We want your opinion, vet students!

Editor's note: The New York State Veterinary Medical Society is recommending to the AVMA Executive Board that the AVMA no longer accredit foreign veterinary schools. Attached below is the proposed resolution. What are your thoughts on this? Please comment below on why or why not you agree with the resolution. Your SAVMA Executive Board wants to share the voice of the students with the AVMA Executive Board.

Resolution 1—Winter 2014 Regular Winter Session

Submitted by New York State Veterinary Medical Society

THE AVMA WILL NO LONGER ACCREDIT FOREIGN VETERINARY SCHOOLS, DEFINED AS THOSE SCHOOLS LOCATED OUTSIDE THE UNITED STATES AND CANADA

Resolved, that the House of Delegates recommend to the Executive Board that the American Veterinary Medical Association (AVMA) will-

1.    Initiate steps to cease the accreditation of foreign veterinary schools by the AVMA Council on Education (COE). Foreign veterinary schools are defined as those schools that operate outside the United States and Canada.
2.    Permit foreign veterinary schools currently accredited by the COE to maintain their accreditation until such time as that accreditation expires. Upon expiration, there will not be an opportunity for said schools to be re-accredited unless said school meets the criteria set forth in paragraph 3 below.
3.    Permit those students currently enrolled in a foreign AVMA COE-accredited program to complete their education and upon graduation, be considered graduates of an AVMA COE-accredited program. For those schools whose COE-accreditation expires prior to the graduation of their freshman class, a one-time accreditation extension will be granted until the time of graduation of that freshman class.

Statement about the Resolution

The accreditation of veterinary schools is a resource intensive process. It requires a great deal of effort from AVMA members and staff as well as being logistically challenging. This is particularly true when accrediting a veterinary school in a foreign country, where English may not be the native language. These concerns are exemplified in the reports by the AVMA’s Task Force on Accreditation of Foreign Veterinary Schools and the recent Staff Report to the Senior Department Official on Recognition of Compliance Issues by the U.S. Department of Education.

The focus of the Council on Education should be to continually improve the quality of the graduates, programs, and institutions of Domestic and Canadian veterinary Colleges. This is best accomplished by adhering to the Standards of Accreditation and ceasing to accredit foreign veterinary schools.

In July 2011, the AVMA House of Delegates passed a resolution for a task force to evaluate the accreditation of foreign veterinary schools. The report of the Task Force on Foreign Veterinary School Accreditation was made available in March of 2013.

The task force listed a number of concerns in the conclusion of its report. Chief among those concerns is the following:
a.    Recognition as a competent accrediting body of veterinary schools by the USDE and CHEA requires the COE to apply accreditation standards consistently across schools. The diversity among countries suggests that the COE encounters an ever wider programmatic variety in schools and ever greater complexity of applying a common set of standards to them. Lack of familiarity with the intricacies of the accreditation process can contribute to individual perceptions of uneven application of accreditation standards, and such misunderstanding can be exacerbated by the necessary confidentiality adhered to by the COE.
b.    The Task Force believes that the COE should clarify the criteria for determining whether a veterinary school is part of a larger institution of higher learning asrequired by Standard 1 or is a free-standing institution and thus not eligible for
accreditation c.    Because the Task Force finds it is unclear how clinical education and outcomes
assessment standards are met across diverse institutions, the Task Force believes it is unclear how the COE–accredited foreign veterinary schools consistently matriculate graduates that are equal to US entry-level veterinarians.
d.    Aside from the overall accreditation process, objective data to measure competency of graduates of accredited foreign and domestic programs are lacking.
e.    The Task Force sees a contradiction in the role of the NAVLE in accreditation. Although the NAVLE is not required for accreditation, there is a pass-fail threshold for those schools whose graduating seniors generally take the NAVLE. The Task Force believes that this use of the NAVLE creates an inconsistency that the COE should address.
f.    The NAVLE cannot provide comparative data across all COE-accredited veterinary schools because it is not a requirement for accreditation. With the exception of Ross University and St. George’s University, most graduates from accredited foreign schools do not take the NAVLE because they are not pursuing licensure in the United States or Canada. However, for schools whose graduating senior students normally take the NAVLE, the COE expects a pass rate of 80% or more.

In December of 2012, the U.S. Department of Education met to evaluate a Petition for Continued Recognition. The Department of Education recommended to continue the AVMA’s recognition as the accrediting body for only the next 12 months, as opposed to the typical five years. The AVMA is expected to come into compliance within 12 months of that report’s issuance. Quoting from the report: “It does not appear that the agency (Council on Education) meets the following sections of the Secretary’s Criteria for Recognition.” It appears obvious that if the USDE has questioned our methods of accreditation for domestic schools, we ourselves must question our criteria for the even more difficult task of effectively accrediting the ever- growing number of foreign veterinary schools.

