Everyone feels for those who failed their boards, but this needs to be reined in.
1. Rumors need to stop. In like 2 pages of posts it has gone from 'this was a totally new unfair test with new concepts' to 'all the big programs use recalls which is rampant cheating' to 'wait... wouldn't it not be congruent for recalls to be effective for an all new test' to 'well recalls would still offer huge payoff to set floor with repeated questions' to '50% of MD Anderson grads failed anyway according to my cousin Danny Devita'.
Anger is justified, but claiming all the big programs cheat is offensive, and I have no personal stake to defend them.
2. Totally justifiable to ask for pass rate, totally ridiculous to speculate. ABR should release, no arguments, but if the fail rate was 50% then I have to say, with about only 10 unique posters here saying they failed, there is a gap. And if its 50% that needs to be examined heavily.
3. Also, the pass rate for physics needs to be posted. There are 2 posts at most complaining about physics. If the pass rate for both exams is low, there is justification in saying that factors related to trainees, how they were taught, what resources they had etc may be the largest factors.
4. To the few posters who have shared they failed rad bio or physics twice, including last year, that stinks and I am sorry, this exam may have been tougher and provided a very tough reprieve, but there may be factors such as test taking strategies, program prep, time per question, which need examination as well. You are not a bad person or less of a physician, but there are factors that caused you to fail twice independent of this years exam.
5. I am not conflating the job market with this exam - in fact I explicitly stated I do not want exams to be used as a weed out tool. But it is justifiable to ask if, in expansion, the educational resources are not what these programs claimed to be. A lot of questions are reported here as being minutae - maybe it is, can't prove it. But at my smaller program we had multiple lectures on basic cell biology and at times even questions. Some people even asked extra questions and exchanged emails and then we subsequently had more lectures. They ended up being helpful. Was their a lack of basic biologic pathway teaching? Lack of time from faculty? Can't say. ALL I can say it is reasonable to examine educational processes when the class size doubles. Stop. End sentence.
6. When there are major events, it is often a confluence of events, such as multiple contributions from all of the above.
7. I called out Wallner for being hypocritical on residency expansion, and provided proof of this by contrasting his published comments from papers 7 years apart. That is fair. You people claiming a Wallner conspiracy are disgusting. I am sorry you failed, heck I don't even like Wallner, but I have a reason and actual evidence of his shifting positions to justify this. Come on, be better.
8. To GFunk and just the general sense that MOC is not worth our time - it is wrong that the older providers were grandfathered in. But the MOC they left us, which I also posted and complained about, is a joke. Kachnic and Wallner have made it far too easy to stay certified, turning it into a color inside the lines type activity instead of actual evaluation of competency which may actually hold said older practitioners to standards becoming of our field / protecting the public. This radbio exam is not a signal to many of us that MOC or certification should be made easier - it is already too east. Would prefer a different body, but do not think everyone who puts in the time effort wants even less oversight of practicing physicians.
