x

[eyestrain]

Its pretty scary!

Why? Do your work, study a little, show up for class occasionally and you should be fine. Smart people who do their work don't fail out.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[swiftiii]

Why? Do your work, study a little, show up for class occasionally and you should be fine. Smart people who do their work don't fail out.

LOL, so true, and maybe it doesn't even take all that! The second year at Nova is a lot easier than the first, anyway. You have a lot more time and you are more settled into the groove of doing what you need to to pass (and even excel.). You're going to have the minor stress of having to pass proficiencies, but having done so and remembering the practice I put it, I can't see why I had so many "freaking out" moments. You'll be fine!

BTW the toughest classes are probably disease I and 2d semester Pharm. Dz was actually very "easy" (at least, the tests were.) Pharm, though, ouch! I think, perhaps, I got lucky, but it's a lot of repetition so maybe the knowledge was just there dug deep and it will be the same for you.

 

[4Eyes]

My class probably had the worst track record at UMSL, though I suppose it could have been much worse:

Lost one after 1st semester 1st year I guess due to academic reasons? No one really knew her because she never came to class.

Lost two after 1st year--one for personal reasons (moved away, went to another school), the other for academic reasons. She was given the option to reapply after taking a few classes, but she decided not to.

Lost two after third year. One had trouble with one class, so he will graduate with the class below us. The other...I think they actually did him a disservice by not kicking him out sooner. I know that sounds cruel, but it seems like they gave him SO many chances (wanting him to succeed), but he just wound up with a boatload of debt.

So we started with 42, lost 5 (1 of those for personal reasons). We also gained two along the way.

 

[swiftiii]

LOL, so true, and maybe it doesn't even take all that! The second year at Nova is a lot easier than the first, anyway. You have a lot more time and you are more settled into the groove of doing what you need to to pass (and even excel.). You're going to have the minor stress of having to pass proficiencies, but having done so and remembering the practice I put it, I can't see why I had so many "freaking out" moments. You'll be fine!

BTW the toughest classes are probably disease I and 2d semester Pharm. Dz was actually very "easy" (at least, the tests were.) Pharm, though, ouch! I think, perhaps, I got lucky, but it's a lot of repetition so maybe the knowledge was just there dug deep and it will be the same for you.

Oops. The years run so fast together. Dz I was hard for me. I have never learned so much yet gotten such a "bad" grade. It was the Dz 2 where the tests were easier. But they're all still quite passable.

 

[IndianaOD]

I'm glad the schools are actually failing people. There is enough hand holding IMO. My class of around 70 lost 3-4 from academics and probably another 4 or so went onto the 5 year program.

It makes me sick they decreased the difficulty of part I Boards.

 

[still_confused]

It makes me sick they decreased the difficulty of part I Boards.

Yeah, since noone has yet to take it. Feel better though

 

[KHE]

That not totally true. You have trouble with even one class here and you're gone.

See, I believe that a 15% failure rate is an indictment of the institution, not those particular students who did not succeed.

opted.org says that NOVA admitted 101 people last year. If 15 of those people failed out, then the fault lies with NOVA.

Sure, you can have a person or two who leaves or struggles for personal reasons and you can have a person or two who was admitted with decent stats and for whatever reason it just didn't work out for them. That happens in any program at any level.

But that leaves over 10 people who just flat out flunked the program. These are people that almost certainly should have never been admitted in the first place.

And that's the tragedy. I actually feel sorry for those people because they almost certainly got duped. And the finger should be pointed at the institution because all the students got was a piss pot full of debt.

 

[AwesomeSauce]

Here at ICO the class of 2011 has lost at least 7 people so far, maybe more, wont know the true count until class starts back up in the fall

4 for non-academic reasons
3 for academic

 

[Jay12]

See, I believe that a 15% failure rate is an indictment of the institution, not those particular students who did not succeed.

opted.org says that NOVA admitted 101 people last year. If 15 of those people failed out, then the fault lies with NOVA.

Sure, you can have a person or two who leaves or struggles for personal reasons and you can have a person or two who was admitted with decent stats and for whatever reason it just didn't work out for them. That happens in any program at any level.

But that leaves over 10 people who just flat out flunked the program. These are people that almost certainly should have never been admitted in the first place.

And that's the tragedy. I actually feel sorry for those people because they almost certainly got duped. And the finger should be pointed at the institution because all the students got was a piss pot full of debt.

