Yeah, I have a general residency issue -

[pikachu]

The whole G-D- application and match process! here I have dropped close to $3K in application fees, a suit, airplane fares, hotel rooms, overpriced meals on the road, and gasoline. What do I get?

1) Department chairs who ask why I bothered to apply into such a competitive specialty. Why'd you interview me then if I was such a joke?
2) Programs that don't even have the basic courtesy to send out a rejection letter by the end of January - when YOU paid THEM! As if it was such a freaking privilege to even APPLY.
3) The Match. Absolutely the most frustrating, unfathomable, expensive, and stressful way to get a job. Ever. Look, anyone with common sense should realize that the Match is weighted in favor of the programs, no matter how much they claim otherwise. The hospitals need staff and the priority of the match is ensuring that the hospitals (especially the money losing academic institutions) have enough resident indentured-servant labor to stay open. not to mention that the Match system completely eliminates competition for fair salaries as it creates a trust-style job market. You know, someone should sue, since trusts are illegal. oh wait, SOMEONE DID! and the Match was exempted from antitrust lawsuits by the actions of the hospital lobby in Congress and their lackey Ted Kennedy.

yes, I'm venting. If anyone wants to share their frustrations with the trail, the NRMP, or anything else about this whole process I think it would be great to hear what others are thinking.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[kem]

I have 2 main complaints:

1) When at the end of a long interview day, I sit down with the PD and chair of a program I like, and the only thing they ask me is if I have any questions! I never can think of anything new and exciting to ask and I end up looking stupid! (It's probably my own fault because I should have more questions, but I'm always so tired at the end of the day)

2) When a really nice program director keeps on talking about how the interview process is "as much for you as for them" and that "it's not about getting to know you, it's about you getting to know us" and that "the match is really under your control". NO IT'S NOT!!!! IF I LIKE YOU IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I'LL MATCH THERE!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

Thanks for the forum to vent. I think I'm getting a bit stressed.

kem

 

[b&ierstiefel]

I agree and your venting makes me want to vent. I will not be redundant though and will summarize my feelings towards the Match with the following statements:

1) The Match sucks donkey balls!
2) The Match is hella lame!

 

[kem]

Oh, I thought of another one...

3) I tend to be a shy person, I'm not good at small talk. Most of the residents I've met have been really nice people, and I'm sure if I worked at the program I would become friends with them. But I'm so sick of making small talk with the residents!!! I JUST DON'T WANT TO MEET ANYONE ELSE!!!

This may be a personal problem but I thought I would vent anyways.

-kem

 

[Coco_Nut]

I also have some programs that are yet to tell me what they are doing with my application. After calling one, the program coordinator says that I shall hear before end of January because that is the last day of interviews. With such a response, I can't help but feel "valued" by this program. What, if I get a call on Jan 30th, I'll run over there on Jan 31st (and pay a poupload of money to get there) to be an interview slot filler for them? In cases like this, it is evident that you are not going to be ranked and I cannot figure out one good reason (on the program's behalf) why they do not reject me through ERAS and end the charade.

I feel that this illustrates a general lack of professional courtesy on the part of the programs. It is absolutely appaling and I am very sad to say that this is my profession where physicians show such little respect for one another. And I also wonder what the overall tone is at programs like this in how these "physicians" treat their patients. Maybe when they diagnose something, they dont tell the patient until the next day, or next week and still collect their $12.

 

[kas23]

I agree and your venting makes me want to vent. I will not be redundant though and will summarize my feelings towards the Match with the following statements:

1) The Match sucks donkey balls!
2) The Match is hella lame!

Pedro offers you his protection.

 

[b&ierstiefel]

Pedro offers you his protection.

If you vote for me, all your wildest dreams will come true.

 

[deleted4401]

I have similar complaints about the application process and the match, especially about last-minute interview invites and the lack of response by many programs. That is absolute crap. Yet, I really can't think of a more fair way then the match. Any other ideas?

If someone had a residency selection program that could be well developed, I think there would have been a better chance for that lawsuit being heard. It's too easy to blame 'liberals' for this. If the match was eliminated today, a free-for-all would ensue, like it did in the early part of the 20th century ...

