Abbreviated pre-clinical curriculum.

[StIGMA]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Read @darkjedi's posts in this thread:
http://forums.studentdoctor.net/threads/1-5-year-pre-clinical-curriculum.1030349/
A 1.5 year pre-clinical curriculum seems to be working well at several schools.

Average step1 score cannot be taken as a measure of success because the average step 1 score is not a static number. In 2011, the average step 1 score was 221. Now it is ~229 or so (someone please post the most recent number). Any individual school that switched curricula recently would see a great score boost- but so will have most schools that did not change curricula (most schools have not). The benefit to abbreviated curricula is more time for students to spend in clinicals, ideally be better prepared for residency, and to conduct research/humanitarian activities.

Now the ulterior motive: The school benefits greatly because they still get tuition but don't need to devote money/time to teaching for at least an entire semester. The benefit to students is marginal- you get a leg up on other students by having time to do extracurriculars/research. If you do research, you are doubly benefiting the school by providing research services while paying for it! The schools that offer these curricula are research powerhouses, and they need free labor to keep the machine moving. You are that free labor.

 

[mvenus929]

And I don't think they've "removed" lectures the way Vanderbilt has. 1 year is absolutely ridiculous. I wouldn't recommend it to anyone. Of course maybe that's why Vanderbilt made the first year P/F.

No, they removed the 'extraneous' material that someone was talking about earlier. The pet projects of the PhDs that no one went to lectures for anyway. There are also quite a bit more online lectures (as in, there is no classroom component... it was intended to be online) than there was before they shortened the curriculum.

You'll probably need that summer break to start looking at Step 1 prep materials.

That doesn't generally happen. Most students use the time for research, volunteering, or vacation. Many of the 1.5 year schools go straight into clinic, with Step1 after the clinical rotations.

I'm not sure what most of the 1.5 year schools do, but UVA gives the summer off (between 7-9 weeks, depending on which class you started with, I think it is currently 8), and most students do not start working on Step 1 study over the summer. We take Step 1 up to 1.5 months after the end of classes in December (you have to take them by the end of January/beginning of February, and pass prior to starting rotations in March).

 

[mvenus929]

In 2011, the average step 1 score was 221. Now it is ~229 or so (someone please post the most recent number).

In 2013, the average Step 1 score among examinees from US and Canadian schools was 228. With a standard deviation of 21.

 

[soccerusa]

Does anyone know when Vandy students take Step 1? Also, how specific will they be when explaining the curriculum. I'm interviewing at both Vandy and Duke in the next few weeks. Will it be ok to ask pointed questions about step 1 prep and scores? What kinds of questions should I ask? I'm really interested in both these schools but I'm also concerned about doing well on Step 1. I am a high MCAT student as well if this makes any difference.

 

[infinitessimal]

I appreciate all the input from current med students and residents on the shortened curriculum. There isn't much I can offer from my own experience as I have no point of comparison. However, saying that the step 1 scores won't suffer at these schools because their students have high GPAs/MCATs is a bit of a copout. I've seen the same people in other threads saying that there are no good predictors to step 1, since gpa and MCAT are average predictors at best. You can't use different sides of an argument when it suits your needs better. Moreover, criticizing the 1-year curriculum and then justifying the results with the quality of the students is like saying the new coach for the soccer team sucks, and after the team wins all their games, saying that the players were good to begin with and would have succeeded with any coach. And what would you say is the reason Harvard went to a 1-year curriculum? Because they want to make a name for themselves in academia?

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Does anyone know when Vandy students take Step 1? Also, how specific will they be when explaining the curriculum. I'm interviewing at both Vandy and Duke in the next few weeks. Will it be ok to ask pointed questions about step 1 prep and scores? What kinds of questions should I ask? I'm really interested in both these schools but I'm also concerned about doing well on Step 1. I am a high MCAT student as well if this makes any difference.

It seems to be at the beginning of the 3rd year. I posted the curriculum schematic earlier in the thread, but I'll attach it to this post

In terms of the MCAT, Duke has a median score of 35, which is relatively high, but not quite Pritzker and Wash U.
I'm more curious about how a 30-32 MCAT student performs under this format. I have no doubt that ppl in this range excel at schools with a 1.5-2 year pre-clinical curriculum (and possibly already at Duke). But at least a few have remarked that a one year curriculum is more suitable for those in the upper MCAT brackets.

Again, it would be really nice to hear from a current Duke student!

