Match Day 2013

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Why cancel my thread/poll?? Airbud has no obligation to answer and with that many programs listed, no personally identifying information would ever have been released. The information HIPAA allows to be released so we can present case studies is more indentifying in nature than that poll.

How can I possibly be held responsible for reading the stupid guidelines of forum posting? That thread cancelation was absolute crap. Some of us have been out creating successes of ourselves and don't have the time to read stupid guidelines.

On that note: it seems everyone thought airbud was going to PSL. Who else has a vote? And to the person who posted west houston - seriously?

Members don't see this ad.
 
I'm almost sure you cannot do a clerkship after you graduate. You are no longer covered under the school's insurance. Visiting is another story. I'm sure a program might let you stick around for a week or two if there aren't many students. Probably wouldn't be able to do much in clinic/OR though.
 
Who cares where airbud is going or anything about airbud. Keep the posts relevant.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
I'm almost sure you cannot do a clerkship after you graduate. You are no longer covered under the school's insurance. Visiting is another story. I'm sure a program might let you stick around for a week or two if there aren't many students. Probably wouldn't be able to do much in clinic/OR though.

You are correct. As a graduate, you're not covered by the school anymore. You can visit, which is what I did. I hung out in clinic , observed, some let me do a little bit but no OR time. Just an opportunity to meet the residents, attendings, and/or director.

I simply contacted the programs I was interested in, let them know upfront I was a reapplicant and let them decide to let me visit or not. I only had one program that told me they couldn't let me visit for that reason.

I agree that I wouldn't spend anymore $ doing a masters unless you plan to not pursue a residency and do something else. I opted for the preceptorship. It keeps ya in the loop of things. As far as it helping you get a residency spot, i really don't know. Some it may have helped make some connections with residency directors to land a spot somewhere.

When I would mention what I did with that year off, some programs didn't know that the preceptorship was even an option to do or existed.

As far as student loans are concerned, I made sure all of my loans were with one lender. Make sure you meet with your financial aid folks before you leave. I did an income based repayment (IBR) plan since I was doing the preceptorship, so I didn't get hit with a ridiculous loan payment that I couldn't afford. It ended up based on the income I made my repayment for the year was $0. But I still made small payments anyway with no penalty.

While waiting for this year's match my IBR renewal came up, and I had to supply my income info again. It was approved again for another year. Which I was glad because I didn't know if I would match or not. So once I start residency I guess I need to change it to the residency training deferment.
 
Last edited:
http://www.aacpm.org/html/statistics/PDFs/MatrStats/11-12_Total_Enroll_CLASS.pdf

How reliable is this data? (+/- attrition) If it is reliable, 2015 will be in for a serious pinch.

Class of 2015: 672
Class of 2014: 605
Class of 2013: 604

Here's to hoping AACPM is wrong about class sizes...then again, are they ever right?:naughty:

If that data is reliable and the current numbers about this year are reliable, there will be 104 qualified students who go unmatched this year.

There are 605 students in the class of 2014. Roughly guessing, if 90% pass boards part 2 there will be 545 qualified students in the class of 2014.

104+545 = 649 applicants for approximately 515 spots which makes the shortage 134 for next year. This situation doesn't appear to be improving for the next couple years.

I would like to know the match rate for re-applicants. I imagine that percentage substantially lower than the percentage for first time applicants.
 
This data is old and inaccurate. The real numbers aren't much prettier but they aren't this bad. I'll post something a little more current when I get to my computer tonight.

Re-applicants were back to traditional levels in terms of match rate (30%). So you can figure of the 59 re-apps basically how many got a spot. I don't know for sure but there haven't been more than a couple (if any at all) who scrambled into a spot. So it would be fair to assume that all but around 20 seats went to 2013.
 
I would dare to guess the percentage of re-applicants matching next year will be higher due to the fact they are probably more qualified as a pool than previous years? Plus, I would almost think there will be additional pressure placed on residency directors to make sure these guys and gals don't get thrown out with the bathwater. Podiatry needs to take care of their young.
 
If that data is reliable and the current numbers about this year are reliable, there will be 104 qualified students who go unmatched this year.

There are 605 students in the class of 2014. Roughly guessing, if 90% pass boards part 2 there will be 545 qualified students in the class of 2014.

104+545 = 649 applicants for approximately 515 spots which makes the shortage 134 for next year. This situation doesn't appear to be improving for the next couple years.

