Last minute smack talk on programs

[ChipLeader]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Still having nagging thoughts of shuffling the rank list, so I thought I'd try and spark some discussion on a few programs. Please feel free to disagree and tell me how I have it all wrong! Okay here we go:

UTSW - Seems solid overall, but what's the deal with all the foreign grads? Seems like there are too many given the supposed strength of the program.

UNC - Anyone have any strong thoughts on this program? Seems just okay to me overall. Seems like they gross too much on surg path and don't have enough responsibility for interpreting/dictating cases early. Didn't get to meet anyone from the CP side when I interviewed=red flag?

Colorado - AP facilities sucked as far as I could tell. When the move to Fitz campus is complete this will be a thing of the past (it is a beautiful new campus), but that's not gonna happen for a few years as far as I can tell. The whole split campus thing could be a problem but they kept saying residents don't have to go back and forth very often. Denver is very nice and I keep thinking this is the big selling point, not so much the program itself...

 

[Aubrey]

UNC- I liked the program a great deal, friendly folk without much palpable angst.. I did meet numbers of the CP faculty there; they pull in plenty of research funding on the CP side and there are plenty of opportunities there for residents to work on collaborational projects. On the AP front, I quizzed them pretty hard about competition for specimens with Duke, and nobody seemed to think it was a major problem. Overall, a good well-rounded program that leans toward preparing residents for private practice, but ops are there for academically inclined folk as well. Chapel Hill's nice, but pricey.. seems like many of the residents lived in Durham instead.

 

[Kibosh]

Of those, I only visited Colorado and I had similar feelings. I came away thinking that in 3-5 years it will be a very strong program as the new chair brings in a few people (they told me the new chair was going to hire 20 new faculty) and the new facility is open, it will be great. However, compared to some of the other places I visited, I felt that I didn't really want to go through this transition. I also felt like Denver was the major selling point and with the prospect that the program is going to be improving a lot with the new chair. I'm going to rank it though (I'd rather be there than not match)

 

[tigerduck]

UTSW - Seems solid overall, but what's the deal with all the foreign grads? Seems like there are too many given the supposed strength of the program.


I REALLY don't like the way you're saying that!!!!!!!

 

[ChipLeader]

I didn't mean to offend anyone with that statement, so I appologize if I did...

I was just trying to get at the fact that there are quite a few FMGs at the program and it doesn't gel with the prevailing thought that "better" or more competitive programs tend to have less foreign grads...Just makes me wonder why that's all - did they have a tough time attracting U.S. students or what?

 

[beary]

UTSW - Seems solid overall, but what's the deal with all the foreign grads? Seems like there are too many given the supposed strength of the program.

I liked UTSW (only place I went of the places you mentioned). I actually didn't notice that they have a lot of foreign grads. I like that they have a lot of fellowships. Actually the two biggest things I didn't like about this program are that it is in Dallas and the gameplaying they do about rank lists.

I am on hemepath at Iowa right now and they were interviewing a residency applicant TODAY. WTF?? 😕 👎

 

[BamaAlum]

I liked UTSW (only place I went of the places you mentioned). I actually didn't notice that they have a lot of foreign grads. I like that they have a lot of fellowships. Actually the two biggest things I didn't like about this program are that it is in Dallas and the gameplaying they do about rank lists.

I am on hemepath at Iowa right now and they were interviewing a residency applicant TODAY. WTF?? 😕 👎

What sort of gameplaying do they do there? My intereaction with them was positive. Of course, I received little feedback from them as ROL approached so maybe they aren't interested enough in me to play games. 🙁 Did anyone get any feedback from Emory? They have been notably silent in the period before ROLs.

 

[beary]

What sort of gameplaying do they do there? My intereaction with them was positive. Of course, I received little feedback from them as ROL approached so maybe they aren't interested enough in me to play games. 🙁

I haven't heard from UTSW from a while either. I heard from a few people before rank season started that they send everybody the same phone calls and letters implying (but not outright stating) that you are ranked to match - even if this is not true. I got the phone calls and letters just as folks told me I would, which I thought was lame.

