There isn't too much discussion regarding the pros and cons of an integrated vs. a traditional curriculum. Does one lead to a better STEP 1 score? Am I at a disadvantage if I end up at a school that still uses the traditional curriculum, when most med schools are now leaning towards the integrated curriculum? What is the biggest difference between these two? Thanks in advance for your help!
Traditional vs. Integrated (Systems based) Curriculum
- Thread starter ddalgi
- Start date
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,375
- Reaction score
- 38
Honestly, "most" schools are probably still traditional. Although a lot of the big names have started switching over.
Traditional is going to teach you histology, anatomy, physiology, microbiology and pathology for each system.
Integrated will teach you the pulmonary system (histology, anatomy, physiology, micro, and path), Cardiac, Musculoskeletal, neuro, GI, etc.
When I studied for step 1 I thought it would have been better to have learned integrated instead of traditional. But thats easy to say once you have a handle on all the concepts. I realize that the reality of it is I may have struggled learning bits and pieces for each system.
Either way you lose something. On traditional you lose the connection for each system and being able to logically connect it all to a functional body system (until you learn it all then you bring it together). For integrated you lose the ability to tie a single concept across an entire subject (because you are learning a bit for each system).
- Joined
- Sep 26, 2007
- Messages
- 17,074
- Reaction score
- 73
I am at a PBL school with integrated curriculum. It works for how I learn. I am not aware of any long-term study indicating one is better for scores than other.
In the end, students learn the material. How they do it is up to what works for them.
You mostly see this talked about within the various school threads because each school has a little different approach to traditional and integrated.
In the end, students learn the material. How they do it is up to what works for them.
You mostly see this talked about within the various school threads because each school has a little different approach to traditional and integrated.
- Joined
- Dec 19, 2009
- Messages
- 2,078
- Reaction score
- 10
i agree with everything angel said. i'll add that i can't imagine doing this in a "traditional" curriculum (if i had to take a longitudinal pharm course..... uuuugghhh).
it really helps to see how everything goes together in a systems-based program. concepts do sometimes get washed away in the mass of detail - but i feel like that's where the review books come in.
i am unaware of any data that would confirm better Step scores for one system vs the other, but i will say that i am unaware of any "trad" based programs that are able to get through the preclinical material in less than two years. so maybe it saves time? just a thought, please correct if i'm wrong.
it really helps to see how everything goes together in a systems-based program. concepts do sometimes get washed away in the mass of detail - but i feel like that's where the review books come in.
i am unaware of any data that would confirm better Step scores for one system vs the other, but i will say that i am unaware of any "trad" based programs that are able to get through the preclinical material in less than two years. so maybe it saves time? just a thought, please correct if i'm wrong.
- Joined
- Apr 13, 2010
- Messages
- 529
- Reaction score
- 6
based on what I've seen others post, the traditional system seems to have more of your board exam materials in the second year.
I think I'd prefer integrated if that's the case:
1. If you actually wanted to review the summer between MS1 and MS2, then you actually have something more valuable to review.
2. When you're kicking your tail studying for boards, you're not doing it at the expense of board material that you're supposed to be learning in class (at least not as much if MS2 doesn't have such a high concentration of this material).
Like I said...just based on what I've seen others say about the traditional system.
I think I'd prefer integrated if that's the case:
1. If you actually wanted to review the summer between MS1 and MS2, then you actually have something more valuable to review.
2. When you're kicking your tail studying for boards, you're not doing it at the expense of board material that you're supposed to be learning in class (at least not as much if MS2 doesn't have such a high concentration of this material).
Like I said...just based on what I've seen others say about the traditional system.
- Joined
- Sep 4, 2006
- Messages
- 5,375
- Reaction score
- 38
How long does it take you guys? I'd be surprised it it took significantly less time either way.
Removing summer and winter breaks my school does the basic sciences in 15 months with traditional curriculum.
- Joined
- Jul 6, 2006
- Messages
- 7,471
- Reaction score
- 2,424
We start in August and end the following December. So my class started August 2010, and will finish December 2011. We still get a week for (each) Thanksgiving, two weeks for winter, two spring breaks, and a summer break. The class that starts in the fall will get additional time off in the form of a Fall break at the beginning of October, and I think they get more time off during the summer.
Our students on the traditional curriculum finished in March, instead of December.