I would like to know the match rate for re-applicants. I imagine that percentage substantially lower than the percentage for first time applicants.

To be fair, I would estimate that there will be at least 10 or so more spots available next year. For the past couple years residency seats have grown (albeit slowly). This year we were expecting a huge growth in seats (I believe the total amount of expected seats was around 570 but I don't quite remember). Obviously, most of those seats were not filled due to lack of funding, but we still had more seats available this match than last year (or the year before that).

I'm just a pre-pod so just take this with a grain of salt, but wouldn't it be more prudent to grow residency seats more slowly but focused? Like, instead of trying to create 60+ new residencies in one cycle, focus on growing maybe 15-20 seats every year while maintaining the residencies that are already in existence as best as possible? We will still have a shortage in the short-term but over time (hopefully within 5 years) we can possibly have enough seats for every qualified graduate.
 
One thing that needs to be taken into account when it comes to "growing residency slots" for the good of the profession - There are 9 schools. There are 100+ residencies, right? The residency directors are looking out for their own just like the schools are. It is easier to police and change 9 than 100.
 
One thing that needs to be taken into account when it comes to "growing residency slots" for the good of the profession - There are 9 schools. There are 100+ residencies, right? The residency directors are looking out for their own just like the schools are. It is easier to police and change 9 than 100.

While I do agree with you (and this problem clearly needs to be addressed from all angles), schools shrinking their class sizes will have no effect until the earliest of 2017 (realistically 2018...). Unless you are suggesting cutting students, this solution will not work fast enough to have any effect in the next four years, and by then the residency shortage c could compound to nearly 400 students...

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
While I do agree with you (and this problem clearly needs to be addressed from all angles), schools shrinking their class sizes will have no effect until the earliest of 2017 (realistically 2018...). Unless you are suggesting cutting students, this solution will not work fast enough to have any effect in the next four years, and by then the residency shortage c could compound to nearly 400 students...

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile

I agree that it won't make a huge difference for a few years, but again, there are just too many confounding factors on the residency side
-administrative red tape
-funding
-numbers
-facilities
-reputations/egos
etc......

I don't necessarily think there is going to be a "solution" to this problem, rather a "prevention" of a future one.
And I am not sure about having to wait until 2018. Dtrack is going to provide some new numbers soon. I am going to sit at home in my bathrobe and skip out on the 2 scheduled TAR's, scope ankle fusion, bilateral cavus recon, and Frost procedure I am supposed to scrub today so that I can read his reply.
 
. I am going to sit at home in my bathrobe and skip out on the 2 scheduled TAR's, scope ankle fusion, bilateral cavus recon, and Frost procedure I am supposed to scrub today so that I can read his reply.

So they wouldn't mind if I subbed in?? This post really makes me wanna start school.....

But my job is trivial right now, so I can work and wait for Dtrack... :(


Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Sorry guys, gonna be longer than I thought to get the class that really matters. Basically any enrollment data that you get for the class of 2014 is still going to have individuals who have yet to pass part I. So I have to do some math...

Class of 2016 = 687 (the current number is probably actually a tiny bit lower due to usual 1st year attrition)
Class of 2015 = 602 (which will also drop after they take part I)
2014 was at 597 (which includes rollovers from 2013 who would be taking boards for the 3rd and 4th time this past summer/fall) and doesnt include part I attrition yet for the reason explained above. Like I said, I think I can come up with a more accurate 2014 number but either way we are smaller at this point than 2013 was
 
I)
2014 was at 597 (which includes rollovers from 2013 who would be taking boards for the 3rd and 4th time this past summer/fall) and doesnt include part I attrition yet for the reason explained above. Like I said, I think I can come up with a more accurate 2014 number but either way we are smaller at this point than 2013 was

Just to be clear, 2014 is smaller at the present time than 2013 was a year ago?? I'm pretty sure that's what you're saying, but I just wanted to clarify. If you mean that number is smaller than current class of 2013 numbers, I would disagree (30 person discrepancy). Pretty sure it's the former though...



Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
So they wouldn't mind if I subbed in?? This post really makes me wanna start school.....

But my job is trivial right now, so I can work and wait for Dtrack... :(


Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile

I was joking
 
So I'm in the scramble. After a week of spinning my wheels, I've decided to share my story. It's personal, and I'm sure it'll be a dead giveaway to any of my classmates who read this who I really am. But this is a story that needs to be told, and I will not write anything here that I would not tell my school administrators face to face. I don't need to make any unfair exaggerations or criticisms, since the truth is damning enough.

