Anyone whose taken traditional curriculum as opposed to systems based, how did you like it?

[subdermallight]

I hear people like it less but I wonder what it’s actually like. In Anatomy for example, are you really just given a bunch of structures and told to memorize them without any context? I see step scores don’t seem too affected by switching to systems based. If it’s more enjoyable and easier to learn, why wouldn’t there be increased scores?

Would you ever make this a significant factor in deciding between two otherwise similar schools?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[wanderingorion]

In retrospect, I think systems based would've made everything flow smoother. A year between the physiology of a system and the pathophys is way too much time, and makes both harder than they need to be. Some clinical context/examples were given during our 1st year, and helps a little. Overall, you still learn the information, but a systems approach lends itself to being more efficient (especially since programs are shortening their preclinical years) and a little kinder to the learners.

 

[medschoolonthemind]

MS1 here, so take this with a grain of salt, but I am pretty happy in the traditional curriculum. I like that the more high-yield STEP information will all be (relatively) fresh in my mind having learned the vast majority of it the year I will be taking STEP. I also like that I will essentially learn the true basics (physiology) twice - first in MS1 and then will need to reference that material again in MS2 in order to master pathology of each system. Anatomy was its own special hell, but I imagine I would have felt that way regardless. I am happy to have the boot-camp style hazing that was learning mundane anatomical details out of the way and be able to concentrate on the anatomy that is actually important to clinical medicine (and STEP1) moving forward.

 

[subdermallight]

MS1 here, so take this with a grain of salt, but I am pretty happy in the traditional curriculum. I like that the more high-yield STEP information will all be (relatively) fresh in my mind having learned the vast majority of it the year I will be taking STEP. I also like that I will essentially learn the true basics (physiology) twice - first in MS1 and then will need to reference that material again in MS2 in order to master pathology of each system. Anatomy was its own special hell, but I imagine I would have felt that way regardless. I am happy to have the boot-camp style hazing that was learning mundane anatomical details out of the way and be able to concentrate on the anatomy that is actually important to clinical medicine (and STEP1) moving forward.

So I never took anatomy in undergrad. I’m thinking of trying to prep a little bit especially if I decide the traditional curriculum school (though everyone tells me not to). Any resources you’d suggest if so?

 

[IMreshopeful]

I did traditional ~9-10 years ago when I was an M1-2. It was fine. I don’t think there’s is truly a huge gulf of difference between that and a systems based. I think learning dedicated anatomy and dedicated biochemistry separately helped me learn more. I’m sure systems based would have been fine too.

I feel like this is one of those things that gets bandied about like it’s a big deal and schools make a huge fuss about it but ultimately both have their pros and cons. I guess curriculum designers and coordinators have to keep their jobs somehow.

 

[medschoolonthemind]

So I never took anatomy in undergrad. I’m thinking of trying to prep a little bit especially if I decide the traditional curriculum school (though everyone tells me not to). Any resources you’d suggest if so?

I used KenHUB. It would not be nearly enough alone, but has an user-friendly interface and can help you nail down some of the basic vocabulary via their quiz function. Also, Rohen's Photographic flashcards were ace for lab. Every post I read said to spend more time with the cadaver and I wish I had ignored them earlier. No matter how hard I tried to make lab time useful it was never anything more than a huge chunk of time wasted that could have been spent memorizing properly dissected structures from Rohen's.

 

[medschoolonthemind]

And, for the record, if I could go back in time I also would have ignored all the people who told me not to pre-study. A couple light and easy flashcard rounds when I felt bored over the summer would have really helped me to hit the ground running with Anatomy. Just don't pre-study so much that it takes any of the med-school excitement away. You'll need that drive for MS1.

 

[Newyawk]

The major benefit to the traditional curriculum is the ability to review the material learned during the first year during year 2. I think this curriculum, if done correctly, produces a much stronger foundation in basic science but probably weaker in clinical science.

 

[neurosurgeon_wannabe]

OP, one thing to also keep in mind is that some schools have systems-based “traditional” curricula, so although you’re only learning physiology during M1, everything’s still all organized and taught in relation to specific organ groups, so there is still some context.

 

[subdermallight]

And, for the record, if I could go back in time I also would have ignored all the people who told me not to pre-study. A couple light and easy flashcard rounds when I felt bored over the summer would have really helped me to hit the ground running with Anatomy. Just don't pre-study so much that it takes any of the med-school excitement away. You'll need that drive for MS1.

Thanks so much for the advice. It is SO helpful!!

 

[subdermallight]

OP, one thing to also keep in mind is that some schools have systems-based “traditional” curricula, so although you’re only learning physiology during M1, everything’s still all organized and taught in relation to specific organ groups, so there is still some context.

That makes sense. That’s also very interesting.. The school I’m strongly considering with trad curriculum (Loyola) is known to have excellent clinical training in years 3 and 4. Perhaps a combination like that works out well

 

[siliso]

I’m a traditional kind of person. I learn just great from lectures and self study and the organization of content doesn’t matter so much to me. In my traditional track there was some overlap between say anatomy, physiology, histology in terms of what systems were being taught at the time, loosely. My alma mater has moved to a systems based integrated flipped PBLed whatever now, so those days are gone but I’m glad I got out before it happened. There’s much to be said for the tried and true that has worked for several generations of physicians.

