Is Touro COM a joke?

  • Thread starter Thread starter NoPMHx
  • Start date Start date
BU Medical Sciences
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Status
Not open for further replies.
N

NoPMHx

Let's forget for a moment about their board exam pass rates, match rates, the things they've done in the past, etc.

I called their admissions office several times with the same question, and each employee gives me a different answer. It seems like nobody knows wtf they're doing over there.

And as for their so-called campus...
touro-college-e1381508946747.jpg

Enough said. Is this a joke or what? I don't know how it is over there in Nevada, but at least Touro NY has already given me some very bad impressions. I applied to 2 Touros, and I'm seriously debating whether I should withdraw my applications or not at least for Touro NY. (and btw, their secondaries are $100 PER CAMPUS) Any thoughts?
Members don't see this ad.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
You're disrespecting all of the students and alumuni to this school for what exactly? Who cares what their campuses look like they graduate decent students that match fine. If you don't like it then withdraw (I did) but no need to start a thread asking if they are a joke
 
This same topic comes up every year with premeds. That same pic always gets posted. I found it hilarious at first as well, but they do a decent job at the end of the day.

The only downside about the look of the campus is less social media pics of you in front of your school's sign, and your family asking if your school is a real medical school. If you don't care about those things then its easy to get over the look.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
In the end if you go to Touro you have a good chance of matching and becoming a doctor. Whatever complaints students pose about the administration, it does the job of turning medical students into residents.

Judging by what is said on SDN you probably won't be as comfortable there as you will elsewhere. The question is if you value that comfort over the uncertainty of not getting into any medical school and reapplying.

EDIT: When I looked up Touro mach rates they self-reported a 100% match in 2015. Is there some nuance to match rates I am missing? Or is that number inaccurate?
 
Last edited:
ReapPremed said:
In the end if you go to Touro you have a good chance of matching and becoming a doctor. Whatever complaints students pose about the administration, it does the job of turning medical students into residents.

Judging by what is said on SDN you probably won't be as comfortable there as you will elsewhere. The question is if you value that comfort over the uncertainty of not getting into any medical school and reapplying.

EDIT: When I looked up Touro mach rates they self-reported a 100% match in 2015. Is there some nuance to match rates I am missing? Or is that number inaccurate?
Click to expand...
Have they not published there most recent match rate? I can't find it anywhere.
 
NoPMHx said:
Let's forget for a moment about their board exam pass rates, match rates, the things they've done in the past, etc.

I called their admissions office several times with the same question, and each employee gives me a different answer. It seems like nobody knows wtf they're doing over there.

And as for their so-called campus...
touro-college-e1381508946747.jpg

Enough said. Is this a joke or what? I don't know how it is over there in Nevada, but at least Touro NY has already given me some very bad impressions. I applied to 2 Touros, and I'm seriously debating whether I should withdraw my applications or not at least for Touro NY. (and btw, their secondaries are $100 PER CAMPUS) Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

Why did you bother applying there in the first place if you knew all of this stuff?

I made this mistake for several schools last year, but never apply to any school where you won't feel comfortable going. There are enough schools (some would say too many) out there if you have the right stats and profile.
 
Then don't go there, no one is forcing you. The three campuses aren't affiliated with each other really outside of sharing the Touro name, very different from schools like the VCOMs where they are all somewhat affiliated
 
OP's rhetoric is the reason why schools choose to invest millions of dollars into more needless buildings, bridges, gardens, and towers. For the sake of vanity they choose to decorate their schools into theme parks while the students who usually benefit the most from a rigorous undergraduate education are often stuck in outdated dilapidated buildings on the fringes of campus. And instead of venturing into long walks across the university gardens, choose to spend a majority of their time in a quiet, forgotten public study area for time efficiency and work productivity.

The school administration benefits because they can put in their quarterly report that they constructed a new building for Latino studies so that now they are culturally aware of the nuances in culture presented by their Hispanic Department and Latino Department. By sheltering professors of similar ideology in similar work environments, they hope to promote a holistic university culture of diversity and multiculturalism.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Only on SDN do people think a medical school is a "joke" based on the appearance. Threads like these tend to stop people from applying there, and may even prevent some people from ever becoming a physician. Graduates from the school contribute to society and put in work like any other medical student.

You are insulting your peers and the community which you hope to join.
 
bigindian4891 said:
Only on SDN do people think a medical school is a "joke" based on the appearance. Threads like these tend to stop people from applying there, and may even prevent some people from ever becoming a physician. Graduates from the school contribute to society and put in work like any other medical student.

