Do people here still hate California Northstate?

[COMMANDER CLOWN]

Received my secondary today and did some searching on past SDN forums, where people were comparing this school to Caribbean schools. Is the general sentiment still the same this year?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Toutie]

Yep. I wouldn't necessarily compare it to a Caribbean school. But it definitely falls into the "proceed at your own risk" category.

 

[CommyO]

I just hate CA tbh. CNU sucks pretty bad though as Goro and others have said. Paypal + Fax transcipts = admission

 

[AttemptingScholar]

As far as I know, CNU is still for-profit and disallowed federal loans. Pretty sketch.

 

[Toutie]

In addition to the original sketchy stuff...According to the school site thread they were denied a request to increase from 90 to 120 students. They were also held at stage 3 for at least another year in the LCME accreditation process. Their first class grads may end up graduating under under provisional accreditation rather than full accreditation.

See the most recent updates on the NState page starting near the end of page 13 through page 14...2016-2017 California Northstate University Application Thread

 

[Goro]

Received my secondary today and did some searching on past SDN forums, where people were comparing this school to Caribbean schools. Is the general sentiment still the same this year?

Why NOT to apply to CNU (from the wise gyngyn)

1. Their method of selecting the inaugural class was slapdash. They didn't use AMCAS, just faxes and PayPal. This disregard for modern systematic processing makes one wonder if their profit motive was more important than thoughtful consideration.

2. This class ended up with twice as many men as women. If their mission precludes thoughtful evaluation of candidates, one

3. A review of faculty credentials reveals a significant lack of scholarship.

4. In a state that is at least 30% Mexican American, they only had a single representative from this group.

5. Because of these and other points too numerous to mention, the PD's I know are reluctant to consider these graduates in the same light as other applicants at the moment.

FYI, CNU is on LCME's radar, and not in a good way.

I'd like to hear if the wise @Med Ed has anything else to add.

 

[Med Ed]

Received my secondary today and did some searching on past SDN forums, where people were comparing this school to Caribbean schools. Is the general sentiment still the same this year?

Over the past couple of years I have had interactions, both directly and indirectly, with some folks who have carnal knowledge of Northstate. It's actually a somewhat pitiable situation. The investors who poured money in at the beginning, perhaps expecting solid returns in perpetuity, seem to have made a grave financial miscalculation. It appears that starting and running an allopathic medical school is more expensive than anticipated (who knew?), and they can only cut so many corners before they risk their accreditation. It wouldn't surprise me one bit to read that the place has simply folded.

I have heard one fairly well-sourced rumor that Kaiser actually offered to buy Northstate's medical school but was turned down. Would love to know more details, if true.

tl;dr Just don't do it.

 

[freak7]

4. In a state that is at least 30% Mexican American, they only had a single representative from this group.

Jimmies. Rustled.

 

[Goro]

Jimmies. Rustled.

Just sayin'.

 

[gyngyn]

I just hate CA tbh. CNU sucks pretty bad though as Goro and others have said. Paypal + Fax transcipts = admission

You will be happy to learn that most successful CA applicants get to go OOS for medical school.

 

[freak7]

Just sayin'.

That legitimately makes me so angry. There's only 1 other school I know of that is that out of touch with its population base.

 

[Dox4lyfe]

Glad I didn't say yes when I got into their 2+4 BA/MD program Haha. I could tell they were scamming when they only asked me four questions at my interview. Tryna suck motivated and driven high-schoolers into making the biggest mistake of their lives.

 

[Goro]

That legitimately makes me so angry. There's only 1 other school I know of that is that out of touch with its population base.

Really? Can you name names?

 

[freak7]

Really? Can you name names?

Not yet.

 

[mwsapphire]

That legitimately makes me so angry. There's only 1 other school I know of that is that out of touch with its population base.

*hug*
Do you feel better now?

 

[cactusman]

Really? Can you name names?

Not yet.

... can you PM names??

