Class vs. Boards?

[itsadoctor]

So it's been a few months into year 2, and i'm at a C average in classes, so i'm passing everything. However, the board questions are not similar to the questions given on exams during the blocks (for some reason my professors can't seem to figure out how to write them). I was wondering if I should just focus on board prep (which i'm doing better in) and just remain at my C average in classes? I am interested in IM so I know it's not a super competitive field.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

You are already at a C average. If you have been getting Cs while focusing on class how on earth do you think you will still pass classes while focusing on boards?

I'm all for focusing on boards but if you have been barely passing as is.....

 

[VincentAdultman]

Not sure I follow the logic of focusing on board prep and just “remain at a C average.”

 

[MerYangBey]

I don’t really understand this concept that class material isn’t board material. No matter how crappily it’s being presented/tested chances are the same concepts are “board” concepts. So supplementing existing class material with question banks, pathoma, Boards and Beyond for a better understanding of essential concepts seems like the most reasonable strategy to me.
(I also had terribly written tests for the first two years but having a solid understanding of core concepts translated to doing well on even the most convoluted questions)

 

[itsadoctor]

You are already at a C average. If you have been getting Cs while focusing on class how on earth do you think you will still pass classes while focusing on boards?

I'm all for focusing on boards but if you have been barely passing as is.....

Not sure I follow the logic of focusing on board prep and just “remain at a C average.”

I'm focusing mainly on boards in general and when I do practice questions I do better on them (80%+) than the in-class test questions. I don't know if that makes more sense? I'm not at risk of failing a class, i'm at the higher end of C (78% ish). I'm just wondering if I should just focus on board material and then look at the class material a bit less. The class test questions are just written so poorly compared to the official board prep questions.

 

[itsadoctor]

I don’t really understand this concept that class material isn’t board material. No matter how crappily it’s being presented/tested chances are the same concepts are “board” concepts. So supplementing existing class material with question banks, pathoma, Boards and Beyond for a better understanding of essential concepts seems like the most reasonable strategy to me.
(I also had terribly written tests for the first two years but having a solid understanding of core concepts translated to doing well on even the most convoluted questions)

My school, i don't know why, does do board relevant material because I see it in pathoma, FA, etc. but they tend to go overboard on things that are either very low yield or not even tested on boards. For example, yes it's great to know EKGs but they go far beyond things expected on the boards because the cardiologist wants us to know them for rotations.

I do have a solid foundation on the concepts, esp physiology and I use that to answer the board style questions on kaplan, uworld, etc.

 

[wanderingorion]

supplementing existing class material

Please say this again for the people in the back. If I had a dollar for every one of these threads, I'd have paid off everyone's loans for them.

 

[MerYangBey]

My school, i don't know why, does do board relevant material because I see it in pathoma, FA, etc. but they tend to go overboard on things that are either very low yield or not even tested on boards. For example, yes it's great to know EKGs but they go far beyond things expected on the boards because the cardiologist wants us to know them for rotations.

I do have a solid foundation on the concepts, esp physiology and I use that to answer the board style questions on kaplan, uworld, etc.

Believe me I really understand. My school is like that too. I just feel like it’s a common misconception for people to think that all they need to study is “board” materials as if school material isn’t board material and it frustrates me lol.
And at the end of the day “low yield” is a very relative term. To me there are core concepts and then some extra stuff that I’ll get to if I have brain space left but nothing is really low yield.
(I’m not saying you’re doing any of this but I’m just clarifying my thought process)

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Believe me I really understand. My school is like that too. I just feel like it’s a common misconception for people to think that all they need to study is “board” materials as if school material isn’t board material and it frustrates me lol.
And at the end of the day “low yield” is a very relative term. To me there are core concepts and then some extra stuff that I’ll get to if I have brain space left but nothing is really low yield.
(I’m not saying you’re doing any of this but I’m just clarifying my thought process)

For me "low yield" isn't "oh that seems like minutia so it's low yield" like it is for most people. Low yield is when the professor starts a lecture talking about how important this stuff will be for Step 3 boards (wish I was kidding).... or when we have multiple lectures on dosing for medications when dosing isn't on Step 1 and I don't even know what half the drugs they are talking about actually do yet. Unfortunately that stuff is on our class tests, when it definitely won't be on Step 1.

Another thing is that some professors simply have crap materials, so it's a lot easier to understand and learn a concept from sources that are well designed, which are usually the board materials and occasionally the text book.