You are insulting your peers and the community which you hope to join.
Click to expand...
And oddly, you never hear SDNers make a peep about how some MD schools are located in some of the worst and most dangerous slums in the US.

But yet I've seen more than one post about how TUNCOM is a converted warehouse in an office park, RVU [?] is out in the middle nowhere, and Western is in a strip mall. There are some other complaints like this about other schools, but I can't think of them at the moment.
 
It's a legit program, especially, if it's your only choice. You will be a doctor at the end of the day, nevertheless.

But by all means, if you have other options and if you think this school is a joke, then go somewhere else!!
 
Yes, but not for the reasons you've mentioned. They're shady af. Would advise against.


Sent from my iPad using Tapatalk
 
Pina Colada said:
OP's rhetoric is the reason why schools choose to invest millions of dollars into more needless buildings, bridges, gardens, and towers. For the sake of vanity they choose to decorate their schools into theme parks while the students who usually benefit the most from a rigorous undergraduate education are often stuck in outdated dilapidated buildings on the fringes of campus. And instead of venturing into long walks across the university gardens, choose to spend a majority of their time in a quiet, forgotten public study area for time efficiency and work productivity.

The school administration benefits because they can put in their quarterly report that they constructed a new building for Latino studies so that now they are culturally aware of the nuances in culture presented by their Hispanic Department and Latino Department. By sheltering professors of similar ideology in similar work environments, they hope to promote a holistic university culture of diversity and multiculturalism.
Click to expand...

What's your argument here? That schools should try to have ****tier campuses?
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I've been to a number of DO schools, and at least in regard to aesthetics, I would put Touro-NY at the bottom. But that alone is not why I would put them lower on any potential school list. My main concern would be with all of the other issues surrounding this program. Namely, poor clinical skills test performance, poor rotations, poor administration, etc. BTW, RVU is located in the South Denver suburbs. It is not in the middle of no where, heck I live 10 minutes from that campus and there is a lot of traffic to deal wtih every day. RVU Utah may be a different story though. (I have not been to that campus yet.)
 
Wjldenver said:
I've been to a number of DO schools, and at least in regard to aesthetics, I would put Touro-NY at the bottom. But that alone is not why I would put them lower on any potential school list. My main concern would be with all of the other issues surrounding this program. Namely, poor clinical skills test performance, poor rotations, poor administration, etc. BTW, RVU is located in the South Denver suburbs. It is not in the middle of no where, heck I live 10 minutes from that campus and there is a lot of traffic to deal wtih every day. RVU Utah may be a different story though. (I have not been to that campus yet.)
Click to expand...
Ok, I was thinking of another school. From Google Street view, it's out in the middle of nowhere. Can't remember which one, though.
 
mcloaf said:
What's your argument here? That schools should try to have ****tier campuses?
Click to expand...
I wasn't making an argument. I was making an observation. Arguments employ a type of persuasive writing that attempts to lead the audience to their conclusion, such as the one you so articulately presented: schools should try to have ****tier campuses.

The observation I was emphasizing was that schools invest more of their income into the appearance of a quality education rather than working towards providing a quality education for students. At the end of the day it's easy to say that you've bought and installed a new garden complex to improve your school's stance on the environment. It's shallow and it's irrefutable that people on the outside must admit that you've done something. However, focusing on improving education, student resources, and turning over the current professor on a pulpit paradigm involves actual work with unknowable results. Those unknowable results is how to gauge the impact of making a change in the curriculum based on what can be considered to be success for the students. Will it be the scores they receive, completion to graduation, or the appointments they gain in life? And what tangible value does student success contribute back to the school?

Administrators are afraid to invest fully in such a premise, when the impact of such an investment isn't tangible and doesn't show up on a quarterly report. Does a graduate who wins a prize for a documentary via their report on nepal sweatshops a la gonzo journalism many years after graduation really matter to an investor as much as a new scenic bridge over a small lake with their name on it?

I thought it was relatively clear that my post highlights the notion that a post-secondary education should be focused on education in and of itself, a Kantian idealism where the notion of education isn't merely used as a means to sequester more tuition dollars, investors, and research capital. One could make the argument that there are plenty of ways in which this is achievable, but you already know that there are efficient ways of providing a better education to students rather than turning a school into a Walt Disney Land.

