Should TCM students/practitioners try to become fluent in Chinese?

[Guest guest]

All,

 

Last night I had the opportunity to talk to Craig Mitchell about how

SIOM can teach Chinese as an integral part of their curriculum. First

of all, they are very selective about who they accept (minimum 3 years

college with a 3.0 GPA and biology, chemistry, anatomy, physiology,

and some Chinese language). Secondly, they have very small classes

(7-12 students per class). So the student:teacher ratio is very low.

This means lots of personal attention. Third, they use a

problem-solving model of education which closely ties didactic work

with clinic experience with Chinese language. For instance, students

who are studying gynecology study gynecology materials in their

Chinese language class, etc. Due to their innovative educational

model, they are able to teach BOTH herbs and formulas in 6 credit

hours as opposed to many schools taking 9 credit hours apiece (for a

total of 18 credit hours). This means that they do not have to

sacrifice anything to incorporate Chinese into their curriculum as a

requirement.

 

Other info gleaned from Craig: SIOM has one of the lowest tuitions,

all their teachers have to have at least 10 years experience, their

students spend 25-30 hours outside class each week on homework, their

teachers are not paid any more than other schools and less than some,

and visiting educators from all around the world consistently say that

their 3rd year students have the knowledge and abilities of

practitioners who have been out of school and in full-time practice

for a couple of years. (This has also been my experience of their

graduates.)

 

Even discounting that Craig is SIOM faculty and, therefore, a biased

reporter, this suggests that " where there's a will, there's a way. "

BTW, Craig has previously taught at PCOM/NY, Touro, Mercy College, and

the Syosset, LI school, and he sounded extremely happy to be a part of

SIOM. He was obviously very impressed by the SIOM methodology and

outcomes.

 

Bob

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws <

pemachophel2001> " <pemachophel2001> wrote:

Due to their innovative educational

> model, they are able to teach BOTH herbs and formulas in 6 credit

> hours as opposed to many schools taking 9 credit hours apiece (for a

> total of 18 credit hours). This means that they do not have to

> sacrifice anything to incorporate Chinese into their curriculum as a

> requirement.

 

Bob

 

Very interesting. the current model of education is definitely inefficient.

but I

wonder if the one you describe could sustain a larger sized class. More

students asking questions demands more time. My herbs class this semester

is 35 students in one section, 25 in another. I know SIOM also require some

chinese as a prereq. do you know what level of ability in chinese they shoot

for? Translation level skills?

 

todd

[Guest guest]

At 7:26 AM +0000 1/29/03, < wrote:

> , " Bob Flaws <

>pemachophel2001> " <pemachophel2001> wrote:

>Due to their innovative educational

>> model, they are able to teach BOTH herbs and formulas in 6 credit

>> hours as opposed to many schools taking 9 credit hours apiece (for a

>> total of 18 credit hours). This means that they do not have to

>> sacrifice anything to incorporate Chinese into their curriculum as a

>> requirement.

>

>Bob

>

>Very interesting. the current model of education is definitely

>inefficient. but I

>wonder if the one you describe could sustain a larger sized class. More

>students asking questions demands more time. My herbs class this semester

>is 35 students in one section, 25 in another. I know SIOM also require some

>chinese as a prereq. do you know what level of ability in chinese they shoot

>for? Translation level skills?

-------

 

I wonder if the SIOM students have the same exposure to the broad

range of herbs and formulas the students get in the more standard

programs. If they are problem solving, then their studies of the

herbs and formula may be more focused and efficient, but within a

smaller range of possibilities. Not that I'm arguing against that

approach, but it does also rely on a good deal more self motivated

study than many students demonstrate. Perhaps SIOM is able to do what

it does because because it is highly selective, and the students who

choose to go there are a special self-selecting and very small

subgroup.

 

So could the SIOM model be successfully applied at colleges that

accept students with less college background, and lower gpa's? Could

you successfully apply such a program to the cohort of students that

is currently enrolled in CM programs around the US?

 

To say nothing about the profit motive of the colleges....

 

Rory

--

[Guest guest]

Very interesting. the current model of education is definitely inefficient. but I wonder if the one you describe could sustain a larger sized class. More students asking questions demands more time. My herbs class this semester is 35 students in one section, 25 in another. I know SIOM also require some chinese as a prereq. do you know what level of ability in chinese they shoot for? Translation level skills?>>>>Their model is base on systems model of some regular medical schools. It is a great model to study medicine with or without Chinese

Alon

[Guest guest]

Todd & Rory,

 

Craig was quite definite that he felt this model was NOT reproducible

at other schools who A) were less selective of their students and

B)had larger class size. When asked about this, he specifically did

not think that larger schools could do the same thing. Nor was I

suggesting that this was a model that is reproducible by the

larger, established schools. I said, " Where's there's a will, there's

a way. " In other words, if you want to do this, it can be done.

However, it's going to look quite different from what most schools are

doing. My problem with the majority of American CM schools goes way

beyond whether they teach Chinese or not, although the fact that they

cannot/do not is, IMO, intimately linked to those other problems.

 

Bob

 

, Rory Kerr <rorykerr@w...>

wrote:

> At 7:26 AM +0000 1/29/03, <@i...> wrote:

> > , " Bob Flaws <

> >pemachophel2001> " <pemachophel2001> wrote:

> >Due to their innovative educational

> >> model, they are able to teach BOTH herbs and formulas in 6

credit

> >> hours as opposed to many schools taking 9 credit hours apiece

(for a

> >> total of 18 credit hours). This means that they do not have to

> >> sacrifice anything to incorporate Chinese into their curriculum

as a

> >> requirement.

> >

> >Bob

> >

> >Very interesting. the current model of education is definitely

> >inefficient. but I

> >wonder if the one you describe could sustain a larger sized class.