Couldn't agree more........isn't it the Institution's responsibility to pick the individuals that they see fit and able to handle the workload that is required in their professional program? (i.e. what's the point of having a GPA cutoff, minimal OAT score, and interview stage?)

 

[prettygreeneyes]

It makes me sick they decreased the difficulty of part I Boards.

Where did you hear that they are making it easier? If anything, we have been told it will be harder.

 

[drbizzaro]

Where did you hear that they are making it easier? If anything, we have been told it will be harder.

it is MUCH easier... what made part 1 hard was the randomness of the questions... now, they are making it more clinical, so even if you dont know the actual "odd fact" you can get to the answer with the clinical relevance...

 

[IndianaOD]

Where did you hear that they are making it easier? If anything, we have been told it will be harder.

I was faculty for a year at IU, and everything sounded like it would be quite a bit easier in the new setup. Not the all the optics, physics, and random systemic medical stuff we had. That thing was a monster.

 

[jefguth]

That thing was a monster.

Oh it's not that bad, just exhausting being tested two day in a row all day long.

 

[still_confused]

noone knows whether the new boards will be harder or easier, the general assumption is that the curve will be adjusted to have a similar pass rate as before.

As a disclaimer, I am only a student and do not have the inside info that a resident might have had.

 

[cpw]

Our Class of 2011 started with 119 and now we're down do 100, which mean 19 were K.I.A.! That's a lot of casualties for one year. How do other school deal with someone who fails a class? Is our "fail one class and off with your head" policy the same everywhere else?

At UHCO if you fail a class you are put in the class behind you and put on academic probation.

 

[KHE]

Now we've hit the magic number of 20 people down since last year!

Again, I believe that this is the fault of the institution for having admitted these people in the first place. Something is wrong with their admissions process if that many people are actually flunking out. A small handful of students may leave for personal reasons, and maybe one or two flunk out but 20 is an outrage and the institution should be ashamed of themselves.

 

[IcanSEEanOD]

.

 

[GoDawgs2007]

I'm going to be a second year at SCO and so far we have lost 3 of 124 people in my class. One for academic reasons and 2 for personal reasons. I'm not sure if that number will go up.. I'll have to see when classes start back up! But not too bad so far..

 

[seminolefish]

yo

 

[vsarge0708]

Don't believe everything fonziefonz says, he tends to overdramatize issues. For the record we did in fact lose 20 students from the 2011 class, here's how it breaks down:

1 of the students switched to the 5 year program.
8 students are repeating first year.
1 of the students transferred into another school (for personal reasons, not academics).
3-4 students left for because optometry was not their bag, at least one of which was failing at the time of his/her decision, another was suspended for a year and decided not to come back, another decided to go and get a masters.

So that leaves about 7 students who failed out and aren't coming back, one of which was already given a second chance, and at least one is going to IUAPR in the fall.

 

[canadaoptnow]

Why are eight students repeating first year? I would assume it is because they failed and I would also assume they have paid their first year's tuition twice (ouch!). SO that is really at least 15 who have failed. The way I read this latest post is of the 20 who started with this class, but are no longer with the class, only 3-4 of them did not fail. The student who switched to the five year program, the student who transferred schools, and I will give you 1 or 2 who found optometry was not their bag even though you state one was already failing and one was suspended. What would you be suspended for?

I have read this thread repeatedly and it really scares/concerns me. I do not want to be accepted into a program, relocate, pay HUGE tuition, and then find out I do not have what it takes to get through 4 years of optometry school.

So how does one know if they "should have never been admitted in the first place"? I do not want to be admitted just so a school (business) can get a year or two of tuition out of me.

 

[KHE]

I have read this thread repeatedly and it really scares/concerns me. I do not want to be accepted into a program, relocate, pay HUGE tuition, and then find out I do not have what it takes to get through 4 years of optometry school.

So how does one know if they "should have never been admitted in the first place"? I do not want to be admitted just so a school (business) can get a year or two of tuition out of me.

If you have a reasonable work ethic and did reasonable well in your undergraduate career and on the OAT, then you should have little trouble making it.

If you were marginal candidate (and deep down in your heart of hearts you would know if you are) then you may want to ask yourself if you're 100% sure that you aren't going to bite off more than you can chew.

 

[vsarge0708]

What would you be suspended for?

Cheating, panty raiding [harrassment], etc.

