Rocky Vista "Turmoil"?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Georgia also ranks almost last in physicians:citizens ratio. MCG is working on creating more residency and clerkship spots throughout the state. We have a ton of hospitals in this state.

MCG 2013

This thread summarizes a lot of the issues here: http://forums.studentdoctor.net/showthread.php?t=626389&page=2

Suffice it to say, our US government is deeply in debt and the Georgia state government is deeply in debt. The idea that new money will be found to fund a significant increase in residency spots is IMO a pipe dream. AProgdirector who is an excellent poster on SDN has mentioned that what is actually being considered by the government as a cheaper alternative to funding more 3-5 year resident physician slots is to move some funding into shorter clinical training programs for PAs and NPs.

Members don't see this ad.
 
VCOM's branch campus will be adjacent to Spartanburg Regional, a 500-bed Level 1 trauma center hospital in upstate SC. I think that will work out great for the clinical aspects of their medical education, "franchise" system be damned.

PCOM-Ga ought to build their permanent campus (assuming they eventually move out of that office park) next to Gwinnett Medical Center, which is another huge hospital in metro Atlanta just down the road from their current campus.
Yes - I think VCOM is an exception in that VCOM does seem to go the extra mile to get good clinical rotation opportunities for their students.
PCOM has no incentive to get out of the office park since they are still filling all their seats while being in the office park.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
could someone direct me to this info? 3rd and 4th year rotations list at rvu
 
Last edited:
the USMLE is a MINIMUM COMPETENCY EXAM

And the NBOME is a maximum competency exam?? you gotta be kidding....
any of those exams are doing only "the minimlally competent candidate" criteria....
 
And the NBOME is a maximum competency exam?? you gotta be kidding....
any of those exams are doing only "the minimlally competent candidate" criteria....

find a single sentence from me that claimed NBOME is a maximum competency exam.

also, just curious, is there DO dermpath fellowship?
 
VCOM's branch campus will be adjacent to Spartanburg Regional, a 500-bed Level 1 trauma center hospital in upstate SC. I think that will work out great for the clinical aspects of their medical education, "franchise" system be damned.

PCOM-Ga ought to build their permanent campus (assuming they eventually move out of that office park) next to Gwinnett Medical Center, which is another huge hospital in metro Atlanta just down the road from their current campus.

I really like that this new branch is starting the right way: hospital/rotations established THEN school. Not the other way around!! I hope this trend continues.
 
Hello all those that bitch about RVU, especially those that did not even apply to the school, never been there and haven't met people that teach and go there.... Perhaps it's a silly observations but does SD attract negative people that have nothing else to do but complain, discourage and talk crap? To all the students that are thinking to apply to RVU, please get your information from respectable sources, talk to students that go to school (there really is not need for us to try to get more applicant, no need to sugar coat anything so you'll get the truth about what it's like to be in this school).
And those that have too much time on your hands and spend hours on SD - I really hope you guys change your attitude towards your collegues to be and become more respectful, more resourceful and just nicer to your peers:)
You are more than welcome to contact me if you would like some information about the school.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Perhaps it's a silly observations but does SD attract negative people that have nothing else to do but complain, discourage and talk crap?

Yes!

On a side note, can anyone take this image and change "Fark" to "SDN" for me?
 
Hello all those that bitch about RVU, especially those that did not even apply to the school, never been there and haven't met people that teach and go there.... Perhaps it's a silly observations but does SD attract negative people that have nothing else to do but complain, discourage and talk crap? To all the students that are thinking to apply to RVU, please get your information from respectable sources, talk to students that go to school (there really is not need for us to try to get more applicant, no need to sugar coat anything so you'll get the truth about what it's like to be in this school).
And those that have too much time on your hands and spend hours on SD - I really hope you guys change your attitude towards your collegues to be and become more respectful, more resourceful and just nicer to your peers:)
You are more than welcome to contact me if you would like some information about the school.

Sing it sister!
 

Attachments

  • welcome2SDN.JPG
    welcome2SDN.JPG
    26.5 KB · Views: 244
I really hope you guys change your attitude towards your collegues to be and become more respectful, more resourceful and just nicer to your peers:)

By choosing to attend RVU, your tuition supports a model that most in the medical community see as disgraceful. We who have practiced osteopathic medicine for years and have worked to enhance this profession would have also appreciated your respect by choosing another school.
 
. Perhaps it's a silly observations but does SD attract negative people that have nothing else to do but complain, discourage and talk crap? To all the students that are thinking to apply to RVU, please get your information from respectable sources, talk to students that go to school (there really is not need for us to try to get more applicant, no need to sugar coat anything so you'll get the truth about what it's like to be in this school).

No, RVU is what is attracts such negative attention. If it so easily stirs such animosity in medical students and attendings, imagine what it does for residency program directors. As Dr M has said before me, it is a disgrace.

To all students thinking about applying to RVU, remember how your school will be viewed by program directors and think of your ability to get into a residency program you want. If you have other options, I highly recommend you choose them.
 
By choosing to attend RVU, your tuition supports a model that most in the medical community see as disgraceful. We who have practiced osteopathic medicine for years and have worked to enhance this profession would have also appreciated your respect by choosing another school.

