NY Times article on vet med profession

[DVMDream]

---

Members don't see this ad.

(CB=Caribbean, CN=Canadian, EU=European Union, AU= Australia, NZ=New Zealand, US=United States)

All I have to say: Devyn will be happy to see that you used EU... and not UK...

 

[Escalla]

all you CNs put there- is there a requirement that you return to your funding province?

Just to answer your question....as far as I know, no. We can go where ever we want for a job after graduation. I haven't ever heard of any restrictions/requirements like for contract seats in the U.S.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Eh, that turned into a dissertation. DId I answer your question?

Sorry to say after you put so much effort into it... But no, not at all. Pretty much everything concrete you gave was everything I knew. Obviously there are differences between the groupings listed as they are separate entities, and the CB schools are pretty much US schools. I never said anything about their relative contribution to oversupply. Like, i said, I'm not against the accreditation of international schools. I was just asking for evidence for your quote about going to international schools opening new markets for US grads, and how they produce more employable graduates. (you lumped CB schools together in the post I quoted about that, and I couldn't see why). You also didn't answer what makes you say that those who go to international schools are more employable/desirable as employee. Again, I have nothing against the accreditation of international schools... So you don't have to try and convince me. I'm just trying to see what your reasoning is behind what I quoted from you in my past post.

Several components to this answer:
How many people take advantage of the additional job markets? I have anecdotal evidence- which tells me where to start looking but is not conclusive- and I have some publicly available objective evidence from which I can make limited inference. Good numbers exist but are not public, of course.

No offense, but that really doesn't help the discussion... I hope you can see why. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's not helpful. Could you maybe at least give examples of those anecdotes, and how those people got the jobs they did? Is it as simple as "I applied for a position in x country, and they gave me a visa?" What country was it? How easy was it for them to find that position? And did they have any special qualities that was necessary for them to get that job?

And the question then becomes... what's a meaningful way to measure how many? in head count terms? percentage terms? percentage of those attending non-resident (overseas schools incl. CB ones can be a much cheaper option for those paying non-res) percentage of those going to that region ie CB, EU, AU/NZ?

I think percentage could be a good start, if you're trying to say that allowing US students to go to international schools alleviate the over-supply burden. Another way to look at it, would be for any given class, what is the average number of "extra" job positions created outside the US uniquely held by those who attended accredited international schools? And were those positions available to all US students who went to international schools, or only for those who were duel citizens?

I guess I'm just trying to take the theoretical advantage you bring up about opening job markets, and seeing how realistic that is. Kinda like, I can say till I'm blue in the face that theoretically the broad licensure of the DVM degree opens equine job markets for me even though I didn't go through school with the intention of becoming an equine practitioner. My chance of landing an equine associate's position or even internship? Close to zero. Same for a majority of my classmates. So, for those who go to international schools, how realistic is it for a US citizen who decides senior year while they're job hunting to try and get a job outside of the US, which wouldn't have been available to them had they gone to a US school? This leads to:

As far as barriers to job entry, it really depends country to country, as different countries take very different approaches to managing supply. Germany has come up a few times, they do have strong central planning and a very tightly controlled market in which entry is controlled by controlling seats. [...]

I don't think the how each country sets their number of vet school seats is too pertinent to this particular conversation (though pertinent to the thread in general about how maybe the US can change enrollment numbers) as that doesn't really address how penetrable that country's job market is for US nationals. What i want to know i guess, is if i were to attend an Australian school (or any of the other ones), how many more realistically attainable jobs are open to me vs. if i were to attend a US school? Even if I had a license that allowed me as a US citizen to work in the EU, how many jobs are actually open to me given my citizenship and English-speaking-only status?

based on what you say afterwards, Essentially, vet markets are saturated everywhere except China. As far as I know, your chances of getting a job in china isn't affected by whether you go to school stateside or international in one of the accredited schools.

Any of the international students want to chime in? How can you specifically go about getting an international job (specifically ones that are only available to you or at least much easier for you but not for those who went to school stateside) and how difficult is it? Is it really a viable option to just decide to job hunt one day close to graduation, and get a position? How hard are work visas to get as a vet in the countries you might potentially look at?