 

[Goro]

Two years ago there was a 4 page thread about the start of CNU and the controversies it raised. The initial concerns are still valid. The wise Med Ed made a pertinent comment that bears repeating:

The LCME granted preliminary accreditation in June 2015 (not unusual), and then CNU took the unprecedented step of seating a class less than three months later. Literally ever other new medical school accredited in the modern era has gone through at least a partial AMCAS cycle. This is why the LCME is apparently pissed off at CNU, and why [CNU] might end up paying a price later. The only reason for CNU to have done this was to get money flowing in the door ASAP. Again, every other new medical school has used the gap between preliminary accreditation and white coat to shore up the faculty and curriculum.

 

[freak7]

... can you PM names??

Not until the dust settles.

 

[PasteMD]

Jimmies. Rustled.

I'm sorry, but those are some one of the dumbest and outdated complaints I've ever seen. I'm usually a lurker and have no real fight in this (other than 1 or 2 old classmates who now go here), but there is sooo many things wrong with that list.

This class ended up with twice as many men as women. If their mission precludes thoughtful evaluation of candidates, one
Oh no, their inaugural class has ~40/20 ratio instead of a perfect 50/50! Sorry that they accepted the most qualified students to represent the inaugural class. Not to mention the ratio is a lot better for the class of 2020 and 2021...

A review of faculty credentials reveals a significant lack of scholarship.
One of those "outdated complaints" without actually fact-checking. Check again. Looking at their list, multiple doctors graduating from Harvard Med, USC, UCLA, UCSD. PhDs graduating from Yale, UCLA, etc. Heck, their Anatomy Course Director is the director at UCSF, but I guess that school is pretty shady too?

In a state that is at least 30% Mexican American, they only had a single representative from this group.
This really gets my jimmies rustled. There is no doubt CNU is a new school that warrants some skepticism. But to criticize them for this? What are they supposed to do, accept a number of Latinos or African Americans with <20 MCAT scores just to appeal to SDN? Not to mention that number again is higher for 2020. Any under-represented students with adequate stats and no red flags can get into a much better CA school.
Check out how many people identify as Hispanic in Touro's entire 2016-2017 university (1000+ people). Only 2%. Because why would they go there when they could get into a top-notch MD program? Where's that criticism?

Because of these and other points too numerous to mention, the PD's I know are reluctant to consider these graduates in the same light as other applicants at the moment.
BS. I'm a new resident who did plenty of away rotations and visits in the Sacramento area (Sutters and Kaisers in Sacramento, Roseville, Napa, etc). The doctors and PDs I've talked to have no critiques of these students and have actually volunteered their time to be preceptors.

 

[PasteMD]

Forgot to mention. You know why these PDs and doctors don't mind? Because they are great doctors and amazing people. They may disagree with administration (no clue, didn't ask that) but they definitely don't plan on taking that out on the students. They will treat them and give them an equal shot as every other US MD when the time comes.

 

[Med Ed]

Oh no, their inaugural class has ~40/20 ratio instead of a perfect 50/50! Sorry that they accepted the most qualified students to represent the inaugural class.

From an admissions standpoint the 41/19 ratio in the first class was pretty shocking, and not easily explained by a mysterious lack of qualified women in the applicant pool.

Not to mention the ratio is a lot better for the class of 2020 and 2021...

The most recent data from the AAMC indicates that the applicant pool for Northstate was 50.3% female but the class only matriculated 44.4%. One would need to see the breakdown of offers made to really get a sense of what is going on, but to be five admits off the 50:50 mark strikes me as rookie.

One of those "outdated complaints" without actually fact-checking. Check again. Looking at their list, multiple doctors graduating from Harvard Med, USC, UCLA, UCSD. PhDs graduating from Yale, UCLA, etc. Heck, their Anatomy Course Director is the director at UCSF, but I guess that school is pretty shady too?

"Scholarship" refers to academic productivity, not alma mater. I can go slap an adjunct appointment on someone from Harvard, doesn't mean he's published a thing in 35 years.

This really gets my jimmies rustled. There is no doubt CNU is a new school that warrants some skepticism. But to criticize them for this? What are they supposed to do, accept a number of Latinos or African Americans with <20 MCAT scores just to appeal to SDN? Not to mention that number again is higher for 2020. Any under-represented students with adequate stats and no red flags can get into a much better CA school.
Check out how many people identify as Hispanic in Touro's entire 2016-2017 university (1000+ people). Only 2%. Because why would they go there when they could get into a top-notch MD program? Where's that criticism?

