. I'm not sure how much that's changed in the past 5 years, but it couldn't be anywhere near a 500 to 1 shot. Either way, you're right, the odds are not in their favor.
I also think it would be great idea to incorporate more upper division science courses in our undergraduate curriculum. Even if just a course in genetics, biochemistry, and microbiology...I found those to be the most interesting. It is a real shame that most undergrad programs place so much emphasis on Speech.
Congratulations to everyone that's applied and been accepted so far this year!
A special 'good luck' to those still waiting 
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
Very much agree with you all on this one. I did take a number of science courses and more than what I was required to do for my GE. I did take General Chemisty, General Neurobiology, General Human Anatomy, General Human Physiology, and General Biology. If an undergraduate student came up to me and asked which classes they should take prior to applying to AuD programs, I would recommend these courses. Although, it'd be wiser to speak with an AuD program adviser (or director) and ask them, since I'm not yet an AuD student and have no idea if these courses will benefit them.
Hey current AuD students, do you recommend taking science-based courses prior to entering grad school?
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2008
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 0
I think you've missed the point. There doesn't appear to be a demand for audiology right now that isn't already being met by a surplus of audiologists in the field.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
Interesting. Where did you gather that information from? I've retrieved a handful of resources bookmarked that does not support your comment.
Keep in mind that I'm entering the field as a grad student and that I have to be hopeful that things DO get better for the profession. I've grown up seeing an audiologist and have audiologists in my family....so I've heard rumblings here and there. It is because of these issues facing the field that I've had to make some very calculated decisions as to where I chose to attend school based on cost, fit and location (for where I intend to seek a job someday)...in anticipation of the issues I will face when I am a full-fledged audiologist and no longer in school. I will be more prepared to tackle those issues as a result..I'm not going into grad school with rose-tinted glasses that's for sure. But I'm under the impression that the audiology profession is increasing in demand and I have read articles on the job growth. Baby boomers? Population growth? Kids who listen to their Ipods too loudly?
What I don't get is how schools can "relax" admission standards despite record numbers of applicants? Each school I applied to had a record number of applicants this year so they had to reject a lot more thus making the process more selective. The program I ultimately decided on..had one more spot than usual last year..maybe because of budget issues..I'd believe that. But for those 13 spots (which my future program can reasonably support) there was a twenty percent increase in applicants for this year.
I hope you all don't mind me asking questions about your posts..I'm just really interested in learning more about this topic of discussion and want to understand where you all are coming from. The one disadvantage I will have staying at my undergrad school for grad school is that I won't as much exposure to other views and opinions that people may get going elsewhere for school.
Also, cidanu, you may be a good person to provide input about this (it was a big reason that attracted me to apply for Gallaudet in the first place!)..but aside from great emphasis on the biological sciences etc for undergrad and for grad school, what about learning ASL or taking a Deaf ("D" is capitalized in the Deaf community) studies class or two? If not in undergrad (which my school offered as an option not as a requirement for the major) but at the graduate level?
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 0
If your goal is to be able to communicate with Deaf clients effectively through ASL, I doubt one ASL class would be enough, but having knowledge of manual communication is a requirement for ASHA certification. I think that something more useful would be knowledge of Deaf culture, and that's something that could be included in a multicultural or counseling course. It's important to know for counseling parents on their choices for example and for working Deaf adults.
I don't think it's really possible to understand Deaf culture though without experiencing it, so I don't really know how valuable a class would be. I've had conversations with grad students at other AuD programs and there always seems to be a disconnect. For the same reasons I love Gallaudet it also irritates me. For example I love that I am learning ASL but I hate that I can't just walk around campus and talk on my cell phone without getting nasty looks or even confronted.
