This blog will focus on the lack of knowledge and technical experience being provided by the stewards of the University of South Dakota School of Medicine. In general, the citizens of the State of South Dakota should be appalled by the service of this University and its Medical School.
Recently, it has come to my attention that a number of extremely well qualified applicants to the 2009 (and I am absolutely certain that this holds true for previous years) admitting class of the University of South Dakota School of Medicine have been denied admission. When viewing these student’s academic credentials (due to the 1974 Federal Data Privacy Act as it relates to Student Data this information cannot be shared publicly without direct student authorization) it is hard to believe that some students were admitted and others were denied.
It is clear that the faculty and administration of this medical school are providing a complete disservice to the citizens of South Dakota. To say that the members of the medical school admissions committee are under-qualified would be an understatement of great proportion. Most of the members of the admissions committee are just absolutely unqualified to sit in judgment of applicants. Moreover, some of the admissions committee members hold lesser academic credentials than some of the applicants.
To better understand the admissions committee it is relevant to consider each member and their academic credentials. The admissions committee is composed of seven PhDs, seven MDs, one MD/PhD and one Masters of Science. Of the seven MDs it is arguable that only two members are qualified to sit in academic judgment of student applicants. The remaining MDs were all trained prior to the “discovery” of modern molecular biology. As such, it is amazing that these individuals have no background or at best limited knowledge of fundamental principles of immunology or "basic" biology and yet sit in judgment of students who have studied these concepts. The world of biological sciences changed in 1984 (“discovery” of the Polymerase Chain Reaction, PCR) and a lot of what we thought was true about the programming of cellular mechanisms prior to c.1984 has been completely re-written in the textbooks. Sadly, a majority of the MD (and PhD) faculty members have no basis or record of training in these fundamental concepts of medicine and biology. More disturbing, none of the MDs appear to have taken the Medical College Admissions Test (i.e., the dreaded eight hour MCAT) since it was completely re-written (and made far more difficult) in approximately 1994. To this point, we are curious to know when each of the MDs took the MCAT (some never completed the exam) and their achievements on the exam. The MD composition of this admissions committee is clearly unacceptable. What is more amazing, none of the MD members have any training in public health or the practice thereof (this probably explains other health issues in South Dakota).
With regard to the PhDs on the admissions committee the story becomes even more interesting and the tale of unqualified academicians becomes even more disturbing. Of the seven PhDs on the admissions committee a majority are not involved in any type of academic biomedical research and those that are involved in research study fields completely unrelated to the study of practical human medicine. The Dean of Student Affairs, Paul Bunger (Associate Professor), completed a PhD in 1976 at the University of Nebraska and based on records of PubMed has not published a single peer-reviewed scientific manuscript (based on novel research hypothesis) in over ten years. Moreover, Dr. Bunger appears to have been senior author on only one manuscript in his career and that dates to c.1976 (Biochem Biophys Res Commun. 1979 Dec 14;91(3):911-8). Clearly, the academic credentials of the Dean should be called into question, as he is certainly unfit and unqualified to lead the medical school admissions committee. Dr. Bunger has no record of academic training or expertise in the fields of education.
There are other serious issues involving the PhD staff. Two of the members have no educational training in the United States. One individual was trained in the United Kingdom and the other was trained in India. Neither individual attended or received a diploma from a nationally recognized institution. An additional member earned a PhD in 1996 and has little to no research experience and is appointed at the lowest academic level of Instructor within the Department of Biological Sciences. To the best of our knowledge, NONE of the PhD staff have ever completed the required MCAT.
If the lack of biological experience and academic technical knowledge in both the MD and PhD admissions committee members isn’t alarming enough, there is more to consider. One of the committee members only holds a Masters of Science degree and is appointed as an instructor. Clearly, this individual is not qualified to command such a position of influence and decision on the admissions committee. Some of the applicants hold an equal academic credential and some hold a higher (doctoral) credential.
Some reading this informational blog might be impressed with the fact that one of the admissions committee members holds a claimed academic credential of the coveted MD, PhD. However, it is important to note that this individual was also trained outside the United States and earned an MD in Iraq. His PhD is from the University of Minnesota, but it is not a true academic PhD that would be normally achieved with five plus years of course work and novel bench-level research and a three to five year post-doctoral appointment. Clearly, this individual is in the same category as many of the other committee members … not qualified.
The intention of this blog is to catch the attention of the Citizens of South Dakota and to bring to their attention that this University and the USD Medical School is failing in its mission to educate the best possible students from throughout South Dakota (another topic we will discuss in an upcoming blog topic). The faculty who comprise the admissions committee are simply NOT QUALIFIED and need to be replaced with members who have the proper academic credentials. Not one member of the admissions committee hails from SDSU or Augustana College. Not one member of the admissions committee represents the public. Not one member of the admissions committee is a member of the clergy. And NO ONE on the admissions committee represents western South Dakota.
The Governor and the State Legislature need to act on this issue and they need to set-up a watchdog system to take back what is so needed and pivotal to the health and well being of South Dakota. The basic health needs of greater than sixty-percent of South Dakota are not being met. It is time the public stands up and takes back control.
To the Citizens of South Dakota, sound off, comment on this blog, and help me make the Medical School, YOUR Medical School, educate people who can competently serve US, South Dakotans.
