Terrible experience at Western

[jon316]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

Hello friends,
I had an interview a few months ago at Western. I thought I aced it. Later that day I had the opportunity to meet the "God," Harkless as likes to think of himself. He was an interesting individual but a bit delusional. I thought he would asked me about myself but he mostly talked about Ku-Klux-klan and the segregation and how the white people actually kept African Americans from attaining the knowledge they deserve. I thought I was listening to Al Sharpton for a minute. During that time I was nodding my head in affirmation even though I don't buy this type of nonsense, specially when someone blames a particular race or ethnic group because his "people" are not in "good" condition.

A few days later I found out that I was not given a seat. When asked why, the counselor said, "Just apply next year." I am glad they denied me because the type of individuals like Harkless can fill up students mind with garbage. He knows how to tell stories and how to cajole students into learning the art of blaming.

He is also good at manipulating data. For Example, Harkless said, his school has the 100% board pass rate. Actually, He didn't allow about 7 students to take the broads because they were not "ready." Had those students taken the exam, the pass rate would have been much lower than 100%. Its just another unscrupulous act.

I was accepted to other schools and will be staring in August. I have no harsh feelings against Western.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

I have no harsh feelings against Western.

You sure?

 

[luckyfeet]

Op, what were your stats? Perhaps it was to do w that? Also, all podiatrists I have shadowed keep telling me westerns program is the BEST! Bc of harckless but I don't buy it!


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

 

[PADPM]

Hello friends,
I had an interview a few months ago at Western. I thought I aced it. Later that day I had the opportunity to meet the "God," Harkless as likes to think of himself. He was an interesting individual but a bit delusional. I thought he would asked me about myself but he mostly talked about Ku-Klux-klan and the segregation and how the white people actually kept African Americans from attaining the knowledge they deserve. I thought I was listening to Al Sharpton for a minute. During that time I was nodding my head in affirmation even though I don't buy this type of nonsense, specially when someone blames a particular race or ethnic group because his "people" are not in "good" condition.

A few days later I found out that I was not given a seat. When asked why, the counselor said, "Just apply next year." I am glad they denied me because the type of individuals like Harkless can fill up students mind with garbage. He knows how to tell stories and how to cajole students into learning the art of blaming.

He is also good at manipulating data. For Example, Harkless said, his school has the 100% board pass rate. Actually, He didn't allow about 7 students to take the broads because they were not "ready." Had those students taken the exam, the pass rate would have been much lower than 100%. Its just another unscrupulous act.

I was accepted to other schools and will be staring in August. I have no harsh feelings against Western.

If Dr. Harkless did discuss those issues with you, I personally don't believe it was appropriate. However, interviewers do different things for different reasons. There's a possibility that he discussed those topics simply to see how you reacted. However, I don't know his reasoning or motives.

I'm glad you were accepted at other schools, and hope you have a successful career.

 

[Traum]

If that occurred during a podiatric school interview or any interview for that matter, it is highly inappropriate. The blame game has gone on far too long.

How about personal accountability?

 

[jon316]

My sgpa was 3.4 with 3.45 overall. Mcat 26. Accepted to DMU,Temple,Ohio,Azpod,Cspm. Going to DMU though.

May be I don't my stats were too low to be a western university genius.

 

[jon316]

You sure?

Just a little bit. I think I'm going to cry now. Poor me!!

 

[AyeAre709]

If Dr. Harkless did discuss those issues with you, I personally don't believe it was appropriate. However, interviewers do different things for different reasons. There's a possibility that he discussed those topics simply to see how you reacted. However, I don't know his reasoning or motives.

I'm glad you were accepted at other schools, and hope you have a successful career.

I was asked some strange things at Barry but I found out afterwards why it made sense to ask that. Later I found out I was asked those things just to see my reactions, like PADPM said.

