One school only placed 91.91% of grads into residency

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Your move COCA
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Members don't see this ad :)
jkdoctor said:
Anyone know how this compares to MD schools?

https://www.aacom.org/docs/default-...rt-2018-final-apr162018.pdf?sfvrsn=5e1f2597_2
Click to expand...

Yikes. Probably single-handedly brought the placement % down from 99% for all COMs to 98.11%. I wonder what school it was.

I kinda took a dig at ARCOM the other day in another thread but I am seriously concerned for that inaugural class and wonder if they might be one of the schools lower than even 91.91% on this list in the future do to the shotgun nature of their application cycle last season.

It's good to see the increase of 10% (~51% -> ~61%) matching NRMP/SOAP (assuming SOAP played a minor role.) Honestly with an increase of 1000 DO students applying NRMP/SOAP and only seeing a 2% drop in placement (from ~92% to ~90%) isn't terrible. I wish we had a few more years of data to see if this is a normal fluctuation or a reflection of overflow. It looks like the AOA placement is actually about the same (~87% successfully matching with a decrease in applicants from 2017 by ~500.)

I'm not nearly as savvy as some on here with this stuff but my initial impression is clearly DO students are clearly embracing the impending merger - good for them.

I wonder if some schools are still adamantly pushing their students to apply strictly AOA. I had an interview last year at a school where I brought up the topic to see what their thoughts were and how they were preparing students for the upcoming merger and they were repulsed at the fact that I brought it up - especially when I asked about their stance on COMLEX vs. USMLE. I won't say what school it was but they seemed pretty dug into their ways.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
92% is not acceptable, especially when half of DO school are at 99-100% and the average is 98%. Last year the lowest was 96.88% and overall 99.34%. Either the admissions standards are too low or the school isn't adequately preparing/advising students for matching... or both. Either way, no good, and I hope something concrete comes of it. They should publish names so that applicants can make an informed decision (and avoid that school for now).
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
Goro said:
Also concerned about the number of schools opening or increasing their class sizes, just to remind you that the sky is not falling.

Both sanctioning bodies will close schools or decrease the class sizes if they are unable to find jobs for their graduates. Medicine is not like Law
Click to expand...
Three schools (out of 37) now have a placement rate of less than 95%. Will COCA close these schools or decrease their sizes?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
AslanMacit said:
Three schools (out of 37) now have a placement rate of less than 95%. Will COCA close these schools or decrease their sizes?
Click to expand...
After chatting with jkdoctor and borntobeDO, we suspect that a big short-term probation is coming. Like "clean this ****ing mess up right now!" probation. It they can't clean it up, then the stick gets wielded.
1000000% agree that those placement rates are unacceptable. It wouldn't surprise me if lawsuits arise from it.

I suspect that the unmatched students had some major red flags. Keep in mind these people didn't even SOAP...that says to me their mess wasn't just poor match choices and/or aiming too high.

Trying to to figure out which school is which is an interesting puzzle. Thoughts?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 7 users
Sheesh. I'm actually worried that opening more schools might even worsen this problem, too.
 
Goro said:
...Trying to to figure out which school is which is an interesting puzzle. Thoughts?
Click to expand...
:rofl:
I already tried alphabetical which didn't help much. If I knew my school's exact reported % placement that could help figure out their sort method, but the reported numbers always seem to vary from source to source. There must be some method to their numbering, though!
 
The 93, 94, 95, 96% placement schools similarly deserve criticism. Hell, even a 97% match doesn't sit right with me. Medical school is too damn expensive and trying for several people not to match somewhere. Accounting for the few people that truly messed up beyond repair in medical school, or are simply unrealistic in their match expectations, I feel like every school should be around 99%+ in their match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
My first guess was that numbering was based on year of accreditation, but thats clearly wrong.

Definitely need to know who these underperforming schools are. Why the need for secrecy? Students face almost 300+k in debt by attending a COM, annual stats need to be published and transparent. There should match rate, match + placement, and # of unmatched grads.
 
A lot of schools post placement percentage - we could at least eliminate a handful of those schools then do some research on the remaining schools if we really wanna figure this out. Have an on-going thread editing the eliminated schools and cite our sources of information.