DO Anes- Just because something is new and different doesn't make it bad. I'm curious as to whether you have ever visited the school to see first hand what they are all about. Like it or not, RVU is here to stay. Why not reserve your judgement until you see the quality of physicians they produce? I know many of the faculty have come from highly respected and well established DO schools and are passionate about providing the best educational experience possible. Please don't condem your future colleagues because you are afraid of change.
 
I'm fairly certain no one's issue is with the competency of future graduates, but rather the business model the school was founded upon. There will be competent physicians from RVU; however, many will not agree with the way those physicians got their education, a for-profit school.
 
By choosing to attend RVU, your tuition supports a model that most in the medical community see as disgraceful. We who have practiced osteopathic medicine for years and have worked to enhance this profession would have also appreciated your respect by choosing another school.

Do most in the medical community really have a problem with for profit schools (surveys, studies, anything)? I would have figured that most doctors would have more pressing concerns than where a colleague went to medical school :shrug:
 
Last edited:
Do most in the medical community really have a problem with for profit schools (surveys, studies, anything)? I would have figured that most doctors would have more pressing concerns than where a colleague went to medical school :shrug:

I would love to see DO Anes' response.

My answer, for the 10 or so physicians I've been around so far, is no, they don't care at all as long as I can answer their questions to show I've learned a little medicine in the past few semesters.
 
Do most in the medical community really have a problem with for profit schools (surveys, studies, anything)? I would have figured that the most doctors would have more pressing concerns than where a colleague went to medical school :shrug:

No, they don't. They've already proven it. If PDs and other doctors were so concerned they wouldn't have trained thousands of graduates from Carribean schools over the years. The non-profit model is NOT a new thing. Program Directors have been ranking students from for-profit Carribean schools for many years. It is new to the DO world and some people think it's the end of the world as we know it. Rant and rave all you want but RVU graduates are just around the corner and they will be your DO breathren. How will you treat them when you are working beside them? If you paint them as outcasts then shame on you! DOs should be working together-- not trying to tear us apart from the inside. This school is alive and running. Get over your fears and find ways to make it work or YOU will be the ones killing the profession!
 
No, they don't. They've already proven it. If PDs and other doctors were so concerned they wouldn't have trained thousands of graduates from Carribean schools over the years. The non-profit model is NOT a new thing. Program Directors have been ranking students from for-profit Carribean schools for many years. It is new to the DO world and some people think it's the end of the world as we know it. Rant and rave all you want but RVU graduates are just around the corner and they will be your DO breathren. How will you treat them when you are working beside them? If you paint them as outcasts then shame on you! DOs should be working together-- not trying to tear us apart from the inside. This school is alive and running. Get over your fears and find ways to make it work or YOU will be the ones killing the profession!

PDs take FMGs to fill spots US Grads don't want. Caribbean grads face an uphill struggle. Why is this likely to be different for RVU-COM. People think that this is the end of the osteopathic world for a reason. It seems to derail the argument that we are MD equivalent, the allopathic world does not have for profit schools and at present no one has demonstrated their necessity. As someone planning to attend a non-profit, older DO school, I think that this reflects poorly on the profession and damages the credibility that we have built up in the past half century. I suspect that RVU grads will be treated the same way as FMGs, dismissively and derisively. I imagine if on a case by case basis a person is skilled, they will get referrals and in practice, that is what counts. I suspect that they will have a match list akin to SGU or Ross, heavy on primary care with very few highly competitive specialties and more people going the Osteopathic match route than at other COMs.
 
Also regarding working together, people within the profession have very different interests. A family practitioner in Nebraska and a dermatologist in Miami have different goals. DOs are not a monolithic bloc of practitioners, they vary. By saying that there is displeasure regarding for-profit education does not mean there is a lack of unity, as it seems most DOs are disgusted by this. This is no more killing the profession than Flexner did to medicine. Dissent tends to strengthen especially when it is listened to. These are not "fears" these are legitimate concerns about the long-term effects of accrediting a for-profit school.
 
Also regarding working together, people within the profession have very different interests. A family practitioner in Nebraska and a dermatologist in Miami have different goals. DOs are not a monolithic bloc of practitioners, they vary. By saying that there is displeasure regarding for-profit education does not mean there is a lack of unity, as it seems most DOs are disgusted by this. This is no more killing the profession than Flexner did to medicine. Dissent tends to strengthen especially when it is listened to. These are not "fears" these are legitimate concerns about the long-term effects of accrediting a for-profit school.

You sir, are an odd duck. You have this skill of making really good arguments and really absurd ones in the same post.

You sure do have a knack for writing though, especially for a Freshman in college.
 
You sir, are an odd duck. You have this skill of making really good arguments and really absurd ones in the same post.

You sure do have a knack for writing though, especially for a Freshman in college.

I'm not certain whether to be offended or pleased, so I will respond with a "Thank You?". I'm trying to point out that the dissension within the ranks is highly variable on the one hand RVU-COM will likely turn out PCPs and some groups will be happy with that. However for specialists, especially those in procedural specialties, they feel that RVU-COM is a slap in the face. SCPod stated that it was imperative to work together to acheive the goals of the osteopathic community, however look on any DO forum and note how fractious we are as a group. We are not a monolithic bloc we have differing interests. I really wonder what osteopathic physicians and surgeons who are either residents or attendings in CO think about this.
 
