I thought traditional was organ-based, or organ system-based.
So we definitely aren't traditional, though the new curriculum probably is much closer to the old curriculum than a traditional one. We don't do physiology for M1 and path for M2. I think the old curriculum probably was more organ-system-based, but integrated, where path and physiology were taught simultaneously. Now it is more integrative, where there is a loose tie to the organ system in each module, to include physiology and pathology, but the concepts are more stretched out (this is for the second semester and presumably the 3rd and 4th)
So....
M1 1st semester - Foundations of Medicine (or something like that) - This was anatomy (throughout semester that followed the dissection), and then basic sciences stretched out throughout the semester (immuno, and kind of an intro to micro and histo, some biochemistry, very little embryo and then probably some other stuff). There were "problems/cases/pathologies" that we would sometimes use to stimulate discussion of these things). I'm sorry if this isn't very coherent, but I don't imagine we will really appreciate the curriculum until it is over. I think the idea is that we are getting exposure to all parts of the science part of the curriculum.
M1 2nd semester - 4 modules, 4 weeks each, loosely neuro/brain&behav/MSK/Derm. I say loosely, because we are in MSK and still doing brain and behavior stuff, and will continue doing some of that stuff throughout Derm. So far, the benefits seem to be that we are visiting topics and drugs repeatedly, as we learn it incrementally, and so maybe we will retain it better than someone that moves from one system to another. Most apparent drawback is that external resources follow organ systems, and, for example, we can't use practice tests for MSK, because we won't finish bones until part way through derm.
M2 is divided into organ systems and may be treated integrated like M1 semester 2 or may not, don't know yet.
Didn't proofread this because I have to study.