After we opened up our envelopes at campus and found out we didn't match, we went into the back conference rooms and started e-mailing our applications to the handful of programs in the scramble. What was really striking to me is how many people I knew didn't deserve to be there. These are men and women who I worked with in clinic and in workshops, who I know personally I can count on, and any resident would be happy to have any of them on his team. So what if we have flaws? Who doesn't? We've still got a lot to offer this profession.

Anyway, this story needs to be told for the underclassmen and prospective students, because the schools are trying to be encouraging at a time when they need to be realistic. First off, somebody in this thread said to the effect that if you do your best and pass your boards you'll be fine. Nope, we all gave our best effort and most of us passed boards on our first attempts. This could happen to almost any of you, and it will happen to some of you.

To whoever tries to be optimistic and remind me that roughly 5 out of 6 applicants got programs, fine, but you've got the same odds of coming out ok in Russian Roulette.

So what's in store for a scrambler like me? I can see this going one of three ways.

1) Placing at a new program. After weeks of hovering over casprcrip.org like a vulture, I eventually come out on top and snag something. Personally, I think I've got a solid application, so I consider this to be a real possibility. However, I'm a nontraditional student, and I have a family. My wife works and can't really move because of her job. In this scenario, I spend three years apart from them. Hopefully my kid still recognizes me by the end of it all. Personally, I don't care about myself, but I'm infuriated that they have to be the innocent victims in all of this. To any school admins reading, I hope you're happy. Your liberal admissions standards over the years created a shortage that will now deprive a child of her father.

2) Reapply next year. There are only so many preceptorships out there, and I otherwise would be in the peculiar position of being a doctor with no qualifications to work in healthcare. So I'm really not sure what I'll do for money in the mean time. However, work I must, since I'll have to fund my numerous residency visits somehow. And the shortage will still be around for next year's cycle as well, probably worse. If this year's match was a bloodbath, next year's will be a crime against humanity.

3) Back to the drawing board. This would be a bittersweet option if I had to pursue it. I still think, in the grand scheme of things, being a podiatrist is not that bad of a job. However, this year's match has really brought to light the ugly side of this profession. 100 of my colleagues and I are in a very uncomfortable position right now, and it's not immediately obvious that the people in charge are particularly moved. Besides, if I switch careers, I won't need to be an absentee father, and call me a sentimental fool, but I think there's value in that. Also, it means I won't be around 3-5 years from now when all the graduates from all these newly created programs saturate the market and drive down the salaries for new associates...

Thanks for sharing this... and from the bottom of my heart, I'm really sorry this happened to you.
 
So what's in store for a scrambler like me? I can see this going one of three ways.

1) Placing at a new program. After weeks of hovering over casprcrip.org like a vulture, I eventually come out on top and snag something. Personally, I think I've got a solid application, so I consider this to be a real possibility. However, I'm a nontraditional student, and I have a family. My wife works and can't really move because of her job. In this scenario, I spend three years apart from them. Hopefully my kid still recognizes me by the end of it all. Personally, I don't care about myself, but I'm infuriated that they have to be the innocent victims in all of this. To any school admins reading, I hope you're happy. Your liberal admissions standards over the years created a shortage that will now deprive a child of her father.

Is this a joke? Your situation sucks it really does. The reality though is that you aren't willing to sacrifice and do what it takes to persue training. By limiting yourself to one specific location for training you did just that, LIMITED yourself to the possibility of matching. I'm sorry but you've got to be willing to do what it takes to persue residency training. If you knew from the beginning that your family would not be willing to move or sacrifice an income during residency to further your career then maybe you should've reconsidered going into podiatry. I know a lot of "non-traditional" students as you put it, that have families with multiple children and are going to sacrifice and live on a resident's salary for the sake of training and a future career. This is what you do. Again you situation sucks, but your excuses suck also.
 
That story was profoundly moving, real, truthful, and took guts--a backbone to post this.

Your family has much to be proud of. You are a doctor-you earned it-not like a paper MD, or some online/ abbreviated PhD nonsense, but a 4 year earned health doctorate that may be not well known, but YOU may be well known, and perhaps, your honor, integrity, and being a stand up Dude (unlike most podo politicians, BS artists) will prevail and help earn you a position that you rightfully deserve.