 

[libertyyne]

 

[MerYangBey]

For me "low yield" isn't "oh that seems like minutia so it's low yield" like it is for most people. Low yield is when the professor starts a lecture talking about how important this stuff will be for Step 3 boards (wish I was kidding).... or when we have multiple lectures on dosing for medications when dosing isn't on Step 1 and I don't even know what half the drugs they are talking about actually do yet. Unfortunately that stuff is on our class tests, when it definitely won't be on Step 1.

Another thing is that some professors simply have crap materials, so it's a lot easier to understand and learn a concept from sources that are well designed, which are usually the board materials and occasionally the text book.

Lol yep we’re totally in agreement here. My school loved to ask us really random stuff from our “clinical” lectures. So I understand how pointless some school stuff can be.
Also I wouldn’t be the person I am today without Boards and Beyond. So yeah I’m all for using the best sources for optimal understanding.

 

[CyrusHabs7695]

Lol yep we’re totally in agreement here. My school loved to ask us really random stuff from our “clinical” lectures. So I understand how pointless some school stuff can be.
Also I wouldn’t be the person I am today without Boards and Beyond. So yeah I’m all for using the best sources for optimal understanding.

How are you using it? Do you watch your class lecture then just watch the B&B corresponding video after? Do you use any q-banks or anything like that?

Anyone can feel free to chime in.

Ive been trying to use firecracker the past few weeks and am not sure if im liking it or not. I thought it was more going to be a resource where you can do a bunch of board style questions on topics you have supposedly learned, then review them, but it doesn't seem like thats what you can do on there. I don't want use UW yet, so I don't really know what I should do.

 

[MerYangBey]

How are you using it? Do you watch your class lecture then just watch the B&B corresponding video after? Do you use any q-banks or anything like that?

Anyone can feel free to chime in.

Ive been trying to use firecracker the past few weeks and am not sure if im liking it or not. I thought it was more going to be a resource where you can do a bunch of board style questions on topics you have supposedly learned, then review them, but it doesn't seem like thats what you can do on there. I don't want use UW yet, so I don't really know what I should do.

I watched lectures if I knew the professor was somewhat good. If they weren't good then I didn't watch. Then i started my individual studying by watching B&B and following along with the notes. After that I would open up USMLE-RX and create a deck of flashcards based on the topics covered. Then i would do those. After that I would look back at lecture powerpoint to make sure I didn't miss any concepts. I would occasionally supplement with Robbins. Finally, i would do RX questions once enough material was covered. I dabbled with the Kaplan Q bank later in the year and i personally liked it because of their explanations.
Hope that made sense.

 

[CyrusHabs7695]

I watched lectures if I knew the professor was somewhat good. If they weren't good then I didn't watch. Then i started my individual studying by watching B&B and following along with the notes. After that I would open up USMLE-RX and create a deck of flashcards based on the topics covered. Then i would do those. After that I would look back at lecture powerpoint to make sure I didn't miss any concepts. I would occasionally supplement with Robbins. Finally, i would do RX questions once enough material was covered. I dabbled with the Kaplan Q bank later in the year and i personally liked it because of their explanations.
Hope that made sense.

Yeah that makes sense.

What is the overall consensus on the quality of Kaplans Q bank? Do people generally find the style of questions similar to that of the real deal?

 

[Chibucks15]

I watched lectures if I knew the professor was somewhat good. If they weren't good then I didn't watch. Then i started my individual studying by watching B&B and following along with the notes. After that I would open up USMLE-RX and create a deck of flashcards based on the topics covered. Then i would do those. After that I would look back at lecture powerpoint to make sure I didn't miss any concepts. I would occasionally supplement with Robbins. Finally, i would do RX questions once enough material was covered. I dabbled with the Kaplan Q bank later in the year and i personally liked it because of their explanations.
Hope that made sense.

The thing is in second year for some schools you get a lot of guest clinician lecturers, who you don't know if they are good or bad. Good plan though I have similar but I need to get into B&B more

 

[MerYangBey]

The thing is in second year for some schools you get a lot of guest clinician lecturers, who you don't know if they are good or bad. Good plan though I have similar but I need to get into B&B more

We usually had to go to those.... (insert grumpy comment about how much i hate mandatory lectures)

 

[mistafab]

Gonna drop a bomb on you bro.