 

[justavet]

no, not at all. Pretty much everything concrete you gave was everything I knew. Obviously there are differences between the groupings listed as they are separate entities, and the CB schools are pretty much US schools. I never said anything about their relative contribution to oversupply. Like, i said, I'm not against the accreditation of international schools. I was just asking for evidence for your quote about going to international schools opening new markets for US grads, and how they produce more employable graduates. (you lumped CB schools together in the post I quoted about that, and I couldn't see why). You also didn't answer what makes you say that those who go to international schools are more employable/desirable as employee. Again, I have nothing against the accreditation of international schools... So you don't have to try and convince me. I'm just trying to see what your reasoning is behind what I quoted from you in my past post.


No offense, but that really doesn't help the discussion... I hope you can see why. I'm not saying you're wrong, but it's not helpful. Could you maybe at least give examples of those anecdotes, and how those people got the jobs they did? Is it as simple as "I applied for a position in x country, and they gave me a visa?" What country was it? How easy was it for them to find that position? And did they have any special qualities that was necessary for them to get that job?

I think percentage could be a good start, if you're trying to say that allowing US students to go to international schools alleviate the over-supply burden. Another way to look at it, would be for any given class, what is the average number of "extra" job positions created outside the US uniquely held by those who attended accredited international schools? And were those positions available to all US students who went to international schools, or only for those who were duel citizens?

I guess I'm just trying to take the theoretical advantage you bring up about opening job markets, and seeing how realistic that is. Kinda like, I can say till I'm blue in the face that theoretically the broad licensure of the DVM degree opens equine job markets for me even though I didn't go through school with the intention of becoming an equine practitioner. My chance of landing an equine associate's position or even internship? Close to zero. Same for a majority of my classmates. So, for those who go to international schools, how realistic is it for a US citizen who decides senior year while they're job hunting to try and get a job outside of the US, which wouldn't have been available to them had they gone to a US school? This leads to:



I don't think the how each country sets their number of vet school seats is too pertinent to this particular conversation (though pertinent to the thread in general about how maybe the US can change enrollment numbers) as that doesn't really address how penetrable that country's job market is for US nationals. What i want to know i guess, is if i were to attend an Australian school (or any of the other ones), how many more realistically attainable jobs are open to me vs. if i were to attend a US school? Even if I had a license that allowed me as a US citizen to work in the EU, how many jobs are actually open to me given my citizenship and English-speaking-only status?

based on what you say afterwards, Essentially, vet markets are saturated everywhere except China. As far as I know, your chances of getting a job in china isn't affected by whether you go to school stateside or international in one of the accredited schools.

Any of the international students want to chime in? How can you specifically go about getting an international job (specifically ones that are only available to you or at least much easier for you but not for those who went to school stateside) and how difficult is it? Is it really a viable option to just decide to job hunt one day close to graduation, and get a position? How hard are work visas to get as a vet in the countries you might potentially look at?

Right- I was pretty sure I wandered away from what you asked

I think the international students are the better ones to provide anecdotes as evidence- they'll be able to give the details you're looking for.

I guess when I read your quote I need to correct a false impression I gave.
I never meant to imply that getting a veterinary job in another country was easy because you went to an accredited school in that country. The veterinary job markets everywhere seem to be crowded; there is no region or country so lacking in total graduates or with such unmet demand that it will draw grads away from the US. The way having international schools accredited will ease US vet labor markets is that grads have additional jobs outside the US to compete for.

Your equine job example- are you saying your odds of getting an equine position are close to zero bc you weren't aimed at it thru school, or because there are so few equine positions?

"Is it really a viable option to just decide to job hunt one day close to graduation, and get a position? "
Even if this is a viable strategy, it isn't a good one. Kinda like, is it really a viable option to decide to go to school on loans, and worry about how to pay them back later? As a nation, with student loan debt surpassing credit card debt in both amount and number of defaults, the answer has to be a system with more long term consideration. Bring that down to the microeconomic level- we have to enable prospective students to choose and up the odds of getting .

