Guest guest Posted February 20, 2002 Report Share Posted February 20, 2002 I think, Bob and Ken, that such a process is underway, at least at PCOM. Every department and faculty meeting has as its main topic upgrading and improving the quality of education. The development of the doctorate has accelerated this process. I think that most of the teachers are trying to upgrade their abilities with seminars, studying medical Chinese, new learning resources, and expanding classroom study materials. There is an underlying awareness that if we don't improve our abilities to teach and our knowledge base, that the profession will not be able to grow as well. As far as on a national level or beyond, I don't hold much hope for that process being anything but glacially slow, judging by recent decisions to cripple the Chinese language requirement in the doctorate by the national organization (ACOM?). And as Bob pointed out, the state and national exams being based on older books doesn't help either. The nature of any medical education is, at heart, one of constant growth, progression and refinement. Otherwise, health practitioners and students tend to be left in the dust. On another issue, specialties: There is not enough time in the present 3-4 year program for a full development of specialties, although there is an overview are covered both in the OM series 1-7 (7 semesters), with an emphasis on an 'integrated perspective', and in Chinese Internal Medicine, three semesters. This includes oncology, lots of gynecology, pediatrics, dermatology, and other internal medicine specialties. But I agree, the time allotted doesn't compare with similar training in China, Taiwan or Japan, and more is needed. At this point, the question is where to put the extra classes, with the constraints from the overall state licensure considerations. I have lobbied for several years to add three more semesters of Chinese Internal Medicine, the present allotment is not enough, in my opinion. The doctorate will address some of it, post-graduate training, for now, will have to do the rest. I assume reform will happen from the top down, as Bob puts it, over time. I know Jack Miller is committed to that. I would like to hear from faculty or administrators at other CM colleges on these issues, if there are any on this list (Will?). On Wednesday, February 20, 2002, at 10:22 AM, pemachophel2001 wrote: > Ken, > > I agree that real educational reform within our profession should, in > the best of all worlds, start with the fundamentals. However, so far, > we've seen little interest on the part of the schools to implement > such fundamental reform. > > So perhaps the way to get reform going is to work backwards, not to > start at the beginning if, realistically, that is not possible. What > if we started with something that makes sense to a number of people -- > stating what our graduates are actually qualified through their > training to treat. Mightn't this allow us to gradually and > incrementally work our way backwards to the real problems? > > I think it would be hard to argue against such a basic endeavor as > creating such a list for students and the public AND maintain any kind > of academic or medical ethical credibility. However, once such a list > was created, wouldn't students want to push that envelope. " How come > we can't treat this or that? Oh, you mean that we would need to know > X, Y, Z? So how come you're not teaching us X, Y, Z? " > > For instance, one of the things that students may need to learn in > order to treat cancer and other such serious, complicated diseases > might be a reading knowledge of Chinese, since there's plenty of > literature in Chinese and not very much in English. > > On the other hand, thinking realistically about such a list of > conditions, I can't see the schools actually doing this. In fact, I do > think the schools would argue against such a list, although they may > not be willing to argue in public. I'm surprised that no one ventured > any responses to my original query about the financial and/or > political downsides of such a list. > > Bob > > , " dragon90405 " <yulong@m...> wrote: > > Frances, Bob, and All, > > > > > Yes, this line of thinking makes total sense. It seems a good > > direction > > > for a movement in our profession. Related to it are the issues > > recently > > > brought up about our continuing education and ceu's. So much work > > to be > > > done. We definitely can't depend on the schools. > > > Frances > > > > > > pemachophel2001 wrote: > > > > > > > However, > > > > at BPE, we hear all the time from students and practitioners who > > are > > > > attempting to treat really scary diseases with basically no > > training > > > > and no access to good information on those diseases. I keep > > wondering > > > > why we think we can try to treat anything even if it exceeds our > > scope > > > > > > > > of education. > > > > I think this is a very important line of > > development, but before I could agree that > > it makes total sense I would suggest that > > our brief on educational reform include > > the issues related to foundations and education > > in the fundamentals of the subject which > > are similarly weak at present. > > > > In the tai4 ji2 classic attributed to > > Zhang San Feng, it states: > > > > " If the timing and position are not correct, > > the body becomes disordered, > > and the defect must be sought > > in the legs and waist. " > > > > I believe the analogy between tai4 ji2 > > and Chinese medicine is valid and > > valuable. What we do with our hands > > in both disciplines depends upon the > > strength of our foundations, our > > flexibility, and our clarity of mind. > > > > If we want well trained specialist > > hands, we must reform the educational > > system so that it adequately treats > > the root and the center. > > > > Ken > > > Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed > healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate > academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety > of professional services, including board approved online continuing > education. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2002 Report Share Posted February 20, 2002 Zev, By the way you never answered my question is PCOM wasc accredited? Alon Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Guest guest Posted February 20, 2002 Report Share Posted February 20, 2002 Working on it still, last inquiry. Z'ev On Wednesday, February 20, 2002, at 05:41 PM, ALON MARCUS wrote: > Zev, > By the way you never answered my question is PCOM wasc accredited? > Alon > > > > Chinese Herbal Medicine, a voluntary organization of licensed > healthcare practitioners, matriculated students and postgraduate > academics specializing in Chinese Herbal Medicine, provides a variety > of professional services, including board approved online continuing > education. > > > > Quote Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Join the conversation
You are posting as a guest. If you have an account, sign in now to post with your account.
Note: Your post will require moderator approval before it will be visible.