This blog is purely meant to be an avenue of exposure to the unqualified admissions practices and unqualified admissions committee members that composed the University of South Dakota School of Medicine. It would seem that some individuals are taking this blog as a personal attack. No such personal attacks have occurred. The members of the admissions committee that have been brought to light in this blog are public servants, thus by the nature of their positions they are subject to public criticism.
Issue 1: Calling me a coward is not very professional of you. Again I think this proves a couple of my points. First off, that having "my name and e-mail address [which] are complete, published, and available through the website," does not make me any less anonymous. In fact, having you say nothing about yourself is quite frustrating. I guess the old adage is true 'what comes around goes around.'
Answer: I am not going to continue this debate with you. Again, my credentials (academic or otherwise) are of no consequence to this debate. It is not a me vs USD issue. This blog centers around exposing the frauds of the USD admissions committee and their incompetence and unsuitability of sitting on this admissions panel.
You are welcome to contact me at gerry.gilbertson@yahoo.com
Issue 2: Who makes personal attacks on anonymous posters if he/she is calm, collected, and reasonable as you so claim?
Answer: This blog has been calm and civil from its start. At no point did I make a personal attack against you. I have only requested that you substantiate your claims.
About Issue 1: You still hide behind a cloak of anonymity. Your motives are still in question, and you haven't done anything to change that.
Answer: I have thoroughly explained my motives. When you read the NY Times or any other newspaper do you question all the motives of the authors? Maybe, you should read the article, think about the content, agree or disagree with the authors points-of-view or conclusions.
About Issue 2: This issue really "has nothing to do with rejection letters?" I'm not sure if I buy what you are trying to sell Mr. Gilbertson. Why bring up this issue now? What sparked it? I just ask so we can clarify your motivation.
Answer: I only responded to your point(s). In an early comment you claimed that I was an applicant or that maybe I had a son or daughter who was rejected. You claimed to have knowledge about March rejection letters. You seem to claim that you have inside knowledge that only a member of the USD School of Medicine Admissions Committee would know. I brought that issue forward, suggesting that you might be a member of the Admissions Committee … you have denied this association.
About Issue 2: You now claim to be a journalist. That's funny Mr. Gilbertson. After a short google search I have not been able to find any of your writings. I am going to put that claim into the lie category until proven otherwise.
Answer: As always, you are welcome to assume anything you so choose. The blog is only meant to be informational. Additional Legislative action is moving forward. Legal suits on behalf of those supporting this blog will probably be following shortly.
I think it is interesting that you claim that my credentials are fabricated and yet you are hiding your identity and using my name as your identity. Interesting!
About Issue 3: Yes, we've heard about the 'supporters' before. Still no concrete evidence, just a claim. Also, I think you are just taking the words of the president to fit your unique scenario about being upset by the admissions committee. If you were truly worried about state accountability, you would not have narrowed in on the medical school admissions committee. Now Mr. Gilbertson, please be honest, would you be so kind as to tell us the REAL reason you are upset? I would bet not.
Answer: Like many Americans, I have supported Government transparency. When you have a non-accountable system that hides behind doors, there is nothing left but assumption of corruption. It is time we, as Americans, start exposing all individuals who participate in these actions. The USD is a PUBLIC institution, responsible to the Citizens of South Dakota. This is not YOU LITTLE PRIVATE UNIVERSITY. We have the right and responsibility to constantly provide oversight of all governmental and public agencies.
About Issue 4: Really Mr. Gilbertson, an 'investigative journalist' who has no articles cited online? What other claims are you going to make before you collapse under a pile of lies?
Answer: I think you claimed that PubMed was not all inclusive of biomedical research publications and you discounted publications as a source for credentialing. You provide an exception for the admissions committee, but then you hold me to a different standard. Next thing we know, you will be spouting that black Americans should have separate eating facilities or positions on public transportation.