If you open a medical school that is structurally incapable of recruiting significant numbers of URM's, that is a problem.

BS. I'm a new resident who did plenty of away rotations and visits in the Sacramento area (Sutters and Kaisers in Sacramento, Roseville, Napa, etc). The doctors and PDs I've talked to have no critiques of these students and have actually volunteered their time to be preceptors.

Anecdotal. The jury is still out for a few more years.

 

[gyngyn]

I'm sorry, but those are some one of the dumbest and outdated complaints I've ever seen. I'm usually a lurker and have no real fight in this (other than 1 or 2 old classmates who now go here), but there is sooo many things wrong with that list.

You didn't address the school's choice to deny their students access to federal loans and payback mechanisms (something that every eligible Caribbean schools does). They continue to harm them in this way even now. No outdated news there.

 

[Goro]

In a state that is at least 30% Mexican American, they only had a single representative from this group.
This really gets my jimmies rustled. There is no doubt CNU is a new school that warrants some skepticism. But to criticize them for this? What are they supposed to do, accept a number of Latinos or African Americans with <20 MCAT scores just to appeal to SDN? Not to mention that number again is higher for 2020. Any under-represented students with adequate stats and no red flags can get into a much better CA school.
Check out how many people identify as Hispanic in Touro's entire 2016-2017 university (1000+ people). Only 2%. Because why would they go there when they could get into a top-notch MD program? Where's that criticism?

The bolded is true but irrelevant. Nice straw man argument. Even Loma Linda has 10% of its much larger Class as Latin/Hispanic, which still higher than what CNU has for its 2016 Class (7/90 = ~8%).

 

[Toutie]

The bolded is true irrelevant. Nice straw man argument. Even Loma Linda has 10% of its much larger Class as Latin/Hispanic, which still higher than what CNU has for its 2016 Class (7/90 = ~8%).

Well...a possible reason for that circles back to the lack of Federal Loans and payback mechanisms. It's entirely possible many low income Hispanics would not qualify for the private loans required by CNU.

 

[Goro]

Well...a possible reason for that circles back to the lack of Federal Loans and payback mechanisms. It's entirely possible many low income Hispanics would not qualify for the private loans required by CNU.

A very telling observation. It illustrates what CNU's priorities are.

 

[PasteMD]

From an admissions standpoint the 41/19 ratio in the first class was pretty shocking, and not easily explained by a mysterious lack of qualified women in the applicant pool.

The most recent data from the AAMC indicates that the applicant pool for Northstate was 50.3% female but the class only matriculated 44.4%. One would need to see the breakdown of offers made to really get a sense of what is going on, but to be five admits off the 50:50 mark strikes me as rookie.

Well schools like Albany and Rosy Franklin are actually 60% female with over 500 students. To be over 50+ applicants over 50:50 should be a "rookie move" too no? UC Irvine Med is 4 admits off 50/50 with more males. To bring back Touro, they actually have 63:37 Male:Female ratio in their 2020 class. Loma Linda has 80 more males. Keck has 50+ more males. USF and Pritzker have over 100 more males. Einsten has 80+ more males. Vanderbilt has 60+ more males. The list goes on and on A-Z. All rookie moves?

"Scholarship" refers to academic productivity, not alma mater. I can go slap an adjunct appointment on someone from Harvard, doesn't mean he's published a thing in 35 years.

Just perusing through their faculty stats. So a guy who still works for UCSF isn't much? How about a former PD at Davis SOM for over a decade? A head pathologist from Davis SOM? A highly-published endocrinologist also from Davis SOM? (Unless Davis and UCSF also have "sketchy faculty") One of the most respected neurologists in the state (believe me, many doctors I've rotated with touted him)? A highly published pharmacology professor who is actually in a number of textbooks? A Yale graduated biochemistry professor (formerly taught at Lake Erie) with a number of publications?

If you open a medical school that is structurally incapable of recruiting significant numbers of URM's, that is a problem.

See my response to Goro below.

Anecdotal. The jury is still out for a few more years.

So actually talking to PDs and doctors is anecdotal, but gyngyn's "sources" aren't?

You didn't address the school's choice to deny their students access to federal loans and payback mechanisms (something that every eligible Caribbean schools does). They continue to harm them in this way even now. No outdated news there.