More

> >students asking questions demands more time. My herbs class this

semester

> >is 35 students in one section, 25 in another. I know SIOM also

require some

> >chinese as a prereq. do you know what level of ability in chinese

they shoot

> >for? Translation level skills?

> -------

>

> I wonder if the SIOM students have the same exposure to the broad

> range of herbs and formulas the students get in the more standard

> programs. If they are problem solving, then their studies of the

> herbs and formula may be more focused and efficient, but within a

> smaller range of possibilities. Not that I'm arguing against that

> approach, but it does also rely on a good deal more self motivated

> study than many students demonstrate. Perhaps SIOM is able to do

what

> it does because because it is highly selective, and the students who

> choose to go there are a special self-selecting and very small

> subgroup.

>

> So could the SIOM model be successfully applied at colleges that

> accept students with less college background, and lower gpa's? Could

> you successfully apply such a program to the cohort of students that

> is currently enrolled in CM programs around the US?

>

> To say nothing about the profit motive of the colleges....

>

> Rory

> --

[Guest guest]

> > To say nothing about the profit motive of the colleges....

> >

> > Rory

> > --

 

I am most surprised that SIOM can pay its bills with low tuition and small

classes. they are either managed impeccably or the principles have other

source of income and thus do not need the school to make a profit. either

way, I also have heard great things about the grads of SIOM?

 

[Guest guest]

, "

<@i...> "

> I am most surprised that SIOM can pay its bills with low tuition

and small

> classes. they are either managed impeccably or the principles have

other

> source of income and thus do not need the school to make a profit.

either

> way, I also have heard great things about the grads of SIOM?

>

 

 

I met with the admissions committee at SIOM last year and asked them

about their profitability. Dan didn't seem to like the question, but

indicated that their business plan is set up to break even, or even

profit with as few as 7(?) students. (I don't remember the exact

number, but it was no higher than 7. If you've ever visited

the " campus " you would understand where some of the cutbacks are

realized.

 

Regarding great things about their grads: I was very impressed by

their first year classes. For instance, they have a native English

speaking TCM theory instructor (co-founder Paul Karsten)who does a

really good job getting across concepts. I visited second semester

and they were already discussing in class the specifics of patient

cases they witnessed in the clinic, including analyzing the treatment

protocol. The small number of students really helps create an

efficient scenario for that type of discourse. The down-side, quite

openly admitted by Dan and Paul, is that the balance of personalities

becomes critical. Any clashes and the whole continuity can be

upset. I asked a number of frank questions in my interview, the

finance question mentioned above for example. They expressed a

concern that my inquisitiveness might disrupt their Socratic teaching

method, and proceeded to give me the thumbs down on admissions. (I

now plague my instructors at OCOM with questions - but good ones -

honest...)

 

In a nutshell, from what I saw of their first year, SIOM is a great

school, but it's definitely not for everyone.

 

As a sidenote, Dan indicated that they would never offer the Doctoral

program because their graduates already practice at a high enough

level. He considered it a waste of time and money.

[Guest guest]

 

 

I asked Craig the same questions. His answer was that 1) they have a

very lean and stram-lined administration, and 2) their clinic is very

successful and a big money-maker.

 

Bob

 

, " <@i...> "

<@i...> wrote:

>

> > > To say nothing about the profit motive of the colleges....

> > >

> > > Rory

> > > --

>

> I am most surprised that SIOM can pay its bills with low tuition and

small

> classes. they are either managed impeccably or the principles have

other

> source of income and thus do not need the school to make a profit.

either

> way, I also have heard great things about the grads of SIOM?

>

 

[Guest guest]

At 5:14 PM +0000 1/29/03, Bob Flaws <pemachophel2001 wrote:

>My problem with the majority of American CM schools goes way

>beyond whether they teach Chinese or not, although the fact that they

>cannot/do not is, IMO, intimately linked to those other problems.

--

 

sounds interesting...care to share?

 

Rory

--

[Guest guest]

, " Bob Flaws <

pemachophel2001> " <pemachophel2001> wrote:

>

>

> I asked Craig the same questions. His answer was that 1) they have a

> very lean and stram-lined administration, and 2) their clinic is very

> successful and a big money-maker.

>

> Bob

 

Bob

 

Its interesting that this model is exactly the opposite of the university

hospital

based model I know you also like such as Mercy college. I certainly can

imaginthat with only a handful of students, one needs minimal support

personnel, which is the one of the largest school expenses. I wonder if there

is room to duplicate the SIOM model here in CA.

 

todd

[Guest guest]

 

 

The single most important issue for me is the quality of the graduates

a program turns out. Since the quality of the students, teachers, and

clinical experience (1500 hours) of SIOM seems to be a cut above, I

like their model. I liked Mercy's model since it seemed to be

attempting to do something similar, i.e., upgrade education via more

stringent academic standards for both students and teachers and

better clinical experience in a hospital setting. It would be

interesting to somehow compare the graduates of these two programs.

 

Bob

 

 

, " <@i...> "

<@i...> wrote:

> , " Bob Flaws <

> pemachophel2001> " <pemachophel2001> wrote:

> >

> >

> > I asked Craig the same questions. His answer was that 1) they have

a

> > very lean and stram-lined administration, and 2) their clinic is

very

> > successful and a big money-maker.

> >

> > Bob

>

> Bob

>

> Its interesting that this model is exactly the opposite of the

university hospital

> based model I know you also like such as Mercy college. I certainly

can

> imaginthat with only a handful of students, one needs minimal

support

> personnel, which is the one of the largest school expenses. I

wonder if there

> is room to duplicate the SIOM model here in CA.

>

> todd