That takes firm, comprehensive, timely numbers on who goes to school where and what jobs they take after graduation All we have, as you know already,is anecdote and inference. Given the last set of employment data released from the AAVMC I am not hopeful anyone is compiling such numbers, although I do commend the AAVMC for providing numbers!
(There's a survey designed to supplement the AAMVC employment data here).
Basically, I don;t think anyone can give you the answer you're looking for because the answer you're looking for has yet to be generated. Hopefully some of the internnational srudets will chime in!

 

[Minnerbelle]

To recap- cheaper education, competitive pressure for US schools, equivalent education, overseas experience, additional job markets, eases US labor oversupply, govt gets better return on investment as grad more likely to be employed.... why are we against this?

I'm not sure how asking you to justify the bolded statements you've made in the above quote keeps getting me lessons on things I wasn't asking for... so I'm beginning to think I'm not asking coherently. Am I really that unclear? The following is the closest I got in the form of a relevant answer.

I guess when I read your quote I need to correct a false impression I gave.
I never meant to imply that getting a veterinary job in another country was easy because you went to an accredited school in that country. [...] The way having international schools accredited will ease US vet labor markets is that grads have additional jobs outside the US to compete for.

Well, again, yes in theory...But it's only true IF there are a significant number of viable additional jobs they can compete for uniquely that students stateside cannot. Visa issues, job market issues, and average salary where these additional jobs are located are integral to assessing this viability. That's why I asked about the first two. The third is just as important now that I think about it, because if vet salaries for these "additional jobs" cannot support paying back these students' rather monstrous student loans, they're not very viable either. Yes, I understand they're not the MOST expensive, but a vast majority of all accredited vet schools will result in monstrous student loans from society's point of view, and the international schools are definitely not the exceptions (esp in those countries where no one else around you would ever have that kind of educational debt, if any at all).

And then when it comes to questions pertinent to viability, (chiefly how easy it is for a US citizen foreign school vet to get a job outside the US, or alternatively how many jobs does it add for these students) you say:

Basically, I don;t think anyone can give you the answer you're looking for because the answer you're looking for has yet to be generated.

If no one can give you evidence to support your claim, why make that claim?

You then say that you have anecdotes as evidence, and that's the best we have so we should accept it since anecdotes trump nothing. But then you don't even offer them for others to assess. So essentially your opinions, or rather, your assessment of the situation seen through your particular set of lenses must be true... I guess that's what bothers me about this whole thing. I have huge amounts of respect for you to take time out of your life to help those wanting to enter your profession by making yourself an educational resource. You have been super helpful on this forum, and I'm sure you've made a huge impact on many people. But because you are someone who has a lot of impact, I get disappointed when I see propaganda like that in your posts. Sorry if that's an inaccurate depiction of what's going on, but I'm not sure what else I'm supposed to think when you won't/can't justify these rather large claims but still make them anyway.

 

[justavet]

I'm not sure how asking you to justify the bolded statements you've made in the above quote keeps getting me lessons on things I wasn't asking for... so I'm beginning to think I'm not asking coherently. Am I really that unclear? The following is the closest I got in the form of a relevant answer.



Well, again, yes in theory...But it's only true IF there are a significant number of viable additional jobs they can compete for uniquely that students stateside cannot. Visa issues, job market issues, and average salary where these additional jobs are located are integral to assessing this viability. That's why I asked about the first two. The third is just as important now that I think about it, because if vet salaries for these "additional jobs" cannot support paying back these students' rather monstrous student loans, they're not very viable either. Yes, I understand they're not the MOST expensive, but a vast majority of all accredited vet schools will result in monstrous student loans from society's point of view, and the international schools are definitely not the exceptions (esp in those countries where no one else around you would ever have that kind of educational debt, if any at all).

And then when it comes to questions pertinent to viability, (chiefly how easy it is for a US citizen foreign school vet to get a job outside the US, or alternatively how many jobs does it add for these students) you say:



If no one can give you evidence to support your claim, why make that claim?