Perhaps, your schools, clubs, or others can help retool you into something other than clinical podiatry given that you do not have a residency, nor can forsee earning one in the future. Few options exist outside of clinical podiatry.

Most students and practitioners have huge student loans (unlike other countries that place a much higher value on education/heavily subsidized schooling) and must earn a serious paycheck to start paying these massive loans back without getting into the deadly neg amort situation--and eat, clothe, car, rent, petrol, life necessitites.. Without a residency, you have very few options. Perhaps seek legal recourse.

The clubs and schools should be tarred and feathered--they are indeed tuition driven, fog the mirror and you;re in, and now well intentioned, enthuiastic students are in deep peril.

Those "leaders", "masters'', "famers" --they did not know that this was going to happen??? Or were they too busy giving each other pep talks, selling braces, spin stories, back peddling, plastic trophies, and which non-ABMS board certification is the best?! More of nothing.

Where were the alarms from those "leaders"-this did not know of the post grad training shortage??

Must believe in santa klaus and unicorns too.

For that much debt, studying, doing all the "right" things-and thinking it won't happen to you...good luck with that concept. That is delusional thinking-happy talk and more of nothing.

Instead of attacking one of your own colleagues--why not start with the schools and the podiatry clubs that sell empty promises and hot air, and 104 students or whatever number is now...have paid a heck of price. Due diligences states that these shortages have occurred in the 80s, 90s, etc...--history repeats itself, and more of nothing.

G-d bless you and your family, it is NOT you, it is a rudderless ship profession with the wrong people in the wrong positions.
 
Last edited:
realistically, what's considered a "bad" GPA going into the match?

I've heard a number of things from <2.5, 2.0 cutoff, or it depends...
 
So I'm in the scramble. After a week of spinning my wheels, I've decided to share my story. It's personal, and I'm sure it'll be a dead giveaway to any of my classmates who read this who I really am. But this is a story that needs to be told, and I will not write anything here that I would not tell my school administrators face to face. I don't need to make any unfair exaggerations or criticisms, since the truth is damning enough.

After we opened up our envelopes at campus and found out we didn't match, we went into the back conference rooms and started e-mailing our applications to the handful of programs in the scramble. What was really striking to me is how many people I knew didn't deserve to be there. These are men and women who I worked with in clinic and in workshops, who I know personally I can count on, and any resident would be happy to have any of them on his team. So what if we have flaws? Who doesn't? We've still got a lot to offer this profession.

Anyway, this story needs to be told for the underclassmen and prospective students, because the schools are trying to be encouraging at a time when they need to be realistic. First off, somebody in this thread said to the effect that if you do your best and pass your boards you'll be fine. Nope, we all gave our best effort and most of us passed boards on our first attempts. This could happen to almost any of you, and it will happen to some of you.

To whoever tries to be optimistic and remind me that roughly 5 out of 6 applicants got programs, fine, but you've got the same odds of coming out ok in Russian Roulette.

So what's in store for a scrambler like me? I can see this going one of three ways.

1) Placing at a new program. After weeks of hovering over casprcrip.org like a vulture, I eventually come out on top and snag something. Personally, I think I've got a solid application, so I consider this to be a real possibility. However, I'm a nontraditional student, and I have a family. My wife works and can't really move because of her job. In this scenario, I spend three years apart from them. Hopefully my kid still recognizes me by the end of it all. Personally, I don't care about myself, but I'm infuriated that they have to be the innocent victims in all of this. To any school admins reading, I hope you're happy. Your liberal admissions standards over the years created a shortage that will now deprive a child of her father.

2) Reapply next year. There are only so many preceptorships out there, and I otherwise would be in the peculiar position of being a doctor with no qualifications to work in healthcare. So I'm really not sure what I'll do for money in the mean time. However, work I must, since I'll have to fund my numerous residency visits somehow. And the shortage will still be around for next year's cycle as well, probably worse. If this year's match was a bloodbath, next year's will be a crime against humanity.

3) Back to the drawing board. This would be a bittersweet option if I had to pursue it. I still think, in the grand scheme of things, being a podiatrist is not that bad of a job. However, this year's match has really brought to light the ugly side of this profession. 100 of my colleagues and I are in a very uncomfortable position right now, and it's not immediately obvious that the people in charge are particularly moved. Besides, if I switch careers, I won't need to be an absentee father, and call me a sentimental fool, but I think there's value in that. Also, it means I won't be around 3-5 years from now when all the graduates from all these newly created programs saturate the market and drive down the salaries for new associates...

