Firecracker
- Thread starter JackShephard MD
- Start date
- Joined
- Jan 14, 2013
- Messages
- 612
- Reaction score
- 372
- Points
- 5,171
- Location
- Gotham City
- Medical Student
Maybe you could unflag topics you know really well to make the daily reviews easier throughout the year.
just putting my opinion here; the brosencephalon pathology deck is better than the firecracker pathology section b/c it incorporates not just first aid, but also pathoma, as well as some bit of Robbins (some of which shows up on Step 1, just not as much as Pathoma). brosencephalon also includes histology pictures and pictures of various symptoms in his anki cards. best of all, it's free.
- Joined
- Jan 21, 2012
- Messages
- 5,173
- Reaction score
- 4,759
- Points
- 6,766
- Resident [Any Field]
FC doesn't just draw from first aid.
- Joined
- May 5, 2014
- Messages
- 540
- Reaction score
- 451
- Points
- 5,246
- Medical Student
The algorithm takes care of it. Sometimes you won't see cards you rate as a 3 for awhile, but if you rate things 1's you generally see them the next day. Just make sure you're being honest with yourself when you rate those 20 new micro cards.
- Joined
- Sep 29, 2014
- Messages
- 51
- Reaction score
- 41
- Points
- 4,651
- Medical Student
Could any of the recent test takers comment on FC after taking the test? Would you have done anything different with it? Added another resource? Removed one?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
Would have started 1st year instead of 2nd. Ended up with 240's on the USMLE and 650's on the COMLEX. Pretty average on the intelligence scale. Had 75% flagged. Used UWorld, Pathoma and FC, wouldn't change that a bit. Read about half of FA before I got sick of it. My weaker subjects on the tests and on practice tests were always subjects I hadn't done in FC. My strongest subjects were consistently subjects I'd flagged and mastered in FC. If I had started first year, I easily could have had 100% flagged with good mastery. I feel confident I would have been shooting 250's-260's and 700's if I had started a lot earlier.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 236
- Reaction score
- 57
- Points
- 4,651
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Website
- www.google.com
- Medical Student
what was your % mastery ?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
Don't know, used beta. Average rank was like 3.9 I think because I banked a ton in the couple months before dedicated so that dragged me down a lot in that regard.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,045
- Reaction score
- 208
- Points
- 5,101
- Medical Student
So before school starts I should definitely have all of 1st year flagged including anatomy (roughly 32-37% of the bank). Im not sure if I should try and do embryo a lot, should I A) Do it (would be my last few days of summer vacation and would take a fair amount of effort since i really didnt learn embryo at all)
B) Focus on flagging 2nd year Path stuff that we had a decent amount of exposure to first year
C) Relax and just take the last few days off with the exception of daily cards
-I do eventually wanna do Embryo and flag 100% but Im wondering if I should do it now or make it more of a short term memory thing before my actual exam?
B) Focus on flagging 2nd year Path stuff that we had a decent amount of exposure to first year
C) Relax and just take the last few days off with the exception of daily cards
-I do eventually wanna do Embryo and flag 100% but Im wondering if I should do it now or make it more of a short term memory thing before my actual exam?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
Sooner you get it done, the sooner you'll be 100% flagged. I'd say just knock it out personally.
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 236
- Reaction score
- 57
- Points
- 4,651
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Website
- www.google.com
- Medical Student
Did you feel physio was enough in FC to cover the step qs ?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
UWorld made up the difference. I'd say it was weak on physiology. You would not regret using another resource for it, but it might help you retain certain straight memorization things.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Oct 5, 2007
- Messages
- 3,347
- Reaction score
- 3,120
- Points
- 5,596
- Location
- Midwest, USA
- Resident [Any Field]
Congrats on your fantastic scores!
- Joined
- May 20, 2015
- Messages
- 99
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 4,601
- Medical Student
There was an email sent out today about how Firecracker Beta is ending, and how they will be launching Firecracker MD/DO in Aug. However, the email said that you can continue using Firecracker Beta and Legacy if desired.
