PDA

View Full Version : What do students do?



azskeptic
05-01-2006, 09:16 AM
I read with interest the website

http://www.stchrisimd.com/luton.htm

Basically it would appear from that website that the Senegal people are trying to act like the former owner was an employee and fired but that wouldn't be the case since he was the owner and the only one with the power to hire or fire or am I wrong?

Mua-B is attempting apparently to do a merger with the school.

Both of these attempts continue the squatter in london model. With the GMC's ruling this wouldn't appear to be logical or helpful for licensing.

How many students will follow these 2 attempts? how many have transferred out?

diogenes
05-01-2006, 10:27 AM
I read with interest the website
http://www.stchrisimd.com/luton.htm
.....Both of these attempts continue the squatter in london model. With the GMC's ruling this wouldn't appear to be logical or helpful for licensing.
How many students will follow these 2 attempts? how many have transferred out?
What do people make of this, from the St. Chris. website news-
"March 6, 2006
******, former Dean of University of California, Berkeley - Academic Programs ('87-'89) and consultant for Quality Audits in Education (QAE), to oversee improvements in quality assurance standards as requested by the General Medical Council (GMC)."
I don't have a hotline to the GMC, Senegal or St. Chris., but I have long suspected that the GMC was less concerned about "squatter schools" per se than many on this forum have assumed (they did, after all, have several years to do something about them if they wished). QA has always seemed to me to be at the heart of their difficulties with the school. So, I wonder if the above appointment is part of the deal between Senegal/St. Chris. and the GMC which several people here have been assuring us would eventually emerge.

azskeptic
05-01-2006, 11:47 AM
What do people make of this, from the St. Chris. website news-
"March 6, 2006
******, former Dean of University of California, Berkeley - Academic Programs ('87-'89) and consultant for Quality Audits in Education (QAE), to oversee improvements in quality assurance standards as requested by the General Medical Council (GMC)."
I don't have a hotline to the GMC, Senegal or St. Chris., but I have long suspected that the GMC was less concerned about "squatter schools" per se than many on this forum have assumed (they did, after all, have several years to do something about them if they wished). QA has always seemed to me to be at the heart of their difficulties with the school. So, I wonder if the above appointment is part of the deal between Senegal/St. Chris. and the GMC which several people here have been assuring us would eventually emerge. My information is that there is no way to make the GMC happy if you aren't an approved UK school per their recent ruling. Is this window dressing for prospective students? Who knows? Again the jury is out and the students are taking risks either way it would appear.

diogenes
05-01-2006, 01:25 PM
My information is that there is no way to make the GMC happy if you aren't an approved UK school per their recent ruling. Is this window dressing for prospective students? Who knows? Again the jury is out and the students are taking risks either way it would appear.
Agreed! I, and anyone else on vmd, can speculate all day; but nobody should rush into anything until they are certain that this is not just a ploy by St. Chris.

azskeptic
05-01-2006, 05:07 PM
Agreed! I, and anyone else on vmd, can speculate all day; but nobody should rush into anything until they are certain that this is not just a ploy by St. Chris. I heard through informed sources that the Senegal version of St. Chris has some sort of ECFMG approval now. But does this mean for all studies from here on, studies done at Senegal or the Luton version?

###
05-01-2006, 05:49 PM
..............

futrphysician
05-09-2006, 08:31 AM
Dean, it boggles the mind that this really weighs on you day after day. Don't you have something better to do?

First off, and this will be incredibly brief, the founding people with SC have made significant out reach to the GMC and have made significant progress toward having the ban removed. I suspect it will take a while longer and details ironed out, but the school is now headed in the right direction. So your information that there is no way to make them happy is quite wrong....as usual.

Second and lastly, never trust supposed "informed sources", they could very well be wrong. Very wrong. Although in this case its a step in the right direction. Its amazing though, whenever someone brought up a certain name in both conferences with the GMC, ECFMG and certain state boards, the common reaction was...."oh please, lets not talk about him."

AS for how many lost....no one knows. ONLY 23 showed up for MUA UK in the first 2 semesters that I can confirm. How they are getting in without DFES is beyond me. England must be like a seive with a Mexican border.

azskeptic
05-09-2006, 08:37 AM
Dean, it boggles the mind that this really weighs on you day after day. Don't you have something better to do?