I'm not certain whether to be offended or pleased, so I will respond with a "Thank You?". I'm trying to point out that the dissension within the ranks is highly variable on the one hand RVU-COM will likely turn out PCPs and some groups will be happy with that. However for specialists, especially those in procedural specialties, they feel that RVU-COM is a slap in the face. SCPod stated that it was imperative to work together to acheive the goals of the osteopathic community, however look on any DO forum and note how fractious we are as a group. We are not a monolithic bloc we have differing interests. I really wonder what osteopathic physicians and surgeons who are either residents or attendings in CO think about this.

My whole thought on the RVU situation has always been not to bash because of the students, but I don't think anyone is too thrilled about the idea of a for profit status school in the states.
 
My whole thought on the RVU situation has always been not to bash because of the students, but I don't think anyone is too thrilled about the idea of a for profit status school in the states.

My personal feelings are along this vein. A guy I did some undergrad with is in their initial class. I wouldn't bash him because RVU wanted him and the locale was a place he'd be happy. These students are and will be our colleagues and should be treated as such. I imagine the first few classes will have to bear the burden of proof of competency for future classes, nut every new school GPRS through a similar ordeal. If the graduates are competent, motivated and relatively personable they'll find jobs. If not, they won't and the school will suffer.
Personally, the for-profit model bugs the he'll out of me, but noone asked me. I'll voice my protest by not applying and not attending. However, I don't fault the students for wanting to be and doing whatever is necessary to become a physician.
 
However for specialists, especially those in procedural specialties, they feel that RVU-COM is a slap in the face. SCPod stated that it was imperative to work together to acheive the goals of the osteopathic community, however look on any DO forum and note how fractious we are as a group. We are not a monolithic bloc we have differing interests. I really wonder what osteopathic physicians and surgeons who are either residents or attendings in CO think about this.

Ok here is a prime example, everything not in bold I feel you did a solid job pointing out that, much like our MD counterparts, we are different groups of people.
Now the bolded parts, at first you say that specialists feel RVU-COM as a slap in the face as though you have conducted some sort of field study on this (and if you did I'm not sure why you added the final bolded sentence).

I don't think a for-profit school helps osteopathic medicine, as it currently still seems to be fighting against prejudices. Originally I was planning on not applying to RVU (still haven't decided), but as app time draws nearer for me I start to think about my clinical years and I do believe RVU has secured CU's ex-rotations for clinicals. Which makes this school much more appealing that I don't have to move to tim-buck-too and back to get a good clinical education.
 
I wouldn't bash him because RVU wanted him and the locale was a place he'd be happy. These students are and will be our colleagues and should be treated as such. ... However, I don't fault the students for wanting to be and doing whatever is necessary to become a physician.

So, the ends justify the means? I don't completely understand the "let's not bash the students" argument. They are all intelligent adults and had the free will to choose their educational pathway. So a nice locale excuses the damage done to our professional reputation?
The desire to be a doctor does not mitigate support of an abhorrent philosophy. The students are not all at fault, but they are not all innocent either. One can also include the faculty and administrators as "collaborators" in this.
 
So, the ends justify the means? I don't completely understand the "let's not bash the students" argument. They are all intelligent adults and had the free will to choose their educational pathway. So a nice locale excuses the damage done to our professional reputation?
The desire to be a doctor does not mitigate support of an abhorrent philosophy. The students are not all at fault, but they are not all innocent either. One can also include the faculty and administrators as "collaborators" in this.
It would appear that my response leaves something to be desired. I say, in essence, don't bash the students for a few reasons. The first of which is my bias and emotion regarding my buddy. I can't fault him because he had one option for a medical school, RVU, and wanted to be a doctor. By one option, I mean one acceptance only. I'd like to think I wouldn't choose RVU out of principle, but I don't know for certain. Additionally, it's hard because they may not be truly aware of the potential damage to the profession. We are constanly reminded as pre-meds of just how little we know, both here and IRL. Maybe those who pass on that reminder should heed that as well. Not every pre-med is going to recognize all of these concerns as a premed. Please don't read this as me excusing the students of all culpability. I happen to think that the faculty and administration of RVU are the main culprits, with COCA and the AOA as enablets in the process. Frankly, Mr. Tsien is aware of the desparate nature of American students who want to be doctors and is willing to exploit that, and apparently no one was willing to check him. I can't figure out why RVU can't fulfill it's stated mission of supplying CO and the surrounding states with physicians as a non-profit, but I think we all know it's about $$$ and not the dearth of physicians in CO. Ultimately, I'd like to see RVU converted to a non-profit or close it's doors, but I can't in good conscious write off it's grads because they went there. If they are incompetent or pricks I'll be happy to do so, but I'd like to think I wouldn't discriminate based on where they went to medical school.