If I'm just starting to use Firecracker, do you guys think it would be better to use Firecracker Beta and Legacy or wait for the new Firecracker MD? Also, what's the difference between Beta and Legacy?
If I'm just starting to use Firecracker, do you guys think it would be better to use Firecracker Beta and Legacy or wait for the new Firecracker MD? Also, what's the difference between Beta and Legacy?
- Joined
- May 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,185
- Reaction score
- 851
- Points
- 5,496
- Medical Student
The email did not say that you can continue using Firecracker Beta if desired. You can only continue using Legacy.
It said "On August 10th, we'll first launch to brand new members. At that point, we'll let you know the final day of Beta (don't worry - we'll give you a few weeks notice), as well as the process of transitioning over (or just sticking with Legacy)."
(Someone please correct me if I'm wrong!)
So I'd recommend waiting for the new Firecracker MD.
No idea what the differences are between Legacy and the new Firecracker MD - The email said more details on this will be released in a week or so. The big differences between Beta and Legacy don't matter, since Beta is ending.
- Joined
- May 20, 2015
- Messages
- 99
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 4,601
- Medical Student
You're right, I only skimmed it the first time but going back it does mention continuing with Legacy specifically.
So I guess the decision comes down to starting Legacy now or waiting until Firecracker MD is launched. No point in starting Beta if they're going to discontinue it soon right?
- Joined
- May 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,185
- Reaction score
- 851
- Points
- 5,496
- Medical Student
Right. And I don't see any point in starting with Legacy. Everyone on here seems to have switched over to Beta, and I expect the new version to have the best features of the Beta. That being said, nobody as of yet has any idea what the new MD version is like, so we can't really say which is the better option, right?
- Joined
- Dec 6, 2008
- Messages
- 1,031
- Reaction score
- 556
- Points
- 5,296
- Location
- Carrel 118
- Medical Student
Wait, I thought the new MD version was basically fully implemented beta. Did I misunderstand that? Didn't the email say that beta had been implemented for 11 months and it was time for it to 'graduate'.
- Joined
- May 9, 2010
- Messages
- 1,185
- Reaction score
- 851
- Points
- 5,496
- Medical Student
I mean, that's what I expect too, but we don't know for sure. And if that were the case, wouldn't they just say so now? Which makes me think there will be differences.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 844
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 5,396
- Fellow [Any Field]
Can someone give a quick summary of the differences between legacy and beta / the new version? I'm about 40% flagged going into 2nd year and I'd hate to lose all of that 🙁
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Hey @spicysoup55 and @surely - Keith here from Firecracker (you know, the guy who sent you the obnoxiously long email this afternoon). Just wanted to pop in and confirm that you are both correct regarding the plan moving forward (i.e. Beta ending and only Legacy persisting). However, I wanted to clarify that the upcoming launch (and transition, if you decide to do so) shouldn't stop you from continuing to do work in Firecracker in the meantime. I promise that you will absolutely not lose any of your history or progress if you decide to transition, @justAstudent. The only reason we are delaying transitioning current Firecracker members at all is because we want to ensure that all of your usage, progress, and flagging history will transition without fault. Candidly, it's just me being overly cautious.
If you are already using Beta, the transition to MD or DO will feel pretty natural (although - admittedly - there will be much that is new), so just keep doing what you're doing. However, if you're unsure if you should start using Legacy or Beta as you wait for the transition, I recommend just going with Legacy for now. When we launch Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO, make the transition. We'll carry all of your history and progress over, as well as help you transition your current flags into the new priority levels (don't fret- this is a fairly simple 2-step process, and I'll explain it in more detail on Monday). If you aren't a fan, just jump back to Legacy. I'll cry, but no harm done. At least this way, you'll avoid putting yourself through two transitions in the course of a month or so... Hope that helps, but feel free to ask anything else that I wasn't clear about in the email earlier.