You went to med school to be the best doctor you can be - not the best test-taker you can be.

Purposefully avoiding information that your school is teaching you to become a GOOD DOCTOR is counter-productive for your career. You’re missing the forest for the trees.

My school, i don't know why, does do board relevant material because I see it in pathoma, FA, etc. but they tend to go overboard on things that are either very low yield or not even tested on boards. For example, yes it's great to know EKGs but they go far beyond things expected on the boards because the cardiologist wants us to know them for rotations.

I do have a solid foundation on the concepts, esp physiology and I use that to answer the board style questions on kaplan, uworld, etc.

 

[getdown]

What you guys don't understand is that all schools teaches board material by varying degrees of effectiveness but certain schools feel the need to produce a nice bell curve distribution for internal rankings, dean letters for residency, etc. It is the nature of the beast. They know if they were to test on clinically relevant materials only everyone would hit 90% hence the super detailed oriented questions (third word of powerpoint presentation 3, slide 17).

Just remember that your preclinical grades, while they do matter for residency, don't matter as much as you think they do. Just like grades at different colleges in undergrad mean different things depending on student body, grading scheme, professors. That's why every residency program use STEP1 as a proxy to how well you know the material.

The corollary to this however is that you also shouldn't just study to the boards. There's a lot of material taught in class that are actually relevant to your everyday practice as a physician. Med school do not and should not teach to the boards although it's a shame how heavily weighted STEP1 scores are to give this impression that only board scores matter.

My advice is to study the class material in supplementation to FA in order to know which will be high yield for STEP1 but still focus on doing well in your classes. You do yourself a bigger disservice by having to repeat a year vs just passing your classes and maximizing your dedicated study time and doing well on STEP1.

 

[Goro]

Gonna drop a bomb on you bro.

You went to med school to be the best doctor you can be - not the best test-taker you can be.

Purposefully avoiding information that your school is teaching you to become a GOOD DOCTOR is counter-productive for your career. You’re missing the forest for the trees.

Yup. Sadly, too many SDNers seem to think that their medical education ends with Step I.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

Yup. Sadly, too many SDNers seem to think that their medical education ends with Step I.

Not really, we get that the point is to become a doctor and not a test taker. However, there is a reason that things come in steps and often what is taught in some of these pre-clinical courses is putting the cart before the horse.

 

[Goro]

Not really, we get that the point is to become a doctor and not a test taker. However, there is a reason that things come in steps and often what is taught in some of these pre-clinical courses is putting the cart before the horse.

The bolded is very true and nothing makes me tear my hair out more is a faculty who teaches to preclinical students at the level of clinical and even residents. At my school we've found guest lecturers fall into this category.

 

[CherryRedDracul]

You wanna settle for being average? Just stick to the high yield stuff.

You want to go beyond? Start learning some "low yield" stuff along the way.

 

[libertyyne]

You wanna settle for being average? Just stick to the high yield stuff.

You want to go beyond? Start learning some "low yield" stuff along the way.

is that contrast diffusing into the liver or just moving to another slice?

 

[Oso]

is that contrast diffusing into the liver or just moving to another slice?

yeah what the **** am i looking at here


edit: ^ me any time i look at any imaging ever

 

[CherryRedDracul]

is that contrast diffusing into the liver or just moving to another slice?

yeah what the **** am i looking at here


edit: ^ me any time i look at any imaging ever

You're looking at sequential delayed post-contrast T1-weighted axial MRI images, so the images are of the same slice, but taken at different delays. The first image of the sequence is actually pre-contrast T1-weighted. You can tell if it's pre- or post-contrast here by looking at the signal from descending aorta (dark before contrast, bright after contrast).

That huge low signal lesion in the right lobe of the liver is a giant cavernous hemangioma. It demonstrates the classic peripheral discontinuous nodular enhancement with progressive centripetal filling-in.

 

[Angus Avagadro]

The bolded is very true and nothing makes me tear my hair out more is a faculty who teaches to preclinical students at the level of clinical and even residents. At my school we've found guest lecturers fall into this category.

I'm really conflicted with the highlighted text. I get that preclinical is teaching for the Step. But at some point, in 2nd year, you are going to have to present some clinical material. Otherwise, what happens after Step 1? That's right, you are on clinical rotations, and need to know some clinical stuff, otherwise you will look like a dumb a$$ on teaching rounds, and will receive mediocre evaluations. What do residencies look at? Pre clinical grades or clinical evals? When we tell you it's all important, it's because it's all important. This is a very tough time in medical education, and I admire all who are engaged in the process. A good Step 1 and lackluster clinical evals may not get you the residency you seek. Keep working hard. Good luck and best wishes!