 

[luckyfeet]

Like which types of questions?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

 

[AyeAre709]

Like which types of questions?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN Mobile app

Things related to the business aspect of medicine and podiatry. I was a business major as an undergrad and I was asked a couple questions about patient/insurance/reimbursement dilemmas. At Barry and at DMU I was asked if I would give medicare/medicaid patients the same attention as private insurance patients. Or how I would deal with patients differently based on their insurance. Or if my treatment plan would change as a result of their insurance coverage. At Temple I remember being asked whether or not I planned on working in private practice or for a hospital. I knew that they knew I would change and evolve my opinion over the course of my education and career, but Barry told me later that they asked those things to see how I reasoned through things and where my priorities were. I'm sure Dr. Harkless was the same way, he wanted to see how jon316 would react to his story.

 

[TimmyT]

He is also good at manipulating data. For Example, Harkless said, his school has the 100% board pass rate. Actually, He didn't allow about 7 students to take the broads because they were not "ready." Had those students taken the exam, the pass rate would have been much lower than 100%. Its just another unscrupulous act.

I was accepted to other schools and will be staring in August. I have no harsh feelings against Western.

I don't know where you got this rumor but its false. Can you please tell us where you heard this? I would like to know.

 

[347932]

There are questions that are not allowed to be approached when interviewing.

Anything to do with race, religion or political views is strictly off limits in an interview setting, and if indeed these topics where discussed, I strongly urge you to call the CPME and discuss this with them.

I know Larry, and he does tend to fly off the handle with these things to just about anyone who will listen. This has gotten in him into trouble before, and is NOT the behavior I would expect from a Dean of a college.

 

[trinifootdoc]

Dr. Harkless was very out of place to discuss such things during the interview process. There is a time and place for everything.

 

[kmmoon]

I interviewed and was accepted at Western. I do not know your entire story, but when I was there Dr. Harkless was not the interviewer. He came to talk to us, but he did not interview us. Race is something that is relevant to the health field because I have been asked about diversity many times at interviews. I also asked about the board pass rates and if some people were told they could not take the boards because I had heard of the same thing happening at other schools that say they have a 100% board pass rate. He denied that Western did this. I just thought i would say this because I had a good experience at Western. To be honest, you should be ready to answer any question at an interview. Temple asked me if I planned on having children, which in my opinion is personal, but I do not hold that against them because it is relevant to how well i would do in Pod school.

 

[flyhi]

Temple asked me if I planned on having children, which in my opinion is personal, but I do not hold that against them because it is relevant to how well i would do in Pod school.

I find this, and discussing anything racial (which is different from diversity) highly unprofessional. Not sure about school interviews, but it's illegal to do in a job interview.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

I find this, and discussing anything racial (which is different from diversity) highly unprofessional. Not sure about school interviews, but it's illegal to do in a job interview.

I think it's dumb that's illegal to discuss in a job interview, or a school interview. I think picking and choosing what types of discrimination we allow is risky business, and people should have the freedom to determine the criteria for selecting their employees or students. If I only want black jewish women that like country music at my school, I should have the freedom to choose only black jewish women that like country music. This is America, we should have freedom.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

Just to clarify though: Depending on the topic it probably will still be unprofessional, but I think it is dumb that it is illegal.

 

[kmmoon]

I believe it is illegal to ask in an interview what a person's ethnicity is, but it does not say that race cannot come up in conversation at all. I think that the point is that they cannot choose a student based on race, or keep a student out based on race. I agree that it may not be professional, but I don't believe that what he said was illegal. AND was Dr. Harkless even interviewing Jon316, or was he just having a conversation with him and stating what was on his mind?

 

[347932]

ANYTHING to do with race, religion, political views, family plans and your personal handicaps (if you have any) are strictly off limits, unless YOU open the door. If you approach the topic first, then any question be asked, but if the interviewer brings these things up, they can be sanctioned by whatever governing body is responsible. In our case, the CPME should be notified to take the appropriate steps if the student feels that that is appropriate.

 

[flyhi]

I think it's dumb that's illegal to discuss in a job interview, or a school interview. I think picking and choosing what types of discrimination we allow is risky business, and people should have the freedom to determine the criteria for selecting their employees or students. If I only want black jewish women that like country music at my school, I should have the freedom to choose only black jewish women that like country music. This is America, we should have freedom.