Don't play coy with me by misconstruing an intrinsically basic premise. We all at least have a single neuron, don't tell me yours is only sensory. Get it? That's the joke. I'm insulting you when I imply that you aren't using your brain, but I'm polite enough to tell you that it's an insult because I am not treating you like an idiot by pretending to insinuate it.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pina Colada said:
I wasn't making an argument. I was making an observation. Arguments employ a type of persuasive writing that attempts to lead the audience to their conclusion, such as the one you so articulately presented: schools should try to have ****tier campuses.

The observation I was emphasizing was that schools invest more of their income into the appearance of a quality education rather than working towards providing a quality education for students. At the end of the day it's easy to say that you've bought and installed a new garden complex to improve your school's stance on the environment. It's shallow and it's irrefutable that people on the outside must admit that you've done something. However, focusing on improving education, student resources, and turning over the current professor on a pulpit paradigm involves actual work with unknowable results. Those unknowable results is how to gauge the impact of making a change in the curriculum based on what can be considered to be success for the students. Will it be the scores they receive, completion to graduation, or the appointments they gain in life? And what tangible value does student success contribute back to the school?

Administrators are afraid to invest fully in such a premise, when the impact of such an investment isn't tangible and doesn't show up on a quarterly report. Does a graduate who wins a prize for a documentary via their report on nepal sweatshops a la gonzo journalism many years after graduation really matter to an investor as much as a new scenic bridge over a small lake with their name on it?

I thought it was relatively clear that my post highlights the notion that a post-secondary education should be focused on education in and of itself, a Kantian idealism where the notion of education isn't merely used as a means to sequester more tuition dollars, investors, and research capital. One could make the argument that there are plenty of ways in which this is achievable, but you already know that there are efficient ways of providing a better education to students rather than turning a school into a Walt Disney Land.

Don't be daft. We all at least have a single neuron, don't tell me that yours is just a motor neuron.
Click to expand...

Did you actually take yourself seriously while typing this?
 
mcloaf said:
Did you actually take yourself seriously while typing this?
Click to expand...
I care about each and every one of my posts. Don't you? After all, if I don't care about what I post, then why would I expect anyone else to waste their time reading it? On that note, I blocked you. Sorry, I don't like you and I don't think you like me. And I like to waste time on SDN, but not when we both mutually fail to abstract value from having a conversation like this one. I'm sorry I responded to your instigation, I thought you actually cared about having a conversation on the matter. My bad!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Pina Colada said:
I care about each and every one of my posts. Don't you? After all, if I don't care about what I post, then why would I expect anyone else to waste their time reading it?
Click to expand...
There's a worthwhile discussion to be had about the merits of investment in campus improvement, but I'm neither patient nor masochistic enough to try to have it with you.
 
It is a joke school but not for the reasons you described.
 
Pina Colada said:
I care about each and every one of my posts. Don't you? After all, if I don't care about what I post, then why would I expect anyone else to waste their time reading it? On that note, I blocked you. Sorry, I don't like you and I don't think you like me. And I like to waste time on SDN, but not when we both mutually fail to abstract value from having a conversation like this one. I'm sorry I responded to your instigation, I thought you actually cared about having a conversation on the matter. My bad!
Click to expand...

Lighten up Francis. A balance between nice esthetics and education quality should be what schools are shooting for. To simply dismiss the necessity for putting money into improving the outward appearance is absurd. In a perfect world the primary focus of every school would be to pour all of its resources into fixing every aspect of their curriculum, but that is not reality. While most schools are "non profit" it does not mean they can operate with zero sense of business sense. Also, improvement of the appearance of a school, Touro NY is a good example, is a good step to take in attracting students. The phrase perception is reality is 100% applicable here. If I showed up to the school as it looks now without even knowing about the schools internal issues, I'd be 100% turned off of the program.
 
The short answer is yes it is a joke. So many faculty left this past year alone. Not only is the school short staffed but the clinical rotations are a joke. Nothing more than expensive shadowing. Some sites are good but the majority are not at teaching hospitals.
 
Upset2ndyearDO said:
The short answer is yes it is a joke. So many faculty left this past year alone. Not only is the school short staffed but the clinical rotations are a joke. Nothing more than expensive shadowing. Some sites are good but the majority are not at teaching hospitals.
Click to expand...

Typical med student blaming everyone for their failure of not passing level 1 and getting pulled out of clinical rotations
 
Money4MyHoney said:
Typical med student blaming everyone for their failure of not passing level 1 and getting pulled out of clinical rotations
Click to expand...