If you are already using Beta, the transition to MD or DO will feel pretty natural (although - admittedly - there will be much that is new), so just keep doing what you're doing. However, if you're unsure if you should start using Legacy or Beta as you wait for the transition, I recommend just going with Legacy for now. When we launch Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO, make the transition. We'll carry all of your history and progress over, as well as help you transition your current flags into the new priority levels (don't fret- this is a fairly simple 2-step process, and I'll explain it in more detail on Monday). If you aren't a fan, just jump back to Legacy. I'll cry, but no harm done. At least this way, you'll avoid putting yourself through two transitions in the course of a month or so... Hope that helps, but feel free to ask anything else that I wasn't clear about in the email earlier.
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2013
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 4,701
- Medical Student
How will flagging topics work? I want to see all the information before I flag any topic and start doing questions. Currently the beta does not allow for that, so I've been using the old system for flagging while doing my regular questions with the beta. Will there be a change to this?
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 140
- Points
- 5,171
- Resident [Any Field]
Not sure what you mean. I usually go into a topic, read all of the info, then click do questions for that topic. Once I finish the questions for that topic, I go back and flag it to add to my overall review. The beta definitely allows me to see any information on any topic before deciding to flag/do questions
- Joined
- May 5, 2014
- Messages
- 540
- Reaction score
- 451
- Points
- 5,246
- Medical Student
You are definitely able to see the same info in the beta that you can on the website version. You just go as far as you can into the topic and then the information is in the white space. You may need to hit "more info" or something to see all of it but it is there
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2013
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 4,701
- Medical Student
On a second look, it seems you were right. Being able to see how many questions there are on a particular topic would be a nice addition though.
I was also under the impression that doing new questions in the beta automatically added the questions to your review, but if I understand you correctly you need to flag as well?
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2013
- Messages
- 94
- Reaction score
- 140
- Points
- 5,171
- Resident [Any Field]
I think it may have been like that in the past, but you now have to physically flag topics. I can do the questions, but the topic is still not flagged after I do them
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Sorry for the delay in getting back to you guys; as you can imagine, my inbox is a bit slammed right now 😉 I'm going to go a bit more in depth than you probably care to hear, but I just want to make sure I've answered all of your questions. Disclaimer: #TLDR
@pacman2018 and @Ophthoseidon are both correct regarding being able to drill down to the topic level in order to review the summary of the concepts prior to launching a question session. You will be able to do the same thing in both Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO. However, we've adjusted a bit of the behavior around flagging and reviewing questions. Each week Firecracker will assign you a task to mark the new topics you learned in class. This is "flagging" in the new experience. Marking topics as learned in this manner will unlock those questions for review, and as such they will begin appearing in your daily review tasks. However, we're also introducing the concept of priority levels, which you can use to affect the frequency with which you'll see all of the different topics. These priority levels are "Current", "Past", and "Urgent". I'll explain all of these in more detail next week, but to give you an example of their purpose: The 'Urgent' priority level is essentially a big red emergency button. You'll mark certain topics as Urgent whenever they need to become an obsession that very same week. As such, the questions from these topics will be pushed to the top of all of your review sessions. Current and Past each have their own respective effects on your stack and review tasks, as well. (Just as an aside: You'll also now be able to immediately launch review from every level of the content tree - not just the topic level. In fact, you can even choose what you want to review more specifically by filtering certain questions, such as those you've never seen, those with which you have low or high review score, etc. This was included to allow you to take the reins in a more thoughtful way.)