 

[afib123]

The only thing that sucks about traditional curriculum is anatomy. everything else is ok. I mean we had basic sciences till february then moved to system based, so not for too long but it was not bad. good foundation and high yield stuff during 2nd year keeping it fresh

 

[mehc012]

I did traditional ~9-10 years ago when I was an M1-2. It was fine. I don’t think there’s is truly a huge gulf of difference between that and a systems based. I think learning dedicated anatomy and dedicated biochemistry separately helped me learn more. I’m sure systems based would have been fine too.

I feel like this is one of those things that gets bandied about like it’s a big deal and schools make a huge fuss about it but ultimately both have their pros and cons. I guess curriculum designers and coordinators have to keep their jobs somehow.

We did systems based, but with a dedicated biochemistry section coordinated with our GI/Nutrition section, which made sense.
Anatomy ran separately, but tried to correlate with the systems as best as it could given the logistics of cadaveric dissection.

Not saying systems based is better, just trying to point out that dedicated biochem and anatomy is not necessarily exclusive to the traditional setup.

 

[ciestar]

So I never took anatomy in undergrad. I’m thinking of trying to prep a little bit especially if I decide the traditional curriculum school (though everyone tells me not to). Any resources you’d suggest if so?

Anatomy is the only one that isn’t a complete waste of time pre-studying, IMO. I used Essential Anatomy (it’s a fun app) to work through structures. Try Anki as well, maybe get your cards together early rather than spending time making them later, and then just review it.

 

[ed*26]

My school is traditional in that we learn normal in first year then abnormal in second, but it's still systems based (so we do cardio twice, GI twice, etc). It is nice to see a lot of the core concepts twice, but I think some concepts fall through the cracks in a systems-based curriculum -- like we never got a really good introduction to carcinogenesis or biochem disorders because we learned the foundational stuff through a strictly normal lens. It probably doesn't matter that much in the end -- the bigger things to think about are what your day-to-day is going to look like (e.g. required lectures, PBL), and if/how you get graded and ranked.

 

[IMG69]

I moved medical schools from a traditional curriculum to a systems approach and I could never go back.

System approach easily takes the cake. At my school we learn the systems based on disease, e.g We'll be given a case such a MI and then we'll have all the cards lectures that week from anatomy to treatment/prognosis and we'll learn everything then we'll sum up the case and have an hour of unstructured; essentially question time with the lecturers from that week to further explain/answer any questions.

It's much more difficult to link everything together in a traditional program in my opinion compared to having the whole picture. Plus you cover things multiple times as they'll keep appearing in various cases.

Yesterday I was at the ophthalmology clinic and they were just discussing how they constantly have to talk with the other specialists such as rheumatologists, neurologists etc about medications and suspected diagnoses because the systems overlap and relate to each other which you'll learn about once you start learning physical examinations and investigations/ddx

Take this with a grain of salt, i'm an IMG and we see patients in first year - currently seen maybe ~20-30? so we have to cover all bases.

 

[subdermallight]

Curriculum wasn’t a deciding factor but definitely a factor and I chose the school with a systems based curriculum. I’m really excited about it. Thanks for the input everyone

 

[sunshinefl]

I always knew I wanted a systems based school but I ended up at a traditional curriculum. I continue to believe a systems based curriculum is better.

 

[7331poas]

I dont understand the "fresh in your mind" argument. If you are learning appropriately, you should be reviewing prior material as you go, regardless of the current block you are in. e.g Anki Reviews.

What you learned in your very first block of M1 should be your strongest topic.

 

[afib123]

I dont understand the "fresh in your mind" argument. If you are learning appropriately, you should be reviewing prior material as you go, regardless of the current block you are in. e.g Anki Reviews.

What you learned in your very first block of M1 should be your strongest topic.

Maybe actually if the material is high yield. First year anatomy, no way I was going to waste my time remembering that material for 2 years when there are barely any questions on it.

 

[7331poas]

Maybe actually if the material is high yield. First year anatomy, no way I was going to waste my time remembering that material for 2 years when there are barely any questions on it.

Okay but anatomy is low yield for step 1 and therefore the "fresh in your mind" argument fails for that reason.

 

[Neopolymath]

Prepping for step 1 has shown me that traditional curriculum is garbage for both block to block workflow and also long term for average students. If anki wasn't a thing I would be in trouble and many of my classmates are finding that out 2 months from their exam date. The idea behind traditional curriculum is some sudden spontaneous surge of "getting it" and putting it all together that happens way too late into your second year. Most students spend a lot of time feeling like they are missing something because curriculum pretends it doesn't exist until the next year. Students need to be focusing on integrations early on AND not forgetting the BS biochem/genetics/gritty immunology stuff that is only briefly reviewed during a pathology driven second year.

Traditional curriculum with proper anki use is good if you overstudy your first year because you don't ever forget biochem/genetics/immunology, but people constantly advise against going super hard first year for risk of burn out or something. I think systems based with a good order of systems is best because it allows you to build on the normal/abnormal block to block but also system to system.