I have read this thread repeatedly and it really scares/concerns me. I do not want to be accepted into a program, relocate, pay HUGE tuition, and then find out I do not have what it takes to get through 4 years of optometry school.

If you are accepted, statistically speaking you have what it takes to get through the program. It comes down to whether or not you are willing to put out the work needed to get through the program.

 

[seminolefish]

Yeah I'm still liking SCO over Nova after this.

 

[vsarge0708]

Well hurry up and make a decision, orientation for first years starts in two days.

 

[zyg0te]

What exactly is the 5 year program?

I always assumed it was when someone failed classes first year, they just stayed a year back and repeated the failed courses.

 

[vsarge0708]

Well, if you fail a course you are left behind to repeat the whole year--not just the course(s) you flunked. If you received a 90% or better in a course then you do not have to repeat it, unless it is optics or optometric theory and methods--which you would have to repeat regardless of your grade.

The 5 year, also called the E [extended] program was design for those needing a lighter course load during the first few didactic years, i.e. nontraditionals. The first 2 years of the didactic portion of the curriculum is divided into 3 years, the final 2 years are the same. I'm pretty sure you cannot apply directly to the E program. Some of the students in the 5 year tract had an option to do the 4 year program if they wanted.

 

[eyestrain]

What exactly is the 5 year program?

I always assumed it was when someone failed classes first year, they just stayed a year back and repeated the failed courses.

It's a way for schools to extract another year of tuition out of slow students.

 

[JMU07]

Does opted.org ever post these dropout/failure rates? I'd be curious to see what they are across the board.

 

[JMU07]

I think its something that's more hush hush. I'm interested to know though. That's why I started this thread. Because 1 in 6 students shouldn't be disappearing.

You're probably right. I mean, you're definitely right about 1 in 6 students leaving. It seems really strange to me.

 

[seminolefish]

Hey vsarge0708, I'm a junior in college and I'm about to apply to Nova and SCO...so I still have plenty of time. I'm still keeping my windows open and obviously I will officially decide after the tours and interviews. I wouldn't be making a hasty decision that late in the process; that's for dummies.

 

[vsarge0708]

Hey vsarge0708, I'm a junior in college and I'm about to apply to Nova and SCO...so I still have plenty of time. I'm still keeping my windows open and obviously I will officially decide after the tours and interviews. I wouldn't be making a hasty decision that late in the process; that's for dummies.

Sorry, I assumed you were already accepted to both.

 

[seminolefish]

Good luck fonziefonz I will still be considering Nova.

 

[swiftiii]

OMG, I can't believe I am actually in agreement with KHE. Nova absolutely accepts people they shouldn't; though it doesn't actually equal the number of people that fail out.

Yes, optom students should be serious, but it's easy to get the "too much fun bug" into your system down in South FL. I'm not making excuses for the people that chose to go that route, just pointing out a fact.

The reason I really wanted to comment, is because I don't think a prospective Nova student should be put off by some of the statements put forth here. It really is a good school. But like KHE said, Nova absolutely accepts more students than they should. I can say with certainty after two years that the high failure rate doesn't correspond at all to poor teaching or a lack of "nurturing". Sadly, I wish the business end of things here could get it in their heads to accept less people and give them an even more personal education. Unfortunately, a high failure rate is not a big deal to the bigwigs.

So...a very good education awaits you at Nova, if you want it and put in the work. Many qualified Optometrists are formed here every year. If you worry at all about failing, just know that it is up to you to pass. Maybe it is more difficult here. Who really knows. Regardless, if you work hard, you will pass. If you struggle here, you will struggle anywhere.

 

[eyecare4eyecare]

Fonziefonz: will you quit referring to students who fail, as "dearly departed" or "casualties of war". That is very disrespectful to them, especially since they were once your classmates. I would say friends, but it is obvious that you don't consider them as such, to make such demeaning comments.

Same goes to the way you create such a bad rep. for your school. I notice you have some positive comments about NOVA, but you have just as many negative ones. I personally really like NOVA. They have some cons here and there, but they try to work those out via student surveys, student reps., etc. Academically speaking, the professors are competent and caring, and though some teach better then others, the content gets through (hence the high passing rates for boards). Their tests also seem to mirror the boards, so that's beneficial.

Asking for quantitative numbers about drop outs is pretty naive; you should be asking about it qualitatively (why & how). Some of the schools out there have a more lenient grading policy. For example, some curve (even if they say they don't), while others use a normal scale; also others have the average score count as a "B" and everything below that (unless it's REALLY bad) = C. So, you really can't compare based on numbers in this case, because the grading policies are different. In a perfect world, all optometry schools would have the same grading policies, and similar curriculum, but unfortunately, they don't.