First off, and this will be incredibly brief, the founding people with SC have made significant out reach to the GMC and have made significant progress toward having the ban removed. I suspect it will take a while longer and details ironed out, but the school is now headed in the right direction. So your information that there is no way to make them happy is quite wrong....as usual.

Second and lastly, never trust supposed "informed sources", they could very well be wrong. Very wrong. Although in this case its a step in the right direction. Its amazing though, whenever someone brought up a certain name in both conferences with the GMC, ECFMG and certain state boards, the common reaction was...."oh please, lets not talk about him."

AS for how many lost....no one knows. ONLY 23 showed up for MUA UK in the first 2 semesters that I can confirm. How they are getting in without DFES is beyond me. England must be like a seive with a Mexican border. SC continues to not be accepted by the GMC and potential students would be crazed to go there with the problems involved which either flavor you choose to accept, the Senegal or Belize approach.

pruritis_ani
05-09-2006, 09:26 PM
Dean, it boggles the mind that this really weighs on you day after day. Don't you have something better to do?

First off, and this will be incredibly brief, the founding people with SC have made significant out reach to the GMC and have made significant progress toward having the ban removed. I suspect it will take a while longer and details ironed out, but the school is now headed in the right direction. So your information that there is no way to make them happy is quite wrong....as usual.

Second and lastly, never trust supposed "informed sources", they could very well be wrong. Very wrong. Although in this case its a step in the right direction. Its amazing though, whenever someone brought up a certain name in both conferences with the GMC, ECFMG and certain state boards, the common reaction was...."oh please, lets not talk about him."

AS for how many lost....no one knows. ONLY 23 showed up for MUA UK in the first 2 semesters that I can confirm. How they are getting in without DFES is beyond me. England must be like a seive with a Mexican border.
Always "the school is heading in the right direction" from you guys. Didn't you say the exact same thing about the old St. Chris? Well, unless the right direction is straight to the crap heap of worthless degrees, you were wrong with your first predictions. Why on earth should we think that you will be right this time?

I swear, I don't know how people talking up SC sleep at night. Are you aware that your positive spin on a crappy school hurt a lot of people, and got them to attend a second rate school run by a very dodgy administration. An administration, I might add, that at one time had your full support. Nice track record.

So, now you have a school that is basically squating in the UK offering worthless degrees. At best, the school MAY get ECFMG back...whee! Then you can crawl back to the very bottom of the offshore school heap. Yet, hear you are again....

The only worthwhile change that SC could make would be to disband. That would be the "honorable" thing. Instead, they are going to milk as many poor students as they can. And current students like yourself who realize that the school needs money to offer you ANY hope of working in the US (and even then only in a select few states at best) will continue to mislead and misinform....

The real name people at the GMC and ECFMG should be sick of hearing is St Chris, or any corrupt incarnation of that crappy school.

After July 1, if St Chris students cannot start work, your school will be toast. Not a lot of PD's are going to interveiw people from a school that screwed them once already. The only upside of this will be the fact that some of the most disgusting of the SC cheerleaders will not be out working as doctors. I feel for the poor suckers that believed some of these people, but the leaders of this cult of cheerleaders deserve a fate such as this.

azskeptic
05-10-2006, 07:49 AM
Always "the school is heading in the right direction" from you guys. Didn't you say the exact same thing about the old St. Chris? Well, unless the right direction is straight to the crap heap of worthless degrees, you were wrong with your first predictions. Why on earth should we think that you will be right this time?

I swear, I don't know how people talking up SC sleep at night. Are you aware that your positive spin on a crappy school hurt a lot of people, and got them to attend a second rate school run by a very dodgy administration. An administration, I might add, that at one time had your full support. Nice track record.

So, now you have a school that is basically squating in the UK offering worthless degrees. At best, the school MAY get ECFMG back...whee! Then you can crawl back to the very bottom of the offshore school heap. Yet, hear you are again....

The only worthwhile change that SC could make would be to disband. That would be the "honorable" thing. Instead, they are going to milk as many poor students as they can. And current students like yourself who realize that the school needs money to offer you ANY hope of working in the US (and even then only in a select few states at best) will continue to mislead and misinform....

The real name people at the GMC and ECFMG should be sick of hearing is St Chris, or any corrupt incarnation of that crappy school.

