Obligatory shortage 2014 thread
- Thread starter hotdawg
- Start date
- Joined
- Jun 8, 2012
- Messages
- 150
- Reaction score
- 264
- Points
- 4,621
- Podiatry Student
According to the Match results there were 117 unmatched with something like 51 residency spots that scrambled. It seems like there will be more programs opening up before the deadline just like last year but nothing solid.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,561
- Reaction score
- 4,928
- Points
- 5,661
- Podiatrist
There was always going to be a "shortage" this year. But there were more programs than graduates with almost 40 seats being added in the last year.
There is one program that is taking residents that just opened that isn't on the scramble list. I'd bet there are a couple more that will open before July 1 as well. There will still be a "shortage" next year though, so we can make the shortage thread for 2015 right now.
There is one program that is taking residents that just opened that isn't on the scramble list. I'd bet there are a couple more that will open before July 1 as well. There will still be a "shortage" next year though, so we can make the shortage thread for 2015 right now.
- Joined
- Oct 24, 2010
- Messages
- 290
- Reaction score
- 155
- Points
- 4,671
- Location
- NE Ohio
- Resident [Any Field]
dtrack, is it possible for them to continue increasing positions at the rate they did this past year, or is that wishful thinking? Are there many hospitals "waiting in the wings" to get approval?
D
dyk343
Yeah shortage was not that bad this year.
How did everyone like clicking the match tab only to wait 3-5 minutes for the page to load? Then all we saw was a breakdown on how many were unmatched and how many shortages there will be with a "click here to see where you matched" link. Then click the link and wait another 3-5 minutes to see whee your going. Felt like it took forever.
I do know some people scrambling right now though and I feel very bad for them.
How did everyone like clicking the match tab only to wait 3-5 minutes for the page to load? Then all we saw was a breakdown on how many were unmatched and how many shortages there will be with a "click here to see where you matched" link. Then click the link and wait another 3-5 minutes to see whee your going. Felt like it took forever.
I do know some people scrambling right now though and I feel very bad for them.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 97
- Points
- 4,691
- Podiatrist
http://www.cpme.org/residencies/content.cfm?ItemNumber=4598&navItemNumber=4599
This website always has new programs coming in the future... at least they are doing something about it, now the schools just need to reduce how many students they take, some schools more than others.
This website always has new programs coming in the future... at least they are doing something about it, now the schools just need to reduce how many students they take, some schools more than others.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2012
- Messages
- 417
- Reaction score
- 342
- Points
- 4,756
- Podiatrist
The CPME has expressed repeatedly that it is neither desirable nor appropriate to reduce the enrollment cap, so this will not happen, at least anytime soon. It's very hard to say whether residency position numbers will continue to grow or not at this rate. As of 1/31/14, 18 new positions were approved by the CPME, with 9 additional positions awaiting action.
When these threads pop up it's important to define your terms, otherwise it gets really confusing for people who haven't kept up with things over the last few years.
There were more than enough positions available in the match this year for every student in the class of 2014.
Last cycle, there were not enough for the class of 2013.
When you say "shortage" as it applies to this year, you are only referring to a shortage of positions for EVERYONE who is applying. That is a completely different landscape than what students faced last year and important to note.
I'm sure there will be discussion about how unfair it is not to have enough positions for everyone who wants one, but I think it's more important that enough seats were added so that every graduate from 2014 had a seat with their name on it going into the match and scramble. Everyone in 2014 actually controlled their own destiny this cycle, it wasn't purely a numbers game like it was last year.
It will also be interesting to see the match rate for re applicants from class of 2013. I think the numerical shortage last cycle produced an usually competitive group of re applicants and I won't be surprised to see a higher than normal match rate for them this year.
There were more than enough positions available in the match this year for every student in the class of 2014.
Last cycle, there were not enough for the class of 2013.
When you say "shortage" as it applies to this year, you are only referring to a shortage of positions for EVERYONE who is applying. That is a completely different landscape than what students faced last year and important to note.