Pre-match days, hospitals would directly contact applicants and offer them contracts for residency positions. However, the competition for competitive applicants became so stiff, that eventually, people were being offered contracts early in the third year and then even in the second year (!). Eventually there was even kickbacks and such offered to department heads that would identify top prospects within the medical school, and the system then became corrupt and academically bankrupt. There is an interesting article in JAMA from 2001, I think, on the history of the match, and it details the mess that was before the match.

I don't know what system would work. The banking and consulting folks use an "interview leading to offer" system to a group of candidates, and a limited time to say yes or no. If not enough "yes" answers to fill up the slots, they offer more interviews. That system is really unfavorable for those of us that look just okay on paper, but may be stars in real life, b/c they'd only get interview offers later.

I think we are distinct from those fields, in that meeting as many candidates in person as possible would be most efficient and fair. Plus, those other organizations are for-profit and can schedule as many interview sessions as they need, or just choose to not hire as many people. Hospitals don't have that luxury.

Pikachu, I think you're applying to what I am. Yes, it totally sucks for the ultra-competitive specialties. It makes the "most expensive vacation of your life" (4th year) damn stressful. Maybe those need a different system, one that I have no idea how to design. I think for FP, IM, PM&R, etc. this really is a fair way to assess enough candidates and let the candidates pretty much choose where they will end up, which is the ultimate goal for everyone.

I do agree that the match is somewhat guilty of anti-trust violations, but the major question will be the decision to group us as either students/trainees or employees. I'm not sure if I want to be known purely as an employee. Lots of possibilities for problems will occur. One is opening the door to unionization. Two, is a huge reduction in salaries for highly competitive residencies (i.e. - honestly, if I could guarantee a rad-onc spot, I'd do it for free and that might make me a much more desirable candidate to certain programs; I know many derm applicants that would feel that way, as well). Three, our education may be compromised if we are now just, e.g. HCA/Columbia employees. Maybe the suits will decide that morning reports are inefficient and not money producing, so interns are to be doing ... phlebotomy for that hour. That could become a nightmare.

So, someone smarter than me should try to develop a better, less painful way to do this. Because, I'm pissed off as well, but I can't think of a solution.

Simul

 

[H2SO4]

DARN IT! I just typed a nice, thoughtful reply and my computer ate it!

How about if the programs sent out a list Feb 1 (or 15th) that categorized all of the interviewees into four categories:
TOP (ranked in the top number of slots offered - if they have 12 slots, you are in the top 12 - a guaranteed admission)
HIGH (ranked within the "normal" acceptance level - not a guarantee, but within the number that the program normally dips down to, say top 25)
VARIABLE (ranked, but rarely selected in the match)
UNRANKED (self explanatory)

That way, if I have my heart set on a program that didn't rank me, I won't waste a space on them. But I can still rank a VARIABLE program and hope. Or, if I want a basic guarantee, I can rank #1 a TOP program, which would allow my spouse to begin looking for a job a MONTH earlier! Grr...

 

[scootad.]

I like that idea!!

 

[patelakshar]

Programs will never do it. The programs will always vie for the power, and get it. Students will always have the lower hand.

 

[Coco_Nut]

I do not believe that at the moment there is a better solution to the match. I happen to find the match to be fairly benefical to both parties, and at the same time preventing the anarchy that SimulD mentioned. And while the process of selecting applicants and ranking them is skewed towards the programs, we have to remember that ultimately they are looking for the people who "best" meet their needs - and you dont want to end up in some place where you're not wanted. However, none of this precludes programs from being upfront (i.e. polite, professional, or nice) on whether you will be interviewed there or not....as I biotched about in my previous post.

And in response to H2SO4, would you be willing to let the programs know that you ranked them 1-3, 4-6, etc..... and let them reorder their rank list based on their speculation of whether or not they are going to get you.....

I have similar complaints about the application process and the match, especially about last-minute interview invites and the lack of response by many programs. That is absolute crap. Yet, I really can't think of a more fair way then the match. Any other ideas?

If someone had a residency selection program that could be well developed, I think there would have been a better chance for that lawsuit being heard. It's too easy to blame 'liberals' for this. If the match was eliminated today, a free-for-all would ensue, like it did in the early part of the 20th century ...

Pre-match days, hospitals would directly contact applicants and offer them contracts for residency positions. However, the competition for competitive applicants became so stiff, that eventually, people were being offered contracts early in the third year and then even in the second year (!). Eventually there was even kickbacks and such offered to department heads that would identify top prospects within the medical school, and the system then became corrupt and academically bankrupt. There is an interesting article in JAMA from 2001, I think, on the history of the match, and it details the mess that was before the match.

