Talk:Ross University School of Medicine

Removal of neutrality tag

Let's discuss the removal of the neutrality tag. Most of the comments below are very old and I believe all have been addressed.

FAIMER listing & accreditation

FAIMER's search engine/page has not been working all week. Once it works again I'll add the reference for Ross's FAIMER/IMED listing. Also, I cannot find a website for the Dominica Medical Board tho I did find that they are listed as as "medical regulatory authority" . It appears they may not have a website. If that is the case will this be forever listed as {{Fact}}? I'll be adding more info as the days go by. Bstone 07:00, 24 October 2007 (UTC)

Adding a RFC based on the above questions. Bstone 19:26, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

If you're going to add RFCs, please fill out the RFC templates correctly, you must specify the section, reason and time parameters as shown in the RFC instructions. DMcMPO11AAUK/Talk/Contribs 14:56, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

My sincere apologies. However, instead of simply removing them how about correcting them? I admit I have done few RFCs. I believe this article would benefit from a comment. Bstone 17:30, 6 November 2007 (UTC)

References

Accreditations section has complete citations. Issues above no longer valid.

SOM category

User:Scottalter has indicated in the article history that, "all med schools are sorted by country, none directly in Category:Schools of medicine". I am confused why the category of School of Medicine even exists then. Can it be that both categories are proper? SOM being the main and country being a sub/additional category? Bstone 19:24, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

You might not be aware of it, but there is an entire hierarchical structure of categories within Wikipedia - many of which have no articles at all - only sub-categories. This is used to effectively categorize articles, and be able to browse the categories. If all of the schools of medicine in the world were directly within Category:Schools of medicine, the category would be too massive to navigate. Since each country is a (sub-)sub-category of Category:Schools of medicine, there is no need to place an article in both places. It is actually against Wikipedia guidelines to do so (see Wikipedia:Categorization and subcategories). One could find Category:Schools of medicine is found as a sub-category of Category:Universities and colleges by type and Category:Medical education. If you look in Category:Universities and colleges by type, you can see that all the different "types" of schools are categorized by country. --Scott Alter 19:42, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Cool. Thanks for teaching me. :) Bstone 19:52, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Licensing

Added info and link for CA site visit. Looking for NY one. Bstone 21:40, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

Added NY one. Article is shaping up. Bstone 21:44, 4 November 2007 (UTC)

The links are dead. Can you update? MartinezMD (talk) 19:38, 4 April 2012 (UTC)

I have searched, unsuccessfully, for a reference for both the New York and California state approval for medical licenses (under licensing section). If anyone knows of a verifiable source, please share! Rytyho usa (talk) 22:07, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

I found an article by the LA times on Caribbean medical schools and California licensing, so I summarized the key points relevant to RUSM, and added the content to this article. While I placed it in the licensing section, it may be best suited for the history section. Thoughts? Rytyho usa (talk) 03:46, 4 February 2014 (UTC)

Citation added. Issue considered closed per the cited sources included in the article.

Portsmouth link is broken

Someone fix the Portsmouth link in the top right. It takes you to the wrong Portsmouth's page. Use this link: http://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Portsmouth%2C_Dominica —Preceding unsigned comment added by 96.252.143.185 (talk) 02:46, 16 March 2008 (UTC)

Closed issue. School no longer located in Dominica.

Ommissions and Objectivity

This article reads like an admissions brochure. I tried to add some important and usual facts and data, conspicuously omitted from the article, using an outside source, but I'm limited in my knowledge of medical school schools and their educational practices, and I also don't have up-to-date statistics or accreditation evaluations, which would be very useful in filling out this article. Many lines lack citations as well or should be independently verified (i.e., separate from Ross University webpages) whenever possible. — Preceding unsigned comment added by TheMonkofSummer (talk • contribs) 16:06, 19 November 2013 (UTC)

Issue addressed: - Article now follows a more standard template for a university page, rather than mirroring an admission brochure - Up to date statistics added to all sections - Citations added throughout article which now relies >90% on external sources and when the university is the sources it is noted

Controversy

It is clear that this school has attracted some controversy. Please try to retain a neutral approach to editing. If your intent is to paint the subject in a negative light only your edits are likely to be reverted. Flat Out let's discuss it 02:52, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

It's become clear that the following user https://en.wiki.x.io/wiki/Special:Contributions/68.227.250.88 is the same person who is a dismissed former Ross student who was eventually sued by the university for setting up fake Ross websites. His writing on Wikipedia resembles too closely his writing on fake websites he created in order to harm Ross. His name is Behzad Amini and here are details of Ross's claims against him. Ross sued Behzad Amini for trademark violation and dilution, cybersquatting and breach of contract, in Federal Court. Ross claims that Amini dropped out after two years, after another student filed a grievance against him. Amini agreed to withdraw voluntarily withdraw if the grievance were withdrawn and the hearing canceled. But since he entered that agreement, Amini has repeatedly sent emails, sometimes to more than 300 recipients, including senior hospital officials in the United States, accusing the university of corruption and of defrauding the government.

