I sat through the entire presentation and I seriously hope this isn't a recent presentation (edit: is just noticed it's from this year
). While I'll give him credit for recognizing there's a serious problem, he's either in total denial or completely ignorant of why pathology is unattractive. You can bring a horse to water, but you'll never get them to drink if the water is fetid. Low starting salary and limited geographic choice are almost universal deal breakers. Either the starting salaries are going to have to double so that you really won't care where you live until you find a place that you want to be or job openings are going to have to open up much more frequently and be much more accessible to new graduates. Since neither are likely to happen under the current leadership (although I think the first option is easier to do than the second), they're going to continue to bark up the wrong tree. Medical students don't care about "jobs". They want "careers" with as much control over as they can have in terms of salary and place. Pathology offers neither presently.
I'm a partnership tracked pathologist making good money at this point, so I have nothing to personally gain from saying any of this. Yaah, whether you agree with any of this or not if you have someone's ear in these committees please make them understand that. It's like I tell all the vendors who show up at my door: I don't care if you think you have a good product, it only matters if I think you have a good product. And I'm annoyed deeply to see obliviously wasted effort spent chasing down red herrings when all they need to do is pull in a couple of successfully matched derm, ortho, anesthesia, and radiology med students (the target demographic they appear to be chasing) into a room and talk to them. These students will be honest because they have nothing to lose by saying what's on their mind and CAP will learn more in 20 minutes than the months it takes them to aggregate the data in a vacuum.