 

[drPLUM]

About UNC...
I got pretty much the same feeling. The people were the main selling point to me. They seemed really easy to get along with and really laid back. I also was disappointed in the lack of early responsibility, although I have no doubt that their residents are well trained. I was told that preview time early in residency isn't as important because you don't know enough yet. It was a little heavy on forensics and autopsy for me (this doesn't really interest me as much). I interviewed with a couple of CP folks there and got a good impression though. I remember them having an amazing view from the autopsy suite. Chapel Hill is a great town with a high quality of life to me. Overall, I think they are a good program but I visited a few that I will rank higher.

 

[Gene_]

I got the same vague letters/emails implying that I was ranked highly. 👎

During the interview I found out Emory has been stealing their faculty. That can't be a good thing for UTSW.

I still ranked them highly though. I like the city except for all the over the top cowboy stuff (and I'm a Texan).

 

[bio-psy]

I haven't heard anything from Emory either, but I interviewed late in January.

I was wondering if anyone else interviewed at East Virginia Medical School? When I interviewed there, one of the faculty members interviewing me basically told me that there were better programs than EVMS and I should go somewhere else. I have heard that others who interviewed there had the same experience. Seemed like a bad sign to me that they are talking bad about the program during interviews. They also sent out a letter to everyone that applied (whether they were interviewed or not) that sounded like a rejection letter saying that they had interviewed everyone they were going to interview, had lots of good applicants, expect to fill all their spaces, etc, etc. It could leave some who interviewed with the impression that they aren't being ranked, which would hurt the program more than it is already hurting. Not smart on their part - I fully expect to see this program show up as one that did not match all of their spaces.

 

[Samanta]

I didn't mean to offend anyone with that statement, so I appologize if I did...

I was just trying to get at the fact that there are quite a few FMGs at the program and it doesn't gel with the prevailing thought that "better" or more competitive programs tend to have less foreign grads...Just makes me wonder why that's all - did they have a tough time attracting U.S. students or what?

Yes, it is very offensive and implying that FMG have a worse education than US graduates. I think this attidude comes from ignorance and lack of knowledge about other countries. In my oppinion the FMGs who match in the US have to overcome much more difficulties than US graduates and are mostly very good in what they do. So for the future do not judge someone based on their nationality but on what they represent. As a matter of the fact some of the leading pathologists in this country did not train in the US.

 

[ChipLeader]

Yes, it is very offensive and implying that FMG have a worse education than US graduates. I think this attidude comes from ignorance and lack of knowledge about other countries. In my oppinion the FMGs who match in the US have to overcome much more difficulties than US graduates and are mostly very good in what they do. So for the future do not judge someone based on their nationality but on what they represent. As a matter of the fact some of the leading pathologists in this country did not train in the US.

Ummm...that's quite a leap you made there. I don't think that's what I was saying at all. I never judged anyone based on their nationality - I wasn't even talking about anyone in particular. And my statements certainly do not imply anything about the education of foreign versus US grads. I don't doubt one bit that one can get a strong medical education outside the USA.

The fact remains however that as far as residency training programsin this country go the number of foreign graduates in a given program says something about it's competitiveness (and possibly, though not necessarily, it's quality). Of course it's not always that simple and there are exceptions but I considered this (among many other factors obviously) when I was ranking programs and I stand by that.

Anyhow I really don't care to get into a protracted debate about this so this will be my last post on this topic.

 

[Samanta]

The fact remains however that as far as residency training programsin this country go the number of foreign graduates in a given program says something about it's competitiveness (and possibly, though not necessarily, it's quality). Of course it's not always that simple and there are exceptions but I considered this (among many other factors obviously) when I was ranking programs and I stand by that.

I know that many programs and US applicants think that way and i did not mean to personally attack you. However I felt it was important to take a stand here. I just think that this attitude is very unfortunate and prejudiced and leads to waisting of a lot of great potential that FMGs have to offer by not even considering them for an interview just on the base that they did not do their medical training in the US. I really wished that this could be different in the future.