Because as I said, you could very well have an argument against the administration, but not the faculty or the students. The number of PDs and doctors I've talked to hold nothing against either of those two groups.

The bolded is true irrelevant. Nice straw man argument. Even Loma Linda has 10% of its much larger Class as Latin/Hispanic, which still higher than what CNU has for its 2016 Class (7/90 = ~8%).

How is it irrelevant? "Even" Loma Linda? Loma Linda is a solid program that I even interviewed at for residency. Not to mention the city's demographics are a lot different. Cities like Loma Linda and Vallejo have a higher percentage of Hispanics/Latinos in the population than Elk Grove. Yet that still doesn't explain Touro's lower numbers either. I use Touro, you use Loma Linda, yet my argument is straw man? Want more examples besides Touro? Rosalind Franklin as a whole when they just started had <50 Hispanics/Latino out of their 2000+ students. Albany still has less than 3% of their total medical school admissions. I use these schools and Touro because these are the "lower" name schools; URMs have the opportunity to choose much better schools in those areas. Hell, the country as a whole only had 5% of the medical student graduates as Hispanic in 2015, but how dare CNU only have 8%!
Or is it just straw man because of your bias? Not to mention the hilarious "30%" number. Because obviously all 30% of the state's population is pre-med.

 

[Toutie]

@PasteMD There are many issues with CNU that should be of concern to those considering it. Obviously you are a resident and not considering applying to the school. BUT if you were...

The fact they chose NOT to offer access to federal loans and payback mechanisms to their students doesn't concern you?

The fact they have just been denied their request to increase from 90 to 120 students doesn't concern you?

The fact they have just been denied the move past step 3 in the accreditation process does not concern you?

The fact their first class will very likely graduate under provisional accreditation doesn't concern you?

What if they fall short of provisional accreditation again? Then what? Probable probation. Would you then be concerned?

I don't quite understand your blind defense of CNU. Maybe all will work out in the end, who knows. BUT...right now they have more than a few issues that should cause those considering going there (and those already there) to proceed with caution.

 

[gyngyn]

Because as I said, you could very well have an argument against the administration, but not the faculty or the students. The number of PDs and doctors I've talked to hold nothing against either of those two groups.

The largest blame certainly falls on the investors who put their own interests ahead of all else.
That is the point of all these posts. There is also plenty of blame to be placed on the LCME who allowed this to happen. They were supposed to be the adults in the room.
The fruit of this poisoned tree will be revealed in time and the victims will be the students. It is in the interest of full disclosure that facts regarding this miscarriage of educational justice are made clear in these fora.

 

[Dox4lyfe]

This is just another situation of risk vs reward. With so many concerns and sketchy things going on with CNU, I'd never risk my future going there and neither should anyone else.

 

[gyngyn]

Well schools like Albany and Rosy Franklin are actually 60% female with over 500 students. To be over 50+ applicants over 50:50 should be a "rookie move" too no? UC Irvine Med is 4 admits off 50/50 with more males. To bring back Touro, they actually have 63:37 Male:Female ratio in their 2020 class. Loma Linda has 80 more males. Keck has 50+ more males. USF and Pritzker have over 100 more males. Einsten has 80+ more males. Vanderbilt has 60+ more males. The list goes on and on A-Z. All rookie moves?

I looked at CA schools in your post... You are using a combination of cherry-picking and failure to include a denominator.
Speaking of fact checking, I don't know what MSAR edition you are looking at but the latest edition reveals that Loma Linda has 12 more men than women in a class of 168.
USC has 94 men and 90 women. That's statistically identical.
UCI has 56 women and 48 men!

 

[PasteMD]

@PasteMD There are many issues with CNU that should be of concern to those considering it. Obviously you are a resident and not considering applying to the school. BUT if you were...

The fact they chose NOT to offer access to federal loans and payback mechanisms to their students doesn't concern you?

The fact they have just been denied their request to increase from 90 to 120 students doesn't concern you?

The fact they have just been denied the move past step 3 in the accreditation process does not concern you?

The fact their first class will very likely graduate under provisional accreditation doesn't concern you?

What if they fall short of provisional accreditation again? Then what? Probable probation. Would you then be concerned?