Students should post their school's grading policies, then how many got dropped out...to see if there is a correlation. There's also the factor of recycled test questions, or practice tests that come into play.

All the numbers listed for NOVA are correct, for this past year's drop out rate. The school goes on a straight percentage scale for tests, though some tests are curved if concerns are raised about a particular test question. <70 = a retake test for the class. If you fail that test, you fail out of the school (unless you get a chance to return, which seems to be a new policy this year).

 

[eyecare4eyecare]

I was wondering what are the failure/dropout rates at the different optometry schools? I'm here at Nova in my 1st year, and I'm getting pretty nervous based on last year's class. Of 115 starting, 15 either failed or dropped out. That's a very significant number! Our anatomy class only is brutal. Last year, 30 people failed the course! That's like 1 in every 4 students! I was just wondering how it is everywhere else. Maybe that will make me feel better, lol.

"I was wondering what are the failure/dropout rates at the different optometry schools?"

I don't see anything about policies, or you mentioning NOVA's policies in that post. Also, it's true that I don't frequent here as often as you do, but at least my posts don't put down others like some of yours do, especially toward hopeful applicants (for example, discouraging entering optometry school at an older age, or calling IAUPR a "farm team"). I respect that you do give some good advice, and do represent NOVA, but when you bring out the negatives, try to do it more professionally.

Referring to optometry schools, creating "casualties of war", or "dearly departed" kind of demeans the profession and it's students. I understand it's an analogy, but I try not to think of optometry as some kind of war zone. Also, I was trying to give positive criticism, sorry if it was too offensive. I'm all for free speech, but lets keep the profanity to a minimum please.

I'm sorry if I offended you, regarding your friends, but again, if they are your friends, please don't consider them "dearly departed" as if getting dropped is the end of their life.

I don't mean to pick a fight, and I'll probably stop after this post; but i was just frustrated how your post did nothing but spur more negative assumptions about NOVA.

 

[cpw]

If this thread can go back to constructive conversation I"ll leave it open. Please refrain from name-calling and swearing.

 

[gochi]

Well we lost another person in 2nd year now. That brings us to 99 students left from 120 entering. Just curious how the other school are holding up halfway through the school year?

LOL!

this post implicitly states why nova=fail.

 

[JMU07]

We lost one person last semester (c/o 2012). As far as I know, nobody else lost any but don't quote me on that.

 

[Pre Opt Student]

I think you are bitter because you interviewed at Nova 3 times and still didnt get accepted. Sorry.

 

[EyeWitness]

Do they just accept unqualified students so they can get an extra 30+ thousand from each one that drops out? I don't understand all this NOVA ridiculousness.

 

[Taven7755]

I am trying to get more involved on this forum, and to try to improve it somehow as far as tone. This is a public forum, unlike a few other sites that require that you are in school or practicing...this is the first one that comes up when someone interested in our profession searches on google, so I feel that it is important to put a good face forward, with reality of course.

Here is my Nova thread addition: First, the accusation that was made on the part of one writer in this thread, regarding the empathy that Fonz felt for his own classmates was completely out of line. Insult the idea if you must, not the character. (And yes, calling out the caring of a colleague toward his fellow classmates is most definetely an attack on his character).

Getting to the root of it, Nova does accept a large class. Having said this, I believe there are major nuances that are coming into play as to why their classes see a lot of attrition.I will be starting there in aug, and am friends with 2 brothers that are 3rd year there...

Florida is a very populous state, and thus nova takes a lot of students. Having said this, pco takes 160, oregon 92, Illinois 163. Clearly, the populations of these states is much less than florida, and I feel like no one says a word (regarding oversupply) to the huge class sizes of these other schools in states less populous...the effect of this is that Nova recruits a lot from Fl, whereas many of these other schools draw from a wider variety of places...

Now to the crux of the problem...Many of Florida's state schools (Fl state, Fl in gainesville, USF, UCF) have INSANE grade inflation. I know this because I have attended three schools (Cal poly, MO state, and FL state). Put as an example; I took 4 classes at Fl state, and in all four over 60% of the class got an A. The same is true for Florida, USF, UCF (according to a few people that will be coming to nova with me...a friend got a 3.8 cumul GPA, and struggles big on the MCAT and OAT. I'm worried about him!)