In closing, anyone is welcome to comment on this blog, however, your comments must be civil, factful, and truthful. Any comments found to violate these three tenets will be summarily removed.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
I would be interested to see your grades, MCAT score, recommendations, research experience, and other supporting data that say that you are in fact a great candidate.
ReplyDeleteYou state that MD's are not qualified to sit on admissions to a medical school. I would argue that they went through Medical school before you graduated high school. They are qualified. While before the MCATs admissions mainly relied on GPA and other supporting information, they still did a fine job of making sure that those who could not make the grade did not receive admission. You argue that they should not be on the selection team, however they know what medical school, residency, and fellowship is like. They know far more than you about what it takes to make it through medical school. As for the PhD's and master of science on the committee. Most if not all of the people on the admissions committee teach courses in the medical school curriculumn. They have anywhere from 5-20 or more years experience in this capacity. Again this gives a lot of experience that dwarfs yours and others in comparison. They know what each student has for qualifications and they also see how well the students do in their courses and others. All of this information helps make them even better at their job of screening out applicants who will have trouble or not make it through medical school.
Their research experience has nothing to do with this fact. However many have successful research and are prolific writers. Not all articles are readily available on pubmed. It is a great system, but by no means perfect. I digress, many of them have research in areas that are only a hop, skip, or a jump from translational research. Many of the SD faculty also have large research grants, which shows that on a national level judged by their peers they are successful and therefore deserve these large funds. The admissions committee is set up so that one individual serves 3 years and then is replaced by another. The pool of qualified individuals again all meet particular criteria that I have kind of alluded to in this last paragraph.
Next what is your frame of reference?
Are you doing any work at comparing to other medical school admissions committees? Did you apply to any other schools? Did you get accepted at other schools and it is just SD admissions that you feel is at fault? Do you think Deans have much time for medical practice/research all while teaching courses and also serving in their administrative roles?
What qualifications do you have to make such accusations?
Do you have the grades, MCAT scores, and other pertinent supporting information for everyone that has been accepted in the last 5 years and for everyone that has been denied?
You mentioned pubmed, in which if you do a simple search will bring up many publications that address the correlation between MCAT score and USMLE I and II scores as well as success in residency programs. This research is obviously based on credible information, so I ask where is your credible information.
The MCAT is difficult for a reason, medical school is worse. If one cannot make the grade on the MCAT you will have little chance in medical school. The sheer amount of material covered just in the first two weeks of medical school dwarfs an entire semester of undergraduate or even graduate course work.
In regards to talking about fundamentals of medicine and biology:
ReplyDeleteyou left out anatomy, biochemistry (still existed before the dawn of molecular biology), pathology-the bulk of medicine, pharmacology, microbiology, psych/advanced behavior, neuroanatomy, immunology (sorry but this has not been an area of science that we have been completely in the dark on by any means even before 1984) and all the other clinical skills.
Just because PCR was not invented (you are wrong on the date) 1971, credited in 1983 however. It does not make them unqualified. If you believe you become obsolete just because new things are discovered after you are done with school then you should not be in an MD, PhD, MD/PhD, or masters program even. In the professional world you are constantly learning. I am also concerned that you are speaking so badly about a group of people which includes one of the major experts on mitochondria who was one of the pioneers who helped increase our knowledge of that important organelle.
Speaking of individuals with out of country education. Are you qualified to say that a person with a PhD from india, iraq, china, or the UK is not as good as a person with a PhD from the US. Do you even know any of these individuals? All of these individuals are more than qualified and are far more intelligent than you give them credit.
The individual in question with a masters of science. Do you know anything about this person? If you do your research you will see that this person's husband was a PhD who formerly taught and designed much of the curriculum for gross anatomy. You will also find that this person has been teaching gross anatomy for decades. It does not take an MD or a PhD to know ones anatomy. What it takes is experience and I am sure this person can point out and talk about anatomy better or at the same level as many physicians and PhD's.
How does being an augie graduate, SDSU graduate, or clergy member qualify anyone to be on the admissions board? Apparently they know what it takes to make it through medical school? Explain that one for me.
Wow, sounds like this person didn't get accepted into medical school. As a medical school student currently, I was denied admission from a number of schools. All you focus on is the academics, the numbers. You pay no attention to the fact that maybe these people who were denied (to me it sounds like you are included) were deficient in many other areas such as volunteer work, shadowing, and most important, people skills. I have a number of students in my class who are very intelligent, but are completely oblivious to social situations. They more than likely got in based on grades, but in my opinion will not make excellent doctors.
ReplyDeleteMD's, no matter what level, are qualified to select other MD's. Again, here you are focusing far to much on the academic side of the issue and not the personal side. There is a difference between someone who dreams of being a doctor and one who can be a doctor. If that doesn't make sense to you, you probably are the one dreaming. The credentials these individuals have show their dedication to their field and their knowledge of what it takes to achieve the distinction.
And another point, just because these board individuals didn't learn something during their education doesn't mean they don't know something now. CME (continuing medical education) is required of all medical personal. There are things that I am learning now that will be obsolete in 20 years. Does that mean I am a worse physician that a new medical school graduate? NO! Experience matters in medicine and it is the difference between life and death. If you didn't get accepted into medical school maybe it is YOUR experiences that are lacking and not THEIR credentials