 

[soccerusa]

I'll make sure to post my experience in a few weeks after I hear what the schools have to say.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

I appreciate all the input from current med students and residents on the shortened curriculum. There isn't much I can offer from my own experience as I have no point of comparison. However, saying that the step 1 scores won't suffer at these schools because their students have high GPAs/MCATs is a bit of a copout. I've seen the same people in other threads saying that there are no good predictors to step 1, since gpa and MCAT are average predictors at best. You can't use different sides of an argument when it suits your needs better. Moreover, criticizing the 1-year curriculum and then justifying the results with the quality of the students is like saying the new coach for the soccer team sucks, and after the team wins all their games, saying that the players were good to begin with and would have succeeded with any coach. And what would you say is the reason Harvard went to a 1-year curriculum? Because they want to make a name for themselves in academia?

And this is why I'm practically begging Duke students to respond to this thread.

 

[alpinism]

IIRC Duke's average has been in the mid 230s to 240s for the past few yrs, however I wouldn't be surprised if it has bumped up recently.

This is likely misleading however, because Duke students can take step 1 anytime during their 3rd year (i.e. their research year). Apparently its common practice for students there to study for 8+ months while working in the lab (compared to the 4-6 weeks that most schools allow).

Edit: yep they even mention it on their student FAQ website:
http://www.dukedavisoncouncil.org/?page_id=258

 

[Aerus]

I appreciate all the input from current med students and residents on the shortened curriculum. There isn't much I can offer from my own experience as I have no point of comparison. However, saying that the step 1 scores won't suffer at these schools because their students have high GPAs/MCATs is a bit of a copout. I've seen the same people in other threads saying that there are no good predictors to step 1, since gpa and MCAT are average predictors at best. You can't use different sides of an argument when it suits your needs better. Moreover, criticizing the 1-year curriculum and then justifying the results with the quality of the students is like saying the new coach for the soccer team sucks, and after the team wins all their games, saying that the players were good to begin with and would have succeeded with any coach. And what would you say is the reason Harvard went to a 1-year curriculum? Because they want to make a name for themselves in academia?

The problem with your argument is that you're comparing individual GPA's and MCAT scores with the school's average. Individually, the GPA and MCAT has small prediction value for performance in medical school. But if you look at school averages, it becomes a better predictor on average performance of the class. It's similar with the SAT and college performance.

 

[infinitessimal]

The problem with your argument is that you're comparing individual GPA's and MCAT scores with the school's average. Individually, the GPA and MCAT has small prediction value for performance in medical school. But if you look at school averages, it becomes a better predictor on average performance of the class. It's similar with the SAT and college performance.

Are you saying if the school average is a 38 and 3.9, the class is likely to do really well on step 1? I'm not necessarily arguing against this, but by this logic, why not eliminate the pre-clincal curriculum altogether since these students can probably study on their own and do really well, and this entire debate is moot.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

@darkjedi, as a veteran of a 1.5 year track, how do you feel about a 1 year format? Is the flexibility provided by Duke enough to make up for the reduced time?

 

[Aerus]

Are you saying if the school average is a 38 and 3.9, the class is likely to do really well on step 1?

No, I'm saying that if the school average is a 38 and a 3.9, they are likely to do better (not well) than a school with a 32 and 3.65 average. Whether both schools utilize a 2 year, 1.5 year, or 1 year curriculum, the predictive value remains.

I'm not necessarily arguing against this, but by this logic, why not eliminate the pre-clincal curriculum altogether since these students can probably study on their own and do really well, and this entire debate is moot.

Because we are assuming both schools are doing similarly to educate their students. The whole point of this thread is to debate whether these changes in curriculum would affect success on the STEP exams and how it would affect the predictive value of the MCAT/GPA compared to schools with a more traditional pre-clinical curriculum.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Are you saying if the school average is a 38 and 3.9, the class is likely to do really well on step 1? I'm not necessarily arguing against this, but by this logic, why not eliminate the pre-clincal curriculum altogether since these students can probably study on their own and do really well, and this entire debate is moot.

I'll make sure to post my experience in a few weeks after I hear what the schools have to say.

I just edited the Vanderbilt curriculum schematic. I'm wondering if the flex time in the 3rd year and/or the research block allow for additional step 1 preparation.

 

[gyngyn]

I just edited the Vanderbilt curriculum schematic. I'm wondering if the flex time in the 3rd year and/or the research block allow for additional step 1 preparation.

The dark secret, revealed!

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

The dark secret, revealed!

 

[infinitessimal]

No, I'm saying that if the school average is a 38 and a 3.9, they are likely to do better (not well) than a school with a 32 and 3.65 average. Whether both schools utilize a 2 year, 1.5 year, or 1 year curriculum, the predictive value remains.

Because we are assuming both schools are doing similarly to educate their students. The whole point of this thread is to debate whether these changes in curriculum would affect success on the STEP exams and how it would affect the predictive value of the MCAT/GPA compared to schools with a more traditional pre-clinical curriculum.