 

[Black Coffee 24/7]

So it's been a few months into year 2, and i'm at a C average in classes, so i'm passing everything. However, the board questions are not similar to the questions given on exams during the blocks (for some reason my professors can't seem to figure out how to write them). I was wondering if I should just focus on board prep (which i'm doing better in) and just remain at my C average in classes? I am interested in IM so I know it's not a super competitive field.

All materials taught by MD/DO lecturers are high yield. As for the crap being taught by PhDs, I would use supplementary board review sources.

 

[Jesus1]

I still don't get it..In general, doing well on your preclinical exams has the strongest correlation with crushing board exams...As a tutor, I hear this all the time-> "focus on boards, screw classes"..At the end of the day, many (not all) of these same people begin to struggle when their actual dedicated period hits..Trust me, focus on your classes and get yourself to an A average even if you cannot do any separate boards studying..You'll thank yourself next year. It's paradoxical advice but there are very few people I know who were on a C average who ended up getting in the high ranges on Step 1.

 

[Ho0v-man]

Do both. Crush class. Crush boards material. Crush your will to live. If you’re happy you’re doing it wrong.

 

[Aerus]

I don’t really understand this concept that class material isn’t board material. No matter how crappily it’s being presented/tested chances are the same concepts are “board” concepts. So supplementing existing class material with question banks, pathoma, Boards and Beyond for a better understanding of essential concepts seems like the most reasonable strategy to me.
(I also had terribly written tests for the first two years but having a solid understanding of core concepts translated to doing well on even the most convoluted questions)

Sometimes, I've had professors contradict what the most recent First Aid says because this is how they think it should be. The amount of times I've had a professor THIS BLOCK correct Pathoma because they didn't agree with the definitions...Not saying that these resources are always right or even close, but when you try to correct things with your own definitions, that could hurt students...

Also, ditto to the clinical practice stuff. We get questions like "What's the next step in the management of this patient" with answers like "get an advanced directive" or something. So no, class material is most definitely not board material.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

I'm really conflicted with the highlighted text. I get that preclinical is teaching for the Step. But at some point, in 2nd year, you are going to have to present some clinical material. Otherwise, what happens after Step 1? That's right, you are on clinical rotations, and need to know some clinical stuff, otherwise you will look like a dumb a$$ on teaching rounds, and will receive mediocre evaluations. What do residencies look at? Pre clinical grades or clinical evals? When we tell you it's all important, it's because it's all important. This is a very tough time in medical education, and I admire all who are engaged in the process. A good Step 1 and lackluster clinical evals may not get you the residency you seek. Keep working hard. Good luck and best wishes!

Of course, however it would be more helpful to teach the clinical application of stuff we have already learned. There is literally zero reason why the words, "this will be on your Step 3 boards" should ever be uttered to a group of first years.

 

[NicMouse64]

I'm gonna jump onto this thread. I am a M1 and I am passing my classes (usually a bit below average (around 85) I get around 80, but whatever). I would say that so far medical school has been pretty chill. I wake up at 9, and go to bed around 12. Don't go to class and watch lectures 2X. I go to the gym everyday and have time to hang with my gf and play videogames. I am starting zanki and FA studying along with my classes (we have NBME exams).

I guess my question is do I need to strive for above average if I want to match into a good IM program? I am involved in research already and have a few pubs from my gap year. I just don't see the point of trying to get top of my class. I am happy getting around average and doing things like research (which I enjoy much more than memorizing minutae), and enjoying other aspects of my life.

 

[7331poas]

Believe me I really understand. My school is like that too. I just feel like it’s a common misconception for people to think that all they need to study is “board” materials as if school material isn’t board material and it frustrates me lol.
And at the end of the day “low yield” is a very relative term. To me there are core concepts and then some extra stuff that I’ll get to if I have brain space left but nothing is really low yield.
(I’m not saying you’re doing any of this but I’m just clarifying my thought process)

Because school material isnt boards material. How can you say with a straight face that you be better prepared by actually following your school's curriculum rather than studying off boards and beyond/pathoma/anki?