Winner (part 2), Foot in Mouth Disease
Brittni East, Texas A&M

The culpritThe story I am about to divulge is the story of how a dog can look cute one second, and destroy a date and cost you your dignity in all of about half a second. The story begins like this: I decided to invite this guy over that I had liked for a long time for dinner, he thought my dog was cute so of course when I told him Moose would be there he was in. We had just finished dinner, when Moose ruined my life (Okay that might be a little drastic but it was close). David* and I had just finished dinner and were chatting aimlessly about school and projects etc, when Moose suddenly walks out of the bathroom and straight to David. This is when I notice that there is a string hanging from his mouth. Yes, it is exactly what you are hoping it’s not. David, being the unaware and completely oblivious male that he is, had absolutely NO idea what this string could POSSIBLY be attached to because he held his hands out to Moose’s mouth and said, “Hey Moosey, whatcha got there?” I’m sure you can see where this is going. Moose then drops the USED feminine product he so graciously retrieved from the trash can into my dates hands. The next five seconds happened in slow motion – David, after experiencing the most horrifying moment of his life has thrown the tampon onto the floor and ran outside dry heaving into my grass. Since David had thrown the tampon so quickly, Moose now thinks this is some kind of fun game and grabs it and starts running around the house like a mad-man with me chasing him and screaming, and him with a tampon string hanging out of his mouth looking like the happiest dog in the whole world. Needless to say I never got that second date and my dignity has never made a full recovery.  

**Names have been changed to protect the identiy as well as dignity of the person involved in this series of embarrassing events. I didn’t change Moose’s name, he deserves all the credit for this. Don't let that cute face fool you.

I just couldn't figure out who could have possibly eaten my roommates resume the night before her big interview

Winner, Foot in Mouth Disease
Brittni East, Texas A&M

The Jungle Orchestra

Winner, Creative Corner
Megan Mathews, University of Georgia

Let parrots be parrots

Winner, Op-Ed
Athena Gianopoulos, UC Davis

It makes me uncomfortable to discuss the ethics of owning parrots, and that is exactly why I must start the conversation. I accept my own cognitive dissonance, as I am and have been for many years, a parrot owner. Luckily for me (and my Jenday conure, Moxie), my guilty conscience can rest a little easier because I acquired Moxie from a family who was no longer able to keep her. Still, almost everyday I look at her and think that this is not her place. As much as I attend to her needs, encourage natural behavior, and give her the most liberated captive life possible, it still isn’t good enough.

After spending a week at a macaw sanctuary in Costa Rica and over a month in Australia where there are dozens of native parrot species flying free in their natural habitats, I cannot imagine any captive life equivalent. There is nothing comparable to the wonderfully complex social networks established in a flock environment, or the level of engagement and stimulation that only natural foraging can offer; the freedom and autonomy of being able to choose their playground, their mates, their lives. Some would argue that keeping parrots as pets benefits them by sheltering them from predators and natural threats, and it provides them with an abundance of food. But the reality is that we are doing parrots no favors by keeping them confined to a home. The captive life presents an infinite amount of novel dangers that serve as etiologies for mortalities and illness. Where these parrots have evolved and adapted to in the wild is where they are meant to be.

Thinking of parrots as companion pets is really more of a convenient way to justify their current state of ownership than recognizing what is in their best interest. If we are authentically honest with ourselves, then we must acknowledge two things about ownership of parrots as a companion species; first, that they are wild animals, and secondly, they can (and often will) outlive their owners. These are two unique features of owning parrots that are distinct from owning other small animals, and serve as additional challenges that parrot owners and caretakers must seriously consider before deciding to acquire (hopefully by adopting) a bird.

As wild animals, parrots are inherently inappropriate for a captive companion-animal life. They do not adjust well to being caged, solitary creatures. Birds bred in captivity are only a few generations at most removed from the wild. Their behaviors, instincts, and motivations are still suited for the wild and not as someone’s pet. We can tame parrots to our hearts’ content, but they will never be domesticated animals. As beings that can live up to 80 years, they are a responsibility beyond an individual’s means, no matter how well intentioned a parrot owner may be. It’s not uncommon to see parrots end up in sanctuaries and rescue organizations after being handed off or given away numerous times. This is no way for a parrot to live.

Moreover, we must acknowledge that parrots are exquisitely intelligent creatures. Cognitively speaking, parrots’ numerical and conceptual processing is similar to that of a human toddler. Their abilities are both their blessing and their curse.

Click to read more ...