There must be more to this story. It feels as if this anecdote doesn't get at the heart of the issue. Why would they not want their students to learn the material? Maybe the admins thought med students would be well versed in the basics by some other lecture or the pre-medical curriculum?
Everything that I've heard (from both students and admins) up to this point has suggested the exact opposite from what you're telling us.
I tried to post this earlier, but my internet died on me. Anyway...
If I remember correctly, that comment was based on a session that was supposed to be Family Feud. I did not actually attend that session, because I got horribly behind and was not able to do the pre-class reading, and I learned long ago that you're lost in those types of classes if you don't do the pre-class work.
The original professor for that session had to leave town for something, so another professor stepped in. The (original) professor developed Family Feud last year, and was using it as a teaching tool, rather than as a review tool. I think a lot of people got frustrated by this, and acid-base stuff is hard anyway, so teaching it in this style complicated the problem.
The professor who stepped in didn't realize (or wasn't told, or whatever) that this was the first time we were really seeing the information, and thought it more as a review. So, as I understand it, instead of doing FF, he opted to do a basic lecture.
The original professor has been told that the FF doesn't work (for us) in that setting, and I think he will be revising his teaching style next year.
There are a couple things you have to understand about my class. We're the first people on this curriculum, and it's very rough. The first years don't have nearly as many complaints as we do, because they had a nice even transition from the start (and they have the benefit of us, who can say 'don't read this book, purchase this one, this one will be your bible for this thread,' etc). The class above us gave us advice too, but most of it was tailored to their curriculum, and was completely not applicable to us. We encounter many problems at the start of each new system because the system leaders don't know how to run the system yet. They've had the benefit of knowing what we don't like about past systems, but they don't always know what to do better, or if something will work better in their system than systems past without having done it yet, which makes it difficult.
But, because we're the first class, we tend to complain about things that aren't going to matter for the next classes. For instance, we got every Friday before an exam off until recently, when they started putting classes on those days (they've been optional review sessions; no new material presented). But, the first years have always had class on those Fridays, so they're used to it. The test review policy is also different, and we frequently complain because they keep trying to change our policy to match the first years' policy, when we've been doing it our way for over a year. We've adapted to the problems that we've faced, from people sending our reminder e-mails because the system leaders don't, to hosting our own review sessions when we feel something wasn't taught well. We tell the administration about those problems, but it's like moving a huge ship... it takes time to make the adjustments, and often by the time we complain about them, it's too late for us (because we've moved on to a new system, or aren't going to have that professor teach us anymore, etc).
I'm by no means saying that NexGen is perfect, and I am often one of the more vocal people when something goes wrong. But, I don't think it's a bad curriculum as a whole. It's certainly not for everyone, so be sure you get informed as to what NexGen entails before you decide to come here.