I'm sure there will be discussion about how unfair it is not to have enough positions for everyone who wants one, but I think it's more important that enough seats were added so that every graduate from 2014 had a seat with their name on it going into the match and scramble. Everyone in 2014 actually controlled their own destiny this cycle, it wasn't purely a numbers game like it was last year.
It will also be interesting to see the match rate for re applicants from class of 2013. I think the numerical shortage last cycle produced an usually competitive group of re applicants and I won't be surprised to see a higher than normal match rate for them this year.
- Joined
- May 17, 2009
- Messages
- 129
- Reaction score
- 3
- Points
- 4,591
- Location
- Banana Stand
- Resident [Any Field]
I completely agree. I can't imagine what they're going through right now...
Here at AZPod, there are some high quality students scrambling - people who I never imagined in a million years would ever be at risk of not matching to their top 1 or 2 programs. Since our class size is so small, we really get to know one another very very well which makes this feel so much more personal.
It's a damn shame.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,561
- Reaction score
- 4,928
- Points
- 5,661
- Podiatrist
This is a very popular theme/idea, but I'm going to tell you why it may not be as effective as everyone assumes. By in large, the kids who would not be getting accepted with reduced admissions would be the ones who don't make it to graduation now. Most schools are very consistent in the number of students that they graduate, even in years where they've taken more or less students (more noticeable in years with the allowed 10% buffer). ie If Ohio takes 125 kids they graduate around 100. If they take 110 (that's a big cut, in terms of lost tuition $ and probably more than you'd get them to do voluntarily), they are still going to graduate around 100 kids. To make a meaningful impact on graduating class size you'd likely have to decrease enrollment by 15-20% (essentially the current rate of attrition). Not only will the CPME not make changes to the caps, but the deans would never voluntarily reduce their class size by that many students. $$$ talks.
I'm mostly playing devil's advocate since I believe the larger schools ought to take less students. It has little to do with the school itself and everything to do with an applicant pool that will only ever have a certain number of kids who can hack it. At least until it grows. If DMU took 120 kids, everything that DMU can currently brag about would be gone. Board pass rates would drop, attrition rate would increase, and I guarantee the 100% residency placement number would be no more. With 9 schools fighting over 1000 kids, no one school can take and graduate over 100 kids AND place them all into residency. It just won't happen. But like I said, not going to happen. Temple was very vocal about not being able to retain faculty and admin if they accepted less students and lost tuition $ at a national meeting some time ago. So in the meantime we hope young DPMs continue to get involved in our training, adding seats to current programs and starting up new ones.
D
dyk343
I don't really agree with this. Last year 30-50 qualified individuals didn't get a spot. This year many of them did. Now qualified 2014 individuals did not get a spot.
It's still much better than last year (as you said 2014 had a surplus spots) but there are some solid 2014 candidates without positions out there. Hopefully more positions open up late in the game like they did last year.
I am inclined to agree with this. I scrambled and have not yet matched. I was in the top 1/3 of my class. I received multiple "top-20, 10, 5, 3, etc." phone calls following interviews. Nothing was definite, but statistically it seemed much more likely that I would match. At scramble, I had all of my applications prepared. I had them sent out to nearly all of the scrambling programs within the hour. Multiple directors and residents at programs I had visited made calls in my behalf.
Despite that, I received a grand total of one phone call. Hopefully that one works out, but this whole situation is very strange and unexpected.
Based on what you typed, I don't think we are talking about the same thing.
You used the term "qualified" where I used "competitive". That was intentional on my part because "qualified" simply means you have passed part 1 and 2, where "competitive" means (to me) you are in the top 1/2 of your class, good work ethic, good interpersonal skills, etc.
"Qualified" simply means you are allowed by the AACPM to participate in the match, to be a competitive applicant and land a residency program takes more than that especially when a higher number of similarly competitive applicants from the last cycle are in the mix.
There will always be a few highly competitive student who scramble each year, but it is the exception. Last year, not only did competitive applicants scramble but, because of the drastic shortage, quite a few had to actually sit out a year and re-apply.