You then say that you have anecdotes as evidence, and that's the best we have so we should accept it since anecdotes trump nothing. But then you don't even offer them for others to assess. So essentially your opinions, or rather, your assessment of the situation seen through your particular set of lenses must be true... I guess that's what bothers me about this whole thing. I have huge amounts of respect for you to take time out of your life to help those wanting to enter your profession by making yourself an educational resource. You have been super helpful on this forum, and I'm sure you've made a huge impact on many people. But because you are someone who has a lot of impact, I get disappointed when I see propaganda like that in your posts. Sorry if that's an inaccurate depiction of what's going on, but I'm not sure what else I'm supposed to think when you won't/can't justify these rather large claims but still make them anyway.

Minnerbelle, you seem to be expecting something you have no right to expect. I have told you on what evidence I based my position, that it was the best evidence I knew of, that I knew we needed better, and that I was in the process of generating it.

If you expect people not to form or express opinions until they have perfect evidence, get out of veterinary medicine now. Much of practice is based on anecdote and theory because no matter how hard you look, a lot of times- like here- the evidence just ain't there. So yes, a lot of the time you move forward with anecdote because anecdote and theory do trump nothing. And you (the generic you) never get relieved of the responsibility to evaluate for yourself whether the evidence supporting a position is good enough *for you in your situation*. That's one of the things I really like about SDN- much more so than elsewhere, people here are, and learn to be, independent thinkers who critically evaluate the statements that get made. No matter who makes them.

Which is why I can't quite figure out where you're coming from, honestly. Because you've proven yourself to be one of those critical thinkers, I have a hard time believing you expect not to have to think about getting a job until shortly before graduation, just like I have a hard time believing you dismiss equine as a viable option because it is a field few go into and then only with a lot of planning.

My point was that expecting to fix the situation vet med is in by manipulating only the foreign schools won't work on a microeconomic level or a macroeconomic one. Am I comfortable taking that position based on limited, low quality data? Yes, until someone has data that makes some other position more tenable. I've not found it- does anyone out there have any better data to make some other position more tenable?

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes: "If we have data let's look at data; if all we have is opinion, let's go with mine."

 

[bbeventer]

Have we killed this topic yet?

 

[deli]

Have we killed this topic yet?

I think so. The latest argument seems to be based on just argument's sake.

 

[StartingoverVet]

Reminds me of one of my favorite quotes: "If we have data let's look at data; if all we have is opinion, let's go with mine."

I like this quote... but for the sake of argument.... I would say skewed or poor data that makes you ignore common sense may be worse than data at all. (not saying that has anything to do with the current discussion, just arguing for arguing sake as the last 2 posters pointed ou)

 

[Minnerbelle]

I don't think you are understanding what I was trying to say justavet, so I'm just going to leave it there. You've missed the points i was trying to get across entirely, and it also seems like our definitions of things like employability and job search aren't even the same... so I don't think this is ever going to lead to anything productive. I'm not saying that's your fault, since the issue is most likely that I'm not making sense/explaining clearly or understanding what you're saying, and that we're clearly seeing things from different points of view.

 

[orcagirl]

Just to answer your question....as far as I know, no. We can go where ever we want for a job after graduation. I haven't ever heard of any restrictions/requirements like for contract seats in the U.S.

There are restrictions for AZ contracts. You have to work in the state a year for each year you were sponsored (less if you work in a high needs area) or you have to pay the state back. They will allow you to continue your education (internships and residencies) if you want, but you still have to come back when that is done.

 

[DVMDream]

There are restrictions for AZ contracts. You have to work in the state a year for each year you were sponsored (less if you work in a high needs area) or you have to pay the state back. They will allow you to continue your education (internships and residencies) if you want, but you still have to come back when that is done.

Provided you can even get accepted... good luck with that... my first file review with CSU I was basically told that my chance of getting accepted via WICHE through AZ is close to the same as being accepted OOS.....

 

[orcagirl]

Provided you can even get accepted... good luck with that... my first file review with CSU I was basically told that my chance of getting accepted via WICHE through AZ is close to the same as being accepted OOS.....

