Curriculum comparison?

[dhooppi]

Hi,

I am trying to decide between medical school curriculums.

One is the traditional 2+2 curriculum (U of North Carolina), with very little clinical action in the first 2 years.

The other involves much more patient interaction interleaved throughout the 4 years (U of Rochester).

any opinions or suggestions would be greatly appreciated.

Thank you,

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Wednesday]

I have to say that the clinical stuff has really helped motivate me, especially during my second year. My school is technically "traditional" but we do have a lot of clinical exposure.

However, we also have very active student clinics where we can see patients any day of the week (pretty much) if we desire. You might look a little deeper into the opportunities at UNC. It may be that they DO see patients, they just don't sell it as much as Rochester. Or it might be that there are easy ways to see patients outside the curriculum (like at student clinics).

 

[Kalel]

If you are in-state at UNC, you should definitely go there. I'm sure that you will have some clinical exposure at UNC even if they are not advertising it like they are at U Rochester. And even if they don't, to be honest, even though people in pre-clinical courses may say how much they like pre-clinical exposure, in retrospect, I think that most people find that it added very little to their education and mainly just detracted from their study time. Just as long as you are taught how to do an H+P before third year, you will be fine. It actually gets kind of frustrating to practice interviewing patients during first year listening to them rattle off the names of all of these diseases you have no idea about anyways. U Rochester is a nice school, but UNC is an excellent public school with very low in-state tuition.

 

[dhooppi]

Thank you all for you valuable opinions.