If you read my post, I acknowledge the fact that there are not enough positions for every "qualified" applicant in the match, but that wasn't the topic of my post.
D
dyk343
Not trying to be an ass, but I still don't agree. I think you missed my point. There is still a shortage. There are top half/top 10% students from 2014 with great personalities and work effort that are without a program right now (I personally know two people). They are without a program because there is still a shortage. There are "top" students from 2013 that took slots this year. Therefore there is a shortage for 2014 students too. No way to argue around it. I am pretty pleased with the upswing but we still need 40-50 more slots to cover the people who have the tools needed to be successful that are without a program from the 2013/2014 class.
I believe in the coming month(s) more programs will open up and most will get a spot, but it has to be incredibly frustrating experience.
The term "shortage" is often used here without context. My original post was intended to provide some. Let's move on.
- Joined
- Oct 10, 2011
- Messages
- 66
- Reaction score
- 4
- Points
- 4,571
Ohio accepted 105 students for their class of 2015 and they're down to 79 so they won't always graduate 100.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,561
- Reaction score
- 4,928
- Points
- 5,661
- Podiatrist
If Ohio has finally stopped letting people move from one year to another regardless of if they've passed boards and if those 26 they've "lost" are actually gone and not just adding to the class of 2016, then you are right they won't always graduate 100. Also, good for them if that's the case.
I think it's still important to note that with a 25% attrition rate, some large schools are really scraping the bottom of the applicant barrel in order to fill seats. The poor applicant pool is the biggest problem within our profession.
"Qualified" simply means you are allowed by the AACPM to participate in the match, to be a competitive applicant and land a residency program takes more than that especially when a higher number of similarly competitive applicants from the last cycle are in the mix.
http://www.aacpm.org/pdf/AACPM_Residency_Statement_Apr10_2013.pdf
i understand you are trying to make a distinction but most of the literature (see above) does not. Until the official word is "its only a shortage if competitive applicants do not secure a position" I will buy that.
As far as the "poor applicant pool being the biggest problem within our profession" There are bigger problems as any practicing pod or resident soon to graduate would attest to (check out the epresent forums for starters).
http://www.aacpm.org/pdf/AACPM_Residency_Statement_Apr10_2013.pdf
i understand you are trying to make a distinction but most of the literature (see above) does not. Until the official word is "its only a shortage if competitive applicants do not secure a position" I will buy that.
As far as the "poor applicant pool being the biggest problem within our profession" There are bigger problems as any practicing pod or resident soon to graduate would attest to (check out the epresent forums for starters).
This isn't a quote, because I haven't said this. If you think I implied it, please actually quote the post in question and I'll be happy to clear it up for you.
- Joined
- Apr 21, 2008
- Messages
- 3,561
- Reaction score
- 4,928
- Points
- 5,661
- Podiatrist
I'm sorry, you are absolutely right. The biggest "problems" according to Present Podiatry's etalk:
1) Some dude wants EMR recommendations
2) The Council for Nail Disorders has added another board position for a podiatrist
3) "Vaulting." Apparently this is some made up term "used to describe the arch of a foot orthosis by one podiatrist in the world....."
In fact there is a Match Day 2014 thread and a Residency Directors thread, neither of which have a single comment and fewer views than the Walmart toe sucker (who also has a thread on their forums). So go ahead and let a group of pods who care little about our actual training dictate the biggest problems in the profession.
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 97
- Points
- 4,691
- Podiatrist
Haha, well said!
- Joined
- Mar 12, 2014
- Messages
- 128
- Reaction score
- 97
- Points
- 4,691
- Podiatrist
What do y'all think about this idea? The number of students that match on match day is the cap number for that schools next matriculating class. Example( completely hypothetical): Temple had 85 students in the match, only 70 match, their next matriculating class tops out at 70. Thoughts?
I think that would be a good way to shut down every school...