We have enough combined brainpower & neuroticism - I think we could do it.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Members don't see this ad :)
AslanMacit said:
2 other observations when comparing the 2018 data to 2017 data (see link)
https://www.aacom.org/docs/default-...ements-in-2017-matches.pdf?sfvrsn=cb502d97_10
1) In 2017, 15 schools had 100.00% placement rate, in 2018 only 8 schools had 100% placement rate.
2) In 2017, only 8 schools had less than 99.00% placement rate. In 2018, only 15 schools had a placement rate above 99.00%
Click to expand...
I can't help but blame much of it on substantially increased participation in the NRMP match (55.9% --> 68.5%) and overall lower NRMP match percentage (92.4% --> 89.8%). It's just a tougher world out there when competing with MD applicants.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
DelayedGratification said:
My first guess was that numbering was based on year of accreditation, but thats clearly wrong.

Definitely need to know who these underperforming schools are. Why the need for secrecy? Students face almost 300+k in debt by attending a COM, annual stats need to be published and transparent. There should match rate, match + placement, and # of unmatched grads.
Click to expand...
How about numbering by state? 1= AL (ACOM) and 37 = WA (PacNW). Their match rates would make sense (94 and 99).
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
The total average % match was reported at 98.11, but when you take the average of the 37 percentages reported, it comes out to 98.03%.

I think this would help with class size calculation using the percentages reported by COM. It might take some guess work and would probably be complicated because you have to assign a class size to each reported percentage. I might try this later but I encourage anyone to start or point out some error with this line of thinking that I am not seeing, before I start.

Goro said:
How about numbering by state? 1= AL (ACOM) and 37 = WA (PacNW). Their match rates would make sense (94 and 99).
Click to expand...

This could possibly be accurate, but I thought ACOM reported a 99% placement rate this year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
Why are they making it such a mystery?

Just shame the school.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 4 users
Goro said:
I suspect that the unmatched students had some major red flags. Keep in mind these people didn't even SOAP...that says to me their mess wasn't just poor match choices and/or aiming too high.
Click to expand...
What are some red flags that make a D.O graduate undeserving of a future job? Failing a course in their pre-clinical years by a few points? Failing a board exam?
Or maybe part of "their mess" is their school that just threw them to the wolves? Or is it the AOA and COCA who are responsible when they surrendered all their AOA-protected GME spots to the ACGME while rapidly expanding COMs?
 
AslanMacit said:
What are some red flags that make a D.O graduate undeserving of a future job? Failing a course in their pre-clinical years by a few points? Failing a board exam?
Or maybe part of "their mess" is their school that just threw them to the wolves? Or is it the AOA and COCA who are responsible when they surrendered all their AOA-protected GME spots to the ACGME while rapidly expanding COMs?
Click to expand...
Most of the people I would have felt uncomfortable calling a colleague were weeded out during medical school. But there are those with multiple board or rotation fails, poor/alarming evaluations, or other professionalism/competency issues that may technically graduate but not make it through the matching process.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
NecrotizingFasciitis said:
Yikes. Probably single-handedly brought the placement % down from 99% for all COMs to 98.11%. I wonder what school it was.

I kinda took a dig at ARCOM the other day in another thread but I am seriously concerned for that inaugural class and wonder if they might be one of the schools lower than even 91.91% on this list in the future do to the shotgun nature of their application cycle last season.

It's good to see the increase of 10% (~51% -> ~61%) matching NRMP/SOAP (assuming SOAP played a minor role.) Honestly with an increase of 1000 DO students applying NRMP/SOAP and only seeing a 2% drop in placement (from ~92% to ~90%) isn't terrible. I wish we had a few more years of data to see if this is a normal fluctuation or a reflection of overflow. It looks like the AOA placement is actually about the same (~87% successfully matching with a decrease in applicants from 2017 by ~500.)

I'm not nearly as savvy as some on here with this stuff but my initial impression is clearly DO students are clearly embracing the impending merger - good for them.

I wonder if some schools are still adamantly pushing their students to apply strictly AOA. I had an interview last year at a school where I brought up the topic to see what their thoughts were and how they were preparing students for the upcoming merger and they were repulsed at the fact that I brought it up - especially when I asked about their stance on COMLEX vs. USMLE. I won't say what school it was but they seemed pretty dug into their ways.
Click to expand...
From what I understand ARCOM is opening its own GME with the local hospitals. I don't think they are the one to worry about in Arkansas. The Jonesboro, Ar NYIT branch campus however, that might be the one in 2021.

Good sleuthing above, you have to remember that this list is current as of 4/12/18 so it is possible some of them moved up.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
AslanMacit said:
Three schools (out of 37) now have a placement rate of less than 95%. Will COCA close these schools or decrease their sizes?
Click to expand...
Its a rolling 3 year average before anything happens, they will prob be on some sort of 'stealthy' probation till after 2020.

The real consequence will be the students who are currently there for 3rd and 4th year. They need to pass their boards, because I am betting that the school will be more willing to cut them loose than to try and give more time to study etc.