 

[Samanta]

Ummm...that's quite a leap you made there. I don't think that's what I was saying at all. I never judged anyone based on their nationality - I wasn't even talking about anyone in particular. And my statements certainly do not imply anything about the education of foreign versus US grads. I don't doubt one bit that one can get a strong medical education outside the USA.

The fact remains however that as far as residency training programsin this country go the number of foreign graduates in a given program says something about it's competitiveness (and possibly, though not necessarily, it's quality). Of course it's not always that simple and there are exceptions but I considered this (among many other factors obviously) when I was ranking programs and I stand by that.

Anyhow I really don't care to get into a protracted debate about this so this will be my last post on this topic.

I know that many programs and US applicants think that way and i did not mean to personally attack you. However I felt it was important to take a stand here. I just think that this attitude is very unfortunate and prejudiced and leads to waisting of a lot of great potential that FMGs have to offer by not even considering them for an interview just on the base that they did not do their medical training in the US. I really wished that this could be different in the future.

 

[yaah]

I know that many programs and US applicants think that way and i did not mean to personally attack you. However I felt it was important to take a stand here. I just think that this attitude is very unfortunate and prejudiced and leads to waisting of a lot of great potential that FMGs have to offer by not even considering them for an interview just on the base that they did not do their medical training in the US. I really wished that this could be different in the future.

Part of the problem with FMGs with program directors is that they simply don't know what they are getting. If the person is a US grad, they know the educational system they are coming out of and it is, in a sense, taking less of a chance.

Another problem is that the american medical education system puts out a lot of graduates every year, and programs often want to take someone who comes out of that system (and pays into that system) first.

No doubt there is some bias on some perspectives, but a lot of the difficulties that FMGs face are not from bias.

 

[QuietSylph]

I know that many programs and US applicants think that way and i did not mean to personally attack you. However I felt it was important to take a stand here. I just think that this attitude is very unfortunate and prejudiced and leads to waisting of a lot of great potential that FMGs have to offer by not even considering them for an interview just on the base that they did not do their medical training in the US. I really wished that this could be different in the future.

Part of it is also the ability to communicate clearly in English, both in writing and verbally. Significant grammatical errors and misspellings in a pathology report -- or clumsy, heavily accented English when speaking on the telephone -- raises a red flag with most clinicians and reflects poorly on the department. Realistically, this is a big issue for many FMGs that programs must consider when ranking applicants. It's not an issue so much of prejudice but pragmatism.

 

[tsj]

Part of the problem with FMGs with program directors is that they simply don't know what they are getting. If the person is a US grad, they know the educational system they are coming out of and it is, in a sense, taking less of a chance.

Another problem is that the american medical education system puts out a lot of graduates every year, and programs often want to take someone who comes out of that system (and pays into that system) first.

No doubt there is some bias on some perspectives, but a lot of the difficulties that FMGs face are not from bias.

Yeah, but it seems that FMGs are better in path. Take a look at Kumar, Abbas, Cotran, etc...

 

[Gut Shot]

Yeah, but it seems that FMGs are better in path. Take a look at Kumar, Abbas, Cotran, etc...

That's funny, both my facetio-meter and my ******o-meter are going off.

 

[deschutes]

UTSW - Seems solid overall, but what's the deal with all the foreign grads? Seems like there are too many given the supposed strength of the program.

Were they in the senior PGY's? It wasn't too long ago that Path wasn't attracting the so-called "best and brightest" AMGs. Didn't interview at the UT's, but I don't think it necessarily counts against the strength of the program.

As for the youses and us'es that usually get dragged into these AMG/FMG debates... You visit a country on their terms. Get used to it. Otherwise, just don't go there!

Speaking as an FMG, of course.

 

[Non-Trad DO]

That's funny, both my facetio-meter and my ******o-meter are going off.

 

[tsj]

That's funny, both my facetio-meter and my ******o-meter are going off.

No. Seriously. A lot of the leaders in academics are FMGs. Of course it is not close to 100% but it is high.