Unmatched c/o 2013 by School

Started by flyhi
Physicians and veterinarians: Turn your expertise into action! Explore CDC’s Epidemiology Elective Program and Epidemic Intelligence Service today.
This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.
Get help with your application

Use all the free resources available to you from SDN: articles, guides, expert advising, forums discussions, and school research.

Browse articles Compare schools My application plan Read Interview Feedback
Practice for interviews Ask an Advisor
flyhi

flyhi

Full Member
15+ Year Member
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
There are a lot of numbers being thrown around, so I thought it would be helpful have just c/o 2013 unmatched numbers by school in one place. Just cut and paste if you have the information.

AZPod
Barry - 6
CSPM
DMU
KUSPM
NYCPM - 0
Scholl - 18
Temple
Western
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
One of "my" residents who is a grad of TUSPM told me that there were 20-25 from TUSPM who went unmatched prior to the scramble. I don't know how many eventually landed a program in the scramble.

It's a horrible and inexcusable situation.
 
VinceViegel said:
Looks like my top 2 choices, Scholl and Temple, are now my bottom 2 choices.

Seriously those two schools single-handedly were responsible for almost half the students who didn't get placed.

NYCPM, on the other hand...
Click to expand...
I'm pretty sure the students are the ones responsible for not placing.
 
handoverfist77 said:
I'm pretty sure the students are the ones responsible for not placing.
Click to expand...
I don't think that's a fair comment to make at all considering the lack of residency spots for every new grad.

Even if every student in the class of 2013 had a 3.5+, passed boards on the first try, had great LORs, had great work ethics, published research, were great people to work with, and possessed every single trait you look for in a resident, we would still have 60something 2013 graduates out of luck.

How can you place the sole blame on the students?
 
zdlamkin8195 said:
So NYCPM placed everyone of its students that started the program 4 years ago?? I call BS...
Click to expand...
I don't think anyone ever claimed that. Why would you count someone who dropped out in the middle of their 1st semester or failed out in their 2nd semester for residency placement rates of the graduating senior class? As stated numerous times all over this forum, the class of 2013 initially started with 93 and are graduating with 73. If you want to include attrition numbers in these, some schools will look even worse.
 
hotdawg said:
Which would be true if there were enough spots.

Next...
Click to expand...

josebiwasabi said:
I don't think that's a fair comment to make at all considering the lack of residency spots for every new grad.

Even if every student in the class of 2013 had a 3.5+, passed boards on the first try, had great LORs, had great work ethics, published research, were great people to work with, and possessed every single trait you look for in a resident, we would still have 60something 2013 graduates out of luck.

How can you place the sole blame on the students?
Click to expand...

The post I was responding to placed all the blame on the 2 schools. I do agree every qualified student that has graduated, passed boards, and isn't socially inept deserves a residency spot somewhere. Unfortunately the schools, and higher ups haven't fostered this. In light of there not being enough spots, there are reasons why some people matched and others didn't. Be it better people skills, GPA, networking etc. I guess my original statement was a bit harsh; students are partly responsible.
 
Because the same vicious cycle that creates unmatched graduates stim from the schools that accept more students than they know will complete the program. The schools that have a good percentage of their freshman class fail out, then boast every "qualified" student to have matched is just as much of the problem as anything else...
 
I'm really not trying to start anything, but it really just seems unfair for some schools that fail close to 20% of its freshman class to claim that it has a 100% match rate.
 
Exactly. Raise the standards. There is no reason for any school to be failing 20% of its first year classes.
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
zdlamkin8195 said:
So NYCPM placed everyone of its students that started the program 4 years ago?? I call BS...
Click to expand...

Yeah, Lol. Looking at "qualified applicant" match rates is a different story than entering class eventual residency placement. I will say NYCPM did well in placing their qualified students, but that had to lose over 20% of their class to do it. That being said, I'd WAY rather get cut first year than get strung along for four years and never get placed....

We need schools with high placement and good attrition....

Sent from my Nexus 4 using SDN Mobile
 
zdlamkin8195 said:
Exactly. Raise the standards. There is no reason for any school to be failing 20% of its first year classes.
Click to expand...
School Cumulative/Science/MCAT

AZPOD 3.51 / 3.37 / 24
DMU 3.41 / 3.27 / 23
NYCPM 3.3 / 3.2 / 23
Temple 3.3 / 3.15 / 22.8
Western 3.27 / 3.12 / 22
Scholl 3.21 / 3.01 / 22.5
Barry 3.26 / 3.12 / 21
CSPM 3.23 / 3.12 / 21
Kent 3.21 / 3.05 / 22

Source


*edit*
this is very off topic lol. will try not to derail this thread any further.
 