I still don't understand your point and how it argues against mine. I agree that schools whose students have higher averages are likely to do better on step 1. That's not the question we're discussing. To avoid comparing apples and oranges, we should perhaps compare schools with high averages that have a one-year preclinical to those with high averages and a 2 year preclinical. My argument was that saying the preclinical length doesn't matter simply because the students are very smart and motivated in both cases, and that the one-year still sucks, is a copout that doesn't address the issue well enough.

Ideally, the med school curriculum should prepare any student for the exam, whether he had an MCAT of 38 or 32. So then perhaps we can compare step 1 scores at two schools with one-year preclinicals, one with high MCAT averages and one with low averages. There are many ways of doing this depending on what you are looking for specifically.

 

[darkjedi]

@darkjedi, as a veteran of a 1.5 year track, how do you feel about a 1 year format? Is the flexibility provided by Duke enough to make up for the reduced time?

While I can't speak to the 1-year format, I am a big proponent of the 1.5 year format. I consider myself a very 'hands-on' and contexual type learner, and so feel like I really benefit from learning directly on clinics. I have not taken Step 1 yet, so I can't personally speak to how much clinical learning will help. From what I hear from upperclassmen it seems to help for most.

I think the 1-year curriculum may be too condensed, as the 1.5yr curriculum already feels like it is highly compressed as far as amount of information per week goes. I imagine they are still able to do quite well on boards however.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

While I can't speak to the 1-year format, I am a big proponent of the 1.5 year format. I consider myself a very 'hands-on' and contexual type learner, and so feel like I really benefit from learning directly on clinics. I have not taken Step 1 yet, so I can't personally speak to how much clinical learning will help. From what I hear from upperclassmen it seems to help for most.

I think the 1-year curriculum may be too condensed, as the 1.5yr curriculum already feels like it is highly compressed as far as amount of information per week goes. I imagine they are still able to do quite well on boards however.

Thanks!! Your feedback is appreciated!

 

[Aerus]

I still don't understand your point and how it argues against mine. I agree that schools whose students have higher averages are likely to do better on step 1. That's not the question we're discussing. To avoid comparing apples and oranges, we should perhaps compare schools with high averages that have a one-year preclinical to those with high averages and a 2 year preclinical. My argument was that saying the preclinical length doesn't matter simply because the students are very smart and motivated in both cases, and that the one-year still sucks, is a copout that doesn't address the issue well enough.

Ideally, the med school curriculum should prepare any student for the exam, whether he had an MCAT of 38 or 32. So then perhaps we can compare step 1 scores at two schools with one-year preclinicals, one with high MCAT averages and one with low averages. There are many ways of doing this depending on what you are looking for specifically.

I don't have any experience with either system, so I'm going to remain neutral on this discussion overall. I was solely addressing this point you made:

However, saying that the step 1 scores won't suffer at these schools because their students have high GPAs/MCATs is a bit of a copout. I've seen the same people in other threads saying that there are no good predictors to step 1, since gpa and MCAT are average predictors at best. You can't use different sides of an argument when it suits your needs better.

Since you were comparing individual GPA/MCAT predictive value vs. a whole med school class GPA/MCAT predictive value.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Ideally, the med school curriculum should prepare any student for the exam, whether he had an MCAT of 38 or 32. So then perhaps we can compare step 1 scores at two schools with one-year preclinicals, one with high MCAT averages and one with low averages. There are many ways of doing this depending on what you are looking for specifically.

The 3 schools with a 1 year pre-clinical curriculum (Vanderbilt, Duke, and Harvard) are among the most selective in the country. Although, it's very likely that Duke (which is currently the only 1 year pre-clinical veteran) prepares its students with slightly lower stats effectively for the boards.

I'm not discouraging anyone from considering these schools (they are some of the best), but the abbreviated pre-clinical track and its impact must be examined thoroughly. If a one year track were not a "special case," then more schools would have adopted this format. (See @gyngyn's posts on the 1st page- it's already assumed that this curriculum selects for students with higher stats for a reason).

 

[Serous Demilune]

The 3 schools with a 1 year pre-clinical curriculum (Vanderbilt, Duke, and Harvard) are among the most selective in the country. Although, it's very likely that Duke (which is currently the only 1 year pre-clinical veteran) prepares its students with slightly lower stats effectively for the boards.

I'm not discouraging anyone from considering these schools (they are some of the best), but the abbreviated pre-clinical track and its impact must be examined thoroughly. If a one year track were not a "special case," then more schools would have adopted this format. (See @gyngyn's posts on the 1st page- it's already assumed that this curriculum selects for students with higher stats for a reason).

Well if students can take Step 1 at any time during an 8 month research block (i.e. vacation if doing clinical research), then they shouldn't have any problems. I would just grit my teeth and get through the first year, learn actual medicine during clinicals the second year, and do non-stop pathoma/uworld/FA the third year for 8 months and get a 250 no problem. But what if I only get a 240? Who gives a f*ck, I go to Duke!

