- Joined
- Apr 13, 2009
- Messages
- 487
- Reaction score
- 26
I've heard that goljan audio is starting to lose relevance. Is this true for 2013?
I've heard that goljan audio is starting to lose relevance. Is this true for 2013?
I liked goljian more than pathoma, especially for listening. Pathoma listening is a waste of time, everything he says is written.
I liked goljian more than pathoma, especially for listening. Pathoma listening is a waste of time, everything he says is written.
Goljan transcripts exist. You can read those if you truly believe that you don't gain anything from listening to something over reading something.
i think the utility of goljan is often understated. He's entertaining, reenforces material, makes connections between different topics, and goes through important path. What's not to like?
I think you misread his post... He says he liked goljan audio
Have you listened to Goljian? He organizes the info brilliantly, he draws connections between seemingly unrelated topics, he makes jokes which keep you interested, etc. These are things that cannot be written into text. Sattar just basically reads his slides. If you're writing down a ton of ****, you're doing it wrong. I dont see the utility of sattar that your classes won't do just as well. I used both goljian and pathoma btw.My interpretation of his quote was: Goljan is better than Pathoma for listening because all Sattar says in his videos is written in the book. The inference: Listening to anything is a waste of time when you can get all the material by reading through the book.
My response was: You can also get all of Goljan's material by reading the transcript.
What I was trying to imply is the value of the audio of Goljan vs Pathoma should be not be assessed by whether the material is available in printed form, because absorbing material through multiple modalities has value (ever heard of auditory and visual learning styles?).
Why doesn't anyone listen to Pathoma while jogging but everyone listens to Goljan while jogging?
You can argue that Pathoma has video slides whereas Goljan is just audio. But it doesn't make any sense to me because Goljan should really be video as well (because of all the pathology slides he refers to); it's just that the audio is a bootleg recording of his in-person step 1 review course. So Goljan has a ceiling to its usefulness because it's missing visuals.
Have you listened to Goljian? He organizes the info brilliantly, he draws connections between seemingly unrelated topics, he makes jokes which keep you interested, etc. These are things that cannot be written into text. Sattar just basically reads his slides. If you're writing down a ton of ****, you're doing it wrong. I dont see the utility of sattar that your classes won't do just as well. I used both goljian and pathoma btw.
Do you mean his seemingly endless tangents?