I'm with Lamkin and max...a school that starts with 100, has a 5% attrition rate and a 95% placement rate is better than a school with 20% attrition and 100% placement. It's disengenuine to advertise 100% placement rates to a prepod while failing to mention that they could be part of the 20% that don't make it to graduation.
 
Again, it's part of the bigger picture of the problem. We have schools that accept HUGE classes and then fail out a good portion - only to claim great match rates or to not list any official match statistics at all - and then only accept a large number of students for the next year in order to keep the cycle going...
 
heybrother said:
Failing out people who can't cut it 1st year is the kindest thing you can do for them other than not accepting them to begin with.
Click to expand...

Even as I consider being a podiatrist, I would totally agree with that. Being 200k in the hole with no road forward is worse than only getting through a year.

When I talked with their rep (this was before match day) I was impressed by how they had matched people for the last couple of years. And they were pretty confident about this year-This way improves my opinion of this school.
 
zdlamkin8195 said:
Again, it's part of the bigger picture of the problem. We have schools that accept HUGE classes and then fail out a good portion - only to claim great match rates or to not list any official match statistics at all - and then only accept a large number of students for the next year in order to keep the cycle going...
Click to expand...

You make it sound like the school is at fault for accepting large classes. Let's be realistic. Larger schools have to accept past the number they believe will graduate due not every seat being taken by the more qualified applicants. The schools shouldn't be blamed for students failing out. There are tons of resources available to students to keep this very thing from happening. This is a totally separate issue from the fact that those deemed competent by school and national standards can't get residencies.
 
MaxillofacialMN said:
Yeah, Lol. Looking at "qualified applicant" match rates is a different story than entering class eventual residency placement. I will say NYCPM did well in placing their qualified students, but that had to lose over 20% of their class to do it.
Click to expand...

It is a fact that EVERY school loses students during the first 3 years, and the schools accept some loss. The variability between schools is there, but just going off the 20% remark, CSPM and Temple (just naming two schools where I interviewed) have % losses approaching that number. BTW why is everyone bashing NYCPM for sugarcoating their residency placement? As someone stated earlier, if you don't include attrition rates, all schools will have much lower match numbers. Honestly, if NYCPM graduated the extra 15-20 students that failed out, the match rate would lower only slightly due to the saturation of programs in the area, let's be serious... They're in a very fortunate location. I can't help but sense that the bashing is in defense of student's choices in their own schools.
 
PatchAdamsFan said:
It is a fact that EVERY school loses students during the first 3 years, and the schools accept some loss. The variability between schools is there, but just going off the 20% remark, CSPM and Temple (just naming two schools where I interviewed) have % losses approaching that number. BTW why is everyone bashing NYCPM for sugarcoating their residency placement? As someone stated earlier, if you don't include attrition rates, all schools will have much lower match numbers. Honestly, if NYCPM graduated the extra 15-20 students that failed out, the match rate would lower only slightly due to the saturation of programs in the area, let's be serious... They're in a very fortunate location. I can't help but sense that the bashing is in defense of student's choices in their own schools.
Click to expand...
Agreed, every school has attrition.

School A started with 100 students and lost 20 students during the first 3 years. But 100% of students who entered the match got residencies. 80/100.

School B started with 100 students and only lost 5 students during the first 3 years. But only 70% of students who entered the match got residencies. 67/100.

Which scenario is worse?

Keep in mind that the students from School B spent more years in school and have more debt. Also, even though I used an attrition rate of 5% for School B, I highly doubt that any pod school has an attrition rate that low (apart from possibly DMU and AZPOD).

Another thing to keep in mind, do we want people who couldn't pass pre-clinical courses and board exams to be treating patients and representing our profession in the future? In my humble opinion, attrition is only a bad thing if qualified and capable people don't make it through. It's just a lot harder to predict who will or will not be capable of succeeding when you have 100+ people in a class compared to 40. If you took the top 40, or even middle 40 students, from any of the large pod schools, the attrition rates would be nearly zero.
 
Last edited:
PatchAdamsFan said:
It is a fact that EVERY school loses students during the first 3 years, and the schools accept some loss. The variability between schools is there, but just going off the 20% remark, CSPM and Temple (just naming two schools where I interviewed) have % losses approaching that number. BTW why is everyone bashing NYCPM for sugarcoating their residency placement? As someone stated earlier, if you don't include attrition rates, all schools will have much lower match numbers. Honestly, if NYCPM graduated the extra 15-20 students that failed out, the match rate would lower only slightly due to the saturation of programs in the area, let's be serious... They're in a very fortunate location. I can't help but sense that the bashing is in defense of student's choices in their own schools.
Click to expand...