My point is that a key component of a school's entering class is what schools were their primary feeder programs...Are the schools they are drawing from preparing them?(according to my 3rd year friend, at least half of his class is from one of Fl's big state schools, and ALL of the people he personally knew that failed out were from Fl state or gainesville)

Because of this, a 3.4 from a fl state is NOT equal to the same GPA from Cal Poly. (Took A and P there, 4 people of 72 got an A...never happen at fl state in any class). My point is that I believe that Nova's problem is also Florida's problem...add to this the lack of leniency in nova's early classes, the distractions of South Fl, etc, and I you end up with a larger attrition rate. I feel that because of these outside factors that I speak of that Nova is in some ways handed a "fixed deck", and that the school itself should not be blamed (as much, I'm sure they could improve) for problems much more unchangable and systemic than acknowledged.

 

[hurricaneuro]

Taven is right, and I hope anyone that has any ill feelings towards NOVA takes what he said seriously. Alot of people at UM have friends from HS that go to all of the FL state schools and when comparing, we are struggling with physics and orgo here at UM while people at UCF, USF are getting A's and hardly studying. Therefore...when these people apply to schools they might be shocked as to how much different it is going to be.

 

[KHE]

I am trying to get more involved on this forum, and to try to improve it somehow as far as tone. This is a public forum, unlike a few other sites that require that you are in school or practicing...this is the first one that comes up when someone interested in our profession searches on google, so I feel that it is important to put a good face forward, with reality of course.

Because of this, a 3.4 from a fl state is NOT equal to the same GPA from Cal Poly. (Took A and P there, 4 people of 72 got an A...never happen at fl state in any class). My point is that I believe that Nova's problem is also Florida's problem...add to this the lack of leniency in nova's early classes, the distractions of South Fl, etc, and I you end up with a larger attrition rate. I feel that because of these outside factors that I speak of that Nova is in some ways handed a "fixed deck", and that the school itself should not be blamed (as much, I'm sure they could improve) for problems much more unchangable and systemic than acknowledged.

To me then, this makes NOVA even a MORE serious offender.

If they KNOW that there is such grade inflation in the Florida state system (surely they know) and they continue to admit students that they know do not have a realistic chance of success in their program, then they should be publicly scorned. That is completely unethical and basically makes them no more respectable than a pool hustler.

 

[Taven7755]

“To me then, this makes NOVA even a MORE serious offender.

If they KNOW that there is such grade inflation in the Florida state system (surely they know) and they continue to admit students that they know do not have a realistic chance of success in their program, then they should be publicly scorned. That is completely unethical and basically makes them no more respectable than a pool hustler.”

I must respectfully disagree with you on this, KHE…

The first assumption is very flawed, that is that Nova “knows” that a student is inferior because they went to a state school. The problem, in my opinion, is very simple: There is no measurable way for a school to know the “difficulty” of the school that an applicant attended. Until such a measure is available or even sought for, I feel that it would be grossly unfair to penalize an applicant simply because they attended a particular school.

Here is an example: I got into Nova and a few other schools with the following stats, 3.0 cumulative GPA, 380 OAT AA, and two years plus of experience, most of it near 40 hrs/week.

A friend of mine has a GPA of 3.87, a 320 OAT, and experience in six different setting over three years.

ADVANTAGE: My friend

But… he attended fl state, and to his own admission “had about two semesters where it was kinda tough”. He openly said to me that he put off his OAT’s 6 months to study, and that initially he was scoring in the 270’s on practice tests that he took. He studied very hard and did about average on his OAT. Having said this, I remember month after month of him being able to go out most anytime, while I (2000 miles away) had to study most every night to get a much lower GPA. When I applied, no number could measure what was known to everyone that attended our two schools; that at FL state over half his class would routinely get an A…while at Cal Poly even the most coveted grads rarely left with anything over a 3.3 or so.

My point then is this, on what grounds could nova deny him? (or any of the countless others with similar preparation) His GPA and experience are better, and people bemoan the reliance that opt and med schools put on entrance tests… The simple fact is this: When my friend starts with me at Nova this fall, he will have never seen anything remotely like what he’ll be faced with there…and he knows it.