*Please forgive any typos or other errors, I toed this on my iPhone and I'm sure I made mistakes. I've also got a few unfinished thoughts, I'm sure, brcause of how hard it is to review a post prior to posting and just how long it took me to type this out.*
 
I currently work at a rural hospital research center and have contact with 20 or so DOs. I asked each and every one of them about RVU and only one has an issue with RVU based on its business model / tax status and his idealistic views not clicking. The othe 95% said to go where you feel most comfortable. For me personally, a choice between Harlem NY and Parker CO is very clear.

I have spoken to my residency program director and he has spoken to five others (his friends) for me and the fact that RVU is for-profit would not enter into any of their minds when interviewing prospective applicants. He said they mainly care about your board scores and clinical grades.

All medical schools make money, regardless of whether they are for-profit or not-for-profit. All that should matter to the students and program directors is the quality of education, and I think (based on my own research/experience) by and large, it is..

In addition, of the four medical schools I have spent significant time at, RVU is by FAR the best run. Perhaps this is a side effect of being for-profit?

Lastly, it is not fair or even remotely acceptable to compare RVU to carib medical schools. Their acceptance standards are light-years ahead of carib schools, (and indeed several established sister programs) and the environment for learning is far superior. You don't see the practice of admitting huge classes just to thin them out later, although you do see this sort of thing starting to happen at some more-established DO schools. IMO, this is something that should be of more concern to the osteopathic community at large...
 
Also regarding working together, people within the profession have very different interests. A family practitioner in Nebraska and a dermatologist in Miami have different goals. DOs are not a monolithic bloc of practitioners, they vary. By saying that there is displeasure regarding for-profit education does not mean there is a lack of unity, as it seems most DOs are disgusted by this. This is no more killing the profession than Flexner did to medicine. Dissent tends to strengthen especially when it is listened to. These are not "fears" these are legitimate concerns about the long-term effects of accrediting a for-profit school.

Agree 100%.

As far as your question regarding the attitudes of practicing residents / physicians, one could speak volumes on this topic, as with many other contentious issues in osteopathic medicine, but I think the themes are consistent.

#1 The average DO is disinterested in the politics of the "osteopathic profession." They are far more concerned with their practice.
#2 There is no gravitational center to the DO identity, but there are two distinct sets of attitudes about the AOA (i.e. the DO mothership) and its policies.
A.One set of attitudes casts the "osteopathic physician" as some kind of special healer with training simultaneously equal to, distinct from, and superior to allopathic physicians. They see the AOA as the advocate and protector of this faith. They see modern DOs as a kind of torch-bearer for patient-centered care through the dark night of modern managed health care.​
B. Another set of attitudes sees the AOA and its policies as consistently undermining the essential standards of educational integrity and value, especially in regards to clinical education during the 3rd and 4th years. They see these policies as weakening the legitimacy of the (already tenuous) claim of equivalency of osteopathic and allopathic training.​

In the case of RVU, many of us fall into the latter category. There's no knocking of the students, or even the school itself. Rather there is a deep concern about why this policy of accrediting a for-profit school (the first and only for-profit school in the US) was passed, and what effect such a policy will have on the osteopathic medical education system as a whole, especially in regards to our allopathic counterparts, who notably have passed an out-right ban on for-profit medical eduction in the US. These concerns can only be understood in the context of the recent rapid expansion of DO school size and numbers and the subsequent cries of gaps in educational quality or of administrative malfeasance, especially at some recently opened DO schools.

To bring back to the level of the individual pre-med making an individual choice between schools, as a recent graduate, now staring down the barrel of my 200,000+ dollar educational debt which funded my med school adventure, I would say to the DO school shopper: Buyer beware. Carefully consider what you are buying with your 200,000 dollars. Kick the tires. Talk to current owners, graduates. Don't allow your emotional attachments to drive your decision, and don't allow sweet-talking admissions personnel or cherry-picked 1st year med students to lead you down the garden path on a carefully scripted tour of a shiny new Anatomy lab or well-appointed lecture hall.

bth
 
Last edited:
Agree 100%.

As far as your question regarding the attitudes of practicing residents / physicians, one could speak volumes on this topic, as with many other contentious issues in osteopathic medicine, but I think the themes are consistent.

#1 The average DO is disinterested in the politics of the "osteopathic profession." They are far more concerned with their practice.
#2 There is no gravitational center to the DO identity, but there are two distinct sets of attitudes about the AOA (i.e. the DO mothership) and its policies.
A.One set of attitudes casts the "osteopathic physician" as some kind of special healer with training simultaneously equal to, distinct from, and superior to allopathic physicians. They see the AOA as the advocate and protector of this faith. They see modern DOs as a kind of torch-bearer for patient-centered care through the dark night of modern managed health care.​
B. Another set of attitudes sees the AOA and its policies as consistently undermining the essential standards of educational integrity and value, especially in regards to clinical education during the 3rd and 4th years. They see these policies as weakening the legitimacy of the (already tenuous) claim of equivalency of osteopathic and allopathic training.​
In the case of RVU, many of us fall into the latter category. There's no knocking of the students, or even the school itself. Rather there is a deep concern about why this policy of accrediting a for-profit school (the first and only for-profit school in the US) was passed, and what effect such a policy will have on the osteopathic medical education system as a whole, especially in regards to our allopathic counterparts, who notably have passed an out-right ban on for-profit medical eduction in the US. These concerns can only be understood in the context of the recent rapid expansion of DO school size and numbers and the subsequent cries of gaps in educational quality or of administrative malfeasance, especially at some recently opened DO schools.