About Issue 5: So, in short you're saying you have no background in medical school policies, the medical world, or biology. Sounds like you are not qualified to give an opinion on the matter. You mention an academic experience at a top-five biomedical research institute (no name given), then dodge whether it was in science or journalism.
Answer: Never made any of “these” claims. I have a very broad background in the biomedical sciences and I have both studied and been trained at three of the top ranked educational institutions in the USA. Harvard is one of them. In terms of medical school policies, I have been involved in reformation of programs from New York to California. I have fought for admissions causes for American Indian applicants and other minority applicants. One of my backgrounds is medical reporting. Some very talented and highly trained MDs have been excellent journalist and science writers: Michael Crichton ring a bell?
There is no dodging of questions. I have answered all points addresses. The only dodging on issues and comments are from people like you who hide their identity.
As I said, a Live Radio broadcast will be held next week. You are welcome to call in.
About Issue 6: Back to the emotionally charged issue. Calling people a coward, yet hiding in anonymity your self? "Lighting a fire" on the issue at 3 AM? These acts point towards emotion Mr. Gilbertson not reasonable. As a seasoned investigative journalist, one would think that you would be able to notice that in your writing.
Answer: I have not been emotional in this blog … sorry if you have interpreted the blog postings as emotional. As for responding at 3:00AM, sorry I was fast asleep. Maybe, the host server is abroad? Maybe, I am currently out of the country.
About Issue 6: Also, I am flattered that you think I am one of the highly qualified individuals on the admissions board.
Answer: Okay, if you are not a member of the faculty why are you so passionately charged on this issue. The blog is simply a blog. We are attempting to make social and political change. I think in a short time-frame you will find-out how powerful grass-roots movements like this can be when well orchestrated.
If you are not a member of the faculty, then all the issues and statements of [facts] that you supposedly claim about residencies, qualifications, etc are bunk. Clearly, if this is the case (that you are not a faculty member) then you have no qualifications to comment-on.
About Issue 7: You obviously do not know how the Sanford SOM works. Again showing that you probably do not have the knowledge to be 'lighting a fire' on this issue.
Answer: Well, since you are not a faulty member then I too assume that you know nothing about USD SOM. However, I think my knowledge of the administration and its internal workings and policies is quite solid.
About Issue 8: No Mr. Gilbertson there is no critical flaw in my argument. The argument was that the students graduating from the Sanford SOM are very competitive at a national level as shown by their match statistics. I said nothing about the amount of students going into primary care, or coming back to South Dakota after residency. Those stats are available if you choose to find them. Once you do find them, you'll clearly see that they support the fact that the administrators are doing a wonderful job upholding the mission of the school. I find it rather odd that an 'investigative journalist' did not do his homework before writing all of this.
Answer: Please, direct me to these references. I am in the progress of contacting the institutions you previously mentioned. When the data comes back, I will post it.
I think my homework thus far has been dead-spot-on. Clearly, my writings have irritated you.
About Issue 9: I did not quote a statistic, and that is why you are unaware of it. Mr. Gilbertson, please don't take my comments out of context. I was stating that the competitiveness of the school, as shown by match statistics has excelled at a national level. As an investigative journalist, how come you have not found the over arching problem with the US News and World Report ratings? Seems as though you only use the statistics that support your argument while leaving others out. If you are truly about enlightening the South Dakota public, maybe you might want to start by putting in all of the facts. That shouldn't be difficult for a journalist.
Answer: “We are all entitled to our individuals opinions, but not to our individuals facts.”
About Issue 10: Again, I am only as anonymous as you. No credentials, no articles, no biography? This should leave South Dakotans suspect of your motives.
Answer: My name and e-mail address is clearly posted. Anyone can contact me. Please feel free to e-mail me your academic credentials and I will gladly assemble the course work against mine and publish. The only caveat I state: when my academic credentials and experiences out-weigh your credentials and experiences, you are required to resign from your faculty position. There is your ultimate challenge.
Subscribe to:
Post Comments (Atom)
Posts
No comments:
Post a Comment