Lol, so you're not going to address the garbage level 2 scores? Or the unusually high faculty rate? Or disprove that poster with actual data? You're just going to shill out for Touro NY by making a straw man argument that has nothing to do with the post you quoted? Touro needs to hire better SDN shills because you are doing a very poor job
 
NoPMHx said:
Let's forget for a moment about their board exam pass rates, match rates, the things they've done in the past, etc.

I called their admissions office several times with the same question, and each employee gives me a different answer. It seems like nobody knows wtf they're doing over there.

And as for their so-called campus...
touro-college-e1381508946747.jpg

Enough said. Is this a joke or what? I don't know how it is over there in Nevada, but at least Touro NY has already given me some very bad impressions. I applied to 2 Touros, and I'm seriously debating whether I should withdraw my applications or not at least for Touro NY. (and btw, their secondaries are $100 PER CAMPUS) Any thoughts?
Click to expand...

It would not be my first choice when choosing to spend $300K on a medical education.
 
The problems mentioned here are found at virtually all osteopathic schools, especially the new ones.

Clinical rotations are inconsistent at (edited) most schools... and Touro at least keeps you close to NYC. Lots of the new (and some established) schools have rotations that are just as inconsistent - and they send you halfway across the country to do them.

Level 2 pass rates aren't great, but they've consistently improved since Touro's founding. Compare that to the schools that have had consistently poor Level 1 pass rates.

Administration and Turnover aren't great, but virtually every medical student (MDs and DOs) say the exact same thing. Turnover is worse at DO schools in general (my suspicion is because of the lack of research).

Placement rates are the same as any other DO school. Match lists look the same as any other.

Though I will admit the campus sure is depressing.
 
Last edited:
Milotic said:
This same topic comes up every year with premeds. That same pic always gets posted. I found it hilarious at first as well, but they do a decent job at the end of the day.

The only downside about the look of the campus is less social media pics of you in front of your school's sign, and your family asking if your school is a real medical school. If you don't care about those things then its easy to get over the look.
Click to expand...

ESPECIALLY WITH A TEACHER LIKE DR. PREDDY. Touro's so blessed to have him.
 
Peach Newport said:
The problems mentioned here are found at virtually all osteopathic schools, especially the new ones.

Clinical rotations are inconsistent at ALL DO schools... and Touro at least keeps you close to NYC. Lots of the new (and established) schools have rotations that are just as inconsistent - and they send you halfway across the country to do them.

Level 2 pass rates are bad, but they've consistently improved since Touro's founding. Compare that to the schools that have had consistently poor Level 1 pass rates.

Administration and Turnover are bad, but virtually every medical student (MDs and DOs) say the exact same thing. Turnover is worse at DO schools in general (my suspicion is because of the lack of research).

Placement rates are the same as any other DO school. Match lists look the same as any other.

Though I will admit the campus sure is depressing.
Click to expand...

I can tell you that the clinical rotations at PCOM were and continue to be reasonable and consistent since I graduated in 2011. Not major academic centers FTMP but good community and midsize hospitals with the added bonus of electives at the major academic centers in Philly.
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
Lol, so you're not going to address the garbage level 2 scores? Or the unusually high faculty rate? Or disprove that poster with actual data? You're just going to shill out for Touro NY by making a straw man argument that has nothing to do with the post you quoted? Touro needs to hire better SDN shills because you are doing a very poor job
Click to expand...

Looks like you get off bashing schools, strange..

Bottom line, if you go to Touro, you will be a doctor
 
Money4MyHoney said:
Looks like you get off bashing schools, strange..

Bottom line, if you go to Touro, you will be a doctor
Click to expand...

Once again, nice straw man. Just a suggestion, but you make Touro look worse by avoiding the issues presented so maybe instead of blaming it on students or sweeping it under rug with statements like "if you go to Touro you will become a doctor," you should give data and facts or discuss the things Touro NY is doing to address the deficits.

I will bash any school that does its students a disservice that is above the norm.
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
Once again, nice straw man. Just a suggestion, but you make Touro look worse by avoiding the issues presented so maybe instead of blaming it on students or sweeping it under rug with statements like "if you go to Touro you will become a doctor," you should give data and facts or discuss the things Touro NY is doing to address the deficits.

I will bash any school that does its students a disservice that is above the norm.
Click to expand...

Do you even go to Touro?
 