To bring back to the level of the individual pre-med making an individual choice between schools, as a recent graduate, now staring down the barrel of my 200,000+ dollar educational debt which funded my med school adventure, I would say to the DO school shopper: Buyer beware. Carefully consider what you are buying with your 200,000 dollars. Kick the tires. Talk to current owners, graduates. Don't allow your emotional attachments to drive your decision, and don't allow sweet-talking admissions personnel or cherry-picked 1st year med students to lead you down the garden path on a carefully scripted tour of a shiny new Anatomy lab or well-appointed lecture hall.

bth

If you read the newest macy report on medical school expansion, there is a blurb about a for-profit, MD school that is attempting to tether itself to a non-profit hospital in order to dance around the standards.

report:
http://www.josiahmacyfoundation.org/...chools_web.pdf

explanation (supplied nicely by ChiDO):

If you read the wording carefully, the school has to be A) non-profit or B) PART OF a non-profit. "Planning is not yet far enough along for the school to seek preliminary accreditation by the LCME. Because the LCME now states that a medical school should be, or be part of, a not-for-profit institution,"

What this means to me is that I can go to 500-bed Hospital X in City A and tell them that I would like to be apart of their hospital so that I can open my for-profit medical school. In return for allowing me to be apart of your institution and for letting my students rotate with you, we will allow your clinicians to be apart of our school (teachers) and also give you 10% of our profits.


I don't know if anyone 'likes it,' but the report mentions two things: 1. the osteopathic model of expansion is working, and will probably start being used by the allopathic side (meaning the AOA now has validity for their practices), and 2. for-profit education could becoming an increasing reality in the US.
 
1) I currently work at a rural hospital research center and have contact with 20 or so DOs.

I have spoken to my residency program director and he has spoken to five others (his friends) for me and the fact that RVU is for-profit would not enter into any of their minds when interviewing prospective applicants. He said they mainly care about your board scores and clinical grades.


2) Lastly, it is not fair or even remotely acceptable to compare RVU to carib medical schools. Their acceptance standards are light-years ahead of carib schools, (and indeed several established sister programs) and the environment for learning is far superior.

1) And this program director that you supposedly talked is where? In what specialty? I'm gonna guess it is a rural community program in a non-competitive specialty.

I do not think anyone is saying that RVU students won't get a residency but we are saying that in highly desirable programs, they are not going to be as well regarded as their counterparts.

2) I have posted on another thread that SGU has higher acceptance standards and AUC and Ross have comparable admission stats. So no, RVU is by no means light-years ahead of carribean schools and in some cases, actually behind.

If you read the newest macy report on medical school expansion, there is a blurb about a for-profit, MD school that is attempting to tether itself to a non-profit hospital in order to dance around the standards.

report:
http://www.josiahmacyfoundation.org/...chools_web.pdf

You've posted this on a few other threads. I'm going to be honest. I had never heard of the Macy foundation before this but...

This school talked about by the macy report not only does not have provisional accreditation, they are not even a "candidate" school. Hell they haven't even applied.

I am skeptical that the ivory tower academics of allopathic medicine would ever let this pass. That said, if they do, I will fight it even harder than I did RVU. The school sounds sketchy... here is the school's website if you are interested... http://www.palmbeachmedicalcollege.com/edu.cfm
 
1) And this program director that you supposedly talked is where? In what specialty? I'm gonna guess it is a rural community program in a non-competitive specialty.

I do not think anyone is saying that RVU students won't get a residency but we are saying that in highly desirable programs, they are not going to be as well regarded as their counterparts.

2) I have posted on another thread that SGU has higher acceptance standards and AUC and Ross have comparable admission stats. So no, RVU is by no means light-years ahead of carribean schools and in some cases, actually behind.

1. Bassett Medical Center in Cooperstown NY, and yes it was family medicine, however he talked to some emergency medicine people for me (as that's what I'd like to get in to) and they said similar things. I'm not THAT up on residency qualities but their surg residency doesn't even consider DO's so if snooty-ness is a measure of quality, it's probably pretty good. He did speak to the more competitive specialties by saying that the fact that the school was new is more of a red flag to ROAD PD's than it's is for-profit status.

2. Your previous posts were made in error. Here's a composite screen shot of RVU's inaugural class (Sorry for it looking odd I had to mess with it to get it down to 400x400 pixels; It's impressive for a first class, esp when you consider Touro NY's first class stats were 3.3 overall and 3.1 sci...of course both will only go up) average GPA's vs SGU's. RVU's first class is stronger academically than the average of all of SGU's matriculated classes throughout its entire existence. Since SGU is among the best in the carib (and I do consider it to be a good school), it is logical to say that RVU > Carib schools, period.
 