I don't know what system would work. The banking and consulting folks use an "interview leading to offer" system to a group of candidates, and a limited time to say yes or no. If not enough "yes" answers to fill up the slots, they offer more interviews. That system is really unfavorable for those of us that look just okay on paper, but may be stars in real life, b/c they'd only get interview offers later.

I think we are distinct from those fields, in that meeting as many candidates in person as possible would be most efficient and fair. Plus, those other organizations are for-profit and can schedule as many interview sessions as they need, or just choose to not hire as many people. Hospitals don't have that luxury.

Pikachu, I think you're applying to what I am. Yes, it totally sucks for the ultra-competitive specialties. It makes the "most expensive vacation of your life" (4th year) damn stressful. Maybe those need a different system, one that I have no idea how to design. I think for FP, IM, PM&R, etc. this really is a fair way to assess enough candidates and let the candidates pretty much choose where they will end up, which is the ultimate goal for everyone.

I do agree that the match is somewhat guilty of anti-trust violations, but the major question will be the decision to group us as either students/trainees or employees. I'm not sure if I want to be known purely as an employee. Lots of possibilities for problems will occur. One is opening the door to unionization. Two, is a huge reduction in salaries for highly competitive residencies (i.e. - honestly, if I could guarantee a rad-onc spot, I'd do it for free and that might make me a much more desirable candidate to certain programs; I know many derm applicants that would feel that way, as well). Three, our education may be compromised if we are now just, e.g. HCA/Columbia employees. Maybe the suits will decide that morning reports are inefficient and not money producing, so interns are to be doing ... phlebotomy for that hour. That could become a nightmare.

So, someone smarter than me should try to develop a better, less painful way to do this. Because, I'm pissed off as well, but I can't think of a solution.

Simul

 

[H2SO4]

And in response to H2SO4, would you be willing to let the programs know that you ranked them 1-3, 4-6, etc..... and let them reorder their rank list based on their speculation of whether or not they are going to get you.....

I'd be willing to mention Top 3, Ranked, and Unranked. But I think the point is that we rank 5-15 programs (give or take) and the programs list 100+ (some more, I'm sure). They are looking for a group and we are looking for one place. They aren't moving, and we might be (and may have family coming with us).

 

[MichiMO]

I had one idea for making the match a little better while still preventing the insanity of applying like we did for medical school.
Have applicants go through the application/interview process at their desired programs. The programs then rank the applicants and on a certain day offers will go out to the top ranking students...ie: 5 positions...offers go out to 1-5 on the rank list. The applicants have say a week to either accept or reject their offers on some automated system. Then, based upon how many slots are still available after the first round of offers has gone out, programs will send out offers to their next ranked applicants...so they have 3 positions left, so they send out their next three offers. It might take a couple rounds, but it would give students more choice about where they go. I don't know if the results, in the end, would end up being much different than the match, but it would present that whole senerio of..."if you ranked a program 1 and they ranked you 3, but your number 2 program ranked you 1, would you go to your number 1 or number 2." I know this senario is supposed to work to our advantage, but who knows right.
I just think people might feel they had a little bit more control over the process if they were given their choice of every program that had a spot for them. It would also eliminate the game playing of ranking. Programs fill thier spots in their order of preference and students get to make an informed decision based upon who really wants them.
Any thoughts?

 

[sacrament]

2) When a really nice program director keeps on talking about how the interview process is "as much for you as for them" and that "it's not about getting to know you, it's about you getting to know us" and that "the match is really under your control". NO IT'S NOT!!!! IF I LIKE YOU IT DOESN'T MEAN THAT I'LL MATCH THERE!!! AAAAAAAAAAAAAH!

haha, yeah... I don't match until next year, but I've heard a variation of that line during virtually every interview I've ever had for anything. It's so patently absurd. Yeah, I'm just here at Harvard sort of chillin', ya know? Maybe in the middle of the interview I'll just stand up and say "Hey, thanks for your time but, ya know, I'm just not feelin' it here. Laters bro."

Whenever an interviewer gives me that crap I have an overwhelming urge to stand up, drop my pants and take a leak in their face. "Well this is what I do, ya know! Just want to see if you can handle me! It's all about me!"