So no, nova admin are not hustlers for accepting Fl students that from all appearances are very strong. Clearly it is not a question of not having enough people. (they were third last year in total apps, yet 7 other schools accept more students) We cannot somehow justify not letting in a student based on where they went to school when there is no measure of that schools environment. “Well, we hear that fl state is easier than Tennesee, so let’s not accept this person that is otherwise more qualified.” Hearsay would be the only determinant with no real quantitative way to see this factor, and you cannot somehow suggest that we allow the fabricated “reputation” of a school determine if someone gets in… that would be very elitist.

Even more reason for someone to overpay for an undergrad education--not the answer.

 

[KHE]

"To me then, this makes NOVA even a MORE serious offender.

If they KNOW that there is such grade inflation in the Florida state system (surely they know) and they continue to admit students that they know do not have a realistic chance of success in their program, then they should be publicly scorned. That is completely unethical and basically makes them no more respectable than a pool hustler."

I must respectfully disagree with you on this, KHE&#8230;

The first assumption is very flawed, that is that Nova "knows" that a student is inferior because they went to a state school. The problem, in my opinion, is very simple: There is no measurable way for a school to know the "difficulty" of the school that an applicant attended. Until such a measure is available or even sought for, I feel that it would be grossly unfair to penalize an applicant simply because they attended a particular school.

You seem to be contradicting yourself....

In an earlier posting you mentioned the rampant grade inflation in the FSU system and how NOVA recruits a lot of students from Florida so much so that the FSU system is NOVAs "primary feeder system." You then seem to indicate that a large number of those people failing out of NOVA are coming from the FSU system.

If that's the case, then NOVA knows, or SHOULD KNOW that the FSU system is rife with grade inflation and they SHOULD HAVE NOTICED that a disproportionate number of their flunking students are those who attended FSU for their undergraduate educations.

As such, YES, I would conceivably deny your friend with the 3.87 admission because it should be a SERIOUS red flag to NOVA that a student with a 3.87 GPA only manages to perform "about average" on the OAT after "months of studying."

Now, NOVA isn't going to know how long your friend studied for the OAT but the combination of an FSU student (with their history of grade inflation) with a lofty GPA but mediocre 320 OAT score should be sending up a signal that "hey, maybe we shouldn't take this guy because a whole lot of people with similar profiles tend to flunk out a much higher rate."

That of course would be the responsible thing to do, but I guess that's beyond NOVA's admission department to accomplish. They may not be hustlers but it sounds like they're pretty damn close to it. At best, they're incompetent at consistently picking students who can succeed at their program. At worst, they're admitting students they know have little chance just to pick up a bunch of money. That to me, is criminal.

 

[Taven7755]

At heart, I agree with your point...

The overarching problem is that there is no way for schools to be graded as to how difficult their programs are. I believe that this information should be made widely available. (as it is for upper-echelon studies such as law and medicine). I believe that a school should be required to show the average GPA's of people graduating in your major, and that this should be included in the transcript. And yes, I realize that this won't be happening anytime soon...It would blow the cover off of a lot of schools that charge a lot of money for programs that are fluff and do not prepare people well...

The point that I know got lost in my last post is this: I believe it is wrong to deny a student based on the reputation of their school. I realize that extremes of this must be applicable (someone from Dartmouth vs a state school), but that people that play by the rules MUST not be hurt. It cannot be forgotten that many students do not choose where they attend school, at least to any significant degree. My friend went to FL state because they had to attend school in Florida for cost reasons, as well as the want to stay somewhat close to school. This is no news flash; many people go to college where they can afford to go to college.I know that is what I did.

In my opinion, what WOULD be criminal would be to punish the person that went to the school they had to attend...especially because a vast majority of them (i.e. the rest of the class, many also from these schools, that do so well on the NBEO's) ARE prepared. To me, allowing for one student that fails out is not as morally culpable as disallowing a student, who IS READY, from doing what they want to do....Again though, something must be setup to show these kinds of figures. The fact that they are non-existent is lunacy.

Anyway, just my opinion, and I am more than likely wrong. (I am argueing an idea, not against you KHE...you're prob a really nice guy!.) This site needs more of this type of discussion anyway. Cheers!

 

[KHE]

The point that I know got lost in my last post is this: I believe it is wrong to deny a student based on the reputation of their school. I realize that extremes of this must be applicable (someone from Dartmouth vs a state school), but that people that play by the rules MUST not be hurt. It cannot be forgotten that many students do not choose where they attend school, at least to any significant degree. My friend went to FL state because they had to attend school in Florida for cost reasons, as well as the want to stay somewhat close to school. This is no news flash; many people go to college where they can afford to go to college.I know that is what I did.