Looks like this article continues to be maliciously edited by a dismissed former student who lacks a shred of objectivity. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 206.209.108.14 (talk) 12:57, 10 September 2014 (UTC)

This claim is an assumption, by no means proof, ironically the IP address is from a Devry location, which naturally makes me question the impartiality of dispute as well as some of the edits made under the same IP address. It seems pretty petty to be claiming a person involved in a legal dispute with the school is also the one making the edits, when you have no way to prove it. Moreover, if there is negative content related to the school that can be cited, it should be allowed. If Wikipedia is truly neutral, then both the good and the bad should be included. HyrumBeck (talk) 00:04, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

References

Outdated Statistics

This article relies heavily on a 2009 news article in the Tampa Bay Times that itself contained spurious claims about Ross University School of Medicine. Recent edits regarding the school's graduation rate bear resemblance to other unsubstantiated negative attacks on the school posted anonymously on message boards by a disgruntled former student. — Preceding unsigned comment added by HI302 (talk • contribs) 11:11, 30 January 2014 (UTC)

This item no longer accurate. The Tampa Bay Times article is not a source heavily used in the article and references to "unsubstantiated negative attacks" are not included in the article. Considered closed. 16 April 2021.

Name of parent organization

The sources I've seen describe the parent organization of RUSM as DeVry Inc. I have only seen one instance of it being described as DeVry Education Group, which specifically related to its US offices, which apparently, is how the organization is recognized as a medical school in the state of Florida. However, it is not clear to me that the official name of the organization has changed. Ruby Murray, could you point out which source you are referring to? Are there referencing regarding that change?

Rytyho usa (talk) 02:18, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

It's the reference at the end of the History section in the DeVry article: [1]. They only changed it two months ago, so websites on their subsidiary businesses like RUSM might not be updated yet. Ruby Murray 07:15, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Thanks! Rytyho usa (talk) 18:02, 31 January 2014 (UTC)

Notability of investigation

This content was recently deleted, being deemed insignificant for the opening paragraph. While I think it could receive more brief coverage in the lead, it still seems significant enough to be included in the article. Anybody else have thoughts on this?

"DeVry Education Group is currently being investigated by the Illinois Attorney General and the Massachusetts Attorney General for its use of student loans, its compensation practices, and accounting malpractice."

Note: Issue above closed. It has been 7 years with no findings. The insertion of such extensive detail on DeVry is obviously intended to be harmful. It has little to nothing to do with RUSM. The investigation concerns undergraduate education.HI302 (talk) 12:46, 9 October 2014 (UTC)

Note: Issue above closed. It has been 7 years with no findings relevant to this school.

As well as:

"Based on published reports by DeVry Inc., Ross University School of Medicine's attrition rate is about 10 times (27% vs. 3%) that of medical schools operating in the US. Of the students who do graduate, about half do not graduate on time. According to Ross University, 52 percent of Ross University School of Medicine students finished their program on-time."

Rytyho usa (talk) 02:24, 26 February 2014 (UTC)

HI302 (talk) 12:42, 9 October 2014 (UTC)Gainful Employment data is updated each year and should be updated on this page. Prior year data was 52% on-time completion rate. New year data is 47% on-time completion rate. I tried to clarify this with the updated figure but my edit was undone.

Statistics cited above updated per cited source, but the Dept of Education does not require them to calculate a job placement rate for program completers, the best estimate would be the match rate.

References

NPOV Flag and Dubious Tag

The article does not read like a disinterested summary of the facts, but like it was written by a disgruntled graduate or dropout who is engaging in WP:SOAPBOX and WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS. The tone needs to be made more neutral throughout, which I have begun to work on.

Please note that per WP:NPOVD, this tag should not be removed until the issue is resolved. Formerly 98 (talk) 17:41, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

You make an assumption regarding who has added content, I would gladly verify my objectivity to a moderator. Whereas, we can for a fact show that some of the edits are made by someone associated with Devry, based upon the IP address. There is Negative content about Ross University as well as Positive. Both are relevant with the proper citation. You say you need to make it more neutral, yet all you did was delete the negative content while ironically criticizing the format of this negative content, but leave positive content that is in the same format as what you deleted.