I am not bashing NYCPM for their good residency placement rate. All the schools should be placing that high. I am just pointing out that many students left the school - 22%. The number pre-pods should be worried about is "what are the chances that I will get a residency if I go to this school?" Unfortunately, attrition MUST be factored into this consideration. Everyone here seems to be under the impression of a false dichotomy - either good attrition and bad match, or good match and bad attrition... The REAL solution is one no one seems to recognize is possible.... Good attrition and good match... If only there were schools that offered this...
 
SuperFeisty said:
You make it sound like the school is at fault for accepting large classes. Let's be realistic. Larger schools have to accept past the number they believe will graduate due not every seat being taken by the more qualified applicants. The schools shouldn't be blamed for students failing out. There are tons of resources available to students to keep this very thing from happening. This is a totally separate issue from the fact that those deemed competent by school and national standards can't get residencies.
Click to expand...

josebiwasabi said:
Also, even though I used an attrition rate of 5% for School B, I highly doubt that any pod school has an attrition rate that low (apart from possibly DMU and AZPOD.
Click to expand...

Yes, hmmm. It must be something in the water in Phoenix and Des Moines.... Certainly the schools arent responsible for good attrition rates.......
 
As far as Azpod goes, it really depends on the year. I know some years have had close to 0% attrition, but 2014 has had well over 20%. The sample size is just so small that you can't really make any assumptions based off of one or two classes.
 
I also would not be making this argument if there weren't schools accepting students with MCAT scores in the mid teens and terrible GPA's. Do you really think the 15MCAT/2.5 GPA students will pass? Shame on any school for doing so...
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
UPDATED... any one else with final unmatched numbers?

AZPod
Barry - 6
CSPM
DMU
KUSPM - 13
NYCPM - 0
Scholl - 18
Temple
Western - 2
 
According to talks among students, 3 unmatched at DMU. Still need current DMU students to confirm this.
 
UPDATED..if any discrepancies noted, feel free to just fix it. Also, added out of how many entered Match for each school.

c/0 2013 Unmatched to # Entered in Match

AZPod ??
Barry - 6/52
CSPM - 5
DMU - 3
KUSPM - 13/102
NYCPM - 0/72
Scholl - 18/100
Temple - ??
Western - 2/22
 
Last edited:
josebiwasabi said:
School Cumulative/Science/MCAT

AZPOD 3.51 / 3.37 / 24
DMU 3.41 / 3.27 / 23
NYCPM 3.3 / 3.2 / 23
Temple 3.3 / 3.15 / 22.8
Western 3.27 / 3.12 / 22
Scholl 3.21 / 3.01 / 22.5
Barry 3.26 / 3.12 / 21
CSPM 3.23 / 3.12 / 21
Kent 3.21 / 3.05 / 22

Source


*edit*
this is very off topic lol. will try not to derail this thread any further.
Click to expand...

It would be interesting to see the entering stats versus the graduating stats.
 
zdlamkin8195 said:
I also would not be making this argument if there weren't schools accepting students with MCAT scores in the mid teens and terrible GPA's. Do you really think the 15MCAT/2.5 GPA students will pass? Shame on any school for doing so...
Click to expand...

This is EXACTLY the point that everyone who is defending high attrition rates is either missing or neglecting to mention. Attrition rates, IMO, should never be that high. I could understand 10% dropping for personal reasons, but 20% makes me think the schools are more worried about filling seats than actually making sure they have a well qualified class that will make it through to the end.
 
UPDATED..if any discrepancies noted, feel free to correct it.

c/0 2013 Unmatched to # Entered in Match

AZPod ??
Barry - 6/52
CSPM - 5
DMU - 3
KUSPM - 13/102
NYCPM - 0/72
Scholl - 17/100
Temple - ??
Western - 2/22
 
I don't want to derail the unmatched counts either, but why are students solely targeting schools for high attrition rates? The dropped students range anywhere from lowest incoming statistics to medium to fairly competitive. It is a fact that podiatry school is very rigorous, unknown to many incoming students, and cutting them out early is better than leeching them all the way through 4th year. Comparing the attrition rates to medical schools is also ridiculous, as the applicants are much more academically competitive and know what they are getting themselves into (generalizing here). The schools have no idea which individuals will drop out while interviewing them, some are given a great chance, while others look solid on paper, yet students from both groups flunk out. Perhaps many come into the school as a backup, or aren't really interested in such a narrow scope, but I guess that's an inherent problem of podiatry. The students bear an enormous responsibility for succeeding, and given that the vast majority of students graduate from every school, it is very, very possible to do so. Just splitting hairs here, but where the heck can you draw the line between 10% attrition is fine, but 20% is unacceptable? That's just a handful of students at the smaller schools. BTW if schools upped their admissions to decent levels, they are shooting themselves in the 'foot', as students will hold out for traditional medical school 9 times out of 10 when given a choice. Unfortunately, it must be done.
 