In my opinion, what WOULD be criminal would be to punish the person that went to the school they had to attend...especially because a vast majority of them (i.e. the rest of the class, many also from these schools, that do so well on the NBEO's) ARE prepared. To me, allowing for one student that fails out is not as morally culpable as disallowing a student, who IS READY, from doing what they want to do....Again though, something must be setup to show these kinds of figures. The fact that they are non-existent is lunacy.

I don't really agree with that. To me, it is the moral responsibility of the admissions committees to at least have some sort of perspective on the reputation of the schools that their applicants are coming from. Now, I understand that a school like NOVA may get an application once in a while from Wyoming State and not really understand fully whether that school has a good or bad reputation. But for NOVA to claim that they don't know the reputation of FSU is ridiculous.

I also strongly disagree that the schools shouldn't "punish" students who attend certain schools. Of course they should. That's their job. People are seeking admission into a professional program where they are going to be trainined to care for the eye and visual welfare of the population. Whether they "had" to go to a particular undergraduate school or not is immaterial. They need to be prepared to handle the rigors of the professional coursework. To admit people knowing that their chances of success is highly unethical.

Now, you're right....you can't automatically deny someone who has a 4.0 from FSU just because it's FSU. But knowing their reputation, that is where it is the duty of the admissions committee to look at OAT scores, or other academic achievments and see if it actually correlates. As stated before, someone with a 4.0 or close to it should not be getting a 310 on the OAT. The OAT is challenging, but it's not that hard. Certainly not for someone with a 4.0.

 

[jymezg]

Now to the crux of the problem...Many of Florida's state schools (Fl state, Fl in gainesville, USF, UCF) have INSANE grade inflation. I know this because I have attended three schools (Cal poly, MO state, and FL state). Put as an example; I took 4 classes at Fl state, and in all four over 60% of the class got an A. The same is true for Florida, USF, UCF (according to a few people that will be coming to nova with me...a friend got a 3.8 cumul GPA, and struggles big on the MCAT and OAT. I'm worried about him!)

Ouch. Please do not group UF with inferior schools such as FSU, USF, and UCF.

http://collegeprowler.com/rankings/academics/

http://content.kiplinger.com/tools/colleges/pubcollege.php?sortby=INRANK04&orderby=flip&states[]=FL&myschool[]=none&outputby=table

 

[blysssful]

I don't really agree with that. To me, it is the moral responsibility of the admissions committees to at least have some sort of perspective on the reputation of the schools that their applicants are coming from. Now, I understand that a school like NOVA may get an application once in a while from Wyoming State and not really understand fully whether that school has a good or bad reputation. But for NOVA to claim that they don't know the reputation of FSU is ridiculous.

I also strongly disagree that the schools shouldn't "punish" students who attend certain schools. Of course they should. That's their job. People are seeking admission into a professional program where they are going to be trainined to care for the eye and visual welfare of the population. Whether they "had" to go to a particular undergraduate school or not is immaterial. They need to be prepared to handle the rigors of the professional coursework. To admit people knowing that their chances of success is highly unethical.

Now, you're right....you can't automatically deny someone who has a 4.0 from FSU just because it's FSU. But knowing their reputation, that is where it is the duty of the admissions committee to look at OAT scores, or other academic achievments and see if it actually correlates. As stated before, someone with a 4.0 or close to it should not be getting a 310 on the OAT. The OAT is challenging, but it's not that hard. Certainly not for someone with a 4.0.

I agree here.

Also, there has to be SOME sort of ranking system for undergrad schools, even if it isn't a concrete system. When I was speaking to the admissions person for UCBSO, I asked if they incorporate the undergrad school when they consider the GPA. She said they do. She asked where I went to school, and even though I go to school across the country in Virgina, she was well aware of my school's academic standing (even though I wouldn't consider it a big name school). Therefore, a Florida school should DEFINITELY incorporate the curriculum of Florida undergrads into the admissions process (or all undergrads for that matter). If they are taking students that they do not believe will be able to hold their heads above water, it is absolutely criminal.

Taven, you bring up a good point in the sense that it would be bad if they started to reject students who actually WERE ready and qualified. There's an easy enough solution for that though. If these students are ready and qualified, they should be able to gain acceptance to another program. NOVA isn't the only optometry school in the country, and right now they could stand to use stricter scrutiny.

Florida needs to get its act together.