- Joined
- Feb 16, 2009
- Messages
- 345
- Reaction score
- 0
my perspective on the "need" for audiologists is that it seems to be highly dependent on geographic area and specialty. there is a shortage of pediatric and educational audiologists according to the federal government who is paying my tuition because of that. And also i have heard that they are desperate for audiologists in Alaska, but I think that goes for health professions in general. Now if you are looking for a job here in DC, where there are 3 AuD programs within 50 miles, good luck.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2008
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 0
In this thread alone you've at least two people in the field telling you how oversaturated the field is and a lack of availability of jobs. The Occupational Outlook handbook (which is usually WAY more optimistic than the reality of the job market for many fields) is tepid about job openings. Doing a cursory job search also reveals a dearth of job postings. From eight years of experience in education, I have never once met an audiologist in the school environment. I have met several audiology graduate students performing hearing tests, however.
There may be a need in the future, but for now audiology services appear to be satisfied.
And I'm speaking as someone interested in entering the field. I continued to be bothered by the extensive schooling, lack of jobs, low pay (vs. educational demands), and the potential for the AMA and HIS to usurp audiology services.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
None of the "occupational outlook handbook" and fancy paperwork is not anywhere seen in my files because honestly, they're unrealistic. Because there is a difference between you and the rest of us here, you have more experience and more of what is going on. I do appreciate your participation on this forum, however, telling folks on here that the demands isn't satisfying as we hope for. Which, somewhat may be true, but it depends where you're located and what you're specialty is and what you stated sounded general.
I've had audiologists tell me what the job hunting is like for a fresh audiologist or an audiologist looking for someplace else to work and it doesn't look pretty if you have a specific area that you're interested in. As far as educational audiology, I don't know how someone not know of an audiologist in a school environment unless you're in a small state that lacks educational programs for the hard of hearing and Deaf. If someone on here is interested in that area, be willing to travel.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
This may be too honest to point out, but it sounds like you need decide whether to stick where you're at right now or take a new path. Whichever path you choose, do what you know is best for yourself and for your family (if any).
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 0
I have little knowledge of supply and demand for audiologists. I do know that our state has one AuD program, and the crop is hardly what I would refer to as premier. That is not meant as a slight towards the students. The overwhelming majority were CSD students who loathed speech enough to go audiology. Nobody knew anything about the field beforehand until taking a fundamentals of audiology course in undergrad. To me, this shows a lack of prestige and exposure to the field. When the prestige is built up, then you can afford to cut programs and be more selective. Until then, it seems that audiology will be the next best thing for students who don't want to go speech (obviously not the case with all). I think the idea way to build prestige would be to instill a pre-audiology tract as already mentioned. This could be based out of the Bio program with a few necessary CSD courses included. I would feel better about the field if we were thought of in the same realm as physical therapists and optometrists rather than SLPs or any other time of 'part-time' profession that EarDoc alluded to.
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 0
We have an extreme shortage of educational audiologists in my state. You can literally count them on one hand.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 1,748
- Reaction score
- 99
Hey EarDoc, since you are such a prominent poster on the AuD boards, I have some questions for you.
1. What are you basing all your negative feelings about Hearing Aid Dispensers on? What do they do that is "bad" for the patients? You have to admit that you are likely heavily biased because you want to make more money, and they do the things that actually pay well: SELLING.
I know the sales in general gets a bad rap, but you can't assume that all dispensors are just out to make the sale. Dispensors can care just as much about patient safety and quality care as any audiologist. After all, this business is very much about customer service and a bad dispensor will go out of business for causing unhappy patients. Business owners do not do things that are bad for business.
Here is the root of your and most audiologists problem. You fell for the scam of higher education means more pay. Why do you think so many health professions schools are popping up programs left and right? Because people looking for a promise of a respectable career with high pay will, usually without hesitation, sign right up for the astronomical tuition and take out huge student loans. Unfortunately, many times, it is not a good investment. Sorry, it's not. Education is not a guarantee of anything anymore. I have to believe that the push for making audiologists earn a "doctorate" degree was to charge more tuition. It's really unfair to you guys. This has followed the same path of many other allied health professions.