 

[yaah]

What would be so terrible about looking for residency positions the way you look for any other job?

I think it's a matter of numbers. Every residency position starts at the same time. So how would the interview process work? I imagine programs would start to offer interviews and positions earlier and earlier, and a candidate who wasn't aggressive about locking up a position quickly could be locked out of their top programs simply because they wanted to look around and explore their options. The way it currently is, programs cannot offer excessive positions outside of the match and therefore the amount of "politics" that is involved is somewhat minimized (I said somewhat). I frankly can't imagine trying to compete with a bunch of med school graduates for jobs. Would people "settle" a lot quicker? Would they jump at an offer from one of the programs halfway down the list if it was offered? It just seems to me that the match optimizes residents with programs in such a way that benefits everyone. Sure, there are some drawbacks, but the alternative is just too chaotic.I am sure many disagree however.

The way it is now, you visit the programs you are interested, and are free (ostensibly) to rank them in your order of preference without concern for where they are ranking you or what things are "agreed upon."

 

[deleted4401]

I liked the above idea initially, but in the end, the outcome doesn't seem to change with Top/Ranked/Unranked idea, and the only thing that would is that you'd know somewhat earlier. Here is an example:

Presumably, as an applicant, you know where you'd rather go. For example: my rank in my head might have been 1) Big State U 2) Small Private U 3) HotShot U 4) Small State U 5) County Hospital ...

Under the new system, I might get an email saying: 1) Big State U - Ranked 2) Small Private U - Top 3) HotShot U - Unranked 4) Small State U - Ranked 5) County Hospital - Ranked.

Then, my rank list would be 1, 2, and I'd end up at either 1 or 2. Or, if I had ego issues and wanted to get my "first" choice, I'd only rank 2. If we did it the current way, that's still the way it would end up - at either 1 or 2. The only difference is that I could possibly know somewhat earlier where I match. I don't think the major problem is knowing earlier or later - or is that what kills us - the waiting?

Flindophile - the problem with searching for it like any other job is the anarchy that ensues, and the competitive nature of programs would eventually have them contacting applicants in their 2nd year if they showed promise/interest.

One other idea might to be have some more transperancy in the process. Honestly, I would like to know why 50+ programs thought I wasn't worth an interview. Say: they have to tell you that you didn't meet certain criteria that they list to you. That way: 1) if I had to reapply, I'd know what I needed to fix 2) the next batch applying would know that they needed specific qualifications (i.e Step 1>215, >2 first author pubs, and stronger letters). I think they'd have to take way closer looks at our applications, and we'd have some control over where we apply, b/c we know we have no shot at certain places. That way, we'd apply to less places, they'd evaluate us much more closely, and we might have somewhat happier applicants and programs, and a tighter match.

Anyway, I think this is quite constructive. As much as it doesn't seem like we can change things, that isn't the case. This is our process and will eventually be our tool to pick our future colleagues/trainees. I'm sure we'd want it to be as perfect as possible.

Later,
Simul

 

[Gut Shot]

Look, anyone with common sense should realize that the Match is weighted in favor of the programs, no matter how much they claim otherwise.

I disagree. The match algorithm will send you to the highest program on your list where you can get in. The algorithm first looks at the applicant's ROL's and makes tentantive matches, then looks at the program's ROL to sort out who will stay and who will be placed in a tentative match elsewhere. Although the program's ROL is essential to you gaining acceptance at a given institution, it is your ROL that dictates which institutions are even considered, and in what order.

For instance, if you are ranked #1 on the ROL of ten programs, what decides which one you will match at? You and your list. I'm burned out from the match too, but I take comfort in the fact that it will be impossible for me to get screwed if I simply rank the programs in the order I prefer.

The algorithm used to be the opposite, looking at the program's list first and then the applicant's list second. When the two algorithms were applied to five previously run matches in 1995, there was less than 0.1% variability in the outcome. This "applicant proposing" algorithm was first applied in 1998, at the behest of all national medical student organizations, the NRMP’s five sponsoring organizations and all U.S. medical school deans.

Given that it used to be the reverse of how it is now, before 1998 would you have said that "anyone with common sense should realize that the Match is weighted in favor of the applicants, no matter how much they claim otherwise"?