I think we are going to start seeing early deadlines to take step 2 now as well. Its the wrong move IMO, but these schools are going to get feedback that if these students had just passed before the match they would have placed somewhere. Thats only partially true, they need to pass AND do it the first time.

Maybe Pikeville had it right giving their students time off for step 2 and PE after all.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
At a class size of 200, 91% is roughly 18 people who did not match or place. That is unimaginably unacceptable to those students all while having been charged $40k+ in tuition per year.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
MD student, but our school has a 98.7% match rate but I believe pre-SOAP it’s in the lower 90s or even upper 80s.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
AslanMacit said:
What are some red flags that make a D.O graduate undeserving of a future job? Failing a course in their pre-clinical years by a few points? Failing a board exam?
Or maybe part of "their mess" is their school that just threw them to the wolves? Or is it the AOA and COCA who are responsible when they surrendered all their AOA-protected GME spots to the ACGME while rapidly expanding COMs?
Click to expand...

Failing a course in their pre-clinical years. FYI, failing a course by one point, ten or 100, it doesn't matter. The failure shows that the student has failed to gain even a minimal level of competence, much less any mastery of the subject.
Failing a board exam
Failing rotations
Having a bad MSPE or Dean's Letter

Don't blame AOA or COCA for failures to match at this point. Matching is on you to a large degree. It's on the school for admitting weak students or having a bad curriculum
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
Goro said:
Failing a course in their pre-clinical years. FYI, failing a course by one point, ten or 100, it doesn't matter. The failure shows that the student has failed to gain even a minimal level of competence, much less any mastery of the subject.
Failing a board exam
Failing rotations
Having a bad MSPE or Dean's Letter

Don't blame AOA or COCA for failures to match at this point. Matching is on you to a large degree. It's on the school for admitting weak students or having a bad curriculum
Click to expand...
I am not a lawyer who can assign percent of the blame, but COCA also deserves some part of the blame. The expansion has definitely had an impact on placement. If I guessed percentages, maybe 60% student for failing, 30% for school failing to recognize a struggling student/poor support environment, and 10% on COCA.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 2 users
 
Goro said:
Failing a course in their pre-clinical years. FYI, failing a course by one point, ten or 100, it doesn't matter. The failure shows that the student has failed to gain even a minimal level of competence, much less any mastery of the subject.
Failing a board exam
Failing rotations
Having a bad MSPE or Dean's Letter

Don't blame AOA or COCA for failures to match at this point. Matching is on you to a large degree. It's on the school for admitting weak students or having a bad curriculum
Click to expand...


Hey Goro,

I failed a single preclinical course for only getting 9/15 OMM questions correct in our Behavioral Sciences block. I did fine in the actual behavioral sciences portion of 200+ questions but our school decided if we fail one portion then we fail the whole course. I admittedly have no mastery of OMM.

Does this really make me undeserving of a job?
 
  • Like
Reactions: 8 users
zero0 said:
Your move COCA
Click to expand...
Goro said:
After chatting with jkdoctor and borntobeDO, we suspect that a big short-term probation is coming. Like "clean this ****ing mess up right now!" probation. It they can't clean it up, then the stick gets wielded.
1000000% agree that those placement rates are unacceptable. It wouldn't surprise me if lawsuits arise from it.
Click to expand...
LOL COCA doesn't care. Back when the overacceptance scandal happened Touro NY was put on probation for only 3 weeks. We got an email saying we were on probation and then, a month later, we were told the probation was lifted. Same thing will happen in this case if they even decide to do anything in the first place.
 
radkat101 said:
Does this really make me undeserving of a job?
Click to expand...

Ignore what he said. Failing a course(s) has no bearing on getting into a residency or getting a job. Go to the AAMC/NRMP websites for accurate data from actual programm directors
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 users
It makes me cringe when they just lump match and soap figures together. Overall placement is one indicator and match percentage is another. I’d love to see actual NRMP match rates vs total placement rates for all DOs entering the Match. Breakdown by school would be even better.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
JamesPotterMS-3 said:
Ignore what he said. Failing a course(s) has no bearing on getting into a residency or getting a job. Go to the AAMC/NRMP websites for accurate data from actual programm directors
Click to expand...

I would argue that it at least has some bearing. Sure, you will get placed assuming all the other ducks are in a row, but to say failing a course has no impact is misleading.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
radkat101 said:
Hey Goro,

I failed a single preclinical course for only getting 9/15 OMM questions correct in our Behavioral Sciences block. I did fine in the actual behavioral sciences portion of 200+ questions but our school decided if we fail one portion then we fail the whole course. I admittedly have no mastery of OMM.