The reason for this new "flagging" and priority level system is to support the high level Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO vision that I believe is a necessary next step for any company that is trying to serve students whose academic careers are segmented by/culminate in significant licensing exams. As an evolution of Beta, both of the new products are designed to be an even better tool for preparing you for both your courses and your Step 1 exam, simultaneously. They accomplish this by creating a study plan that is specific to you, covering everything you need to learn from your first day in the product, all the way up until your board exam. That study plan takes into account your starting knowledge, current courses, past courses, board exam test date, and goal board exam score. It then assigns you daily and weekly tasks depending on your weak areas and greatest immediate need. So for example, while the majority of what you will be assigned each day will relate to your current courses, as you get closer to your board exam, the recommendation will transition to all learned content, prioritized in order of yield. Likewise, current course content we assign will have a mix of high to low yield concepts, while past content will be mostly made up of only the highest yield material. As such, these new priority levels allow us to keep track of all of this the content you're learning as you progress through med school, prioritize it appropriately, yet limit the degree of manual input and manipulation you have to do yourself.
Whew... Hope that helps. But by all means shoot me more questions. Otherwise, you'll hear from me again next week with a bit more info.
@pacman2018 and @Ophthoseidon are both correct regarding being able to drill down to the topic level in order to review the summary of the concepts prior to launching a question session. You will be able to do the same thing in both Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO. However, we've adjusted a bit of the behavior around flagging and reviewing questions. Each week Firecracker will assign you a task to mark the new topics you learned in class. This is "flagging" in the new experience. Marking topics as learned in this manner will unlock those questions for review, and as such they will begin appearing in your daily review tasks. However, we're also introducing the concept of priority levels, which you can use to affect the frequency with which you'll see all of the different topics. These priority levels are "Current", "Past", and "Urgent". I'll explain all of these in more detail next week, but to give you an example of their purpose: The 'Urgent' priority level is essentially a big red emergency button. You'll mark certain topics as Urgent whenever they need to become an obsession that very same week. As such, the questions from these topics will be pushed to the top of all of your review sessions. Current and Past each have their own respective effects on your stack and review tasks, as well. (Just as an aside: You'll also now be able to immediately launch review from every level of the content tree - not just the topic level. In fact, you can even choose what you want to review more specifically by filtering certain questions, such as those you've never seen, those with which you have low or high review score, etc. This was included to allow you to take the reins in a more thoughtful way.)
The reason for this new "flagging" and priority level system is to support the high level Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO vision that I believe is a necessary next step for any company that is trying to serve students whose academic careers are segmented by/culminate in significant licensing exams. As an evolution of Beta, both of the new products are designed to be an even better tool for preparing you for both your courses and your Step 1 exam, simultaneously. They accomplish this by creating a study plan that is specific to you, covering everything you need to learn from your first day in the product, all the way up until your board exam. That study plan takes into account your starting knowledge, current courses, past courses, board exam test date, and goal board exam score. It then assigns you daily and weekly tasks depending on your weak areas and greatest immediate need. So for example, while the majority of what you will be assigned each day will relate to your current courses, as you get closer to your board exam, the recommendation will transition to all learned content, prioritized in order of yield. Likewise, current course content we assign will have a mix of high to low yield concepts, while past content will be mostly made up of only the highest yield material. As such, these new priority levels allow us to keep track of all of this the content you're learning as you progress through med school, prioritize it appropriately, yet limit the degree of manual input and manipulation you have to do yourself.
Whew... Hope that helps. But by all means shoot me more questions. Otherwise, you'll hear from me again next week with a bit more info.
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2013
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 4,701
- Medical Student
Will it be possible to opt out of this?
This seems poorly thought out. The reason I use FC is to solidify information I would otherwise forget. I am much more likely to forget the low yield material of past content than lets say "what are the major functions of insulin?". A much better idea would be to bring back the "never see this again" option which somehow magically disappeared during the transition.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Which piece specifically are you concerned about? The concept of priority levels or marking the topics as learned in order to unlock the related questions for review? Happy to chat through either. In the meantime, good catch on the latter point; I should have been a bit more clear regarding the purpose of this, rather than implying it was a catch all solution. Put simply, the concepts of priority and yield are relative functions of your goal board exam score. All things being equal, a student who starts studying 2 years out from her Step 1 with a desired score of 230 only needs to master a certain percentage of the total content, while a student who starts at the same time but with a desired score of 260 would need to master a much greater percentage of that content (no duh, right?). For the former student, then, "high yield" equals the absolute minimum percentage of content needed to achieve that goal score. For the latter student, "high yield" also equals the absolute minimum percentage of content to achieve that goal score, however that minimum percentage is much greater. No student, regardless of goal score, needs to master everything. However, the amount that does need to be mastered is largely dependent on that goal score. As such, introducing priority and yield as filtering functions allows a recommendation engine to always maximize for efficiency. Having said that, let me dig in a bit deeper (or feel free to bail out here).