I don't quite understand your blind defense of CNU. Maybe all will work out in the end, who knows. BUT...right now they have more than a few issues that should cause those considering going there (and those already there) to proceed with caution.

Federal loans do concern me, but again that has nothing to do with the quality of the faculty or the quality of the students.
Denied 120 doesn't concern me. The fact that they approved 90 so quickly actually surprises me and could indicate the school is doing something right in LCME's eyes.
They certainly aren't the first to be delayed in Step 3, and Goro and GynGyn have been surprisingly quiet since that announcement. According to them, LCME clearly has something against CNU. If that were true, why not put them on probation instead of delaying it? Again, the delay and chance to fix some issues means they must be doing something right. Not to mention they wouldn't be the first school to be put on probation.
Provisional accreditation for the first 2 classes doesn't concern me since that's all that is necessary and all that matters for residency based on my communications with PDs.

It isn't a "blind defense". It's simply defending ridiculous arguments like male to female ratio, "poor" faculty, URMs when those arguments are truly just blind stat watching without any real insight or thought put into the arguments. I've said administration could be sketchy, but the "arguments" Goro uses and continues to repeat are uneducated. We'll see how CNU proceeds in the process in the near future.

Speaking of fact checking, I don't know what MSAR edition you are looking at but the latest edition reveals that Loma Linda has 12 more men than women in a class of 168.
USC has 94 men and 90 women. That's statistically identical.

My apologies, I should've elaborated on that. Albany, Rosy, Touro, and UCI are for their current class or upcoming class (UCI have enrolled 4 more males than females 56 to 48, yet we're criticizing CNU for enrolling 5 more? Those other schools, I couldn't find current stats, but were using AAMC's demographics for the 2016 graduating class.

 

[PasteMD]

Sorry wrong link too messy on a tablet.

 

[AttemptingScholar]

Federal loans do concern me, but again that has nothing to do with the quality of the faculty or the quality of the students.
Denied 120 doesn't concern me. The fact that they approved 90 so quickly actually surprises me and could indicate the school is doing something right in LCME's eyes.
They certainly aren't the first to be delayed in Step 3, and Goro and GynGyn have been surprisingly quiet since that announcement. According to them, LCME clearly has something against CNU. If that were true, why not put them on probation instead of delaying it? Again, the delay and chance to fix some issues means they must be doing something right. Not to mention they wouldn't be the first school to be put on probation.
Provisional accreditation for the first 2 classes doesn't concern me since that's all that is necessary and all that matters for residency based on my communications with PDs.

It isn't a "blind defense". It's simply defending ridiculous arguments like male to female ratio, "poor" faculty, URMs when those arguments are truly just blind stat watching without any real insight or thought put into the arguments. I've said administration could be sketchy, but the "arguments" Goro uses and continues to repeat are uneducated. We'll see how CNU proceeds in the process in the near future.



My apologies, I should've elaborated on that. Albany, Rosy, Touro, and UCI are for their current class or upcoming class (UCI have enrolled 4 more males than females 56 to 48, yet we're criticizing CNU for enrolling 5 more? Those other schools, I couldn't find current stats, but were using AAMC's demographics for the 2016 graduating class.

The criticisms include quality of faculty and students, but also include administration and their handling of federal loans. This entire conversation has included that. You can't ignore a key argument because it isn't into two particular subtopics or this conversation. Just because it has nothing to do with faculty or students doesn't mean it is important and worrying and should be taken into account when students consider applying to the school. Don't brush it aside like this.

INB4 "she's ignoring most of my post!!!": I only responded to that one part because that's what I feel I understand well enough to talk about. My contributions to this conversation have only discussed financial concerns since the beginning.

 

[Toutie]

It isn't a "blind defense". It's simply defending ridiculous arguments like male to female ratio, "poor" faculty, URMs when those arguments are truly just blind stat watching without any real insight or thought put into the arguments. I've said administration could be sketchy, but the "arguments" Goro uses and continues to repeat are uneducated. We'll see how CNU proceeds in the process in the near future.

