Going back to California for residency

[Nasrudin]

---

Members don't see this ad.

View attachment 179976

That kid is fantastic. I've seen him on youtube.

Unfortunately Asian cultures don't tend to emphasize creativity and as a result have produced mostly technically amazing classical players. It's a different set of skills to rock balls or funk.

 

[Wordead]

I've never understood the need for mansions and/or living in expensive places (not talking about property investments). I'd rather use the same money to go with someone special every now and again to the Four Seasons at Bora Bora.

Happiness all year vs happiness for a week out of the year

 

[Brain Bucket]

a valid message.

 

[yankeehotel]

Are we talking early as in 12 months ahead, or more like 6 months? I'm asking because I can picture a program saying no if you're too early since they wouldn't be able to forecast their availability too far in advance.

It differs depending on how sought after the away program is -- your best bet is to call the administrator for the program you're interested in (now) and ask when they start to accept applications & what documents are required. Do the same with your home institution, as they need to process some paperwork too. Wish I knew all this a year ago... lol.

 

[VenturaResident]

But non-Californian candidates might just want to live there based on some stupid stereotype rather than having legit family ties in the region.

This is totally possible and undoubtedly true for some folks, but my guess is that its less of a risk than with people originally from California.

Of course they want to just get back to California. Why would you even think otherwise?

Because some people actually do care more about training than location. And those are the folks we want here. And we have a stellar and fairly unique program that we know attracts people based on its curriculum and opportunities independent of a fabulous location. Hope you find a residency that fits your goals and values, including location.

That's really stupid. Sorry.

If ensuring that your residents care about what you're trying to teach and who you're trying to serve and not just where you are is NOT important to you, then I could see how that would seem stupid. it IS important, then I would hope that even the meager examples in this thread of people wanting to get back to California just because it is California would convince you that this is something to be extra thoughtful about when considering applicants from California. We certainly have people from around here, we just make sure that they want us because of us, not because of our zip code. Your mileage may vary. If that's not important to you, but your residents are happy, that's great. I stand by my original statement.

 

[petyr_baelish]

This is totally possible and undoubtedly true for some folks, but my guess is that its less of a risk than with people originally from California.

That's an interesting recruitment strategy because I've seen a lot of programs who want to train people who will continue to practice in the region.

 

[VenturaResident]

That's an interesting recruitment strategy because I've seen a lot of programs who want to train people who will continue to practice in the region.

We're looking for people who want to practice our kind of full-spectrum family medicine and practice with the underserved, wherever that may be, including, (but absolutely not limited to) our community. If we did specifically want people who would stay right here, then prioritizing folks from California would certainly make more sense.

 

[Sephiroth]

We're looking for people who want to practice our kind of full-spectrum family medicine and practice with the underserved, wherever that may be, including, (but absolutely not limited to) our community. If we did specifically want people who would stay right here, then prioritizing folks from California would certainly make more sense.

The issue I take with this is that location will almost always play some role in weighing options for people, and there isn't a very reliable way for discerning that, short of someone straight up telling you "I just want a program in this specialty in this particular area and that's why I want to come here." That's not to say it will always be the deciding role - someone could despise cold weather but rank B&W/MGH number 1 because of the program and be willing to suck it up, but maybe they'd be less willing to do so for St. Elizabeth's if they have other comparable options in locations they prefer. If you gave a bunch of people going into oncology specialties a choice between MD Anderson and MSK, much of the divide would likely be due to whether they'd rather be in NYC or Houston. Switch up the options but with the same locations, and maybe the choices change, depending on which 2 programs are being compared, but there will still likely be an influence of location. I can understand trying to gauge interest in your training, but trying to parse out geographical preferences like this seems more unlikely to really help much, and instead risk losing out on good candidates.

 

[VenturaResident]

The issue I take with this is that location will almost always play some role in weighing options for people, and there isn't a very reliable way for discerning that, short of someone straight up telling you "I just want a program in this specialty in this particular area and that's why I want to come here." That's not to say it will always be the deciding role - someone could despise cold weather but rank B&W/MGH number 1 because of the program and be willing to suck it up, but maybe they'd be less willing to do so for St. Elizabeth's if they have other comparable options in locations they prefer. If you gave a bunch of people going into oncology specialties a choice between MD Anderson and MSK, much of the divide would likely be due to whether they'd rather be in NYC or Houston. Switch up the options but with the same locations, and maybe the choices change, depending on which 2 programs are being compared, but there will still likely be an influence of location. I can understand trying to gauge interest in your training, but trying to parse out geographical preferences like this seems more unlikely to really help much, and instead risk losing out on good candidates.

Maybe I wasn't clear. Absolutely location figures into residency ranking, but we don't want people for whom it is the single most important factor. Candidates often mention what other programs they are considering - if the entire list is in Southern California, that's a major red flag for us (amazingly, some people are as blunt as your "I just want..." sentence above.) But if they are looking here, contra costa, santa rosa, swedish/seattle, idaho, grand junction, [fill in list of full spectrum programs here] and they say that within that list, our location works well for them (for family reasons, weather reasons, etc) or that they like our program but need to be around more snow so they won't rank us as highly, whatever. All of that is totally legit - of course geography enters into it. Then we feel confident that they do want our type of program and could be happy here, and are just weighing all the other factors to figure out what program might be the best fit. The question is at which point in the ranking process does geography enter in. If geography is the be all end all, then they probably won't do well here. If geography is second to program style, then awesome.