Last edited:
17 unmatched from Scholl? So turns out that 8 out of the 25 managed to find a spot in the scramble. Meaning an 83/100 success rate. Hardly ideal but not as staggering as it seemed at first.

The Scholl class of 2012 had 82 qualified students (passed both boards) and 76 got residencies. That's what was shown during the interview process last fall at least. I feel like if the class of 2013 wasn't so much larger than the class of 2012 then the crunch for Scholl wouldn't have been nearly as bad.

Why is the 2013 class so much larger than the 2012 class anyways? Is it because Scholl accepted a larger class size (over 100) for 2013 than for 2012? Or did far more students pass boards in 2013 in addition to fewer students dropping out? Probably a combination of some of the above factors if I had to guess.
 
PatchAdamsFan said:
BTW if schools upped their admissions to decent levels, they are shooting themselves in the 'foot', as students will hold out for traditional medical school 9 times out of 10 when given a choice. Unfortunately, it must be done.
Click to expand...

And that's one of the bigger problems with podiatry. The students who go to pod school should want to be a pod, not just see it as a back up. If you don't want to be there, and aren't committed, I'd bet there's a greater chance of flunking out. Up the stats, and ya, the class sizes will probably go down for a while. But it would go a long ways towards earning more respect of MD/DO. Podiatry would no longer be seen as a catch all. And people that shouldn't be going to medical school, wouldn't be getting in, leading to a higher quality student overall, lower attrition rates, and in all likelihood, a rectified residency situation.

For every student that drops, adding to a schools attrition rate, I would guess that there's another that is barely scraping by, and those are the ones that have the hardest time getting a residency, and the ones that cast doom and gloom all over the forums.
 
flyhi said:
UPDATED..if any discrepancies noted, feel free to correct it.

c/0 2013 Unmatched to # Entered in Match

AZPod ??
Barry - 6/52
CSPM - 5
DMU - 3
KUSPM - 13/102
NYCPM - 0/72
Scholl - 17/100
Temple - ??
Western - 2/22
Click to expand...

If 104 students have to scramble does that mean that Temple and AZpod share 58????
Do I have to worry as a potential 2017 graduate? This is really serious, spend 4 years and get douched?
 
Advertisement - Members don't see this ad
tempod said:
If 104 students have to scramble does that mean that Temple and AZpod share 58????
Do I have to worry as a potential 2017 graduate? This is really serious, spend 4 years and get douched?
Click to expand...

I was thinking much of the same. Those 104 have to come from somewhere. Either the current numbers aren't exactly right, or more residency positions opened, or the bulk of unmatched students come from AZpod and Temple, or some of all.
 
Zalligan said:
For every student that drops, adding to a schools attrition rate, I would guess that there's another that is barely scraping by, and those are the ones that have the hardest time getting a residency, and the ones that cast doom and gloom all over the forums.
Click to expand...

I would not make this assumption, personally. After the initial attrition, it is more common to have students doing just fine, rather than scraping by. It doesn't take long to weed out those who don't want to and/or can't make it. Those who are doing very poorly aren't worried about getting a residency, they are worried about getting through the program.
 
flyhi said:
I would not make this assumption, personally. After the initial attrition, it is more common to have students doing just fine, rather than scraping by. It doesn't take long to weed out those who don't want to and/or can't make it. Those who are doing very poorly aren't worried about getting a residency, they are worried about getting through the program.
Click to expand...

Do larger schools accept under qualified students knowing they will drop out? Was gpa the major factor students didn't match?
 
You must log in or register to reply here.

Similar threads

D
  • Locked
C
Replies
13
Views
4K
NatCh
NatCh
H
O
Replies
39
Views
15K
Bored Snorlax
Bored Snorlax
W
CASPR/CRIPS C/O 2021
Replies
4
Views
3K
GreenHousePub
GreenHousePub
E
  • Locked
LECOM School of Podiatric Medicine Accepted Students Class of 2027
Replies
9
Views
5K
Weirdy
W
Homo sapien
for unmatched podiatry graduates
Replies
3
Views
2K
Homo sapien
Homo sapien