You are not only entitled to your opinion, but also free to open up the School for Black Jewish Women who like Country Music.

You might feel differently if pod schools excluded applicants who used to want to be dental surgeons, but now want to go to pod school 🙄

 

[347932]

I think it's dumb that's illegal to discuss in a job interview, or a school interview. I think picking and choosing what types of discrimination we allow is risky business, and people should have the freedom to determine the criteria for selecting their employees or students. If I only want black jewish women that like country music at my school, I should have the freedom to choose only black jewish women that like country music. This is America, we should have freedom.

LOL wow.

Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence and it's various amendments? You know the one John Hancock and a bunch of other important people signed in 1776?

You DO have freedom.

 

[air bud]

LOL wow.

Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence and it's various amendments? You know the one John Hancock and a bunch of other important people signed in 1776?

You DO have freedom.

I think you mean Herbie Hancock?

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

You are not only entitled to your opinion, but also free to open up the School for Black Jewish Women who like Country Music.

You might feel differently if pod schools excluded applicants who used to want to be dental surgeons, but now want to go to pod school 🙄

Nope, I'd feel the same. I wouldn't want to go to a school that didn't want me....

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

LOL wow.

Have you ever read the Declaration of Independence and it's various amendments? You know the one John Hancock and a bunch of other important people signed in 1776?

You DO have freedom.

I think I have a better grasp on this than you do.... The Declaration of Independence has never been amended....

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

You DO have freedom.

If you endorse complete liberty and freedom, you will agree that businesses can discriminate on any grounds necessary. [private] Schools are private property and so I think that if Western wants to talk about race and religion in their interviews, they could. I don't think a lot of students will want to go to that school if that is it the case though.

 

[347932]

I think I have a better grasp on this than you do.... The Declaration of Independence has never been amended....

Wow lol. You're right. It's the Canadian in me lol. The Constitution had amendments, of course. Damn, pushing 40 really sucks!

 

[347932]

If you endorse complete liberty and freedom, you will agree that businesses can discriminate on any grounds necessary. [private] Schools are private property and so I think that if Western wants to talk about race and religion in their interviews, they could. I don't think a lot of students will want to go to that school if that is it the case though.

Public or private, they are still bound to the laws of the land. Sorry, but they can't discriminate.

Three quick stories.

The US Gov't went after Hooters (yes, that Hooters) who had to pay a HUGE fine since none of their waiters are Male. They refused to change their policies and continue to pay fines.

The US Gov't also went after Joe's Stone Crab in Florida, who also had to pay a HUGE fine since none of their waiters are Female. They refused to change their policies and continue to pay fines.

Here's another tidbit. A private company (the name escapes me atm) started firing staff who smoked, and also fired staff whose spouses or family who lived in their home smoked. They also asked on their app whether you smoked and didn't even consider those who said they did and also fired you immediately if you lied about it and were found out. The Gov't tried to go after them to for discriminating against smokers until the company produced document after document stating that the medical bills that were shared by everyone due to their mutual medical plan significantly decreased after getting rid of those people, and the productivity of the company went up. The Govt's case failed at the supreme court level. It was on 60 minutes a few years ago. I cheered them.

 

[347932]

complete liberty and freedom

Does not exist.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

I know. 🙁 that's what I'm bummed about... Lol

 

[347932]

I know. 🙁 that's what I'm bummed about... Lol

Truly?

What you propose would lead to outright Anarchy. There MUST be rules that society can agree to live by. That's what makes the USA so great.

 

[flyhi]

That's what makes the USA so great.

And, this is coming from a Canadian 😀

 

[347932]

And, this is coming from a Canadian 😀

One year and eleven months until Citizenship status!!!!

 

[flyhi]

One year and eleven months until Citizenship status!!!!

Awesome! CONGRATS in advance!!

 

[347932]

Awesome! CONGRATS in advance!!

Thanks!! Waiting very anxiously!