Attachments

  • rvu vs sgu.JPG
    rvu vs sgu.JPG
    25.5 KB · Views: 248
2) I have posted on another thread that SGU has higher acceptance standards and AUC and Ross have comparable admission stats. So no, RVU is by no means light-years ahead of carribean schools and in some cases, actually behind.



You've posted this on a few other threads. I'm going to be honest. I had never heard of the Macy foundation before this but...

This school talked about by the macy report not only does not have provisional accreditation, they are not even a "candidate" school. Hell they haven't even applied.

I am skeptical that the ivory tower academics of allopathic medicine would ever let this pass. That said, if they do, I will fight it even harder than I did RVU. The school sounds sketchy... here is the school's website if you are interested... http://www.palmbeachmedicalcollege.com/edu.cfm

I've posted it in a few threads because the point always comes up that people think the LCME has absolutely banned for-profit, etc, but apparently the language isn't quite as strong as it maybe should be, and it is interesting that even if it doesn't happen, people are already trying to exploit it, and even though the first attempt may be too crude, it could become more evolved and happen eventually. You can 'fight it' as hard as you'd like, but I'm not sure how much good it will do. Like I said, it's all up in the air, whatever, they could get nailed down the second they turn in an app, etc, but if AAMC is still trying to expand that 30ish % by 2014 and such ... you could see more similarities to DO expansion which the article mentions as the wave of the future, and could include some things that most people don't like. As far as never hearing of it, the report was written by a legit guy who seems to have some good cred to his name.
 
I've posted it in a few threads because the point always comes up that people think the LCME has absolutely banned for-profit, etc, but apparently the language isn't quite as strong as it maybe should be, and it is interesting that even if it doesn't happen, people are already trying to exploit it, . . .

Whether the ban is de facto or de jure makes little difference, in my opinion. The point is the same, there is no for-profit allopathic school, because the LMCE does not (de facto) permit them, for obvious reasons. The 130 allopathic medical schools that exist in the US and the 17 in Canada are all organized as non-profit organizations, because that status (and many other aspects of their accrediation) represents the values and standards of the allopathic medical community, as enumerated by the LCME, ACGME, AAMC, and AMA.

Those are values and standards which the osteopathic leadership, the AOA, has chosen to diverge from within osteopathic medical education. They have done so, in my opinion, for no good reason. They have done so in spite of what I believe are the values and standards of osteopathic medicine, and good medicine in general. They have done so in spite of a great deal of protest on the part of many members of the osteopathic community, without any explination.

Their decision has, and will continue to, weaken the reputation of osteopathic physicians and osteopathic training programs. It will weaken the notion that allopathic and osteopathic educations are "more or less" equivalent. It further weakens their repeated claim that the "only meaningful difference" between an MD and a DO education is OMM and osteopathic philosophy.

bth
 
Whether the ban is de facto or de jure makes little difference, in my opinion. The point is the same, there is no for-profit allopathic school, because the LMCE does not (de facto) permit them, for obvious reasons. The 130 allopathic medical schools that exist in the US and the 17 in Canada are all organized as non-profit organizations, because that status (and many other aspects of their accrediation) represents the values and standards of the allopathic medical community, as enumerated by the LCME, ACGME, AAMC, and AMA.

Those are values and standards which the osteopathic leadership, the AOA, has chosen to diverge from within osteopathic medical education. They have done so, in my opinion, for no good reason. They have done so in spite of what I believe are the values and standards of osteopathic medicine, and good medicine in general. They have done so in spite of a great deal of protest on the part of many members of the osteopathic community, without any explination.

Their decision has, and will continue to, weaken the reputation of osteopathic physicians and osteopathic training programs. It will weaken the notion that allopathic and osteopathic educations are "more or less" equivalent. It further weakens their repeated claim that the "only meaningful difference" between an MD and a DO education is OMM and osteopathic philosophy.

bth

If the LCME, ACGME, AAMC, and AMA hated for profit education so much, would they not simply block carib-trained docs from sitting for USMLE / applying to residencies? Odd that the opposite seems to have happened over the last several years (IE US allopathic residencies becoming more and more friendly to foreign grads)

Would you, as a practicing and obviously currently upset Osteopathic Physician, feel less degraded if a domestic for-profit MD school were to gain accreditation? I believe this to be a case of people making problems for themselves. As long as the training is as excellent as at other domestic schools, why would anyone care? The average patient scarcely knows the difference between DO and MD, much less the routes to get there or the for profit vs not-for profit issue.
 

2. Your previous posts were made in error. Here's a composite screen shot of RVU's inaugural class (Sorry for it looking odd I had to mess with it to get it down to 400x400 pixels; It's impressive for a first class, esp when you consider Touro NY's first class stats were 3.3 overall and 3.1 sci...of course both will only go up) average GPA's vs SGU's. RVU's first class is stronger academically than the average of all of SGU's matriculated classes throughout its entire existence. Since SGU is among the best in the carib (and I do consider it to be a good school), it is logical to say that RVU > Carib schools, period.

You conveniently left out the MCAT in your diagram. The 0.08 GPA points is basically negligible.