One of the fundamental challenges of any spaced repetition system is in both keeping students on top of the content they've studied and knowing when to present them with new study content, while at the same time minimizing the amount of time they're expected to spend doing this. This issue is compounded when the volume of content that must be learned and retained is extremely high, as is the case with medical education. Put simply: When there is an exceptionally high volume of content, keeping a student on top of all past learned stuff is difficult, without also having to make the student commit an egregious amount of time to continually refreshing everything. (Thats enough for the boring stuff.)
This is why introducing the concept of yield is a thoughtful way for any spaced repetition system to begin prioritizing and sequencing all of the available content. Essentially, yield helps by giving the system a great starting off point, allowing it to more quickly and efficiently work through the content in order to gauge a student's weaknesses and strengths, and by doing so calibrate future recommendations. This is especially important for a few specific cases: For example, for students who come into a spaced repetition system midway, having accumulated a moderately large volume of information, but not having used the system to continually refresh the information. In such a common case, the system struggles to make sense of all of that past content because it has no history of data to rely on, and as such is forced to present it all as if it was equally important. However, the simple fact is that not all concepts are of equal importance. So, by using the concept of yield, it allows us to better narrow down the 'past' stack in order to get an accurate assessment of each student's progress and knowledge. In addition, this allows the algorithm to reduce the required number of daily questions that each user is expected to complete to something that is much more manageable, yet is still sufficient for getting a student where s/he is trying to go (i.e. to a goal exam score).
All of that being said, a properly calibrated recommendation engine is driven first and foremost by contextual inputs, namely the many variables that contribute to the uniqueness of each individual student. Some students start using a spaced repetition system on day one, while others will join after a year of studying. Some students will be content with a Step 1 score of 230, while others will be disappointed with anything below a 260 (Gunners gonna gun). Some students will need to review a concept 5 or 6 times before they can commit it to memory, while others only need 1 or 2 recalls. All of this (and inputs like them) need to drive the system. Over time, as we learn more (meaning as the student does more), the recommendation gets more finely tuned. This means that for those more intense students, yield will cease to be a filtering factor, much in the same way that the number of recommended daily questions might increase).
I know that's a wall of text, so let me summarize: This is new, but I promise you it wasn't just haphazardly tossed in. Anyone working with spaced repetition or recommendation algorithms is used to having to work through some pretty cognitively complex problems (which I actually think is why we're attracted to the medical education space). Regardless, this certainly isn't a do or die situation. We won't all-out block any student from accessing any content; rather, the system will always calibrate itself to maximize efficiency, specific to each individual student. That said, thoughtful feedback like this is invaluable in that it allows me to better identify concerns that I can address in future communication and product updates. We're all on the same team at the end of the day, so the more candid you are, the better a product I can build for you.... Cheers.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Nov 4, 2013
- Messages
- 156
- Reaction score
- 129
- Points
- 4,701
- Medical Student
Thanks for your reply! The concept of priority levels. I've been using this product for almost 2 years and it has served me well thus far. The questions in my daily review are already rated in accordance with how I want them to be prioritized, and at this point I do not wish to have any filter on what questions are presented. What would be immensely helpful, however, would be to bring back the option of manually removing questions that are too easy or bad. For example, If such an option were to be put in place I would be able to remove all the multiple choice questions that clog up my daily routine.