I feel that audiologists also have a poorly laid out job description and even more poorly placed expectations. I have read on here how all they really want to do is diagnose, wear a white coat, be called doctor, and then leave all of the non-clinical work, like selling and running a business, to other people. AND THEN they want to make $100K for it. Sorry, that is not worth that much money!!! Please correct me if I am wrong, but this is largely the perception that they are getting from where I am from and probably has something do with why no one is willing to pay you that much.
Just because the job did not turn out the way you wanted it to does not mean you have the right to change it by attempting to destroy the rights of others (dispensors). If your patient care is truly superior then the dispensors will be forced out of the market naturally. Calling dispensors "nefarious characters" and trying to legislate your way to higher pay by artificially increasing the demand for hearing care practitioners is really disgusting. Hearing aid dispensors provide hearing care for FAR MORE people than audiologists right now, so many people would suffer.
- Joined
- Oct 27, 2008
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 0
SoCal, I really hope you're correct. I believe I would have really enjoyed a career in audiology.
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
We have an extreme shortage of educational audiologists in my state. You can literally count them on one hand.
I agree with you and EarDoc on that one. What can we do about this? I've already set my questions together to speak face-to-face with SDSU/UCSD faculty members and ASU, since I'm in between those two. I'm not saying we should make this "harder," but you know...I can go on forever about this.
And no, I'm serious. What can we do about this? All of this can be changed if we just stand up and talk to these schools. I can't cross my fingers that someone will do this for us. Whose in?
- Joined
- Nov 6, 2008
- Messages
- 335
- Reaction score
- 0
Will your company provide any financial assistance to help you receive your AuD? I apologize advance if I thought you didn't have your AuD, just your Masters.
If you truly enjoy what you're doing, I would go out there and find grants and scholarships for current professionals. It sounds too much to handle when you got a job to go to, go to school, and fill out scholarships, etc.
I hope everything works out for you.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
Ive worked in 3 different towns in Ohio and in all 3 towns there was at least 2 hearing aid dealers offices that I constantly saw that were previous patients of theirs. I cant honest recall even one appropriate fit of any patient I ever saw that had went to one of those offices. Now to play devils advocate, perhaps I only saw the worst of the worst, but I hold dispensers and audiologists both to a higher standard. A hearing aid is a medical device and a rather expensive one at that. If you cant perform a proper fitting and proper counseling to meet the needs of a hearing aid patient then please leave the dispensing to those of us who are good at it and know what we are doing.
If we only have 25% market penetration of all the folks who should be wearing hearing aids and we constantly have groups of people who dont know what they are doing or even worse just want to make a sale and could care less what the outcome for the patient is, then this just further makes our jobs harder.
Ive met good hearing aid dispensers. They are out there. In fact it was a hearing aid dispenser that I met that started my interest in Audiology.
Yes I want to make more money, who the hell doesnt? My main gripe is if it takes a patient 7 years on average to even try hearing aids after they have a diagnosed hearing loss and they cost so much money, if their first experience is extremely negative and they dont get appropriate assistance or follow-up then that causes issues. Studies have proven that 1 happy person tells about 5 other people on average about their experience. 1 unhappy person tells on average about 10 people about their negative experience. Who do you want furthering your professions reputation? Trust me if I was only in it for the money I wouldnt be 1. working with pediatrics for the majority of my patients, 2. I wouldnt be in the hospital setting, 3. I wouldnt be in Ohio.
Id be in sunny Florida or California owning my own practice and selling hearing aids like they were snow cones, but I enjoy working with all populations and enjoy diagnostics. Its the scientist in me that loves the diagnostics and nothing to me is more of a challenge than getting a full audio on that 3 year old on the autism spectrum.
I will agree with you on the fact that higher education doesnt mean higher pay. Ask any family healthcare provider if they had it to do all over again if they would have specialized rather than do family practice. I will also agree with you that many professions move to a doctoral degree for more tuition dollars and its less about adding to the clinical knowledge of a student. Take a look at the doctor of nursing degree if you have any doubts.
