Roy Poses looks behind the scenes at medical schools:
Dr Goldman reveals that in the typical medical school, the most important criterion for faculty success if generation of external funding, that is, generation of fees for clinical work, or of grants from external sponsors. Whether a faculty member is good at patient care, teaching, or research, or whether he or she upholds the highest professional standards, is secondary.
Matthew Holt comments.
Related posts:
- Academic medicine, circa 2008
- Are academic physicians the next target on the inflated executive salary hit list?
- Academic medicine and hypocrisy
- Academic physicians who teach are seeing a raise
- The hands-off culture of American medicine
- The heat on academic physicians
- Old-school doctors on resident work-hour restrictions
KevinMD.com on Facebook
{ 3 comments }
No one cares for patient care now in medical schools.Quality of teacher is not graded by his qualities as a doctor but only by the money he brings in.
The faculty’s Clincal skill, and indeed clincal excellence, is assumed at most medical schools in the US.
Even in the face of evidence pointing otherwise.
Most medical schools view patient care as “something we have to do to pay the bills.”
It is rare to see clinicians advance far in academia. This is slowly changing as research becomes so specialized that it requires essentially a full time committment.
Junior faculty who primary responsibility is patient care get used to being told how to be a good doctor by people who see patients 1 day a week and/or attend on rounds one month a year.
It’s kind of like having senior citizens explain the internet to teen agers.
This must explain the financial diffulties in academe, as the old saw “if you can’t do, teach” is hardly compatible with revenue generation on a clinical basis.
Comments on this entry are closed.