For north american students (same cohort as applying to RVU) SGU's MCAT average is a 28 which significantly higher than the 24 that RVU posts. http://etalk.sgu.edu/faqs/medfaq.pdf (page 3)

I think you would be hard pressed to show that a student with a 24 MCAT and a 3.42 GPA (RVU) is a better candidate than on with a 28 and 3.34 GPA (SGU).


In the end, RVU's admission standards are not light years ahead of the carribean (as you previously posted) and in the case of SGU, markedly lower.
 
Last edited:
1. Bassett Medical Center in Cooperstown NY, and yes it was family medicine, however he talked to some emergency medicine people for me (as that's what I'd like to get in to) and they said similar things. I'm not THAT up on residency qualities but their surg residency doesn't even consider DO's so if snooty-ness is a measure of quality, it's probably pretty good. He did speak to the more competitive specialties by saying that the fact that the school was new is more of a red flag to ROAD PD's than it's is for-profit status.

While basset does seem like an ok program, it is a small, community program with only 2 residency programs- General Surgery and IM. Most people on the board were talking more about academic programs with some name recognition.

In terms of EM, it is a level 2 trauma center and it doesn't look like it has a residency program per the website.

If the LCME, ACGME, AAMC, and AMA hated for profit education so much, would they not simply block carib-trained docs from sitting for USMLE / applying to residencies? Odd that the opposite seems to have happened over the last several years (IE US allopathic residencies becoming more and more friendly to foreign grads)

Note that the LCME does not accredit these schools and the AMA and AAMC are against for profit education.

The NBME will allow anyone who is properly credentialed to take the USMLE whether they came from a for-profit school or not.

They cannot control what other countries do. Being against for profit education means they are against the process of for-profit education. It does not mean they are opposed to letting those with the proper aptitude train.

The issue is that for-profit education does not produce the same kind of quality of education. When it does produce a good product, they will not stand in the way.

As long as the training is as excellent as at other domestic schools, why would anyone care? The average patient scarcely knows the difference between DO and MD, much less the routes to get there or the for profit vs not-for profit issue.

The issue that people have with for profit schools is that if corners need to be cut, it will be the students and not the shareholders taking the hit.
 
If the LCME, ACGME, AAMC, and AMA hated for profit education so much, would they not simply block carib-trained docs from sitting for USMLE / applying to residencies?

Because the US health-care system would grind to a halt, as the already strained yearly supply of new physicians was slashed. You would have a massive physician shortage immediately. Some hospitals would literally be unable to function as their resident physician work force was eliminated entirely. The VA health system would be particularly hard hit, as it heavily depends on international graduates.

Would you, as a practicing and obviously currently upset Osteopathic Physician, feel less degraded if a domestic for-profit MD school were to gain accreditation?

I do not feel degraded. My "feelings" are not at issue. The point is the accreditation standards of DO and MD schools are far from equal - a fact the AOA actively conceals, even as it passes policy that widens the gap. They have allowed osteopathic standards to slip, for the sake of rapid expansion.

Were the LCME to allow for-profit schools to be opened that would reduce the gap, since the policies of MD and DO schools would then be equal on this one (relatively minor) point.


bth
 
You conveniently left out the MCAT in your diagram. The 0.08 GPA points is basically negligible.

For north american students (same cohort as applying to RVU) SGU's MCAT average is a 28 which significantly higher than the 24 that RVU posts. http://etalk.sgu.edu/faqs/medfaq.pdf (page 3)

I think you would be hard pressed to show that a student with a 24 MCAT and a 3.42 GPA (RVU) is a better candidate than on with a 28 and 3.34 GPA (SGU).

In the end, RVU's admission standards are not light years ahead of the carribean (as you previously posted) and in the case of SGU, markedly lower.

If this were true, it would be compelling, however, again you are in error.

1. http://www.rockyvistauniversity.org/PDFs/RVUFactSheetweb.pdf this shows the first class to have an MCAT average of 25, and the GPA stats I before mentioned.

2. per the director of admissions, the c/o 2013 has 3.46 cum, 3.37 sci and 25.8 MCAT. She anticipates (and already is seeing) a similar margin of improvement for this year, so the c/o 2014 will have an MCAT over 26 and very close to, if not over 3.5 cum GPA. This is after only 3 years of operation.

3. SGU has been operating for over 30 years, RVU 2 and 1/2. I cannot find the statistics anywhere for SGU's first class since it was so long ago. I feel like this would be the best way to compare them: if you compared SGU's and RVU's first classes against each other, I tend to think RVU's would be decently ahead. I also tend to think that SGU's stats have more or less stabilized, as those numbers have been on their site for the last few years, whereas RVU has a clear upward trend, as is expected of a US D.O. school.
 
SGU = 3.3cum, 3.1sci, 26 ... that '28 for N American applicants' is bullsh/t, and a perfect example of how they play with numbers to make things look better. I'm really not defending RVU or bashing SGU here, I'm just saying right now they probably have pretty similar stats, and even with the for-profit stigma, will probably have a lot better match list than SGU. Especially if you think about the way AOA programs are currently set up:

to be a PD for the AOA program, you have to be BC via the AOA. If you want to be a PD at an AOA program, pay dues to be BC by the AOA, etc, chances are you aren't one of the 'down the with AOA (majority - hahah) people.' Ergo, they gave the school the OK, these docs support what the AOA does, they take students from RVU. The vocal majority against the AOA seems to be from the younger crowd (meaning RVU could maybe get messed in the future, but could already have a strong enough rep by the time us 14ers are PDs), and those who have experienced a bad situation vs AOA, COCA, etc, and had your ass saved by the ACGME, LCME, etc.