Notice, I have not deleted any content (except what had no citation), I merely added a balanced take on the citations provided. This is true neutrality. HyrumBeck (talk) 23:32, 24 November 2014 (UTC)

Hello HyrumBeck,

Please don't misunderstand me, I did not claim that anyone had a relationship to the school, only that the tone of the article was that of someone who had a problem with them. This violates our standards shown at WP:NPOV, which state:

"NPOV is a fundamental principle of Wikipedia and of other Wikimedia projects. It is also one of Wikipedia's three core content policies.... A neutral point of view neither sympathizes with nor disparages its subject (or what reliable sources say about the subject), although this must sometimes be balanced against clarity. Present opinions and conflicting findings in a disinterested tone. Do not editorialize."

Furthermore, per WP:RIGHTGREATWRONGS: "Some editors come to Wikipedia with the goal of raising the visibility or credibility of a specific viewpoint. It may be a hypothesis which they feel has been unduly dismissed or rejected by the scientific community; it may be alternate or revisionist interpretation of a historical event or personage; it may be additions to an article about an organization to portray it in a positive or negative light. The essential problem is that these goals conflict with Wikipedia's mission. Wikipedia is not a venue to Right Great Wrongs, to promote ideas or beliefs which have been ignored or marginalized in the Real World, or to be an adjunct web presence for an organization"

Specifically I would like to discuss the following passages:

• "An article in Bloomberg News claims that Ross University School of Medicine's attrition rate is about 9 times (27% vs. 3%) that of medical schools operating in the US.[6] " - There are several problems here.

• Its not correctly representing the information in the source. According to the Bloomberg article, the dropout rate is 20-27%. The highest number in the range has been cherrypicked. According to WP:CHERRYPICK, "The main information from a source, insofar as stated in Wikipedia, must be accompanied by any contradictory and qualifying information from the same source.... A source must be fairly represented for the purpose of the article and that includes contradictory and qualifying information>"
• The addition of the phrase "9x higher than other schools" is clearly intended to emphasize that this number is somehow too high. But that comparison is not made in the source document. So its there to illustrate an opinion on the part of the editor, not a quote from a reliable source. That is forbidden by WP:OR

9x is deleted, 20 -27% corrected, selection fixed.HyrumBeck (talk) 23:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

• "However, this attrition rate may be much higher according to the Federal Student Aid Shopping Sheet provided to all Ross University students, which states the graduation rate is only 47%.[7] Of the students who do graduate, about half do not graduate on time.[8]."

• Dubious TagThis is original research (its not in any of the sources that "among those who do graduate, about half do not graduate in time" and factually incorrect. As I noted in the edit summary where I removed this, the 47% graduation rate is the rate of students who graduate on time. The citation for the 47% graduation rate in the article is the School's Federal AID Shopping Sheet. The instructions for filling these sheets out is here, and clearly states that for the purpose of the form, the graduation rate is "The percentage of students who graduate from an institution. This shows students who began their studies as first-time, full-time degree- or certificate-seeking students and completed their degree or certificate within 150 percent of 'normal time.'" The remark that this should be multiplied by 0.5 to account for those who graduate but do not do so on time is simply incorrect and is WP:OR.

There are two sources providing two different pieces of information. A graduate rate of 47% and an on-time completion rate of 47%. Or we can say 53% do not complete the program on time, or we can say of the 47% who graduate, 47% of them do so on-time. It seemed clearer though to say "approximately half" than stating 47% of 47%. This seems not only clearer, but it is accurate, 47/53, and used previously in the article. Feel free to add the qualifiers, but graduation rate is not the same as just those who graduate on time IE "complete their degree" as you pointed out. HyrumBeck (talk) 23:36, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

• "The New York Times reported that Ross is one of a handful of Caribbean medical schools that "have qualified for federal financial aid programs by demonstrating that their standards are comparable to those in the United States". However, the same article noted that quality between these school was "all over the map" and subsequently, first time pass rates on the United States Medical Licensing Exam Step 1 ranged between 19 to 84 percent."

• The latter half of this statement is written as if to "debunk" the first half, but logically does not follow. If the NYTimes has stated that the rates of passing the test are similar to those in the U.S., a general statement about othe r schools in the Caribbean does not "debunk" that statement. It is giving a range, but the precise value of test passing for Ross is the same as in the U.S., so how is the rate for OTHER Caribbean schools a reflection on Ross.