My friend I am in the same position as you are. I have not limited myself to places where I would like to do residency but still no luck. I went to talk to my school dean yesterday, but he was in a conference call meeting with the other 8 school deans for possible part 3 practical board for future classes; that just broke my heart more as I saw these deans trying to find new ways of making students pay money instead of calling an emergency meeting to come up with a solution. Clearly preceptorship is not the solution. I have 3.35 GPA, have passed my boards, and have gotten honors in most of my externships but am at this position now; some of my classmates worked just as hard and are very smart, but do not have any positions still. I have a feeling that lots of schools and programs were not even honest during scramble. How can a program becomes filled 11 minutes after scramble? There are obviously some under the table connection going on with this. APMSA keeps on advertising their approved and pending spots, but it has been like this for a long time. it is also not 104 people without spots; its certainly more since some programs in the scramble only filled one spot instead of two and some went on probation. Most these deans have 300k+ salary and with my experience what they look at is their own pocket and nothing else. Unfortunately, they do not realize because of us they have their jobs and if they do not think about a solution or come up with something immediately, they are gonna be without a job in a few years. Who would want to study for four years and pay 250k for a profession that one out of 5 students do not get residencies?
 
It's heartbreaking for a GREAT student to scramble into a mediocre program when he/she knows one can do better.
 
... I went to talk to my school dean yesterday, but he was in a conference call meeting with the other 8 school deans for possible part 3 practical board for future classes; that just broke my heart more as I saw these deans trying to find new ways of making students pay money instead of calling an emergency meeting to come up with a solution. ...

:mad: :mad: :mad:

Absolutely inexcusable. That right there is a perfect summation of the schools' attitude through the last 4 years. While they may have limited methods to help those currently without a residency spot, I can't think of a worse way to allocate their time or resources. 25 people scrambled at mother Scholl, but hey, why not create another $900 worthless barrier. I guess too many of us passed Part II this year...

I had classmates who expressed concerns since 1st year of school, and were hushed with phrases like "it won't affect you" or "there will be enough spots," when anyone who can do math could smell the smoke.

Adam Smasher and Podpod2013, thank you for sharing and best of luck.
 
Would it be possible to go to another country like England, Australia, or Canada? Do those countries require a residency?

I'm aware that the degree probably does not transfer but its worth throwing out there. If it came down to it I would move away for a year to practice and re-apply.
 
Would it be possible to go to another country like England, Australia, or Canada? Do those countries require a residency?

I'm aware that the degree probably does not transfer but its worth throwing out there. If it came down to it I would move away for a year to practice and re-apply.

This thought crossed my mind too, but with significantly less developed countries... You could probably practice as a fully fledged physician in a handful of countries.

I remember an anecdotal story a Spanish professor told of his time in Belize (albeit 20 years ago). He had gotten sick and went to a hospital. One of the "doctors" that treated him at the hospital had a name tag that read something to the effect of "University of Michigan Medical School, Failed"

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
My friend I am in the same position as you are. I have not limited myself to places where I would like to do residency but still no luck. I went to talk to my school dean yesterday, but he was in a conference call meeting with the other 8 school deans for possible part 3 practical board for future classes; that just broke my heart more as I saw these deans trying to find new ways of making students pay money instead of calling an emergency meeting to come up with a solution. Clearly preceptorship is not the solution. I have 3.35 GPA, have passed my boards, and have gotten honors in most of my externships but am at this position now; some of my classmates worked just as hard and are very smart, but do not have any positions still. I have a feeling that lots of schools and programs were not even honest during scramble. How can a program becomes filled 11 minutes after scramble? There are obviously some under the table connection going on with this. APMSA keeps on advertising their approved and pending spots, but it has been like this for a long time. it is also not 104 people without spots; its certainly more since some programs in the scramble only filled one spot instead of two and some went on probation. Most these deans have 300k+ salary and with my experience what they look at is their own pocket and nothing else. Unfortunately, they do not realize because of us they have their jobs and if they do not think about a solution or come up with something immediately, they are gonna be without a job in a few years. Who would want to study for four years and pay 250k for a profession that one out of 5 students do not get residencies?

I can agree with this. I was told by someone involved in residency interviews that this happened back in the day all the time and currently happened during this year's interviews. All this wheeling and dealing at students expense. It didn't matter what his or the other attendings opinions on the interviews panel were on the candidates. The director stated that they had promised a spot based on an agreement made with someone. Quid pro quo as it were. If he gave a spot, he was getting something on the back end. So you go into a program interview thinking that you may have a chance like everyone else but in reality it's for nothing.