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Well if students can take Step 1 at any time during an 8 month research block (i.e. vacation if doing clinical research), then they shouldn't have any problems. I would just grit my teeth and get through the first year, learn actual medicine during clinicals the second year, and do non-stop pathoma/uworld/FA the third year for 8 months and get a 250 no problem. But what if I only get a 240? Who gives a f*ck, I go to Duke!

Well in that case...

 

[bangadees7]

The 3 schools with a 1 year pre-clinical curriculum (Vanderbilt, Duke, and Harvard) are among the most selective in the country. Although, it's very likely that Duke (which is currently the only 1 year pre-clinical veteran) prepares its students with slightly lower stats effectively for the boards.

I'm not discouraging anyone from considering these schools (they are some of the best), but the abbreviated pre-clinical track and its impact must be examined thoroughly. If a one year track were not a "special case," then more schools would have adopted this format. (See @gyngyn's posts on the 1st page- it's already assumed that this curriculum selects for students with higher stats for a reason).

Hey, just wondering if there is a link to HMS' change to a 1 year preclinical -- had thought they would be going to 1.5 vs. 1 year.

 

[Cyberdyne 101]

Hey, just wondering if there is a link to HMS' change to a 1 year preclinical -- had thought they would be going to 1.5 vs. 1 year.

I got this info from the Harvard thread:
2014-2015 Harvard Medical School Application Thread
Right now, this is what they have on the school website:
http://hms.harvard.edu/sites/default/files/assets/Sites/PME/files/Curriculum Blueprint AY14.pdf
So it looks like the schematic hasn't been updated (or I could be wrong about the 1 year).

 

[iClearDiamond]

Bump! lol Anymore schools joined the 1 or 1.5 preclinical curriculum within the past 3 years?

 

[Iwannaknow]

Yale is 1.5 years!

 

[Kahanakool]

Michigan just transitioned to a one year curriculum as well Diagrams


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile

 

[iClearDiamond]

Bump again! Any updates?

 

[ChicagoBear]

U of Iowa (Carver) is now 1.5 years. The Step 1 scores seem to have had a nice bump with the new curriculum.

 

[narla_hotep]

I’m a first year student at a 1.5 year curriculum school (UT Southwestern) right now. Anything else you guys would like to know?

 

[Mr. Saigon]

Bump again! Any updates?

University of Arizona - Tucson just switched to the 1.5 this year.

 

[3toedsloth]

Georgetown is 1.5 years now.

 

[Mr.Monster]

The Medical University of South Carolina is switching over to a 1.5 year curriculum this fall with a 6 month flex period

 

[narla_hotep]

What's the 6 month flex period? like is it a time in which you do research and electives, or can you start clinical rotations anytime within the first 6 months?

 

[Mr.Monster]

What's the 6 month flex period? like is it a time in which you do research and electives, or can you start clinical rotations anytime within the first 6 months?

Research, masters degrees in clinical research or public health, global health trips, working in a free clinic full time, getting a certificate in education, extra step 1 study time (we are expected to take it by Feb 1 if we do not use the flex time for this purpose), or getting started on clerkships with the goal of graduating in 3 years (this is reserved for a few students that are hand-picked by the faulty and administration). These are just a few of the options available during our flex period.

 

[AnotherLawyer]

Dell Medical School has a ~12 month pre-clinical curriculum.

 

[jma90]

Hi, any updates from people who have gone through the 12-month preclinical curriculum at Harvard, Michigan, Duke, Vandy, etc.? Thoughts on whether the 12 months was of benefit vs. harm in terms of sanity during that time, Step prep, BS avoided vs. important knowledge glossed over, etc.?

 

[sunflowerpeaches]

Bump! Anyone think that 1 year preclinical is more beneficial now that Step 1 is P/F?

 

[YCAGA]

1 year preclinical will be a massive advantage now that step 1 is pass/fail. My school has “2 year preclinical” and we only actually spend 15 months in class. A true 12 month preclinical with no summer is the way of the future. There is a reason top schools already did this.

If the school teaches to NBME exams and cuts out the PhD lecturer BS, there is no reason to have two years of preclinicals. Medical school learning is so streamlined now with Anki integration into third party resources that you can cover the Step 1 relevant facts and your clinical skills stuff in 3-5 hours a day during a 2 year preclinical curriculum, which like I said, is really like 15 months anyways.

Getting to do core rotations second year and then do research during a third year is such a boost if you want to do something competitive, but really any speciality. You can get much more time to explore specialities as a clinical medicine student AND then have time to do research in one. You also get into the wards a year sooner and can have people know you for 2+ years when they write you a letter instead of a few months.

 

[RSVBT]

To add to the list: Einstein just switched to 1.5