Honestly, I do not understand the issue here, qualifying for student loans because of "standards" is not the same pass rates for the USMLE Step exams, which is merely a minimal measure required by an outside party. The quote is referring to standards, not STEP scores. Not to mention having standards and quality education are two very different subjects. Bullet points could of just as easily been provided summarizing the article and the same content would be there.HyrumBeck (talk) 21:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

I don't want to make this too drawn out, so please respond to these passages, then we can go on to the others. If we cannot agree, we can always take this to the NPOV board. Given your strong opinions and the fact that you are very close to meeting the definition of a WP:SPA,

Am I a single purpose account? No, so I do not see the relevance to bringing it up. Does this somehow discount my edits? No, so once again, there is no reason to bring it up.

I suspect that might be the faster and more efficient path anyway. Formerly 98 (talk) 01:32, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

"Fixed" the issues, instead of just deleting them. However, a section titled "Caribbean schools" should allow for content related to this subject, which is inherently general, it doesn't "debunk" the previous statements, it merely provides a summary of the cited article relevant to the content. Once again, if there is negative content it has the same value as positive content, a truly neutral article would contain both even if one debunks the other. I have deleted it and trust you can add the content in an order and format you find to be neutral. HyrumBeck (talk) 21:58, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

@HyrumBeck: @174.26.10.105: please engage here to discuss. The page has been edited since I noted my concerns, but the edits largely ignore my comments and I have not heard from you. Formerly 98 (talk) 21:22, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

The edits directly address your objections. I have simplified almost every stated concern in neutral, factual statements related to the cited content contains. Especially when the source comes from Ross University itself.

Comment - The article still looks very much like a it has been written by someone with a grievance against this institution. There is disproportionate attention to, and emphasis on, apparent controversies surrounding the institution, particularly the detail in the article lede. At the moment, this makes the article look untrustworthy to an unbiased person familiar with the usual structure and content of Wikipedia articles on educational institutions. Note: I had never heard of this institution until I came across the article yesterday and I have no bias about it in one way or the other. I do have knowledge of higher education institutions in general and of the usual approach to describing them within Wikipedia.

At the moment, I think tagging the article as problematic is quite appropriate. I suggest that editors work out on this talk page how to make it more neutral and encyclopedic in structure and tone. Metamagician3000 (talk) 23:40, 25 November 2014 (UTC)

Some institutions have a disproportionate amount of controversy surround them, however this does not suggest the content be changed. Specific examples would be helpful.

Agree still all kinds of problems here None of the following belongs in the lede:

"The dean of the school is Joseph Flaherty, MD, who was appointed in 2011. Flaherty was previously the dean of the University of Illinois College of Medicine, the largest medical school in the United States.[3] Dr. Richard Carmona, former Surgeon General of the United States, is a member of the Ross Board of Trustees.[4]

The New York Times reported that Ross is one of a handful of Caribbean medical schools that "have qualified for federal financial aid programs by demonstrating that their standards are comparable to those in the United States". Yet, "only 53 percent of United States Citizens... were placed through the National Resident Matching Program.[5]

• This passage was edited prior to this comment.HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Bloomberg News published an article indicating Ross University School of Medicine's stated rate of attrition in 2008 was 20-27% compared to 3% that of medical schools operating in the US.[6] The current attrition rate is currently higher according to the Federal Student Aid Shopping Sheet provided to all Ross University students, which shows a graduation rate of 47%.[7] Of the students who do graduate, approximately half do not graduate within a 48 month time-frame. Ross University's program is designed to be completed within 48 months.[8][dubious – discuss]"

• This passage was also edited prior to this comment.HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

This is not St. Peter's Gate, where we sit in judgement on this company, balancing the good and the bad. We simply neutrally describe it. These details of acheivements, connections, and scandals need to be toned down and noted in the text, but not in a way that overstates their importance.

• The famous dean and the famous member of the board of trustees are promotional figureheads. Ok to note briefly in the body, doesn't belong in the lede.
• The details of the graduation rate, the percent passing the exam, and the percent getting U.S. residencies belong in the body, not in the lede.

• First we are not here to sit in judgment. These are students who could not get into med school in the U.S. Of course the perecentage of them who succeed in getting U.S positions will be lower than at U.S. schools that attract better students, whether the attrition occurs as a dropout rate, or as a failure to get a residency after graduation. Also, there are lots of jobs for M.D.s that do not require a residency or that one practice medicine. Some people look at the odds and want to take the chance, just like some people go to Hollywood and try to be actors knowing the odds are terrible. The stats are out there and no one is being decieved.

