|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/10/2008
Posts: 264
|
THERE IS NO USE talking about accreditation in my dead topic
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008
Posts: 1,728
Location: Wilfrid Laurier University
|
LeaF wrote:I think in many ways discrimination is inadvertently created by of the grossly ineffective system (or lack thereof) of accreditation we have in this country. Yes, in some instances the standards of training are different. In some instances, they are more rigorous than our own (lets not get too caught up in ethnocentric notions of superiority).
I agree that sometimes the quality of foreign qualifications warrant consideration, but licensing procedures are unnecessarily difficult. It seems like a travesty to me that an experienced professional's entire academic and occupation life is discarded. There should be institutional mechanisms in place to allow them to upgrade their valuable skills without having to start from the very beginning, which is often too expensive for recent immigrants hence all the highly intelligent taxi drivers in Toronto. This is further pronounced in areas such as medicine, where we have a striking need for doctors, particularly in rural jurisdictions.
I don't see how our current procedures for recognizing (even in part) foreign qualifications can be seen as anything but an utter embarrassment.
There is no way to ensure that a professional is properly qualified other than to have them go through the same process that Canadian doctors go through. I think you would be singing a different tune if some malpractice stories started popping up...
-Stringer
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
Stringer wrote:LeaF wrote:I think in many ways discrimination is inadvertently created by of the grossly ineffective system (or lack thereof) of accreditation we have in this country. Yes, in some instances the standards of training are different. In some instances, they are more rigorous than our own (lets not get too caught up in ethnocentric notions of superiority).
I agree that sometimes the quality of foreign qualifications warrant consideration, but licensing procedures are unnecessarily difficult. It seems like a travesty to me that an experienced professional's entire academic and occupation life is discarded. There should be institutional mechanisms in place to allow them to upgrade their valuable skills without having to start from the very beginning, which is often too expensive for recent immigrants hence all the highly intelligent taxi drivers in Toronto. This is further pronounced in areas such as medicine, where we have a striking need for doctors, particularly in rural jurisdictions.
I don't see how our current procedures for recognizing (even in part) foreign qualifications can be seen as anything but an utter embarrassment.
There is no way to ensure that a professional is properly qualified other than to have them go through the same process that Canadian doctors go through. I think you would be singing a different tune if some malpractice stories started popping up... what about a briefer program that doctors from other countries would go through (perhaps a year or less, and with government subsidies to take up part of the cost), at the end of which they'd determine whether their home country qualified them well enough? that way if they met the standards, they could begin their practice again and if not, then they'd need to go back for more schooling. the fact is that the cma and oma make it deliberately difficult for any foreign accredited professionals to work here because they want dominance over this, and governments in the past have met difficulty in changing standards to reintegrate foreign professionals from the objections of these groups. if they can prove their knowledge and qualification, why are we objecting to their integration, particularly when it's something we have a serious shortage of?
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/9/2008
Posts: 36
Location: Toronto,Ontario, Canada
|
I'm not entirely sure of that Stringer. With MDs, for example, I don't see the use in having them undertake four-years of medical school (plus potentially an entire undergraduate education). I would expect the rudimentary clinical sciences taught during the early years of Med School to be well understood by foreign trained doctors upon arrival. I could see, in certain circumstance, the benefit of them studying at a Canadian institution during their final two years, in order to acclimatize to Canadian conventions. If they are able to aptly get through this period, followed by an internship, I would be more than satisfied. The real challenge with this becoming a reality has very little to do with the quality of their qualifications, but rather with the strong lobby of professional organizations. It is against the interests of the Canadian Medical Association, for instance, to recognize foreign qualitifications, because such professionals may saturate the market. As an alternative, we live in a period where these services are grossly undersupplied (again, this is felt primarily in rural Canada) Edit: Redrose27 took the words straight out of my head 
H.B.A. (History) University of Toronto '08 M.A. (History) York University '09
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008
Posts: 1,728
Location: Wilfrid Laurier University
|
Redrose27 wrote:Stringer wrote:LeaF wrote:I think in many ways discrimination is inadvertently created by of the grossly ineffective system (or lack thereof) of accreditation we have in this country. Yes, in some instances the standards of training are different. In some instances, they are more rigorous than our own (lets not get too caught up in ethnocentric notions of superiority).
I agree that sometimes the quality of foreign qualifications warrant consideration, but licensing procedures are unnecessarily difficult. It seems like a travesty to me that an experienced professional's entire academic and occupation life is discarded. There should be institutional mechanisms in place to allow them to upgrade their valuable skills without having to start from the very beginning, which is often too expensive for recent immigrants hence all the highly intelligent taxi drivers in Toronto. This is further pronounced in areas such as medicine, where we have a striking need for doctors, particularly in rural jurisdictions.
I don't see how our current procedures for recognizing (even in part) foreign qualifications can be seen as anything but an utter embarrassment.
