Deciding b/w 2 schools: How Important is Curriculum?

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

+ve

Keep Ur Head Up!
10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Apr 5, 2005
Messages
91
Reaction score
0
Hi,
I'm trying to decide between 2 schools that differ in their curriculum. One school is organ-system based where you do all the anatomy, histo, physiology, biochem, immuno, etc of body organs/systems at once [they just started this with last year's entering class so I'm guessing they're still experimenting with it]. The other does the block system for first year where you take 1 or 2 subjects at a time for a certain period of time and then move to the next subject, e.g. 9 weeks block for biochem, 16 week anatomy, etc. In the second year, you learn about diseases, abnormal structure & function, and pharmacology by organ-system.

I'm aware that there are pros and cons to each style but how much should I factor this in my decision?. On one hand, organ system seems to be better integrated since you're learning everything there is to learn about each system like cardio or pulmonary at the same time. But then, I think it may be less stressful to be able to focus on one or two subjects at a time. For instance, in the block system, you take anatomy all by itself-- no other major course at the time. Also, I feel that this method might give students a stronger science foundation which is then applied to second year study of patho/micro/pharmacology.

Plus, if you don't like a course e.g. biochem, you know you'll be done with it at the end of the block, rather than doing it again and again with each organ/system. I can't imagine having anatomy extend throughout the whole first year. I just feel that med school is hard enough as is with tons of material to cover, but life can be a little better if you're not learning histo details/minutia along with those of anatomy, phys, biochem, etc at the same time. In the organ system, you have a midterm and final only for each organ/system which covers all the subjects, so you'll be studying out of different textbooks for each exam. I guess this might better prepare you for usmle since your first question maybe on physiology and the next on histo or biochem.

I should probably add that the organ-system school offered me full tuition scholarship but it's in the midwest, and the block system school is my top choice [east coast] but I'm not yet sure if they'll offer me anything-- still waiting to get my financial aid award letter. Everyone's telling me I'd be stupid to turn down the money and that the difference in curriculum should not be play a big role in my decision. I'm also taking location, clinical experience, diversity, finances and other things about each school into consideration.

What do y'all think?

Members don't see this ad.
 
Realistically, no one here can tell you exactly how much curriculum should factor into your decision. I spent a relatively small amount of time considering the variable systems, instead concentrating on the following:

1. Yes, the cost of the schools to which I was applying, cross-referenced with their location--as in cost of living. Would I feel pressured by finance, financial aid notwithstanding, in choosing a school?

2. How the school made me feel--as in appeal. When I interviewed; when I toured; when I communicated with the staff/students/locality/a few teachers and deans...did I feel inspired? Comfortable? This may seem like "feelings" pscyhobabble....but really, I chose WSU because I can see myself being very happy there, in a way that I did not feel at ANY POINT interviewing at UMDNJ in Newark, for example

3. Matching, what I could consider wanting out of my early professional goals....which is to say I came up with no good answer in terms of specialty but it did give me an idea where the school seemed to have strengths.

4. Curriculum is curriculum. My mother is a doctor, I have two friends in medical school....I have been told that you will learn what you need to know and the rest is up to you...studying, stamina, time-management, emotional-management....these seem to me to be the more critical considerations, and not so much how the curriculum is organized.

That's just the input of an MS-0.
 
Moving to Pre-Allo as this is a Pre-Allo issue. Allopathic students can go over there and reply.
 
Members don't see this ad :)
There were more important things to me like the tuition and location but I can't lie: I love that my school has system-based courses. I hate anatomy and it would be significantly harder for me to pass an exam if it was anatomy alone. With system based courses the path, physio, microb etc. dilute the harmful effects of anatomy.
 
but I can't lie: I love that my school has system-based courses. I hate anatomy and it would be significantly harder for me to pass an exam if it was anatomy alone. With system based courses the path, physio, microb etc. dilute the harmful effects of anatomy.

My school is on the block system for MS1 and the first 25% of MS2. Unlike Mayhem, I preferred the block system for MS1. However, the only thing this proves is that whichever curriculum you end up in, you will adjust to it - and you will wonder how people at those "other" schools survive. It all depends on what you become accustomed to, not on which is "better."

I actually think a bigger issue is PBL vs. Lecture based.

I'm trying to decide between 2 schools that differ in their curriculum. One school is organ-system based where you do all the anatomy, histo, physiology, biochem, immuno, etc of body organs/systems at once [they just started this with last year's entering class so I'm guessing they're still experimenting with it].