Yup. I didn't catch up on everything, so I was just responding to the one comment. It's tough. AZ only has about 5-7 spots depending on the year. So you have to get into the schools and then the state can choose to sponsor you basically.

 

[Escalla]

There are restrictions for AZ contracts. You have to work in the state a year for each year you were sponsored (less if you work in a high needs area) or you have to pay the state back. They will allow you to continue your education (internships and residencies) if you want, but you still have to come back when that is done.

I know there's restrictions, I was meaning that Canada didn't have contracts like in the U.S.

Which makes sense though since the state is sponsoring the seats. I dunno why we don't have them, but I'm not going to complain.

 

[Minnerbelle]

Provided you can even get accepted... good luck with that... my first file review with CSU I was basically told that my chance of getting accepted via WICHE through AZ is close to the same as being accepted OOS.....

Probably worse than getting accepted OOS, because due to the ridiculous OOS tuition the waitlist moves far down the line so the number of people actually accepted OOS is much higher than the number of matriculants (of course they will never divulge that number). People who get WICHE tend to take it and run with it. As nice as it is for the people who get WICHE funding, you might as well consider people in those states a student OOS everywhere with a chance enter a $120k raffle prize since there aren't many funding spots.

 

[DVMDream]

Probably worse than getting accepted OOS, because due to the ridiculous OOS tuition the waitlist moves far down the line so the number of people actually accepted OOS is much higher than the number of matriculants (of course they will never divulge that number). People who get WICHE tend to take it and run with it. As nice as it is for the people who get WICHE funding, you might as well consider people in those states a student OOS everywhere with a chance enter a $120k raffle prize since there aren't many funding spots.

This describes it perfectly... although there are some other factors.. such as the more WICHE schools you apply to the better chance you have to get funding and there is some strange ranking thing that the schools do but still the lady from CSU said it was just as hard if not harder to get in via WICHE..

 

[orcagirl]

Probably worse than getting accepted OOS, because due to the ridiculous OOS tuition the waitlist moves far down the line so the number of people actually accepted OOS is much higher than the number of matriculants (of course they will never divulge that number). People who get WICHE tend to take it and run with it. As nice as it is for the people who get WICHE funding, you might as well consider people in those states a student OOS everywhere with a chance enter a $120k raffle prize since there aren't many funding spots.

And then you get the weird people that go OOS instead of taking the WICHE seat. At least my debt should be about the same. I didn't want to be forced to go back to AZ and I loved NCSU. But now I'm feeling like I'll be moving back to AZ eventually.

 

[wildcatj]

Not quite on topic...
But this bill was supposedly introduced to congress last week: http://studentdebtcrisis.org/hr1330/facts_faqs/
Changes IBR to 10% for 10 years, all the rest is excused without having to pay taxes, caps interest rates at 3.4%. However, after the bill goes into place anyone borrowing would only be able to have a max of ~45k excused (which I assume is how they are going to avoid taking a HUGE hit monetarily. Though I'm still not sure how it's financially feasible for the govn't, would need to run some numbers.). Everyone else who has already borrowed would be eligible for all their debt to be excused. And those people who have already done 10 years at at least 10% could automatically have the rest of their debt excused.
I'll be curious to see if it goes through, and if it stays in place. I'm not hugely financially literate, but at the moment the fed government makes a pretty profit off student debt. I'm not sure how they could afford to take a major loss like what is being proposed.

 

[Quigly]

I'll bet next semesters tuition payment that this never passes, and doubt it will even ever be voted on. Even if it did pass, forgiving just $45K after 10 years is not going to make a big difference for vet students that owe $250,000. This is just someones effort to make it look like they are worried about the issue, but won't be much more than a distraction. It costs too much and does nothing to address the underlying problem of the high expense of some secondary education.

Also, the federal government may be doing alright turning a profit with student loans right now, but long term the program is a huge liability and they are going to end up losing money on it. If it was a great long term investment, the private sector would be in on the game more, but they know better than to offer the terms that the government does.