 

[7331poas]

All materials taught by MD/DO lecturers are high yield..

Even those are low yield, as many physicians have no idea what is on Step 1 in 2018.

 

[MerYangBey]

Because school material isnt boards material. How can you say with a straight face that you be better prepared by actually following your school's curriculum rather than studying off boards and beyond/pathoma/anki?

That’s not what I said whatsoever. I said those sources should be used to supplement knowledge. I don’t think that school curriculums should be ignored. And I don’t think board review sources should be the only sources used. The first two years are supposed to be about getting a good science foundation. A foundation that gets added to during the clinical years. It’s not just about studying so called “board” materials.

 

[7331poas]

That’s not what I said whatsoever. I said those sources should be used to supplement knowledge. I don’t think that school curriculums should be ignored. And I don’t think board review sources should be the only sources used. The first two years are supposed to be about getting a good science foundation. A foundation that gets added to during the clinical years. It’s not just about studying so called “board” materials.

The boards IS foundational knowledge. The best school in the country would stop doing lectures, direct their students to boards and beyond/pathoma, and cut tuition.

But the problem is these PhDs feel like they know better than Sattar.

 

[MerYangBey]

The boards IS foundational knowledge. The best school in the country would stop doing lectures, direct their students to boards and beyond/pathoma, and cut tuition.

But the problem is these PhDs feel like they know better than Sattar.

I don’t really disagree with you. I just dislike how medical education is getting so geared towards doing well on a board exam. It makes me feel bad on a fundamental level.

(And yes I get that doing well on a board exam logically means having good foundational knowledge)

 

[CherryRedDracul]

Because school material isnt boards material. How can you say with a straight face that you be better prepared by actually following your school's curriculum rather than studying off boards and beyond/pathoma/anki?

Why not BOTH?

Seriously, what is it with people and this sense of false dichotomy everyone has?

 

[sab3156]

For me "low yield" isn't "oh that seems like minutia so it's low yield" like it is for most people. Low yield is when the professor starts a lecture talking about how important this stuff will be for Step 3 boards (wish I was kidding).... or when we have multiple lectures on dosing for medications when dosing isn't on Step 1 and I don't even know what half the drugs they are talking about actually do yet. Unfortunately that stuff is on our class tests, when it definitely won't be on Step 1.

Another thing is that some professors simply have crap materials, so it's a lot easier to understand and learn a concept from sources that are well designed, which are usually the board materials and occasionally the text book.

We are currently assigned reading from Harrison's... for 2nd year Renal Path. I am depressed.

 

[7331poas]

We are currently assigned reading from Harrison's... for 2nd year Renal Path. I am depressed.

That's why @CherryRedDracul

 

[sab3156]

Why not BOTH?

Seriously, what is it with people and this sense of false dichotomy everyone has?

If you were at my DO school you'd know why.

 

[piii]

The trick to boards is acing class AND doing board prep. Not one or the other. Best students and top scorers crush both aspects of med school.

 

[AnatomyGrey12]

The trick to boards is acing class AND doing board prep.

Again, it depends on the school.

 

[Neopolymath]

My favorite parts of these threads is the people who say use "blah blah blah to *supplement* class lectures not replace it" and then they list their routine and it involves learning everything from sources that aren't lectures and then doing the lectures right before the test to see what they need to just memorize for that exam. It really distorts the true message that I think these posters are trying to teach every time this thread comes up despite good intentions.

OP, do not ignore class lectures. There are important aspects of your curriculum that you need to know for your future as a physician (not tested but your life is only determined 95% by Step 1 these days 🙂 ) and there are things that are an important alternative perspective on certain topics you will see in other resources. These will help you and not hurt your test taking ability.The difference is that only you can decide if you are putting in a good faith effort to learn these things or not. If you are taking this stuff seriously, but still not doing well on exams, then there are really only two things going on: you have some test taking issue that needs addressed or your exams are ****. That is ONLY if you really are learning the material. Otherwise, you should be doing better than a C even if you only used Zanki to study and never looked at anything else before the exam. This could be a sign that you aren't learning the material as well as you think you are. You cannot ignore that possibility.

OP, the first thing you need to do is examine why you are doing poorly on the school exams. You also need some context. You need to gain perspective on how your class grade distribution falls. When you receive advice from others you always have to keep in mind that some schools have much different curriculum and testing styles. Particularly in the MD forum, a lot of these posters ignore material because they have NBME written exams. Of course their advice is going to differ because they don't have ****ty exams so they can't imagine why someone could do poorly on the written even if they ignored lectures. I have also noticed that a lot of schools have really high test averages and high scores on their exams compared to mine. Your school may differ.