AnatomyGrey12 said:
Once again, nice straw man. Just a suggestion, but you make Touro look worse by avoiding the issues presented so maybe instead of blaming it on students or sweeping it under rug with statements like "if you go to Touro you will become a doctor," you should give data and facts or discuss the things Touro NY is doing to address the deficits.

I will bash any school that does its students a disservice that is above the norm.
Click to expand...

When you interview, let us know how the inside looks. I've always wanted to know.
 
MaximusD said:
I can tell you that the clinical rotations at PCOM were and continue to be reasonable and consistent since I graduated in 2011. Not major academic centers FTMP but good community and midsize hospitals with the added bonus of electives at the major academic centers in Philly.
Click to expand...

Maybe I should have said "most DO schools." PCOM is an unfair comparison to most DOs.
 
NoPMHx said:
Let's forget for a moment about their board exam pass rates, match rates, the things they've done in the past, etc.

I called their admissions office several times with the same question, and each employee gives me a different answer. It seems like nobody knows wtf they're doing over there.

And as for their so-called campus...
touro-college-e1381508946747.jpg

Enough said. Is this a joke or what? I don't know how it is over there in Nevada, but at least Touro NY has already given me some very bad impressions. I applied to 2 Touros, and I'm seriously debating whether I should withdraw my applications or not at least for Touro NY. (and btw, their secondaries are $100 PER CAMPUS) Any thoughts?
Click to expand...
The inside is actually pretty nice. That's just kind of how the city is, people put things where they can. Don't judge the book by its cover.

I will say, however, their issues with clinical sites are concerning.
 
Mad Jack said:
The inside is actually pretty nice. That's just kind of how the city is, people put things where they can. Don't judge the book by its cover.

I will say, however, their issues with clinical sites are concerning.
Click to expand...

+1 for not judging a book by its cover. That is an important principle.

Look deeper into the school.

Examine the faculty members. Do they have publications (not a 100% accurate metric)? Where do they come from? If they have publications, are they in PEER REVIEWED Journals?

If you look through the Touro faculty, you will find that some faculty are not very qualified. For instance, check out this guy:

Stany Wilfred Lobo (can't post the link here cause I'm a new member)

He teaches the Anatomy & Physiology components of the preclinical years. If you look at his 'publications' you will find that most, if not all, of them are in NON PEER REVIEWED journals. Is this a joke? Apparently so.

So, going beyond the superficial (n = 1, admittedly), Touro isn't exactly the best place to go to medical school. Sure, it is a means to an end, but you're going to have to have some stellar connections/grades/magic power to match to a decent place.


A physician I work DID mention that "it is residency where you learn to become a doctor", but where you go to medical school is a very large factor in determining where you end up for residency.

If you work hard, pass, do well in clinicals, you will match somewhere that is worth a damn. However, it is frankly concerning the types of 'faculty' that Touro employs.
 
@m45291 Research publications are sort of the joke that no one understands. No one understands the joke because they don't go out of their way to read into it, no one reads into the joke because they don't benefit from exposing it. If I study a protein related to cancer for ten years and I profile some sites, but it's really not big deal despite my protein being "the" cancer protein who is going to call me out on my b.s.? The amount of work put into additional research has been minute and dated, however no one else is the authority on my cancer protein. Everyone else is studying BRCA1, BRCA2, or other tumorogenic sites of transcription.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
m45291 said:
+1 for not judging a book by its cover. That is an important principle.

Look deeper into the school.

Examine the faculty members. Do they have publications (not a 100% accurate metric)? Where do they come from? If they have publications, are they in PEER REVIEWED Journals?

If you look through the Touro faculty, you will find that some faculty are not very qualified. For instance, check out this guy:

Stany Wilfred Lobo (can't post the link here cause I'm a new member)

He teaches the Anatomy & Physiology components of the preclinical years. If you look at his 'publications' you will find that most, if not all, of them are in NON PEER REVIEWED journals. Is this a joke? Apparently so.

So, going beyond the superficial (n = 1, admittedly), Touro isn't exactly the best place to go to medical school. Sure, it is a means to an end, but you're going to have to have some stellar connections/grades/magic power to match to a decent place.


A physician I work DID mention that "it is residency where you learn to become a doctor", but where you go to medical school is a very large factor in determining where you end up for residency.

If you work hard, pass, do well in clinicals, you will match somewhere that is worth a damn. However, it is frankly concerning the types of 'faculty' that Touro employs.
Click to expand...

It's funny because Lobo is actually damn good teacher.
 