I checked out the site someone mentioned and the problems listed in podiatry:
Insurance premiums
Changes to Medicare
Scope changes in east coast
Board certifications
License issues, problems, changes
Private practice issues etc
Yeah I saw the walmart thing ( it was on SDN too) but the few replies to the shortage, residency etc is kind of upsetting
----------------/---
I'm sorry, you are absolutely right. The biggest "problems" according to Present Podiatry's etalk:
1) Some dude wants EMR recommendations
2) The Council for Nail Disorders has added another board position for a podiatrist
3) "Vaulting." Apparently this is some made up term "used to describe the arch of a foot orthosis by one podiatrist in the world....."
In fact there is a Match Day 2014 thread and a Residency Directors thread, neither of which have a single comment and fewer views than the Walmart toe sucker (who also has a thread on their forums). So go ahead and let a group of pods who care little about our actual training dictate the biggest problems in the profession.
dtrack22, Yesterday at 8:34 AMReport
Insurance premiums
Changes to Medicare
Scope changes in east coast
Board certifications
License issues, problems, changes
Private practice issues etc
Yeah I saw the walmart thing ( it was on SDN too) but the few replies to the shortage, residency etc is kind of upsetting
----------------/---
I'm sorry, you are absolutely right. The biggest "problems" according to Present Podiatry's etalk:
1) Some dude wants EMR recommendations
2) The Council for Nail Disorders has added another board position for a podiatrist
3) "Vaulting." Apparently this is some made up term "used to describe the arch of a foot orthosis by one podiatrist in the world....."
In fact there is a Match Day 2014 thread and a Residency Directors thread, neither of which have a single comment and fewer views than the Walmart toe sucker (who also has a thread on their forums). So go ahead and let a group of pods who care little about our actual training dictate the biggest problems in the profession.
dtrack22, Yesterday at 8:34 AMReport
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 3,657
- Reaction score
- 8,573
- Points
- 5,776
- Podiatrist
I'd like to sort of stand up for the etalk. The quality of the discussions on their board are a reflection of the individuals who choose to post - much like this forum (am I mistaken for thinking this forum used to have more DPMs/residents to chime in?). In the past there have been interesting and/or clinically relevant discussions on that forum. As far as the residency crisis is concerned and anything pertaining to schools - they seem to be generally uninformed. I followed their commentary on last year's match and it was all over the place. While you could read their lack of posting on this year's match as something negative - disinterest perhaps, I view it as a small blessing. Most of what gets written about the residency crisis is uninformed opinion/tall talk. We're on the cusp of knowing what direction this whole thing is blowing. Once the scramble finishes we'll have an idea of how the 2014 and 2013 grads did. Until then who wants to read more PM News blowhards solutions?
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 3,657
- Reaction score
- 8,573
- Points
- 5,776
- Podiatrist
So - on 3/19 I received an email pointing to APMSA.org. It indicated the following:
Applicants: 2014 (558), 2013 (50), 2012 (26), Older (11)
Active Positions: 554 (out of a 584 CPME approved with 30 not filling for a variety of reasons)
Today: PM News indicated the following (pasted)
The American Association of Colleges of Podiatric Medicine (AACPM) provides periodic status reports on residency placements from Match Day. The following is residency placement data as of March 28, 2014:
Class of 2014 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 505 ( 89.5%)
Not Eligible/Not Seeking Training 16 ( 2.8%)
To Be Placed 43 ( 7.6%)
Total 564 (100.0%)
Class of 2013 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 29 ( 65.9%)
To Be Placed 15 ( 34.1%)
Total 44 (100.0%)
Class of 2012 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 6 ( 31.6%)
To Be Placed 13 ( 68.4%)
Total 19 (100.0%)
Prior to 2012 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 2 ( 22.2%)
To Be Placed 7 ( 77.8%)
Total 9 (100.0%)
Source: AACPM
Applicants: 2014 (558), 2013 (50), 2012 (26), Older (11)
Active Positions: 554 (out of a 584 CPME approved with 30 not filling for a variety of reasons)
Today: PM News indicated the following (pasted)
The American Association of Colleges of Podiatric Medicine (AACPM) provides periodic status reports on residency placements from Match Day. The following is residency placement data as of March 28, 2014:
Class of 2014 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 505 ( 89.5%)
Not Eligible/Not Seeking Training 16 ( 2.8%)
To Be Placed 43 ( 7.6%)
Total 564 (100.0%)
Class of 2013 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 29 ( 65.9%)
To Be Placed 15 ( 34.1%)
Total 44 (100.0%)
Class of 2012 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 6 ( 31.6%)
To Be Placed 13 ( 68.4%)
Total 19 (100.0%)
Prior to 2012 Placements:
Placed in Residencies 2 ( 22.2%)
To Be Placed 7 ( 77.8%)
Total 9 (100.0%)
Source: AACPM
Last edited:
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2009
- Messages
- 2,815
- Reaction score
- 36
- Points
- 4,711
- Location
- The Grand Ballroom
- Podiatry Student
I wonder how many of them participated in the AAPPM "preceptorship" (or whatever they are calling it now...).