 

[tofurious]

I liked the above idea initially, but in the end, the outcome doesn't seem to change with Top/Ranked/Unranked idea, and the only thing that would is that you'd know somewhat earlier.

This is exactly right. What would happen in the top/ranked/unranked idea is that large programs (who would match more people than only the "top" spots) would have a flurry of average applicants (ranked) drop these programs off their rank lists and go for more sure-thing programs of lesser strength. This would create a lot of randomness and more associated chaos.

I think the OP's complaint may really rest in the unpredictability of the outcome rather than the matching process itself. My advice is that you have to stick with the rule of "don't rank it unless you are okay with going there". Everyone would like some idea as to which region of the country they are moving to, and it wouldn't be fair to rank only regional programs since some programs across the country can be much better 4th-15th choices than your local programs. You are always maximizing your chance of matching somewhere at the cost of this unpredictable outcome, and you will never know FOR SURE if you would have been happier at a place you ranked higher but did not match at...

 

[starayamoskva]

I had one idea for making the match a little better while still preventing the insanity of applying like we did for medical school.
Have applicants go through the application/interview process at their desired programs. The programs then rank the applicants and on a certain day offers will go out to the top ranking students...ie: 5 positions...offers go out to 1-5 on the rank list. The applicants have say a week to either accept or reject their offers on some automated system. Then, based upon how many slots are still available after the first round of offers has gone out, programs will send out offers to their next ranked applicants...so they have 3 positions left, so they send out their next three offers. It might take a couple rounds, but it would give students more choice about where they go. I don't know if the results, in the end, would end up being much different than the match, but it would present that whole senerio of..."if you ranked a program 1 and they ranked you 3, but your number 2 program ranked you 1, would you go to your number 1 or number 2." I know this senario is supposed to work to our advantage, but who knows right.
I just think people might feel they had a little bit more control over the process if they were given their choice of every program that had a spot for them. It would also eliminate the game playing of ranking. Programs fill thier spots in their order of preference and students get to make an informed decision based upon who really wants them.
Any thoughts?

Have you read the NRMP website on how the match works?
The program you rank number one is the program you go to provided they rank you within the number of slots they have available.

Say you rank program A as number 12 and Program B as number one.
Program A ranks you number 1 and program B ranks you number 8 (and has 10 spots). You would match at program B your number one choice.
Therefore, if you rank your programs in the order that you truly desire to go to them instead of trying to outwit the match, you will match at your top choice program that also wants you.
This ain't rocket science people.
s

 

[pikachu]

Given that it used to be the reverse of how it is now, before 1998 would you have said that "anyone with common sense should realize that the Match is weighted in favor of the applicants, no matter how much they claim otherwise"?

No. You yourself said that there was virtually no variability in the ultimate outcomes of the match algorithms, whether they looked at the programs' preferences first or the applicants'. My post was not about the structure of the algorithm; as I said in my original post, the point of the match is to eliminate salary competition for attracting residents and to ensure that the hospitals have sufficient resident staff so as to not shut down. I agree with one of the above posters that the match process may work just fine in specialties where there are enough spots to go around for all the applicants, e.g., internal medicine. My perspective is that of an applicant to a specialty where 2/3 of the applicants didn't match last year (yes Simul we are applying to the same field - and how!). I realize that this is simply a function of having many more applicants than there are spots, but in this situation, the decision power is most certainly in the hands of the programs.

 

[H2SO4]

My biggest complaint is that there is so little time for my spouse to find a job. We send off the list Feb 23. Electronically. Why not get the results Mar 1? Why not give everyone ONE WEEK after interviews end (let's say Feb 10), given the computer time to spit out a match and scramble within that week, and we'd find out Feb 17. That's a MONTH earlier! Early Matches like Neuro find out next week... It can take a while to find a new job...give us the time!

 

[pikachu]

My advice is that you have to stick with the rule of "don't rank it unless you are okay with going there".

This is fine, but I'm dealing with a specialty where you have to rank as many programs as possible to maximize your chances of matching into the field at all. So, do I rank a crappy program where the residents are miserable just because I want to be a radiation oncologist 5 years from now, or do I hold out, rank only the programs I like, and take the very real risk of not matching at all? On the interview trail it's been my experience that a lot of the programs feel that since rad onc is such a sought after specialty, they don't have to do s--- for their residency program since people will want rad onc no matter what. You see the dilemma I'm sure.