 

[beethousand]

I think it's dumb that's illegal to discuss in a job interview, or a school interview. I think picking and choosing what types of discrimination we allow is risky business, and people should have the freedom to determine the criteria for selecting their employees or students. If I only want black jewish women that like country music at my school, I should have the freedom to choose only black jewish women that like country music. This is America, we should have freedom.

We used to have this up until Brown v. Board of Education. Employers and schools had the "freedom" to exclude black people from schools....

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

We used to have this up until Brown v. Board of Education. Employers and schools had the "freedom" to exclude black people from schools....

Personally, I am not a fan of discrimination based on non-performance issues (eg race), but I do think it should be a right for someone to open a store and exclude certain individuals. The markets will determine if that store remains open or not. Would you shop at a store that says, "No blacks allowed" on the front window? I would not, but it isn't my job or the governments job to tell them they don't have the freedom to choose who they sell their merchandise to.

That being said, public institutions like primary and secondary schools should not make any law discriminates against someone based on non-performance issues.

Edit: What I'm trying to say is that it is not the government's job to become the moral compass of the people. If you think that's the case, go vote for Rick Santorum and outlaw pornography.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

Truly?

What you propose would lead to outright Anarchy. There MUST be rules that society can agree to live by. That's what makes the USA so great.

I'm suggesting there is a difference between rules society tells you to live by and rules government tells you to live by. I think we both would agree that society (mostly) tells us not to discriminate based on race. Why is it the government's job to make us live our lives that way? We should look to churches, reason, families, or any number of things for our morals and "rules to live by." If we truly believe in property rights in this country (which is something we were founded on!), we will realize that we should be able to do with our property what we want (as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's right to do the same!).

Speaking of historical documents in our country, Calvinism had one of the greatest impacts on the writing of our constitution. The founders realized that men were inherently evil, and so a smaller government would make it impossible for a group of evil men to ruin your life. Ruining your own life is one thing, but creating a government that will almost certainly ruin your life (Calvinism) is something they did not want to happen. This is the reason why our country was founded on the princples of smaller government, and in this case, the idea that your property/business is your own and the government cannot tell you how to run it!

"The government is best which governs least" Thoreau

 

[347932]

I'm suggesting there is a difference between rules society tells you to live by and rules government tells you to live by. I think we both would agree that society (mostly) tells us not to discriminate based on race. Why is it the government's job to make us live our lives that way? We should look to churches, reason, families, or any number of things for our morals and "rules to live by." If we truly believe in property rights in this country (which is something we were founded on!), we will realize that we should be able to do with our property what we want (as long as it doesn't infringe on someone else's right to do the same!).

Oh goodness, where to begin.

Our government is elected by us to represent our society is it not?

Let's start there.

 

[MaxillofacialMN]

Oh goodness, where to begin.

Our government is elected by us to represent our society is it not?

Let's start there.

Hmmm to an extent. Turns out the founders also thought the laypeople were stupid and that they were uneducated enough to make intelligent decisions about government. Your statement (correct me if i'm wrong) implies somewhat of pure democracy that is acted out by your representative. In other words, your representative represents what the majority of society wants. Pure democracies like this undermine the minority whenever personal advantage of the majority suggest it. Representatives are put in place because they are supposedly smarter than the rest of us and won't make stupid decisions. The only reason they listen to their district/state is for re-election reasons.

 

[347932]

Hmmm to an extent. Turns out the founders also thought the laypeople were stupid and that they were uneducated enough to make intelligent decisions about government. Your statement (correct me if i'm wrong) implies somewhat of pure democracy that is acted out by your representative. In other words, your representative represents what the majority of society wants. Pure democracies like this undermine the minority whenever personal advantage of the majority suggest it. Representatives are put in place because they are supposedly smarter than the rest of us and won't make stupid decisions. The only reason they listen to their district/state is for re-election reasons.

Kinda sorta, but let's get one thing out of the way. There are no pure democracies. It doesn't exist and never will.

Representatives are elected because they share similar views while running for office. Once they are elected, it's anyone's guess as to what or how they affect change.

 

[PADPM]

Is it unconstitutional to fire someone or not hire someone because they suffer from stupidity?? If so, call the authorities.......I'm guilty.

