In answer to your question, I cannot see why your exemplary distance graduate should be penalized in any way.
There are critics who will say that a lack of exposure to certain elements of the traditional course will show eventually: the distance graduate will mess up sooner or later. For those who consider that distance learning in medicine is akin to licensing paedophilia or cannibalism there will never be a convincing retort to that assertion.
However, the opponents of distance learning need to ask themselves how it is that a licensing exam such as USMLE or PLAB is a satisfactory test of fitness-to-practise for one group of students and not for another.
If there are aspects of performance which are not tested in the licensing exams these should be included immediately. A review of licensing might also expose some deficiencies in the education of campus students!
I am also a fan of IVIMEDS and believe they have a workable vision of the future. I have never been able to understand what advantage performing a titration very badly confers on a future jobbing doctor. Much of the traditional basic sciences course is not a preparation for workaday medical practice but rather a harking back to a now distant era when we all did our own assays without benefit of specialist staff and equipment. For doctors who wish to engage in biomedical research or take their microscope to the most obscure corners of the globe there are opportunities to learn lab techniques outside of the core medical curriculum.
USUAL DISCLAIMER: none of the above should be construed in any way as an endorsment of the activities of that excuse for a medical school and educational (sic) establishment IUHS.

As for your assessment, ..." Much of the traditional basic sciences course is not a preparation for workaday medical practice but rather a harking back to a now distant era when we all did our own assays without benefit of specialist staff and equipment. " That is one of the things that needs to be changed in this era. You well point out that 'A review of licensing might also expose some deficiencies in the education of campus students!" as it happens on a day to day basis.

The disclaimer is excellent, I will use it.

two points:

1) many state boards have inserted the wording "physical attendance" for IMG licensure applicants, when noting the requirements for basic science years. i have read it several times, and this will certainly be a stumbling block. this wording is not likely present in the section for US grads. remember, the licensing requirements ARE different in nearly every case for LCME grads vs IMGs. so, a harvard grad with online education will likely not have a problem, as the schooling is in accordance with LCME. but, non-lcme schools will have a totally different set of requirements.

2) as far as the excellent student described above...well, certainly and excellent student is an excellent student, and will likely make an excellent doctor. but, the problem is going to be a matter of defining "excellent", and a matter of the time and money needed to evaluate every single person individually. the state boards have little incentive to do this. if they feel that on-line international medical education is too risky to approve, they will disapprove all of them. it is simply easier to say "no", and there is little downside to this. they may lose a doctor or two that would be great, but they would also close the door on a lot of dodgy ones that may slip through. and, imagine the field day the press would have with something like this, at the first malpractice case. no medical board wants to face those kind of questions.

so, while technology may well be the future of medical education, it will likely be developed and implemented at the leading US universities well before it becomes accepted as a legitimate international alternative. as it stands now, i would be very surprised if an online degree was recognized in more than a few small, desperate states.

dear genossa,

thanks for the intelligent response. If we approach the simple question of on-line education that is one issue. If we approach the question of IUHS's on-line education that is certainly another issue.

Is on-line medical education feasible? Maybe. At the moment, I am not entirely certain I would even accept the grading processes of many of the schools. Many of them make up their rules/regulations as they go along. Even the students have had questions about their own examination processes. This is not a small issue by the way. Do I think IUHS has a good educational process and would I trust their grading? No, to both of these.

You are correct about the transcript thing, however, from what the state boards are telling me, that will change. The medical establishment is old and traditional. Rightly so for many reasons. They move slowly and are resistent to change. Take a look at the litigation and then let's think about discussing this again. If traditional processes are running into the problems they are, imagine the difficulty of a "maverick" establishment trying to defend themselves when they run into problems. They WILL NOT have the backing of anyone.

Are there other people out there who might be able to pass the exams and make decent physicians? Logic and numbers dictate the answer has to be yes. That being said, if my health or the health of my children is going to be in someone's elses hands, I would certainly not choose anyone from the maverick establishment.

The other on-line regular medical schools are not actually on-line. Many of the regular medical schools have their lectures archived and students are allowed to occasionally attend these if certain lectures conflict with other schedules or they cannot attend for whatever reason. These on-line lectures by the way are apparently not available outside the campus. These lectures are attended on-campus university computers, at least that what Harvard told me about theirs. It is not the intention of regular medical schools to allow their students to attend basic sciences on-line.

Regular medical schools also try to select students who have been intensively interviewed in an effort to find more than just academic skills. This is not done in the off-shore schools and it appears from the selection process at IUHS, they certainly are only interested in the student meeting the monthly payment.

I don't think any of us on the forum will have the answer to bridging the gap between the old traditional medical establishment and the possibilities of new technology. However, when we become aware of some schools that have little intention of producing the best that can be, that are "for profit" and are only interested in their bottom line, that are functioning like IUHS, the question may be redundant, but what is our societal duty?

They must be desperate.

That aside, thanks for your contribution, it will be ideal if any IUHS administrator will take a look at this thread and learn something from it, well not just learn something from it but apply it as well.

Thanks Ming!

...for your contribution. It seems that Australia took the lead in this aspect for sometime now, after they developed their problem based learning system, which by the way, they are more than happy to license of a fee, Univeristy of Sydney I beleive it is.

Remember, it is not an online degree this is a misleading concept, it is a degree with a basic sciences component done online, or at least part of it. I do not think that it is correct to address this as "online degree" because the clinical sciences component is done at hospitals and the normal board examination process as well as clinical evaluations is being done as well.

DISCLAIMER: none of the above should be construed in any way as an endorsment of the activities of IUHS.

i used the term "online degree" to specifically refer to basic science as the online portion. i am unaware of anybody trying to do clinical science online as well, though. but, if there is a better term, i am happy to use it.

Better terminology for online degree when a degree may not be truly online is the use of instructional technology or e-learning for portions that are on line. I have dealt with this aspect on numerous occasions. I was even involved in setting up e-learning for a new medical school. E-learning is not a bad educational tool if done appropriately and with student interaction at the maximum level! E-learning encourages maximum student interaction whether intended or not. Those that do not avail themselves of the e-learning opportunities will miss out tremendously and loose out on exams or other summative assessment. E-learning requires a certain number and level of participants to be successful. However I will use the disclaimer with regards to IUHS.

USUAL DISCLAIMER: None of the above should be construed in any way as an endorsment of the activities of IUHS.

I personally use online basic science component. Believe me, there are people out there who read "online degree" and think the entire thing is done online, far from the truth.

Thanks Neil

That is an excellent terminology. We all seem to agree on the disclaimer, we thank Diogenes for that one.