 

[Gut Shot]

My post was not about the structure of the algorithm;

My bad. Usually when people on these boards are complaining about how the match favors programs it is because they don't understand the algorithm.

the point of the match is to eliminate salary competition for attracting residents and to ensure that the hospitals have sufficient resident staff so as to not shut down.

The point of the match is to eliminate the now-forgotten environment that existed before the match.

http://www.savethematch.org/history/before.aspx

In the 50+ years of the match, interns/residents have secured living wages, benefits and now work hour restrictions. I'm personally happy that there is some uniformity in our salaries. Otherwise folks in highly competitive specialties might be paid in peanuts and urine. The point is that things have gotten better, not worse. Residents used to get paid virtually nothing and were Q2, if you can believe that. It wasn't until a highly publicized incident where some residents applied for, and qualified for, food stamp assistance that the hospitals decided to increase pay.

Heck, Emory pays more than most other places I interviewed at. UCSF now gives 10K a year in housing assistance. UTSW and Vanderbilt will match employee contributions to their 401k's. I don't consider any of this a travesty considering that we'll all still be in training.

I realize that this is simply a function of having many more applicants than there are spots, but in this situation, the decision power is most certainly in the hands of the programs.

That's just the nature of the seller's market. It would exist match or no-match.

 

[mosche]

My biggest complaint is that there is so little time for my spouse to find a job. We send off the list Feb 23. Electronically. Why not get the results Mar 1? Why not give everyone ONE WEEK after interviews end (let's say Feb 10), given the computer time to spit out a match and scramble within that week, and we'd find out Feb 17. That's a MONTH earlier! Early Matches like Neuro find out next week... It can take a while to find a new job...give us the time!

This is also my biggest gripe. I mean, c'mon, we enter the data into the computer, the schools do likewise. Ergo, they could certainly hack some of the wait. Unfortunately, most things in medicine are akin to joining a fraternity/sorority: the powers that be figure that they had to endure the pain/hazing, so everyone else should do likewise. I vaguely remember the wait and agony of the MCAT, med. school applications, USMLE, etc...; and I am sure that the match will be a similar evil.

One thing I can't understand: forking out a $1000.00 for a senseless clinical skills exam! Evidently the powers that be are getting even nastier !

 

[pikachu]

That's just the nature of the seller's market. It would exist match or no-match.

Ah! So they shouldn't pretend that the match magically makes things favor the applicants, should they?

As far as "peanuts and urine," find me another job outside of medicine that pays $35K for 80 hours a week of work to a person with 4+ years of post-undergrad training (not to mention carrying > $100,000 of debt).

 

[GopherBrain]

My biggest complaint is that there is so little time for my spouse to find a job. We send off the list Feb 23. Electronically. Why not get the results Mar 1? Why not give everyone ONE WEEK after interviews end (let's say Feb 10), given the computer time to spit out a match and scramble within that week, and we'd find out Feb 17. That's a MONTH earlier! Early Matches like Neuro find out next week... It can take a while to find a new job...give us the time!

Ha Ha Ha! We neurology applicants are going to steal all of the best apartments/houses and jobs for our spouses... Life is good.

Of course, a lot of neurology programs only match you for PGY2-4, and you go through the regular match for PGY1, putting early match specialties on the same footing as everyone else.

 

[Gut Shot]

Ah! So they shouldn't pretend that the match magically makes things favor the applicants, should they?

Who has been saying this?

As far as "peanuts and urine," find me another job outside of medicine that pays $35K for 80 hours a week of work to a person with 4+ years of post-undergrad training (not to mention carrying > $100,000 of debt).

Sure, right after you find me a job outside of being a physician with such a high level of income and job security. I wish residents got paid more and had less debt, too, but as it is you have to pay to play.

I have a brother who did his rads residency from '93-'97. He busted his ass, and now he works cake hours and should hit >600K (before bonuses) within 2 years. Where else but in medicine?

 

[H2SO4]

As far as "peanuts and urine," find me another job outside of medicine that pays $35K for 80 hours a week of work to a person with 4+ years of post-undergrad training (not to mention carrying > $100,000 of debt).

Science post-doc! The NEW NIH minimum is $35K, but that is only if you are being paid with an NIH grant. I have a friend AT the NIH, has a BS, MS, and PhD and is being paid $28K. And he has student loan debt (from BS and MS). And many researchers work 80hrs/wk. And some tenured professors only make $60K.