 

[347932]

Is it unconstitutional to fire someone or not hire someone because they suffer from stupidity?? If so, call the authorities.......I'm guilty.

Not Unconstitutional. Good business😀!

 

[bobdolerson]

These are the sorts of issues that get me into trouble. The quickest way to anger people and to lose good friends is to debate politics with them.

Luckily I don't know any of you, so let's do this!!

I entirely disagree that his actions should be considered illegal, based on my own understanding as to the purpose of the government, and not considering current laws as it's "correct purpose".

However, being a Libertarian who strongly supports the free market, guilds are versions of capitalistic regulation.

Want to perform some service or provide a product? You'll do better if you're part of a group with publicly known requirements and guidelines for entering. This provides the buyer with a better idea as to which product or service is best, and gives motivation to each group to better themselves farther than the rest.

Sure, in this day and age it changes a bit, and considering how touchy people are over how much of medicine should be regulated, and what is and isn't a right (here's a hint; you cannot reasonably enjoy a right that necessitates someone else actively doing something, otherwise it's in constant violation. For example, if no doctors existed, you would constantly have your rights violated. This makes no sense. Doctor's labor is a product, not a right), but this is still how things are done in a lot of situations.

I don't think those questions should be illegal, but if DPMs want to be taken seriously and seen as a proper group of professionals, that sort of thing needs to be eliminated by the governing body. He shouldn't go to jail or even have a fine, he should only face the wrath of the people who put him there.

This isn't about race or racism, it's about keeping on point and just not bringing up unnecessary inflammatory subjects like that without cause.

Want to talk about health care as a right? Sure.

Some Terry Shaivo talk? Let's do it.

What do I consider the role of my race in the ever-present struggles for subconscious racial equality? Nah...I think you should lose your position in this committee, though.

 

[darazon]

Hello friends,
I had an interview a few months ago at Western. I thought I aced it. Later that day I had the opportunity to meet the "God," Harkless as likes to think of himself. He was an interesting individual but a bit delusional. I thought he would asked me about myself but he mostly talked about Ku-Klux-klan and the segregation and how the white people actually kept African Americans from attaining the knowledge they deserve. I thought I was listening to Al Sharpton for a minute. During that time I was nodding my head in affirmation even though I don't buy this type of nonsense, specially when someone blames a particular race or ethnic group because his "people" are not in "good" condition.

A few days later I found out that I was not given a seat. When asked why, the counselor said, "Just apply next year." I am glad they denied me because the type of individuals like Harkless can fill up students mind with garbage. He knows how to tell stories and how to cajole students into learning the art of blaming.

He is also good at manipulating data. For Example, Harkless said, his school has the 100% board pass rate. Actually, He didn't allow about 7 students to take the broads because they were not "ready." Had those students taken the exam, the pass rate would have been much lower than 100%. Its just another unscrupulous act.

I was accepted to other schools and will be staring in August. I have no harsh feelings against Western.

Sorry to bring this thread back on topic...

Firstly, not sure where the OP got this ridiculous information about holding students back from taking the boards. If 7 students were not allowed to take the exam that would be 1/4 of our class!!!

Absolutely everyone who was in our class took the boards. Everyone was "ready."

Secondly, Dr Harkless (as another poster pointed out) does not interview the students. He meets with them as a 'Meet and Greet' type of thing. Not a formal interview at all. However, he does have a huge tendency to go off topic and talk about random stuff.

Thirdly, keep in mind that Western does put a lot of emphasis on who you are and how you present yourself. High stats are good, but they usually are not the deciding factor at Western.

Just wanted to clarify a couple of things....

Good luck wherever you end up.

 

[bobdolerson]

High stats are good, but they usually are not the deciding factor at Western.

I'm curious as to what would make you think that.

 

[AMDG83]

I believe Western looks at more than just GPA. The OP's stats are above last years incoming class in every regard. Maybe the OP isn't "lacking" anything, maybe Western is looking for a specific type of person. I remember during their secondary application I was asked about teaching experience and community service.