• "Sit in judgment", the term judgment has been used several time along with St. Peter's gates without any specific examples, please define which statements are judgmental and feel free to edit them without deleting the content.
• I am not sure how you can draw the conclusion that Ross Students are students who could not get into a US school, this is a sweeping generalization and simply not true. Comments such as this suggest a bias toward the students of the school. The school is a different pathway for different students.
• Attrition rate refers to who started and then do not finish, by definition. A third party organization measures residency success rates of the student as currently cited in the article.
• There are not a lot of jobs for M.D.s that do not require residency and I would appreciate a source. The mission of Ross university is "to prepare highly dedicated students to become effective, successful physicians". This is very specific. Not to mention, when the stat includes a qualifier such as out of 1100 people who applied for the match, these are people who specifically attempted to achieve residency
• Yes the stats are out there, and like many articles Wikipedia provides a resource for people to find them in a concise, consolidated manner. Particularly when they are relevant to the mission of the institution.HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

• Second there are not enough meaningful stats to compare these numbers with other schools

• I had stats comparing all Caribbean Schools and you stated that these stats sounded like they were trying to debunk a previous statement. However they provide the comparison that you are asking for now. There are also attrition rates that are compared to US schools. Can you provide specific example of what you would like to see compared and to which other institutions? HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

• Third, even if not for the two items above, we don't sit in judgement because we are an encyclopedia, not a college guide or investigational journalists.

• What specific judgments are being made? The facts are pure. One draws their own conclusion from them and makes their own judgment. Yet the facts are relevant because they describe the institution and its history. Just like there are editorials an opinion pieces included, all these details make up the sum of the article. Many university pages include statistics without comparison as well as controversial information such as Duke University regarding their lacrosse players and UC Davis pepper spray incident. There are many organizations that inherently take on a negative tone when being described because the facts that describe them are negative.HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

The entire article has problems, and the limited edits made so far only scratch the surface of the overall tone of the article, which is completely outside of the norms and rules of Wikipedia. . Formerly 98 (talk) 01:57, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

Please address the specific norms and rules of Wikipedia, so they may be changed in accordance to those standards. Or might I suggest you edit the content to fit these norms and rule instead of simply deleting content.HyrumBeck (talk) 05:39, 26 November 2014 (UTC)

References

Removed information

Information posted to Wikipedia needs to be matched with a citation to a source that is not published by the subject of the article. I just removed a little which does not meet this. Blue Rasberry (talk) 17:15, 11 August 2015 (UTC)

I removed more. Blue Rasberry (talk) 13:58, 18 September 2015 (UTC)

Reverse Edits

This page was recently updated to be factual information about the university. However, on October 30th, it was reversed to be nothing more than slander against the school. Every other caribbean school has a legitimate wiki page that provides actual information. The Ross page is the only one that lists nothing but opinions of outside organizations. This needs to be reversed immediately. The page was perfect just days ago. — Preceding unsigned comment added by 209.59.105.46 (talk) 03:39, 31 October 2015 (UTC)

Michael R. Williams

This individual is listed under alumni, and he has a Wikipedia page. Nowhere on that page is an affiliation with this institution mentioned. What gives? Also, Dr. Williams is a D.O., which makes me think about what degree Ross confers(Williams' medical degree is from North Texas State). That's pretty standard info for an article on any academic institution, but if it's in the article, I missed it.Toyokuni3 (talk) 19:31, 18 October 2018 (UTC)

The article for Dr. Williams addressed this comment 3 years ago. This individual completed both a D.O. and an M.D. as listed in his biography, several news articles and the UNTHSC website. I updated some broken links in the article to keep it fresh. Issue considered closed and no longer disputed.

Reverted information deleted by 2602:304:b1b2:5460:ed43:b34e:bda1:e278

I reverted a deletion by 2602:304:b1b2:5460:ed43:b34e:bda1:e278 about a Ross University School of Medicine alumnus who was also a perpetrator in a mass killing. I did not create the initial entry, but I believe we settled a similar argument with Bryant & Stratton College (BSC) and US domestic terrorist Timothy McVeigh. The argument in both cases was that including infamous people, would be glorifying terror. McVeigh was still included in the list of former BSC students. CollegeMeltdown (talk) 00:14, 4 July 2019 (UTC)CollegeMeltdown (talk) 00:15, 4 July 2019 (UTC)

I reverted the deletion again by 2602:304:b1b2:5460:74af:531c:2f3a:b754 and asked them to respond on this page. CollegeMeltdown (talk) 10:57, 4 July 2019 (UTC)