I was completely stunned. :scared: But what shocked me the most was why would this attending even be further involved with that program knowing that this is going on?
 
Would it be possible to go to another country like England, Australia, or Canada? Do those countries require a residency?

I'm aware that the degree probably does not transfer but its worth throwing out there. If it came down to it I would move away for a year to practice and re-apply.

I believe Australia requires US trained pods to do the required 3 yr residency before practicing. I checked into it a little bit last year when I was sitting out the year trying to figure out what my options were. I may be incorrect.

It's tough to try to get employed somewhere bc when employers see that pod degree, they get hesitant on whether to hire you. That was a constant struggle and source of concern when I was looking for a job. At one point it was more of a hinderance than help.
 
We got word from Scholl today, via email, that 75/100 students matched. As of today, 7 more students have been placed in programs giving Scholl 2013 a 82% residency placement.

So, out of the 25 that scrambled, 7 of them got spots?
 
I was told by someone involved in residency interviews that this happened back in the day all the time and currently happened during this year's interviews. All this wheeling and dealing at students expense. It didn't matter what his or the other attendings opinions on the interviews panel were on the candidates. The director stated that they had promised a spot based on an agreement made with someone.

Would you mind sharing the program, or at least the state? PM if you rather but I would be very curious to know who was still doing this, as I find it hard to believe...
 
I believe Australia requires US trained pods to do the required 3 yr residency before practicing. I checked into it a little bit last year when I was sitting out the year trying to figure out what my options were. I may be incorrect.

It's tough to try to get employed somewhere bc when employers see that pod degree, they get hesitant on whether to hire you. That was a constant struggle and source of concern when I was looking for a job. At one point it was more of a hinderance than help.

This same problem exists with lawyers with their J.D. who seek alternate employment. It is more of a liability than it is an asset.
 
Perhaps permission has been asked, but stories from this thread are being scooped for the new podiatry-smear site. ie. Adam, your post appears there word for word. If you didn't give permission then Traum's cashing in on your heartache.
 
Permission was neither asked nor granted
 
Would you mind sharing the program, or at least the state? PM if you rather but I would be very curious to know who was still doing this, as I find it hard to believe...

I would rather not say the program...not falling into that trap and get slammed. The source is reliable and I already had my own personal experience with the program. So I believe it.

Whether you believe it or not is your choice. Not asking you to. The point is to be naive to think that this doesn't happen. How often, I don't know. Can only speculate. No one knows what really happens behind closed doors. There is always some level of connections/relationships between programs/residency directors and deans or people in general. It is what it is. Some ppl reap the benefits of those relationships, deserving or not.

I just thought it was pretty shady :thumbdown:
 
I know a couple of pods who graduated 10 years ago and they want residency programs, can they be 105 and 106? Come on, clearly the number is unacceptable but if you are looking at the class of 2012 and 2013 it's about 80. So let's at least be honest about the number.
 
Last edited:
I know a couple of pods who graduated 10 years ago and they want residency programs, can they be 105 and 106? Come on, clearly the number is unacceptable but if you are looking at the class of 2012 and 2013 it's about 80. So let's at least be honest about the number.

I was thinking what you are saying right now all day long and it made me feel better that there was a huge "new grad advantage" and the majority of the scramblers/unmatched people were reapplicants, and therefore in 4 years when the deficit will (potentially) be huge (300ish unmatched?) Those graduating will still have "good" odds and not the 2/3 chance it would seem from outward appearances... However, after reading all I can about this, I surprised at the rate reapplicants did match... They were close to 2/3 matching rate... While the sample is too small and is probably statistically inconclusive at this point, if this trend continues, 2/3 of three hundred in 4 years is 200 students. So if my class graduates with 600, and we have 600 seats, 200 of them will be taken by reapplicants, forcing the recent/new grad average to a staggering 400/600... So, while the 80 looks nice now, numbers are not the optimists friend right now...

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
Until this year, past graduates have always had more than enough programs for the graduating class. Which is why reapplicants have been at a disadvantage. In the past they've been given a fair shake and didn't get a program for various reasons. Which begs the question, why didn't they get a spot? So the 104 number is a bit disingenuous, especially considering the final number won't be that big. The class of 2014 and 2015 are smaller as well. I'm not trying to belittle the current problem, it exists and it needs to be addressed, but the 300+ type numbers being thrown around are simply excessive and inaccurate.
 
