A vet school storm on the horizon

by

Following last year’s announcement that the University of Surrey is to open a new veterinary school (taking in the first cohort of students in autumn 2014), it would appear that the University of Ulster (Northern Ireland) is now jumping on the bandwagon.

These proposals have indeed kicked up quite a storm in the veterinary world.

There seems to be little positive attitude towards this news, with many of us panicking about academic standards, graduate prospects and EMS availability.

With neither of these being Russell Group universities, it has to be questioned whether the academic standards will be comparable to the current UK vet schools.

It is notoriously difficult to get into vet school, but will the two new universities have lower entry requirements? If so, this would be providing a back up option for many applicants and, as a result, decrease the currently high standard of veterinary students. If the graduates are indeed less knowledgable, or have less well-developed clinical skills, would this encourage the employment of poorer quality vets in second-rate practices?

Evidently, more veterinary graduates would mean more competition for jobs, hence pushing down the salaries that graduates would be willing for work for.

It has been suggested that the restricted number of graduates being able to go directly into clinical practice would mean that more veterinary students would be encouraged to take a different career route (research or veterinary education, for example). But if the aim is not to produce veterinary professionals, why not instead increase the intake on veterinary biosciences courses for those more interested in research?

I also think it unfair to expect new graduates to begin teaching at vet schools immediately, even if that is what they’re interested in doing. Their credibility and respect from their students would be dramatically reduced if they’ve not actually had any experience in practice and can’t give clinical case examples to the possible vets of the future.

Another concern is the availability for EMS opportunities. With an increased number of students throughout the UK as a whole, it will become increasingly difficult for students to gain clinical EMS placements. To further the competition, Surrey will not be opening its own teaching hospital as such, and it is expected that final year rotations will instead take place in veterinary practices in the surrounding area, reducing their availability for students from other universities to undertake EMS.

Could this be the future employment opportunity for UK veterinary graduates?

Of course, there are a lot of “ifs” and “buts” here, and potentially the two new vet schools could produce better graduates than the rest of the UK – but this would still increase the competition for graduate jobs and EMS placements.

In my opinion, the main concern is not the repercussions of opening these two vet schools themselves, but the catastrophic effects that would result from further universities following suit.

With little legislation able to dictate requirements for opening a new vet school, the prospect of having as many veterinary education institutions as medical ones could soon become a reality. Before we know it, we could be inundated with veterinary graduates, some of questionable quality, and the next generation of veterinary professionals will be fighting tooth and nail for a severely underpaid job.


Comments

  1. Great article!

  2. “It is notoriously difficult to get into vet school, but will the two new universities have lower entry requirements? If so, this would be providing a back up option for many applicants and, as a result, decrease the currently high standard of veterinary students. If the graduates are indeed less knowledgable, or have less well-developed clinical skills, would this encourage the employment of poorer quality vets in second-rate practices?”

    Lower entry requirements does not mean lower quality vets. Pre James Herriot entry requirements were far lower and arguably the vets produced were more “practical” and less academic.

    1. Sorry, I didn’t mean academic entry requirements specifically. There are a lot of other attributes needed for a perspective vet student… work experience, passion, understanding of the profession, practical ability, sport (teamwork and communication skills). The possibility of ‘low entry requirements’ could also mean a lower expectation of these factors too.

      And I agree – academics aren’t necessarily the going to make the best vets. Practical and, in particular, communication skills are vital aspects of being a good vet.

  3. I’m not sure new schools imply lower standards, Indeed often they embrace a modern teaching style which more traditional school lack.
    The over-saturation of vets into the field is a problem but realistically professional degree courses have lived in a bubble in the UK for a long time with practically guaranteed jobs at the end, which most degrees, and most other countries, don’t have. To expect that to continue when there are people willing and able to attend vet school is not only unfair on those who don’t make it, but also doing a disservice to the country. So long as people know the risks on entry, i see no problem.
    Increased competition at the end of the degree is not necessarily a bad thing, but i suppose its a wait-and-see.
    Would a new vetschool have lower requirements? with such a high proportion of eligable students getting the required grades or better i don’t think they’d have any need to drop grade requirements.

    EMS is a good point however.
    Some good points raised.

    1. Currently, the UK vet schools are on a level playing field, with academic entry requirements being pretty much the same: the current A Level requirement for all UK vet schools is AAA or A*AA at Glasgow and Cambridge. This is in contrast to Surrey’s current requirement of AAB. Currently, Ulster is asking for BBB for courses that would be AAB or higher at other veterinary institutions (their requirements for the actual veterinary course are yet to be confirmed).

      Medical schools tend to have a range of requirements, with the University you attended speaking volumes about the quality of the qualification you receive. Veterinary isn’t like that – despite slight course variations, a degree in veterinary is going to be top quality, no matter which University you received it from.

      Since neither of the two universities that are wanting to open new schools are Russell Group, their other courses will not be as high standard as equivalents in other universities that are. So it’s debatable whether the same will be true for their veterinary courses.

      I would also say that traditional schools do not necessarily lack modern teaching styles – indeed, this year, Glasgow have implemented a brand new preclinical phase of the veterinary course that has a completely different style to the previous course.

      Over saturation is indeed a problem for other courses. Perhaps the correct course of action would be not to introduce this problem to professional degrees, but to eliminate it from the courses current effected. This could be potentially done by reducing the number of courses available and increasing their entry requirements in order to prevent students going to university for the sake of it, but because they genuinely need a degree for the career they’re aiming for.

      But that opens a whole new can of worms.

Leave a Reply

Your email address will not be published. Required fields are marked *