There is no way to ensure that a professional is properly qualified other than to have them go through the same process that Canadian doctors go through. I think you would be singing a different tune if some malpractice stories started popping up... what about a briefer program that doctors from other countries would go through (perhaps a year or less, and with government subsidies to take up part of the cost), at the end of which they'd determine whether their home country qualified them well enough? that way if they met the standards, they could begin their practice again and if not, then they'd need to go back for more schooling. the fact is that the cma and oma make it deliberately difficult for any foreign accredited professionals to work here because they want dominance over this, and governments in the past have met difficulty in changing standards to reintegrate foreign professionals from the objections of these groups. if they can prove their knowledge and qualification, why are we objecting to their integration, particularly when it's something we have a serious shortage of? The problem is it is next to impossible to verify what a foreign doctors knows if they didn't attend an accredited medical school.
-Stringer
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/9/2008
Posts: 36
Location: Toronto,Ontario, Canada
|
I think you're exaggerating the difficulty.
Comphrensive examinations can be administered with ease, followed by a brief period of study at a Canadian University (where it will become very clear what level of knowledge and experience they have). I think, in many instances, these much simplier and faster evaluating techniques can be used to byypass 4+ additional years of university education.
Such processess are already used on lawyers who are trained in the UK and Australia. I don't see why similar approaches cannot be taken elsewhere.
H.B.A. (History) University of Toronto '08
M.A. (History) York University '09
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
which is why there could be an integration program and then a test. I'm not very familiar with how canadian doctors get their accreditation but i'm assuming there'd be some sort of testing that would measure their knowledge at the end of the program (probably in addition to their experience and work while in medical school and teacher referrals?? i don't know). If a foreign doctor could be tested under those same guidelines that would show how well prepared they are
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/5/2008
Posts: 1,728
Location: Wilfrid Laurier University
|
LeaF wrote:I think you're exaggerating the difficulty.
Comphrensive examinations can be administered with ease, followed by a brief period of study at a Canadian University (where it will become very clear what level of knowledge and experience they have). I think, in many instances, these much simplier and faster evaluating techniques can be used to byypass 4+ additional years of university education.
Such processess are already used on lawyers who are trained in the UK and Australia. I don't see why similar approaches cannot be taken elsewhere. There are far fewer consequences to hiring an unqualified lawyer than there is in hiring an unqualified doctor. I'm not against making a quicker path for immigrant doctors to get licensed, but it needs to be very thorough.
-Stringer
|
|
Rank: Student Body President
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/4/2008
Posts: 1,210
|
LeaF wrote:I think you're exaggerating the difficulty.
Comphrensive examinations can be administered with ease, followed by a brief period of study at a Canadian University (where it will become very clear what level of knowledge and experience they have). I think, in many instances, these much simplier and faster evaluating techniques can be used to byypass 4+ additional years of university education.
Such processess are already used on lawyers who are trained in the UK and Australia. I don't see why similar approaches cannot be taken elsewhere. exactly
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/9/2008
Posts: 36
Location: Toronto,Ontario, Canada
|
I think we have finally reached a point of agreement Stringer. No doubt accreditation processes should be thorough, but I think this can still be achieved with much much more efficient procedures than are currently in place.
H.B.A. (History) University of Toronto '08
M.A. (History) York University '09
|
|
Rank: Frosh
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/25/2008
Posts: 9
Location: Lower Mainland, British Columbia
|
Can anyone explain why student loans are not ideal?
I would love to receive student loans and save up my money instead in interest but unfortunately I'm not in any financial need.
If I am in that situation though, I'm not going to sacrifice possibly the best years of my adult life working at a low-paying job to save up for something that in three or four years, I probably would have no interest in. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that people are in debt from student loans because they have spending (and saving) issues, not because student loans are EVIL EVIL EVIL.
|
|
Rank: Senior Student
Groups: Member
Joined: 3/24/2008
Posts: 81
Location: ON
|
lukasm wrote:Can anyone explain why student loans are not ideal?
I would love to receive student loans and save up my money instead in interest but unfortunately I'm not in any financial need.
If I am in that situation though, I'm not going to sacrifice possibly the best years of my adult life working at a low-paying job to save up for something that in three or four years, I probably would have no interest in. I'm going to go out on a limb here and guess that people are in debt from student loans because they have spending (and saving) issues, not because student loans are EVIL EVIL EVIL. Exactly. While those of you who think borrowing for post-secondary education are busy proselytizing, some of the rest of us, who at age 18 do not have $70,000 sitting in the bank, are thinking you should give your heads a shake. Your views are as extreme as the people on the other end of the spectrum who spend madly on everything because they can't possibly deny themselves every little thing their hearts desire. The people in the middle (like me) have no intention of taking years off of school to save save save so we can pay cash for our education because we realize that the time lost has its own cost. I've worked as a lifeguard/swim instructor for the last two years and saved $12000 myself. My parents have about $18000 saved specifically for my education and I (backed by them) will without reservation borrow the rest.
|
|