Until this year, past graduates have always had more than enough programs for the graduating class. Which is why reapplicants have been at a disadvantage. In the past they've been given a fair shake and didn't get a program for various reasons. Which begs the question, why didn't they get a spot? So the 104 number is a bit disingenuous, especially considering the final number won't be that big. The class of 2014 and 2015 are smaller as well. I'm not trying to belittle the current problem, it exists and it needs to be addressed, but the 300+ type numbers being thrown around are simply excessive and inaccurate.

Wait, from my perspective, in 2017, it's not reasonable to see 300 applicants get passed up? I don't mean to challenge you, clearly you are more in the know about this than most (and clearly me as a pre-pod...), but from what I can tell, that is a reasonable guess... It looks like there will be about an additional 50 person deficit per year (in addition to the previous year). over 4 years, that is two hundred people, plus the original 100.

The only information I have been basing my knowledge off of is SDN, PM News, and future classmates. Clearly my posts are possible conjecture, but I don't have access to any other information if people aren't forthcoming with it.

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
Many of the numbers out there are based on a continued 98% pass rate on part II of the boards. This was clearly an anomaly as the typical pass rate after a couple of administrations would be more like 90%. Very unlikely it will happen again. 98% exceeds allopathic and osteopathic board pass rates. There is still an issue with quality and quanity of the national applicant pool and 10-20% of those admitted. You can point a finger at several of the colleges for that. Everyone knows it but are unwilling to acknowledge. I do agree, those that did pass the boards deserve at least the opportunity for a residency program but programs are under no obligation to take if not a good fit.
 
151 people across the country were in the scramble for 49 spots after the match results were released, I forget the exact number from previous years. I' have had heard that under the table deals are made and this is how things have always been. However, some programs were fair, but made quick decisions because students who rotated there were in scramble and re-applied thus their decision was fairly easy. Those in charge have to offer practical solutions for the 102 applicants who won't match this year and stop blaming them for passing boards, that's ridiculous. At least apologize and stop saying no one is to blame. This is not a time for debate it's a time for coming up with practical solutions.
 
Last edited:
So a college that takes 30 and does an outstanding job educating these students should now take 26 and a college that takes 125 (actually exceeds) should take 108. You consider that fair? There should be a decrease in enrollments but not across the board.
 
So a college that takes 30 and does an outstanding job educating these students should now take 26 and a college that takes 125 (actually exceeds) should take 108. You consider that fair? There should be a decrease in enrollments but not across the board.

:thumbup:
 
I actually thought 2015 was quite large??

2015 is down to 602 (could be lower with a couple spring dropouts) and they haven't taken part I yet. Both 2014 and 2015 should be smaller than 2013 was when CASPR rolls around for them.

And as for the big numbers. No, I dont think 200 is reasonable either. There will be around 60 kids from 2013 who don't get a spot. The other 40 people have all had numerous chances in multiple years of surpluses. But even if you find it ethically necessary to include them, the next 2 years won't add to the total. Have to wait another year before you'll be able to project 2016.
 
KSUCPM had 20 enter the scramble. 8 of them got spots. 92% have a residency. Not terrible but kinda tough if you're in the 8%.

Hard to say that the schools should decrease enrollment. Seems like that would just result in residencies going unfilled and then probably disappearing. Decreasing enrollment by 5 to 10% and pushing to add residencies to meet in the middle would be better.

This is a good lesson to third years that you need to be 100% on your game if you want to match. Good grades, pass boards, work hard, make relationships and secure a spot. You can't just assume someone is going to want you, you've gotta make them want you.
 
And as for the big numbers. No, I dont think 200 is reasonable either. There will be around 60 kids from 2013 who don't get a spot. The other 40 people have all had numerous chances in multiple years of surpluses. But even if you find it ethically necessary to include them, the next 2 years won't add to the total. Have to wait another year before you'll be able to project 2016.

ok, need a little clarification on your numbers, please. There are about 100 without a spot. Are you saying 40 are those have entered match numerous times and most likely may never match and 60 are just out of luck from 2013? And, I'm not sure what you mean that if they are included, they won't add to the total? Help :confused:

I guess the real question is.. what is your estimate of the total next year that go without a residency - students from 2014? and those from 2013's match (60 legit)?
 
Top