Well, the title of this thread is "Do people here still hate CNU". Obviously the answer is yes. This school has some serious issues. It is application season and I think it is completely appropriate to point out the shortcomings of this school to those applicants who are uniformed...especially those who are so blinded by wanting to attend a CA school. As I said, all may work out in the end for CNU, but pointing out the deficiencies of this school is not improper.

 

[gyngyn]

It isn't a "blind defense". It's simply defending ridiculous arguments like male to female ratio, "poor" faculty, URMs when those arguments are truly just blind stat watching without any real insight or thought put into the arguments. I've said administration could be sketchy, but the "arguments" Goro uses and continues to repeat are uneducated. We'll see how CNU proceeds in the process in the near future.

Observations that the investors have continued to put their own interests above all else need to remain in the open so that potential students can make informed decisions.
All of my observations are reliably available as facts (including the slapdash method of using FAX's and paypal to seat a class without going through AMCAS. The predictable result was a lopsided class that did not even reflect the CA pool of applicants.
The continued failure to provide Title IV access is the most damning practice of all. It contributes to the already steep financial burdens its students must bear. It is unconscionable.

The "ridiculous" arguments regarding the faculty as well as the rest of the investor decisions are exactly how this school is being evaluated by the LCME. I only hope enough of their recently completed site visit will be made public soon.

 

[PasteMD]

The criticisms include quality of faculty and students, but also include administration and their handling of federal loans. This entire conversation has included that. You can't ignore a key argument because it isn't into two particular subtopics or this conversation. Just because it has nothing to do with faculty or students doesn't mean it is important and worrying and should be taken into account when students consider applying to the school. Don't brush it aside like this.

INB4 "she's ignoring most of my post!!!": I only responded to that one part because that's what I feel I understand well enough to talk about. My contributions to this conversation have only discussed financial concerns since the beginning.

Except I've mentioned that a number of times? I'm not "blindly defending" CNU. I'm defending the misinterpreted and cherry picked stats like the ones Goro mentioned (2-5).

Well, the title of this thread is "Do people here still hate CNU". Obviously the answer is yes. This school has some serious issues. It is application season and I think it is completely appropriate to point out the shortcomings of this school to those applicants who are uniformed...especially those who are so blinded by wanting to attend a CA school. As I said, all may work out in the end for CNU, but pointing out the deficiencies of this school is not improper.

Yeah, and Goro was the one who mentioned those dumb arguments. I said I agree with 1, I disagree the ridiculous 2 to 5 that he chooses to repeat ad nauseum.

 

[PasteMD]

Observations that the investors have continued to put their own interests above all else need to remain in the open so that potential students can make informed decisions.
All of my observations are reliably available as facts (including the slapdash method of using FAX's and paypal to seat a class without going through AMCAS. The predictable result was a lopsided class that did not even reflect the CA pool of applicants.
The continued failure to provide Title IV access is the most damning practice of all. It contributes to the already steep financial burdens its students must bear. It is unconscionable.

You have to clarify facts and opinions. It's a fact that they denied federal loans. It's an opinion about PDs viewing students poorly when I've only heard differently yet you continue to spew it out as if a fact.

 

[LutGholein]

They still use PayPal for secondaries as of last year(2016)--the only school I've seen do that of all the MD/DO schools. Kinda weird.

 

[gyngyn]

You have to clarify facts and opinions. It's a fact that they denied federal loans. It's an opinion about PDs viewing students poorly when I've only heard differently yet you continue to spew it out as if a fact.

A fair portrait of the impression that the school's behavior has made on PD's is perfectly reasonable.
Applicants have to make a decision before data is available (just like irl).

 

[AttemptingScholar]

Except I've mentioned that a number of times? I'm not "blindly defending" CNU. I'm defending the misinterpreted and cherry picked stats like the ones Goro mentioned (2-5).

I just read through the whole thread again and the only time I saw you acknowledge this was "Federal loans do concern me" and your more recent post "It's a fact that they denied federal loans." Did I miss it? Because to me, that's sufficient reason already not to apply and you haven't given a good reason to either discount it or suggest that it's not a big enough deal and apply despite it. There are two problems with CNU because of this--first that it makes it harder to students to get a medical education and second that it suggests the administration's priorities are not with the student's education. Please respond to either or both of these points.

 

[PasteMD]

O

A fair portrait of the impression that the school's behavior has made on PD's is perfectly reasonable.
They have to make a decision before data is available (just like irl).