As for your low opinion of audiologists Im sorry youve met those individuals. Those are the exact individuals that I wish we could weed out of our field. Im very much into the business side of audiology. The first thing I did when I started my fourth year and my hospital was re-analyze our hearing aid pricing and calculate our profit margins and streamline the purchasing process. Also in my 4th year I did all the clerical work, some of the billing, the evaluations, and the hearing aid fittings. I did it all and loved it. Most people choose audiology because of the counseling side of it and the diagnosis side of it. The fact it was a doctorate had no bearing on me choosing the field. It was just what was required. We were all told that the salaries would rise since the doctorate was the required degree from here on it. That has not held true. It really sounds like you must have met some really %^&#@@ audiologists.
The hearing aid dealers for the most part of in it to sell a hearing aid and make a profit, they could care less if they help someone hear better or not. Ive seen that the majority of times. If it wasnt the case then why do they on average mark their hearing aids up 5-7 times what they pay for them? Check out a few hearing aid dealers websites. They advertise free hearing evaluations, often times these are done in a noisy room so of course someone with even minimal hearing loss will perform worse. So they arent following proper testing protocols. The reason the test is free is because they cant bill for it, but bet your cheeks they would if they could! As for why hearing aid dispensers provide hearing aids (I refuse to use the term hearing care because its usually not care), look at the advertising hearing aid dealers perform. I know my parents get something from the local hearing aid dealers at least once a week. I call them nefarious characters because for the most part they are! If being free of disease, having a GED and three character witnesses, and a couple hundred dollars is all thats required to dispense hearing aids then why dont we apply that model to several other medical professions? Who needs pharmacists? We can just use the same software they do to cross reference our meds to make sure there are no interactions and that pharm tech can count pills just as well as the pharmD right? Who needs physical therapists? After all a PTA can do the same activities. Same with occupational therapists and COTAs. Same with general med practitioners? We can use PAs and CNPs to do those jobs right? After all those are just all over-inflated degrees correct?
As for removing hearing aid dealers and more people suffering because of it, well if it wasnt a HIPPA violation I could name you about 20 people off the top of my head who would have loved to have saved their several thousands of dollars and come to see me in the first place.
- Joined
- Feb 6, 2011
- Messages
- 37
- Reaction score
- 0
Not knowing too much about the practice yet, I think I see a difference between dispensing hearing aides as part of a practice, and doing so when they are called for, and working for a business only interested in profits from hearing aids. I don't think audiologist object to working with hearing aids in general; they just don't want to work at a Miracle Ear or a Costcos.
- Joined
- Jan 31, 2010
- Messages
- 1,748
- Reaction score
- 99
Of course you don't want to work at Costco! You have a DOCTORATE!
But honestly, when the top/only treatment for permanent hearing loss is hearing aids, who is going to dispense them if you don't want to? I get that diagnostics and therapy is the fun part, but it is simply not the bulk of the hearing care practice. Same with optometrists and pharmacists. Someone has to deal out the pills/glasses/hearing aids. EarDoc, I should let you know that my father is a BC-HIS, and he is amazing with patients and could say many of the same things about audiologists as you say about "dealers." He gets patients all the time who are not satisfied with their audiologists for a number of reasons. It is more about the individual than anything; you can't paint the entire profession with the same brush.
I am not sure why you claim that hearing instrument specialists are unsafe or providing inferior care. They are trained, have continuing education, can be board certified, care about their patients, etc. Besides your anecdotal evidence, where are the studies proving that ONLY an audiologist can test hearing and fit an aid? As far as product markup, every business does that. There is a different between wholesale and retail price. How do audiologists charge differently for hearing aids? Is that difference based at all on your educational training? That is not a good argument against taking away dispensors' rights to practice.
Basically what I am arguing for is respecting HIS as mid-level providers, such as a PA or NP. They do the "bread and butter" hearing care that you don't want to do. Seriously, look at the post I quoted above. Not everyone needs detailed hearing therapy that audiologists can provide. Some people really just need a well-fitted hearing aid and good maintenance and follow-up care. It just so happens that it does not take 8 years of education to do that.