Again, I'm not supporting it one way or the other ... just my .02.
 
While basset does seem like an ok program, it is a small, community program with only 2 residency programs- General Surgery and IM. Most people on the board were talking more about academic programs with some name recognition.

In terms of EM, it is a level 2 trauma center and it doesn't look like it has a residency program per the website.


I'm aware of the residencies offered by my current employer. In reading my previous post, you should have gotten that their director is friends with other directors of EM programs elsewhere. Also, as stated before, the IM residency is D.O. friendly and the General Surgery one is not.

Note that the LCME does not accredit these schools and the AMA and AAMC are against for profit education.

The NBME will allow anyone who is properly credentialed to take the USMLE whether they came from a for-profit school or not.

They cannot control what other countries do. Being against for profit education means they are against the process of for-profit education. It does not mean they are opposed to letting those with the proper aptitude train.


I understand this. My point was that foreign grads used to be blocked from a vast majority of residencies, and now no longer are. Why? well you said it yourself:

"The issue is that for-profit education does not produce the same kind of quality of education. When it does produce a good product, they will not stand in the way."

Yet so many stand in the way before seeing any end results. If it can work in the carib with lesser acceptance standards in combination with less oversight, why can't it work here? If D.O. education is so broken, as bth and others point out, and I myself have witnessed elsewhere, why not try a new approach?

The issue that people have with for profit schools is that if corners need to be cut, it will be the students and not the shareholders taking the hit.


On what planet do you think corners are not cut at not-for-profit D.O. schools? You also make it sound like RVU is a publicly traded corporation, which it is not, and has no plans to become so. As a (good) business they are very concerned about the product they turn out, IE: quality of education / competency of graduates. I can understand the concern regarding a new approach, but why not see where it goes first? Why not see how they do before condemning them?
 
1. Entrance numbers really don't matter. Let's see how they do on boards, and how they do in clinicals. Aren't those two far better measures than anything else?

2. Instate guy: You say "they [RVU students] are not going to be as well regarded as their counterparts."
Come on. Are you serious? This isn't worth retorting because it is just silly.

You also say "for-profit education does not produce the same kind of quality of education"
I would love to hear just 1 bit evidence for this absurd claim.

If you're going to spout off, at least support your claims so I can have a legitimate discussion with you.
 
Because the US health-care system would grind to a halt, as the already strained yearly supply of new physicians was slashed. You would have a massive physician shortage immediately. Some hospitals would literally be unable to function as their resident physician work force was eliminated entirely. The VA health system would be particularly hard hit, as it heavily depends on international graduates.

Am I wrong in thinking that for-profit medical education was unique to the carib schools until recently? Aren't there many other sources for foreign grads other than the carib for-profit schools? Israel, India, Mexico, UK, etc?

I do not feel degraded. My "feelings" are not at issue. The point is the accreditation standards of DO and MD schools are far from equal - a fact the AOA actively conceals, even as it passes policy that widens the gap. They have allowed osteopathic standards to slip, for the sake of rapid expansion.

Were the LCME to allow for-profit schools to be opened that would reduce the gap, since the policies of MD and DO schools would then be equal on this one (relatively minor) point.

bth


So by your own concession, this for-profit stuff we're arguing about so fervently is a minor point? Can you speak to some of the more significant differences for my own (and others') education as I am honestly ignorant of the subject?
 
1. Entrance numbers really don't matter. Let's see how they do on boards, and how they do in clinicals. Aren't those two far better measures than anything else?

2. Instate guy: You say "they [RVU students] are not going to be as well regarded as their counterparts."
Come on. Are you serious? This isn't worth retorting because it is just silly.

You also say "for-profit education does not produce the same kind of quality of education"
I would love to hear just 1 bit evidence for this absurd claim.

If you're going to spout off, at least support your claims so I can have a legitimate discussion with you.

:claps:

But dammit you attend RVU I thought at first it was someone on the outside.
 
Instate guy: You say "they [RVU students] are not going to be as well regarded as their counterparts."
Come on. Are you serious?

You also say "for-profit education does not produce the same kind of quality of education"
I would love to hear just 1 bit evidence for this absurd claim.

If you're going to spout off, at least support your claims so I can have a legitimate discussion with you.

I am very serious about the RVU students not being as well regarded as their osteo counterparts when they go for residency. Do not underestimate the stigma of for-profit education or of a new school with crappy clinicals. When RVU matches students to places like MGH, BIDMC, B&W, Hopkins, Columbia, Yale, Duke etc we can talk. More likely, it's match list will be full of undesirable community programs in crappy areas. When that happens I expect you to come back here with your tail between your legs.

In terms of quality of education, rince RVU is modeled after Tien's other school why don;t you look there for that high quality you refer to (ha). That will show you that for profit education does not provide a high quality of education.
 
Top