Comparative academic performance of medical students in rural and urban clinical settings

OBJECTIVE To determine whether the academic performance of medical students learning in rural settings differs from those learning in urban settings. DESIGN Comparison of results of assessment for 2 full cohorts and 1 part cohort of medical students learning in rural and urban settings in 2002 (209 students), 2003 (226 students) and 2004 (220 students), including results for each specialist rotation in the 3rd year and end-of-year examinations in the 2nd and 4th years. SETTING University of Queensland School of Medicine, Brisbane. Students spent the whole 3rd year (of a 4-year graduate entry programme) conducting 5 specialist 8-week rotations in either the rural clinical division (rural students) or in Brisbane (urban students), all following the same curriculum and taking the same examinations. RESULTS For the 2002 cohort there were no statistically significant differences in academic performance between rural and urban students. For the 2003 cohort the only significant difference was a higher score for rural students in the end of the 4th-year clinical skills examination (65.7 versus 62.3%, P = 0.025). For the 2004 cohort, rural students scored higher in the 3rd-year mental health rotation (79.3 versus 76.2%, P = 0.038) and lower in the medicine rotation (65.5 versus 68.6%, P = 0.037). CONCLUSION Academic performance among students studying in rural and urban settings is comparable.

Locating whiteness in the academic production of "I Philosophy" in and of time and place

This review will critically evaluate two recent texts by white academics working across disciplines of cultural studies, history and anthropology and published by UNSW Press, which share a focus on the relationship between Aboriginality, Philosophy, Place and Time in Australia. I write from the position of a queer white academic committed to engaging politically and intellectually with the challenge of Indigenous sovereignties in this place while also aware that my position as a middle class white woman and intellectual imposes limits on what it is possible for me to know about Indigenous epistemologies (see Moreton-Robinson, 2000). In the course of this review I will demonstrate how anthropology's tendency to fix its objects of study within a circumscribed space of 'difference' limits the capacity of texts produced within this discipline to account for racialized struggles over sovereignty. While these struggles are equally embedded in the ethnographic context and the nation's constitution and political institutions, we will see that Muecke and Bird Rose confront problems in analysing the relationship between the intimate space of the 'field', in which one's research subjects quickly become one's 'friends' and/or 'classificatory kin'—on one hand—and the public space of the nation within which statements about Aboriginality by white academics circulate and are vested with an authority that escapes individual intentions and control—on the other.