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Oh okay - got it! Well first thing's first: We are bringing back the ability for you to completely hide individual questions that you aren't a fan of (internally, we call this "blacklisting"). To be entirely open, it will not be in Firecracker MD or Firecracker DO at launch, but it is at the very top of our priority list, so members will definitely have it this semester (likely very early into the semester, but you know how software is - I want to be cautious about over-promising).
As for your two year history, I completely respect the desire to not shake things up unnecessarily, especially if what you've been doing is working well. I genuinely believe that if you gave the priority levels a shot, you might reconsider your hesitance. (Just an aside: Any member who decides to try it out will be taken through a quick 2-step process that transitions current flags to these priority levels. That way, the student gets to keep all historical progress and yet is ready to keep moving through in the new product.) However, I know that some members simply won't want to make the transition until they have exactly what they had before. This is a completely fair pushback, and is the reason why we have decided to let members return to Legacy if they are unhappy. Their flagging histories will remain intact, and they can continue forward as usual. It's on my roadmap to implement the ability for users to create custom playlists (meaning, you could save your current deck as is and access it independently of our daily recommendations, if you wanted) but unfortunately it just isn't the highest priority, and as such won't be available for a few months after launch.
I hope that gives you some confidence and clarity regarding the short-term future of Firecracker. I joined the team about halfway through Beta after having been the Creative Director at a software company that went public during my tenure, and I've spent every moment of that time trying to build a product that I believe will truly knock our members' socks off. As you know, software is a 'never done' endeavor, so we will always be improving. That said, I'm really excited to get to work with members like you guys to try to build the future of medical education technology. Candidly, the best part about this space is how intelligent and highly motivated the students are. I love how you all cannot be won over or fooled by marketing gimmicks; only a product that truly works will ever turn your heads. That puts the burden of proof on companies like Firecracker, which is exactly where it should be. Those that execute the best will attract students like you, and I truly appreciate that forcing function.... Cheers.
Last edited:
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2015
- Messages
- 236
- Reaction score
- 57
- Points
- 4,651
- Location
- Houston, Texas
- Website
- www.google.com
- Medical Student
I never got the aforesaid mail...my exam is very near... would it be ok if I send you a message in private about this ?
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Hmmm... That's strange. But yes - by all means, please feel free to shoot me a message.
- Joined
- Dec 25, 2009
- Messages
- 2,045
- Reaction score
- 208
- Points
- 5,101
- Medical Student
Will you guys implement a "Recommended" amount of cards per day feature soon? Obviously someone with 75% flagged should be seeing more questions/day than someone with 20% flagged. Thanks!
- Joined
- Oct 16, 2010
- Messages
- 370
- Reaction score
- 55
- Points
- 4,656
- Resident [Any Field]
My biggest concern with the beta version is that while I see things I never remember all the time, I am not seeing some of the stuff that I've seen periodically in the past with the website version and I feel like I'm forgetting some of those topics because I don't see them at all anymore. Is there any way around this or do I need to keep using the website version?
Is the option to revert back to Legacy always going to be available? By that I mean, can I give Firecracker MD a try for a month, then revert back if I don't like it?
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Yep, but in Firecracker MD and Firecracker DO we'll doing a bit more than just recommending a number of questions each day. During your first foray into the new experience, we will start by creating a study plan that is specific to you, covering everything you need to learn from your first day in the new product, all the way up until your board exam (surprisingly, this only takes a few minutes). That study plan takes into account your previous Firecracker progress, as well as your starting knowledge, current courses, past courses, board exam test date, and goal board exam score. Based on all of this information, we will recommend two things: 1) a starting number of review questions you should answer each day, and 2) the number of new topics you should be marking as learned each week. While most students are familiar with the first, the latter recommendation is actually equally (if not more) important. To achieve your desired goal score, you need to both cover and master a certain percentage of the total available content. (The exact percentage you need to cover and master obviously depends on how well you want to score.) The latter recommendation (i.e. marking x number of topics each week as learned), then, ensures that you achieve the necessary coverage required to have a chance of achieving your goal score, and the former recommendation (i.e. answering x number of review questions each day) ensures that you master all of that content you've covered. As such, the reality is they are both closely related.