Not based on my conversations (sounds like yours are just assumptions). They will base there decision like every other student, using stats, away rotations, and interviews. They aren't holding administration problems against students.

 

[gyngyn]

Sorry wrong link too messy on a tablet.

Let's see, UCI has 51% women over 4 years; USC has 47% women; and Loma Linda (a mission-based school) has 45%.
Looks fine to me.

 

[PasteMD]

I just read through the whole thread again and the only time I saw you acknowledge this was "Federal loans do concern me" and your more recent post "It's a fact that they denied federal loans." Did I miss it? Because to me, that's sufficient reason already not to apply and you haven't given a good reason to either discount it or suggest that it's not a big enough deal and apply despite it. There are two problems with CNU because of this--first that it makes it harder to students to get a medical education and second that it suggests the administration's priorities are not with the student's education. Please respond to either or both of these points.

Yeah, hence why I didn't argue against that point. If students can fine other means of paying, more to then. They certainly aren't going to get discriminated against for doing so.

 

[gyngyn]

Not based on my conversations (sounds like yours are just assumptions). They will base there decision like every other student, using stats, away rotations, and interviews. They aren't holding administration problems against students.

I meet with over a hundred PD's every year for both sustained periods as well as at frequent intervals.
We are both entitled to our observations.

 

[Matthew9Thirtyfive]

Yeah, hence why I didn't argue against that point. If students can fine other means of paying, more to then. They certainly aren't going to get discriminated against for doing so.

So essentially limiting your student body to wealthy applicants and those who can qualify for and afford private loans isn't discriminating against poor or even lower middle class applicants? And I don't mean legally.

 

[PasteMD]

I meet with over a hundred PD's every year for both sustained periods as well as at frequent intervals.
We are both entitled to our observations.

A number of PDs who can actually locate Elk Grove on a map. Agree with we are entitled to our opinions, but why are yours assumed as facts and mine anecdotal.

 

[gyngyn]

A number of PDs who can actually locate Elk Grove on a map. Agree with we are entitled to our opinions, but why are yours assumed as facts and mine anecdotal.

You appear to have inferred that.

 

[GnomeBeGone]

Current student - these two points mean absolutely nothing to us:

The fact they have just been denied their request to increase from 90 to 120 students doesn't concern you?
The fact their first class will very likely graduate under provisional accreditation doesn't concern you?

Please refrain from fear mongering by taking the information I post and then taking away all the context to it. We've been perfectly forthcoming on the CNU main thread about the possible risks and the implications. I don't understand why everyone here loves to resort to Fox news style reporting, PARROTING THE SAME THING OVER AND OVER AGAIN. It contributes to the general ignorance about this school. At this point Gyngyn, etc. etc. purporting to care about the 'full disclosure of facts on these fora' when it comes to CNU is laughable. We get it-- you lot very sincerely hate for-profit education in all its forms. You are not, however, being honest when you go about your crusade in this manner.


@PasteMD 's point that is very apparently lost on this crowd is that by fanning the flames of unintelligent and one-sided discussions about CNU you are directly harming current students. We won't *have* a chance to succeed or fail on our own merits when we've been dragged through the mud for the 4 years leading up to the Match.

CNU has drawbacks. I wouldn't have any problem with these discussions if people would present facts with even a glimmer of objectivity. Half the time I keep my mouth shut here because I know my words will just be twisted and taken out of context later. My inbox gets tons of PM's regarding CNU questions from people who have obviously decided that it's futile to ask these questions in public.

 

[Toutie]

A number of PDs who can actually locate Elk Grove on a map. Agree with we are entitled to our opinions, but why are yours assumed as facts and mine anecdotal.

I dunno...might have something to do with the fact you are a resident and @gyngyn is a long time adcom member at a CA med school.

 

[PasteMD]

Let's see, UCI has 51% women over 4 years; USC has 47% women; and Loma Linda (a mission-based school) has 45%.
Looks fine to me.

And CNU is improving those stats as well, not to mention the dozens of other schools across the country (unlike Hispanics, the sex ratio doesn't change much state to state). Why are we critiquing old faults instead of supporting that they are fixing these so called issues?