Does this really make me undeserving of a job?
Click to expand...
That's between you and the PDs. I'm just pointing out what the risk factors are in the DDx.
 
ACOM student.

Our inaugural class graduation in 2017 was 100% placement
2018 graduating class had 99% placement.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 3 users
BorntobeDO? said:
Wow they literally updated today. I bet they had one stragler that they just managed to place recently.
Click to expand...

parslea said:
What a difference a letter makes!
Click to expand...

Maybe it wasn’t a typo! Maybe it took so long because the residencies considered strangulation a red flag. o_O It’s the 21st century ya know. Lay off the stranglers PD’s. I’m sure they make great docs from a distance.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
Power BI Report

Here...If you open up this link and go to “List of COMs” there are 37 listed up till 2014 in terms of Inauguration Year, which would account for the 37 numbers listed regarding the residency rate placements. Maybe that’s the code? I was bored.

Remember, the AACOM report is current only as of 4/12/18, so it may not be completely accurate.
 
Last edited:
I’m a tad perplexed about KCU’s placement and list this year. There were some phenomenal matches don’t get me wrong, but this is the first time in awhile that the match list hasn’t been posted almost immediately after match day. Makes me wonder if they’re holding off to see if students could SOAP into spots before publishing the placement % or if something else is the reason...

I could 100% be wrong and they just haven’t gotten around to posting it, but has me wondering.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
Last edited:
RamsFan&FutureDO said:
I’m a tad concerned about KCU’s placement and list this year. There were some phenomenal matches don’t get me wrong, but this is the first time in 3 years that the match list hasn’t been posted almost immediately after match day. Makes me wonder if they’re holding off to see if students could SOAP into spots before publishing a not so stellar placement %...

I could 100% be wrong and there is no reason behind them not posting it, but has me wondering.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
Click to expand...

I really do think we are simply starting to see the fruition of the idea that the better students will match better than ever and the lowest students will match worse and worse to the point where they don’t match.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
 
  • Like
Reactions: 6 users
AnatomyGrey12 said:
I really do think we are simply starting to see the fruition of the idea that the better students will match better than ever and the lowest students will match worse and worse to the point where they don’t match.
Click to expand...

I agree completely. Not trying to be a conspiracy theorist in regards to our match list I’m just genuinely curious why the school has posted nothing about it at all


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
  • Like
Reactions: 1 user
W19 said:
92% is not that bad...
Click to expand...

Are you kidding me? It's horrific. In my class, that would be about 11 people who failed to match. That's 11 people whose lives are basically ruined, with likely $250,000+ of debt and no job. That's totally insane.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 14 users
jonnythan said:
Are you kidding me? It's horrific. In my class, that would be about 11 people who failed to match. That's 11 people whose lives are basically ruined, with likely $250,000+ of debt and no job. That's totally insane.
Click to expand...
Agree. For my class it would be something like TWENTY FIVE people not being placed(when historically it's been between zero and maybe two or three at worst). I know a couple of well-qualified people who went matchless this year and I can't even imagine what they're going through.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
jonnythan said:
Are you kidding me? It's horrific. In my class, that would be about 11 people who failed to match. That's 11 people whose lives are basically ruined, with likely $250,000+ of debt and no job. That's totally insane.
Click to expand...
Isn't the placement rate 97% this year? So 92% is not great, but it's not horrific.
 
W19 said:
Isn't the placement rate 97% this year? So 92% is not great, but it's not horrific.
Click to expand...
The placement rate is in link of the first post of this thread. Some could even argue that it is a direct topic of this thread. It is 98.11%.
 
W19 said:
92% is not that bad...
Click to expand...

It’s 92% including all the people who SOAP’ed, Scramble, and begged/borrowed/stole to get placed well after match week. In my class, that would be 24 students lol.
 
  • Like
Reactions: 5 users
You must log in or register to reply here.
Next unread thread

Similar threads

F
Placed on Academic LOA
Replies
10
Views
2K
Mad Jack
Mad Jack
P
If you could only pick one, would you rather focus on top 25% or boards?
Replies
20
Views
2K
AlbinoHawk DO
AlbinoHawk DO
T
Chances at getting into EM residency with only COMLEX
Replies
24
Views
3K
Lexdiamondz
L
D
Matching Psych With Comlex Only
Replies
2
Views
1K
officially_apostate
officially_apostate
A
Matching Internal Medicine COMLEX Only - Advice Needed
Replies
9
Views
2K
AlteredScale
AlteredScale
Top