After July 1, if St Chris students cannot start work, your school will be toast. Not a lot of PD's are going to interveiw people from a school that screwed them once already. The only upside of this will be the fact that some of the most disgusting of the SC cheerleaders will not be out working as doctors. I feel for the poor suckers that believed some of these people, but the leaders of this cult of cheerleaders deserve a fate such as this. those who continue to give false hope indeed deserve the degree they will get that they can't use.

empathy
05-10-2006, 03:10 PM
Please no more spin. These students have been through enough. Some of them are dead broke and really struggling. It would be nice if an organization would come forward and offer them financial assistance.



Dean, it boggles the mind that this really weighs on you day after day. Don't you have something better to do?

First off, and this will be incredibly brief, the founding people with SC have made significant out reach to the GMC and have made significant progress toward having the ban removed. I suspect it will take a while longer and details ironed out, but the school is now headed in the right direction. So your information that there is no way to make them happy is quite wrong....as usual.

Second and lastly, never trust supposed "informed sources", they could very well be wrong. Very wrong. Although in this case its a step in the right direction. Its amazing though, whenever someone brought up a certain name in both conferences with the GMC, ECFMG and certain state boards, the common reaction was...."oh please, lets not talk about him."

AS for how many lost....no one knows. ONLY 23 showed up for MUA UK in the first 2 semesters that I can confirm. How they are getting in without DFES is beyond me. England must be like a seive with a Mexican border.

Medmadmess
05-10-2006, 08:16 PM
Why are clinical students in Chicago being asked to leave their clerkship positions, i.e., non-payment by the MUA-B/SCCM merger?

Believe it. Don't make me post the hospital that kicked 'em out.

CorporateRaider
05-10-2006, 08:52 PM
OK, I MADE YOU DO IT. PRAY TELL SO I CAN HAVE MY OFFICERS CHECK IT OUT.


Why are clinical students in Chicago being asked to leave their clerkship positions, i.e., non-payment by the MUA-B/SCCM merger?

Believe it. Don't make me post the hospital that kicked 'em out.

desai29
05-10-2006, 09:01 PM
http://stchrisimd.com/pics/mainselect.gif


ON thier website it say RECOGNIZED BY ECFMG? IS THAT TRUE?

empathy
05-12-2006, 08:02 AM
Why do they have a campus in the UK? Has the General Medical Council of England changed their stance on squatter schools? I thought students from schools like this could no longer train at UK hospitals and graduates are not allowed to practice medicine in England. If the school is not recognized as a medical college in England can they use England to advertise and recruit students?


http://stchrisimd.com/pics/mainselect.gif


ON thier website it say RECOGNIZED BY ECFMG? IS THAT TRUE?

Tritonesub
05-12-2006, 10:37 AM
In the process of affiliating with a british postgraduate program in luton. This will allow them to have british qualitiy assurance and allow them to sit for the exams. Next semester will start on Monday.

empathy
05-12-2006, 10:59 AM
Should students wait until this is certain and can be verified with the GMC to apply?


In the process of affiliating with a british postgraduate program in luton. This will allow them to have british qualitiy assurance and allow them to sit for the exams. Next semester will start on Monday.

azskeptic
05-12-2006, 12:47 PM
Should students wait until this is certain and can be verified with the GMC to apply? One would hope folks have enough logic to stay away from these schools until something is established.

empathy
05-12-2006, 01:06 PM
How do these businesses justify charging people tuition prior to having these agreements signed, sealed and delivered? Things might fall thru and students will be left with worthless credits and degrees. You think the admin would have learned their lesson from the NJ mishap.

Also, did they check with the GMC prior to contacting the other party regarding an affiliation to see if this would change the situation in England?


One would hope folks have enough logic to stay away from these schools until something is established.

AUCMD2006
05-12-2006, 11:48 PM
In the process of affiliating with a british postgraduate program in luton. This will allow them to have british qualitiy assurance and allow them to sit for the exams. Next semester will start on Monday.

is this a medical post grad program or like a masters in quality assurance or a doctorate in foreign relations? if it is an affiliation with a med school that would be good in the long run for the students....

diogenes
05-13-2006, 04:08 AM
In the process of affiliating with a british postgraduate program in luton. This will allow them to have british qualitiy assurance and allow them to sit for the exams. Next semester will start on Monday.
If true then two possibilities might arise (by the way which bright spark chose Phoenix Hse. as the new St. Chris. building?)-
They could go for gold and seek a U.K. listing. Luton Uni. would award the degrees and be the first level of QA. The GMC through its offshoot, QABME, would provide the second level of QA.
Or, as some of the St. Chris. cognoscenti have hinted at, they could enter into a new type of arrangement with the GMC. The school would still be listed by Senegal, but Luton would carry out sufficient quality checks to satisfy the GMC that being a "squatter" did not affect the quality of the education.