I think that this is a bigger concern. Being organ-system based is fine - many good schools do it this way. But if that school is experimenting with it, it can be such a pain to be their guinea pigs. Ask current students if they feel that there are a lot of kinks to be ironed out, or if the course directors kind of have their crap together.

The other does the block system for first year where you take 1 or 2 subjects at a time for a certain period of time and then move to the next subject, e.g. 9 weeks block for biochem, 16 week anatomy, etc. In the second year, you learn about diseases, abnormal structure & function, and pharmacology by organ-system.

This is how my school does it. It's been okay so far. It depends on how deeply entrenched this curriculum system is - how many years they've been doing it this way.

In the organ system, you have a midterm and final only for each organ/system which covers all the subjects, so you'll be studying out of different textbooks for each exam.

Not necessarily. If the school is nice enough to give you pre-printed lecture notes (= a "syllabus"), which will be your main studying source, then you don't need textbooks. For 1st year physio, my course's syllabus was so good I didn't buy a textbook. If there was something I didn't understand, I'd read the course's "recommended" textbook in the library, use one of the school's online textbooks, look it up in Wikipedia, or read the Merck Manual (online) for free. You could ask current students what they use to study - they may not buy a lot of textbooks at all.
 
My school is on the block system for MS1 and the first 25% of MS2. Unlike Mayhem, I preferred the block system for MS1. However, the only thing this proves is that whichever curriculum you end up in, you will adjust to it - and you will wonder how people at those "other" schools survive. It all depends on what you become accustomed to, not on which is "better."

I actually think a bigger issue is PBL vs. Lecture based.



I think that this is a bigger concern. Being organ-system based is fine - many good schools do it this way. But if that school is experimenting with it, it can be such a pain to be their guinea pigs. Ask current students if they feel that there are a lot of kinks to be ironed out, or if the course directors kind of have their crap together.



This is how my school does it. It's been okay so far. It depends on how deeply entrenched this curriculum system is - how many years they've been doing it this way.



Not necessarily. If the school is nice enough to give you pre-printed lecture notes (= a "syllabus"), which will be your main studying source, then you don't need textbooks. For 1st year physio, my course's syllabus was so good I didn't buy a textbook. If there was something I didn't understand, I'd read the course's "recommended" textbook in the library, use one of the school's online textbooks, look it up in Wikipedia, or read the Merck Manual (online) for free. You could ask current students what they use to study - they may not buy a lot of textbooks at all.

Thanks for your input-- are you sure we're not talking about the same school? The school with block system (VCU) actually gives syllabus which I've heard is so complete that some students don't even go to classes. Nearly everything they need to know for the course and exam is in the syllabus. The organ-systems school (kansas) unfortunately doesn't have syllabus. I read posts by the current students and it seems they do have to buy textbooks. The new curriculum was started with the 2006 entering class so it's only a year old. I'll contact some current M1 students to see what they think as far as kinks being ironed out. I hope they can give me an unbiased opinion about it. Like you, I think I would prefer the block system in first year but I guess tons of students elsewhere are doing just fine with organ-system. Not sure yet how much this will factor into my decision.
 
I'm actually picking my school based on curriculum. I'm a fan of the integrated models, but it really depends on how you learn. The subject model works for many people. Although the other posters are right, you'll probably learn what you need no matter where you go. Having a scholarship will save you a lot of financial headaches down the road.
 
When thinking about curriculum, I've realized that I will have absolutely no standard of comparison, so it'll be hard to know how I feel about it. I feel pretty adaptable, and think I could survive in any atmosphere.

There have really only been 2 curriculum thoughts that enter my mind:

1 - I don't think I'm down with too much PBL. A session or 2 per week would be plenty for me.

2 - Duke has the extremely shortened classroom sequence, freeing up that 3rd year to expand your horizons. To me that is a SIGNIFICANT consideration when thinking about curriculum. <- Sounds GREAT to me.
 
I'm sure if you got in, you will be able to deal with either curriculum, unless your East Coast school is the Ivy League of medschools and the midwest one is just average I don't think you should even go through considerations, take the scholarship and run with it! Of course, I don't know about your financial circumstances, maybe question of scholarship, money and debt is of little concern to you.
 
Focus in on the M3 M4 years as well.
Thats when you really learn what matters and apply it.
clinical opportunites are huge.
 
Top