For the future of your professional battle, I urge you to start relying on actual evidentiary studies on the differences between dispensors and audiologists for basic hearing aid service instead of your highly biased anecdotal evidence. You can't hold up a good argument solely on your personal feelings.
I'm curious. What made you decide that audiologists hate hearing aid fittings and follow-up? I mean, aside from the undergrad and graduate students' anecdotes prior to receiving hearing aid consultation/fitting/follow-up education, and the one or two audiologists on the forum... do you have any evidentiary support of your claim?
By the way, it's "dispenser".
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 0
I'm pretty sure that everyone on here, pursuing or wishing to pursue audiology, would like to provide the "bread and butter" hearing care to their patients. Why else would we want to dedicate our time to studying audiology?
- Joined
- Mar 22, 2010
- Messages
- 49
- Reaction score
- 0
It does if you'd like to work with patients from all age groups, including children.. work in the military.. treat veterans at the VA.. patients with balance disorders.. work with cochlear implants... conduct hearing-related research...
Audiologists contribute a lot more than you probably think.
Last edited:
Thank you for your inputs, but I am slightly confused after reading everyone's response. Everyone is saying that becuase the curriculum is too low, therefore we are over saturated with Audiologists, therefore the low pay, and low job availablility. Correct me if I am wrong, if I remember correctly, pay is low but jobs are readily available. Am I wrong here?
Not everyone is saying the same thing. That's why there is an argument happening.
The curriculum is not too low, as it is now a 4-year doctoral program. Over-saturation is dependent upon location. If you want to live in Specificville, USA and there is a school nearby, chances are you'll have a hard time finding a job. If you don't mind moving to get a job and you're not too picky about a specialty, you have a much better outlook and a higher chance of appropriate pay. All professions work this way.
- Joined
- Dec 28, 2010
- Messages
- 852
- Reaction score
- 273
Of course you don't want to work at Costco! You have a DOCTORATE!
EarDoc, I should let you know that my father is a BC-HIS, and he is amazing with patients and could say many of the same things about audiologists as you say about "dealers." He gets patients all the time who are not satisfied with their audiologists for a number of reasons. It is more about the individual than anything; you can't paint the entire profession with the same brush.
I am not sure why you claim that hearing instrument specialists are unsafe or providing inferior care. They are trained, have continuing education, can be board certified, care about their patients, etc. Besides your anecdotal evidence, where are the studies proving that ONLY an audiologist can test hearing and fit an aid? As far as product markup, every business does that. There is a different between wholesale and retail price. How do audiologists charge differently for hearing aids? Is that difference based at all on your educational training? That is not a good argument against taking away dispensors' rights to practice.
Basically what I am arguing for is respecting HIS as mid-level providers, such as a PA or NP. They do the "bread and butter" hearing care that you don't want to do. Seriously, look at the post I quoted above. Not everyone needs detailed hearing therapy that audiologists can provide. Some people really just need a well-fitted hearing aid and good maintenance and follow-up care. It just so happens that it does not take 8 years of education to do that.
For the future of your professional battle, I urge you to start relying on actual evidentiary studies on the differences between dispensors and audiologists for basic hearing aid service instead of your highly biased anecdotal evidence. You can't hold up a good argument solely on your personal feelings.
Are you serious? Hearing aids are my favorite part of my job and I can assure you I'm damn good at it too. In my state 3 character references, passing a test showing you can perform an ear mold impression, perform basic air conduction pure tone testing (without masking), and perform a tympanometric screening, and $250 and you can fit hearing aids.
Wow that's some serious training! I can also hang IV bags, perform as a first responder as an EMT, but I don't claim to have the training to work as an ER doctor!
You are wanting to argue for HIS to be given the same respect as mid-level providers such as NP's and PA's? Are you serious? Let me educate you on mid-level providers such as NP's and PA's. Both have years of post graduate education and several thousands of hours of direct patient care before they earn those degrees and are considered mid-level providers. I don't consider Audiology a mid-level provider, why would I consider what can be considered as a mail order course to dispense hearing aids as a mid-level provider if Audiology isn't in my opinion a mid-level provider?