(usual caveats apply- "no prospective student should do anything just yet...etc. etc.)

teratos
05-13-2006, 08:01 AM
Still a bunch of "what ifs". There really hasn't been enough time for anything to be done right. G

MrC
05-13-2006, 09:27 AM
I'm not sure how plausable it would be for St. Chris to get British Quality assurance and still target the USMLE for American students.

The GMC published a document in 1995 called Tomorrows Doctors which changed dramatically the way medicine was taught and led to an abolition essentially of the pre-clinical/clinical divide however the USMLE is designed to have this divide.

Therefore to meet the requirements for British quality assurance I assume the whole course structure would have to change. In addition I think it is unlikely that the GMC would be satisfied with the clinical component of current off shore medical schools. I don't understand how it would be possible to have adequate quality assurance when it appears that clinical students are dispersed so widely to different hospitals and states. It seems to me that it would be virtually impossible for the medical school to maintain adequate supervision both of the student and the quality of education they are receiving.

maximillian genossa
05-13-2006, 11:42 AM
Why do they have a campus in the UK?

It is not illegal under UK law as long as it has a business license.

Has the General Medical Council of England changed their stance on squatter schools?

No, but they are not illegal either.

If the school is not recognized as a medical college in England can they use England to advertise and recruit students?

Yes, as long as they advertise it as a campus and not implicitly or explicitly say it is a British School, accredited to grant degrees by the UK government.

Do students from schools like this could no longer train at UK hospitals?

Good question, I assume it up to each hospital's administration, any takers on this one?

Are graduates are not allowed to practice medicine in England?

True, not from these programs, that is covered under the most recent GMC ruling.

Peace to all

Max



Why do they have a campus in the UK? Has the General Medical Council of England changed their stance on squatter schools? I thought students from schools like this could no longer train at UK hospitals and graduates are not allowed to practice medicine in England. If the school is not recognized as a medical college in England can they use England to advertise and recruit students?

diogenes
05-13-2006, 11:46 AM
I'm not sure how plausable it would be for St. Chris to get British Quality assurance and still target the USMLE for American students.
The GMC published a document in 1995 called Tomorrows Doctors which changed dramatically the way medicine was taught and led to an abolition essentially of the pre-clinical/clinical divide however the USMLE is designed to have this divide.
Therefore to meet the requirements for British quality assurance I assume the whole course structure would have to change. In addition I think it is unlikely that the GMC would be satisfied with the clinical component of current off shore medical schools. I don't understand how it would be possible to have adequate quality assurance when it appears that clinical students are dispersed so widely to different hospitals and states. It seems to me that it would be virtually impossible for the medical school to maintain adequate supervision both of the student and the quality of education they are receiving.
I doubt if "Tomorrow's doctors" (incidentally, now in 2003 revised format) would be an impossible hurdle. The document only states that "The clinical and basic sciences should be taught in an integrated way throughout the curriculum." QABME acknowledges that there is wide variation in the amount and nature of the integration: it seems that some U.K. med. schools do little more than pay lip-service to the ideal. Also there are elements of the USMLE curriculum which are certainly more clinically orientated than the traditional U.K. one, e.g. anatomy.
I take your point about QA and dispersed overseas rotations being difficult to monitor. I think that is likely to be an major obstacle. In theory, of course, QA could focus on outcomes and final exams validated by external examiners; but I doubt if the GMC would be brave enough for that.

azskeptic
05-13-2006, 11:55 AM
looking at what it took for the GMC and the DOE in England to react to the charter issues of SC I am extremely doubtful that they will be very helpful to squatter schools.

Reality is that students should go to schools that meet the standards of the local place where they are chartered and do green book rotations,etc. Anything else is risking your future.