 

[syrinx]

Science post-doc! The NEW NIH minimum is $35K, but that is only if you are being paid with an NIH grant. I have a friend AT the NIH, has a BS, MS, and PhD and is being paid $28K. And he has student loan debt (from BS and MS). And many researchers work 80hrs/wk. And some tenured professors only make $60K.

Let's not forget that most PhD students don't pay tuition and make
$20-25,000 during this time.

 

[H2SO4]

They must be going to some rich schools: my friend was making $12K to start, went UP to $18K when he finally graduated, and had to PAY tuition the entire time.

 

[Gut Shot]

They must be going to some rich schools: my friend was making $12K to start, went UP to $18K when he finally graduated, and had to PAY tuition the entire time.

That describes my grad school days perfectly. Starting stipend was $12,634 and edged to $17,500 when I finished. The tuition wasn't expensive, but when you're pulling down about 1K a month it still hurt. Every four months I felt like dialing the rape crisis hotline.

The uncertainty of life after the PhD is also something that many MD students will never fully appreciate. They call it "flexibility." Yeah, great, thanks. I can go start a post-doc that will end at some indeterminant point and then I can start the hunt for some nebulous job in industry and/or academics. Woot.

 

[syrinx]

They must be going to some rich schools: my friend was making $12K to start, went UP to $18K when he finally graduated, and had to PAY tuition the entire time.

This is crazy! My statement was for PhDs in the biomedical sciences. I understand paying tuition for a masters but for a PhD? Most universities have a tuition waiver for the first 2 years and then thesis lab mentor picks up the tab for the remainder of the degree. I can understand some variability in the stipend depending on the location of the school. $20-25,000 yearly stipend was in regards to a major US city. I even padded my stipend a bit by teaching tutoring medical/graduate students, proctoring exams, setting up gross anatomy and histology labs etc.

 

[Gut Shot]

This is crazy! My statement was for PhDs in the biomedical sciences. I understand paying tuition for a masters but for a PhD?

Yes, for a PhD. When I was applying to biomedical PhD programs (granted, this was in 1995), a well known institution in Philadelphia had stipends of 13K. UT-Houston touted a whopping increase to 14K. The Texas schools tended to make you pay tuition, which like I said was cheap but still agonizing given how little we were paid. The more expensive places did give out tuition wavers. The stipends have since increased substantially, but in the end, the vast majority of PhD's will never hope to have the income and security that MD's will.

I also supplemented my income by being a TA at a local undergraduate college. It was the only way I could afford meat and beer. Ah, the memories. May they rot in Hell forever.

 

[GeneGoddess]

I'm going to back up Havarti on this one. My grad school did NOT pay for tuition (in Texas), and I started at $12K! And we weren't allowed to hold supplemental jobs (it interfered with RESEARCH). And there were only rare opportunities to TA, since there isn't an associated undergraduate institution.

I'm going to echo Harvarti, most MDs haven't a clue how hard grad school it (that's most, not all).

 

[jtw]

DARN IT! I just typed a nice, thoughtful reply and my computer ate it!

How about if the programs sent out a list Feb 1 (or 15th) that categorized all of the interviewees into four categories:
TOP (ranked in the top number of slots offered - if they have 12 slots, you are in the top 12 - a guaranteed admission)
HIGH (ranked within the "normal" acceptance level - not a guarantee, but within the number that the program normally dips down to, say top 25)
VARIABLE (ranked, but rarely selected in the match)
UNRANKED (self explanatory)

That way, if I have my heart set on a program that didn't rank me, I won't waste a space on them. But I can still rank a VARIABLE program and hope. Or, if I want a basic guarantee, I can rank #1 a TOP program, which would allow my spouse to begin looking for a job a MONTH earlier! Grr...

The Gas program at UF does this to a lesser extent: they send out a letter after the interview (within days!) telling you that you will or will not be included on their list. Although you don't know where, at least you know whether you should bother putting them on yours. Simul's point is well-taken--it won't change the outcome of your match, but at least it gives you a better idea of which programs to keep and which to forget about. I think the ORDER of both lists should remain confidential for many reasons, but I do think that this courtesy of informing applicants that they are no longer being considered should be standard practice for all programs.