Peach Newport said:
The problems mentioned here are found at virtually all osteopathic schools, especially the new ones.

Clinical rotations are inconsistent at ALL DO schools... and Touro at least keeps you close to NYC. Lots of the new (and established) schools have rotations that are just as inconsistent - and they send you halfway across the country to do them.

Turnover is worse at DO schools in general (my suspicion is because of the lack of research).

Placement rates are the same as any other DO school. Match lists look the same as any other.
Click to expand...

Uhh I wouldn't apply these blanket statements to all DO schools. There are some things my school could improve on, but TCOM in general has fantastic rotations and turnover isn't an issue here whatsoever.
 
Its a means to an end....thats the way to look at things. I did not go to touro ny but am very familiar with tourNV and they definitely have their stuff together. Clinical rotations at a large teaching hospital associated with fellowships. I will say that med school prepared me literally how to pass to get closer to figuring out how to pass the boards on my own. Residency and fellowship is where practical abilities and knowledge was gained the most in my experience. I mean yes, the building of NY touro looks not like a typically medical school but it still can produce a degree. The question to the OP is are you willing to take the initiative to thrive in any environment and come out on top? If the school is somewhere you wouldn't want to be then keep it as a back up...no big deal. If its your only choice left then the question is whether or not you want to be a physician at all costs. Where I want to medical school was known for brutal winters (third highest snow fall in the country behind lake pleasant michigan and syracuse ny) but it prepared me enough to navigate rotations and pick up knowledge to pass shelfs/steps and lock in a residency where I prepared my self and took initiative to get into a fellowship.
 
[QUOTE="m45291 said:
Stany Wilfred Lobo (can't post the link here cause I'm a new member)

He teaches the Anatomy & Physiology components of the preclinical years. If you look at his 'publications' you will find that most, if not all, of them are in NON PEER REVIEWED journals. Is this a joke? Apparently so.
Click to expand...

I actually looked this up.

Of his 10 papers listed, 5 are in a non-reviewed Journal, and 5 are in peer-reviewed Journals.

That's not "most," and definitely not all.

It's not 7 papers in Nature but I think your assessment is unfair.
 
m45291 said:
+1 for not judging a book by its cover. That is an important principle.

Look deeper into the school.

Examine the faculty members. Do they have publications (not a 100% accurate metric)? Where do they come from? If they have publications, are they in PEER REVIEWED Journals?

If you look through the Touro faculty, you will find that some faculty are not very qualified. For instance, check out this guy:

Stany Wilfred Lobo (can't post the link here cause I'm a new member)

He teaches the Anatomy & Physiology components of the preclinical years. If you look at his 'publications' you will find that most, if not all, of them are in NON PEER REVIEWED journals. Is this a joke? Apparently so.

So, going beyond the superficial (n = 1, admittedly), Touro isn't exactly the best place to go to medical school. Sure, it is a means to an end, but you're going to have to have some stellar connections/grades/magic power to match to a decent place.


A physician I work DID mention that "it is residency where you learn to become a doctor", but where you go to medical school is a very large factor in determining where you end up for residency.

If you work hard, pass, do well in clinicals, you will match somewhere that is worth a damn. However, it is frankly concerning the types of 'faculty' that Touro employs.
Click to expand...

I know you don't know him, but I do. Dr Lobo an amazing professor and a great person. If it were not for him I would not be where I am today. He has supported countless others in their journey though medical school and beyond. Touro is quite lucky to have him.
 
Why do publications carry so much weight for faculty? Wouldn't people rather have professors whose lectures are more clinically relevant than research relevant?
 
Coltuna said:
Why do publications carry so much weight for faculty? Wouldn't people rather have professors whose lectures are more clinically relevant than research relevant?
Click to expand...
You honestly don’t learn from your professors lectures anyways. With research, you are most likely going to get productive research through professors at your school. Research is important for competitive residencies. The more published your professors are the more likely they are to be efficient at pumping out papers
 
Status
Not open for further replies.

Similar threads

A
Noorda COM
Replies
4
Views
1K
bloodyscalpel
B
Mr.Smile12
Benedictine COM moves
Replies
1
Views
112
CBass2288
CBass2288
M
Transferring between Touro campuses
Replies
8
Views
1K
medicine23
M
C
The Racism at Noorda is Unbearable
Replies
18
Views
3K
CBass2288
CBass2288
H
taking more than 4 years to compelete a degree? is it a red flag?
Replies
21
Views
2K
dial1010usa
D
Top