It would also appear that the 2 players in the SC thing right now might have some financial challenges. It takes alot of money to change a system like the UK has so upstarts won't be the ones to change it I don't think.

diogenes
05-13-2006, 11:59 AM
......Do students from schools like this could no longer train at UK hospitals?
Good question, I assume it up to each hospital's administration, any takers on this one? ........
Max
The circular which the GMC sent to NHS hospital trusts only urged managers to beware of such schools and to satisfy themselves as to the quality assurance safeguards. It did not proscribe rotations in these instances. Hospital managers want the money and the consultants (who might have overall charge of the teaching) are fiercely independent with a mind of their own.

diogenes
05-13-2006, 12:20 PM
looking at what it took for the GMC and the DOE in England to react to the charter issues of SC I am extremely doubtful that they will be very helpful to squatter schools.
Reality is that students should go to schools that meet the standards of the local place where they are chartered and do green book rotations,etc. Anything else is risking your future.
It would also appear that the 2 players in the SC thing right now might have some financial challenges. It takes alot of money to change a system like the UK has so upstarts won't be the ones to change it I don't think.
What you say is plausible and you are right to warn people about the risks. However, I am puzzled as to why the GMC has only said "At the present time, the GMC is not registering graduates who hold primary medical qualifications obtained from the medical schools listed below....St. Christophers". They can and do dispense with the "present time" bit for other schools. It's as if they are keeping a door open for the right moves to be made on the chess board. Still, I'm probably attaching too much importance to the comments of St. Chris. students who have told us that all will be revealed in due course.

MrC
05-13-2006, 12:21 PM
A final exam to validate the quality of medical education is an impossibility. No exam can cover all of the skills it is assumed that a medical student should have, so it would leave the system wide open for incompetent doctors who got lucky on the day and only got asked what they knew. It is for this reason that at my medical school simply passing the exam isn't enough to pass the course, you also need your class certifcate to say you were there for all it.

Tomorrows Doctors and relevant European legislation also throws up some other large hurdles to overcome. Including the required study of lots of UK specific healthcare issues and course duration.

http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/tomorrows_doctors.asp

In addition I also assume that the facilities that UK medical schools have are actually required to provide high quality medical education. I don't think my medical school has any facilities that aren't really required.
Looking at the costs of setting up some of the new medical schools in the UK which amounted to millions of pounds I can't see squatter schools have the money required to invests properly. Perhaps I'm wrong and all the money spent setting up these schools was wasted.

diogenes
05-13-2006, 12:50 PM
A final exam to validate the quality of medical education is an impossibility. No exam can cover all of the skills it is assumed that a medical student should have, so it would leave the system wide open for incompetent doctors who got lucky on the day and only got asked what they knew. It is for this reason that at my medical school simply passing the exam isn't enough to pass the course, you also need your class certifcate to say you were there for all it.
Tomorrows Doctors and relevant European legislation also throws up some other large hurdles to overcome. Including the required study of lots of UK specific healthcare issues and course duration.
http://www.gmc-uk.org/education/undergraduate/tomorrows_doctors.asp
In addition I also assume that the facilities that UK medical schools have are actually required to provide high quality medical education. I don't think my medical school has any facilities that aren't really required.
Looking at the costs of setting up some of the new medical schools in the UK which amounted to millions of pounds I can't see squatter schools have the money required to invests properly. Perhaps I'm wrong and all the money spent setting up these schools was wasted.
I wasn't suggesting that a final exam diploma on its own would be suffficient. I can see no reason why a St. Chris student could not provide a properly validated certificate of attendance that would be as sound as that from your own school. As for students getting lucky on the day, that can and does happen in the present system. For all the inherent difficulties of monitoring St. Chris or similar it might be worth it if it encouraged new and more rigorous assurance of educational outcomes.
I'm aware of the need for U.K.-specific issues to be taught. I doubt that it would be difficult to provide this (whether St. Chris would want to is another matter).
The cost of med. school set-up is an interesting point. Taking Tomorrow's Doctors and other GMC wish lists as a guide I think a good case could be made for a much leaner school (St. Chris. could also make imaginative use of affiliations to provide those facilities which it lacks and which are necessary).

Milrinone
07-12-2006, 03:19 PM
For my understanding the scimd took over the NJ. Many students made arragements and decide not to go legal. Money won't be reimbursed.
Any update?







Copyright © 2003-2018 ValueMD, LLC. All rights reserved.