- Joined
- Oct 17, 2011
- Messages
- 3,657
- Reaction score
- 8,573
- Points
- 5,776
- Podiatrist
It would take some searching, but I seem to recall a suggestion that in the 2013 match, the 2012 candidates who participated in an preceptorship during their off-year had the greatest success.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 20
- Points
- 4,621
- Podiatry Student
AAPPM preceptorship was a joke, I know of only 1 person that actually got a preceptorship program through them. General consensus was that most people never got a reply from them, I didnt get a response. The other 6-7 people that I knew ended up finding something on their own.
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2009
- Messages
- 2,815
- Reaction score
- 36
- Points
- 4,711
- Location
- The Grand Ballroom
- Podiatry Student
I had heard the year before something like 25 people partook and all of them matched last cycle. Maybe I'm mistaken though.
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2012
- Messages
- 417
- Reaction score
- 342
- Points
- 4,756
- Podiatrist
31 students entered the preceptorship program last year
- Joined
- Feb 12, 2014
- Messages
- 3
- Reaction score
- 0
- Points
- 0
- Podiatry Student
Schools do need to curb the number of students that are admitted. One of the biggest offenders is NYCPM with their January class. Even though on paper, they claim the class is for "non-traditional students" who have been out of school for a while. This is so they can have a easier course load in the beginning and slowly get used to being in school again, that is not the case.
I suspect the real reason the January class was started is to be a filler. In the past, NYCPM would lose up to 20% of students by the end of the 2nd year, and by combining the January class with the Fall class, the class # are up again. If you look at the January class, most of them are NOT non-traditional students, so the core purpose of having a January class is moot.
This has worked well in the past, however I see an impending problem looming. The 2017 class only had 2 students leave after the 1st semester. This is low compared to previous classes and if this goes on, when they add the January students, it will be a HUGE 2017 class graduating. Already, there has been some talk that the school will try to weed out students by making exams harder and not allowing students to repeat.
I suspect the real reason the January class was started is to be a filler. In the past, NYCPM would lose up to 20% of students by the end of the 2nd year, and by combining the January class with the Fall class, the class # are up again. If you look at the January class, most of them are NOT non-traditional students, so the core purpose of having a January class is moot.
This has worked well in the past, however I see an impending problem looming. The 2017 class only had 2 students leave after the 1st semester. This is low compared to previous classes and if this goes on, when they add the January students, it will be a HUGE 2017 class graduating. Already, there has been some talk that the school will try to weed out students by making exams harder and not allowing students to repeat.
- Joined
- Oct 1, 2008
- Messages
- 270
- Reaction score
- 20
- Points
- 4,621
- Podiatry Student
I wasnt from SCPM, I chased down leads for any programs that were opening up throughout the year, and eventually decided that it was gonna work out so focused on the following year. Found a doc to take me on as a preceptee and worked with him for few months. I only visited 3-4 programs throughout the year and applied to all 216 for interviews. My thoughts were that visiting them is expensive and would not accomplish very much, you're just one more face walking through the door for one day. Shine during interviews is more important.