Are you below average compared to your peers or is a high C actually above the mean like at my school? Are the smart students in your class getting solid A's or is the ceiling on exams usually 88-91ish like at my school? Are you reviewing your exams and finding that you are solely missing questions that don't even read like English and are about the caption of a blurry image in a random slide after the PhD droned about a different topic for 40 minutes of the lecture? There needs to be a really, really good reason for you to be doing poorly for you to decide not to care about lectures at all. This is a dangerous situation. You have to understand that if you aren't doing an honest, and thorough self-evaluation you will put yourself in jeopardy of doing ****ty in school AND on boards. Don't be that guy.

The point is that no one can tell you if you don't need to worry or not because they don't know your curriculum. You should either provide some more details or consider examining how you study, not just what and how long you study.

Good luck!

Edit: I do want to clarify and emphasize that I said don't "ignore" lecture. Every medical student in America should be studying stuff beyond their lectures because taking lectures as gospel is going to screw you. You don't have to emphasize them if the situation makes sense, but certainly don't ignore them.

 

[sloop]

I'm team "do well in class."

I've never understood this. Of those who would talk about such things even generally, the people who "did well" on Step 1 by their own estimation were generally the same people who did well in preclinical classes.

A major problem is that there's a misinformed assumption that doing well on the USMLE requires more general knowledge or doesn't require knowledge of minutia. This actually isn't the case. It may be the case for merely passing or doing average on the exam but it's not true of doing well. The minutia-type questions on the USMLE don't comprise a huge percentage of the total questions (maybe like 10-15% but it's been a few years since I took Step 1) but they are the discriminating questions and make a huge difference in your score.

The best way to give yourself a good chance of getting at least a decent proportion of the hardest questions on Step 1 right is to pay attention in class and learn the tedious minutia the professors ask you to learn. First Aid, pathoma, etc. are good for brushing up on core concepts after you've gone through the work of learning the details to begin with but your ability to answer the "WTF, I can't believe they asked that—that wasn't even in FA" questions is what will separate you from the average med student who has gone through and taken notes on top of notes on these books several times before the exam.

This is not always true, but a common trap is for people to take the "I'll just study for boards and crush Step 1" approach as an ego-defense when they realize they're not doing as well as they'd like in class. This is a terrible attitude and will not take them far. Whatever you do, definitely don't do this. If you're noticing a deficit, you need to fix it. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

 

[Neopolymath]

I'm team "do well in class."

I've never understood this. Of those who would talk about such things even generally, the people who "did well" on Step 1 by their own estimation were generally the same people who did well in preclinical classes.

A major problem is that there's a misinformed assumption that doing well on the USMLE requires more general knowledge or doesn't require knowledge of minutia. This actually isn't the case. It may be the case for merely passing or doing average on the exam but it's not true of doing well. The minutia-type questions on the USMLE don't comprise a huge percentage of the total questions (maybe like 10-15% but it's been a few years since I took Step 1) but they are the discriminating questions and make a huge difference in your score.

The best way to give yourself a good chance of getting at least a decent proportion of the hardest questions on Step 1 right is to pay attention in class and learn the tedious minutia the professors ask you to know. First Aid, pathoma, etc. are good for brushing up on core concepts after you've gone through the work of learning the details to begin with but your ability to answer the "WTF, I can't believe they asked that—that wasn't even in FA" questions is what will separate you from the average med student who has gone through and taken notes on top of notes on these books several times before the exam.

This is not always true, but a common trap is for people to take the "I'll just study for boards and crush Step 1" approach as an ego-defense when they realize they're not doing as well as they'd like in class. This is a terrible attitude and will not take them far. Whatever you do, definitely don't do this. If you're noticing a deficit, you need to fix it. There's no such thing as a free lunch.

I agree with your post. I do think we should all say what our definition of doing well is. At my school, if you are 5 points or so behind the high score you are doing well because the exams are PhD written and we have people who only study the powerpoints (it becomes apparent when discussing Qbank averages and in small group situations where knowledge deficits are glaringly obvious for these students and they admit so). Historically, this appears to hold true for the big scorers at my school as well. I can't speak for other schools.