Your school is truly a standout. I would have been impressed with 87% on time rate. To even have a class at 98% tells me you must be doing something right.
I don't think that we're alone in having a good on-time graduation record, and I strongly suspect that the newest schools are making the numbers bad for the entire profession. We used to have a pool of underperforming students do so poorly on COMLEX that they skewed the entire curve for the other 90% to the left! Solution? Raise standards. Ut's not as hard as one thinks (having a high performing SMP pool to draw upon students also helps).
I'm going to one of the super new schools (UIW) They seem to be pretty on top of making their program solid. They had their MSBS program prior to the first class and recruited directly from that. On the other hand I'm sure the applicant pool is on the lower end as it's a new school (rumor is average MCAT is 502). Is it expected that ALL new schools have poor graduation rates or is this more or less a stereotype?
I'm wondering the same thing because I'm about to start at one of the super new schools as well, but everything points to them being super caring of their students and the Dean's a very good one too. So I hope everything goes well lol
.
Actually, I know for a fact how many original students are graduating because I took the original document with all of our names that we got from our dean in 2014, and then I compared it with the document our dean just sent us with all of the names for graduation. Thanks for thinking you are right, but for my class, it most certainly is that high.
New schools all have a weaker applicant pool because people are hesitant to gamble on a new school The term partial accreditation" is scar to some, others are concerned about the lack of info or feedback about the curriculum.
FWIW if you do this for my school you get 99%. Total applicant data on this site is a bit misleading because we lost 6 total students to attrition or being OMM fellows (2 per year), but gained 5 back, so we had a “net loss” of one student when really our specific class rate would be less than that but still 95%.
That's good to hear! They impressed me with their education strategy. I also wanted to stay in Texas and due to poor decisions I blocked my chances at other schools so it's a win-win for me.
I never claimed to know your school individually, just that most DO schools would be worse. If our overall attrition is 8% (going off of @hallowmann ) then there must be schools that are way worse if your school is doing 95% and Goros is 98%. In fact, you can figure out who they are from the reference I gave.
AACOMAS is the application system.
Too different things, placement was indeed 98%, but at most, only 95% of the original 6184 actually got to graduation. Actually its less because the number of graduates included in Dr. Fluffys graduation numbers were not exclusively 4 years grads in 2017, (i.e. a number of them were repeaters fellow, delayed etc). AACOM didn't separate that out for us.
Every thing I've seen over time is that it takes a while for DO schools to hit their stride. Even Rocky Vista, which is a high performing DO school. Here is some RVU performance data over time:I'm wondering the same thing because I'm about to start at one of the super new schools as well, but everything points to them being super caring of their students and the Dean's a very good one too. So I hope everything goes well lol.
Sent from my SM-G950U using SDN mobile
I will be attending ARCOM if I don't get off KCU's waitlist. So far I can say that I really like this school despite being a very new one, but I also believe in myself and my ability to succeed wherever I end up being. I really like their curriculum approach as well because it goes hand in hand with my style of learning. The dean is also a very experienced guy who was the founding dean of LMU, and I can say that school is doing well so far. From what I gathered, everyone has been very supportive of ARCOM in the state of Arkansas, and they've also been very attentive of the student's needs. Now, let's just see how the inaugural class does on the boards next year. I'm really thinking this school is going to do great.
I'm not sure making it mandatory is the right move. Teaching with and helping prepare for the usmle, sure. In the case of students that are lagging for whatever reason, adding an extra board exam could hurt them. I would prefer that an entire merge occur and stop with this comlex/usmle comparison nonsense but since that isn't a present reality I'm not sure making mandatory is the best move.
Well, without an USMLE score applicants have fewer places they can apply to in regard to residency spots. Also, for those institutions which will accept a COMLEX score in lieu of an USMLE score, many program directors require much higher COMLEX scores (percentile-wise) than the USMLE equivalents. That is just the way it is right now. In my opinion, all DO students should take the USMLE if they have the drive and aptitude to multi-task (COMLEX & USMLE). Of course, I would not recommend any of the weaker DO students to do this. So there should be some self-selection involved.
I've reviewed rvu and I agree they do fairly well in the match. With the merger my understanding was that the usmle would not be required but I could be wrong. My point was only that it shouldn't be mandatory which it seems based on your response you agree with. I'll likely take step as well but I think as the environment currently stands for DOs making it mandatory could be great for some and awful for others.
I never said acgme PDs had any understanding of the comlex. I did remember reading something that suggested that step wouldn't be required. I didn't say it was the best idea not to take it, just that you didn't HAVE to.
I think we're agreeing here. I didn't say if one should or shouldn't just that it isn't a requirement to apply for consideration. I absolutely agree that being unable to pass step is poor form and needs to be reevaluated if common place. I will say though that at, least for myself, that content review matters far less than literally taking practice exams over and over for testing strategy and the like. If this is common in even a quarter of DO students then of course step might appear as if we perform worse on it. Standardized tests while a necessary evil are still evil for very good reasons. Alas we have nothing better and the day someone does discover a better way the world will rejoice and that man would deserve a Nobel prize.
I'm not saying it doesn't and you most certainly could be right as I've not taken either board exam but I've found with all past standardized exams I've taken that practice taking exams improves my performance far more than content review.
Well maybe my performance will be better on step than the MCAT as often my wrong answers were due to question approach. In either case it's always abundantly obvious after the fact what you should have done, right? Lol
Sure man. If you think question approach is the key to even an average score then be my guest.
I'm sure in reality I have absolutely no idea, but that's all a part of the "fun" if you will.
Well...since the AOA's strategic plan indicates that they want to increase the number of DO schools by 30%, I guess they will be making a lot of $ due to all of the new COM's they want to open.
FTFY AOA, feel free to thank me later for the free edit. I know it was a Freudian slip, we all do it sometimes...Well...since the AOA's strategic plan indicates that they want to increase the number of DO schools by 30%, I guess they will be making a lot of $ due to all of the new COM's they want to open.
"Increasing the number andqualityquantity of osteopathic graduatesmedical education (OGME)opportunitie$ is the third pillar of the AOA'$ $trategic plan. Specifically, our goal is a 30%
I thought that was in the context of like residency programs acknowledging differences between the schools and that most acgme PDs don't know?