So your father may be a good HIS, great for him and his patients, but it definitely shows the reason for your bias. There are good audiologists and bad audiologists, but I'd venture a guess in my experience that the good audiologists far outweigh the bad HIS's in this world.
The training of a HIS can never compete for the training of an Audiologist, just like the training for an LPN can never replace the training of an MD/DO.
It's not a personal opinion, it's just a fact.
- Joined
- Feb 1, 2009
- Messages
- 475
- Reaction score
- 0
We had a patient a few weeks back that had an assymetric loss, mild-moderate loss in one and profound loss in the other. An HIS had fit her with a CIC in the worse ear. The hearing aid cost close to $4,000. How this stuff is allowed to go on is beyond me. LOL @ audiologists not liking the "bread and butter".
- Joined
- Jun 26, 2009
- Messages
- 18
- Reaction score
- 0
Unfortunately, this is just bias. There are plenty, and I mean plenty, of audiologists that operate in exactly the same manner. If you put Auds and HIS's in the same market, with the same overhead (actually, the Aud probably has more because of student loans) and the same hopes and dreams, then you will get very similar behavior across a large sample. Inferring that there is some type of propensity for Auds to act more ethically, in a large sample of Auds, is very wishful thinking. My uncle is completely deaf in one ear (middle ear bones and mastoid removed when he was a child) and 60% in the other ear. He's been dealing with Audiologists his entire life. Just talking to him yesterday, he was attesting to this exact dynamic I just described. He just recently had hearing aids pushed on him by a new Aud. With appropriate testing, the Aud would have known that hearing aids don't benefit my uncle. But the hard sell was made anyway. And yes, you are different. And there are other Auds who are different. But guess what? There are HIS's that are different as well.
More bias and a generalized ad-hominem attack. HIS's were around long before audiologists, and they arent going anywhere. Im not saying this as someone who is an aspiring HIS, but as someone who is an aspiring audiologist.
Most of your examples (assistants) don't hold water as far as appropriately parallel examples go. The pharmacy example is even less applicable for a variety of reasons.
Well, you would save them money and the next Aud would cost them money. There is no basis for distinguishing Auds form HIS's when it comes to the dispensing of hearing aids. Studies have proven as much.
Regarding your assertion that an Audiologist is not a mid-level provider, you have to define the scope of practice that you are assigning this qualification to.
If you are talking about diagnosing the health of the ear, then they certainly are mid-level providers. Anytime there is a better qualified professional to provide service, then the professionals that are less qualified are designated, at the most, as mid-level. ENT's are better qualified and in most cases the only pros allowed to diagnose everything but hearing loss in the ear. And they are also allowed to diagnose hearing loss.
If you are referring to running the machinery that provides thae data that diagnoses hearing loss, and fitting hearing aids to mitigate that loss, then audiologists are the most qualified. But that doesn't make them more than mid-level. Most MD's think of them as technicians. Arguing the counterpoint is not easy. Most MD's don't know how to run an MRI scanner, and MRI technicians can read the results of the scan, but that doesn't make the MRI technician the top level provider. Of course, this isn't an exact parallel either. Yes, audiologists treat vestibular issues, etc.. In treatment of those disorders, then they can act as a primary provider of care. However, so PA's and NP's also act as a primary provider in many instances. But they are still mid level.
Last edited:
I'm tired of arguing this issue, so here's my final post related to the central argument:
There are good eggs and bad eggs in every basket. The difference is that the standards of practice and ethics to which ASHA requires certified audiologists to adhere leads to more good audiologists than bad and a method for 'taking care of' those bad audiologists and making sure they don't gouge/hurt/etc. any more people.
Oh, and I can't leave without saying that if your uncle has been dealing with audiologists his whole life, he should know better than to describe his hearing loss in percentages. And if that's just your description of his loss, wise-up quickly or you'll be one of those audiologists who operates more like a HIS than a real audiologist.