While we're on the subject, it's worthwhile to point out two additional ideas: First, the actual numbers recommended for each of these are highly variable and specific to each student's unique situation. That said, the goal is the same for every student - to map out a path to success that will take a member from where they are today to where they are trying to get (i.e. a desired board score). Second, these are just starting numbers. Sometimes you'll get ahead; sometimes you'll fall behind. Either way, the system responds to your ongoing progress by continually recalibrating to make sure you are still on the right trajectory toward your goal board score.
Hope that helps!
Last edited:
- Joined
- Aug 3, 2015
- Messages
- 47
- Reaction score
- 34
- Points
- 4,651
- Non-Student
Ah yes - the question I've received the most up to this point (boy you med school folks sure do love yourselves some certainty!) But seriously, it's a great question. Candidly, we went back and forth on it internally for a good while, but in the end we just couldn't justify forcing long term Legacy users to transition to the new experience before they were ready. So, the plan is to allow Legacy users to hop back and forth for an extended length of time. During that period, anything you flag in Legacy will appear as learned in Firecracker MD, and likewise anything you mark as learned in Firecracker MD will be flagged when you transition back to Legacy. We're honestly not entirely sure how long we'll keep Legacy open (and thus allow members to use them both simultaneously before asking them to make a decision). What I do know is that we will not force any behavior until we have achieved complete feature parity, i.e. making sure that everything you love about Legacy and couldn't live without either exists or is improved in Firecracker MD. Once we feel certain (I guess we tech folks like it too) that we've truly accomplished that, we'll revisit closing that back-and-forth window.
Summary: We have no schedule for shutting down Legacy, so feel free to be as polyamorous as you'd like.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 844
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 5,396
- Fellow [Any Field]
Not to highjack the thread, but about what % did you all have flagged going into MS2?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
I had zero%. Wish it was closer to 50%.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 844
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 5,396
- Fellow [Any Field]
Did you find it hard to keep up with it during 2nd year?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
I finished 2nd year at 75% completed because when beta was having issues I just spent a solid month banking questions without doing review. I was doing 200+ new questions a day. Then I just hit it hard to catch up after that. Seriously if I had 50+% done starting 2nd year, it would have been immensely advantageous. I easily could have hit 100% and had good mastery of it.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 844
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 5,396
- Fellow [Any Field]
Oh wow. I have about 40% going into MS2 and find that I'm doing close to 200 cards before adding new cards. How many cards did you average per day?
- Joined
- Apr 24, 2012
- Messages
- 4,964
- Reaction score
- 6,134
- Points
- 6,286
- Resident [Any Field]
Not actually sure because once dedicated started I didn't hardly use firecracker, so the average went down a ton. I think my average was around 150q per day before that. You will be solid if you keep it up and flag aggressively now instead of later. Getting it banked sooner will allow you to master material later long before dedicated. Good luck! Keep up the good work.
- Joined
- Apr 12, 2011
- Messages
- 844
- Reaction score
- 522
- Points
- 5,396
- Fellow [Any Field]
Thank you for your help and encouragement. Appreciate it.
- Joined
- Dec 16, 2014
- Messages
- 278
- Reaction score
- 222
- Points
- 5,226
- Medical Student
So how do you flag topics to keep up? Did you flag topics just under the subheading of your class or did you search the topics in fc and flag from there? Right now in biochem a lot of my lecture material has to do not only with the biochem section on fc but a lot of the organ system topics as well. Do you guys flag in both areas? @mcloaf @abolt18
- Joined
- Dec 2, 2012
- Messages
- 73
- Reaction score
- 12
- Points
- 4,631
- Medical Student (Accepted)
I heard Osmosis is better than FC.
