Goljan 2005 Kaplan Lecture Notes and his Rapid Review=SAME BOOK

[DaRockk]

---

Members don't see this ad.

I have both his 2005 Kaplan Lecture notes and his Rapid Review book, it's the same book. Lecture notes have slightly more overall info, but RR is way better organized. You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement.

 

[Pox in a box]

I have both his 2005 Kaplan Lecture notes and his Rapid Review book, it's the same book. Lecture notes have slightly more overall info, but RR is way better organized. You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement.

I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact.

 

[OSUdoc08]

I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact.

You'll want to review my posts, attesting to the fact that they are the same.

 

[bulletproof]

I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact.

Oh, so thats what you meant when you wrote the following "
I'm convinced that Dr. Goljan has told all his medical students at OSU to tell everyone this information. Having listened to the audio several times, read the Goljan Rapid Review, read the Goljan notes he passes out at his lectures, and taken a peak at his STARS book...this advice is bull. The notes are not like the book and the book is not correlative with the audio. The notes do correlate with the audio, not in the correct order, but they do correlate. Anyone else agree?"
Maybe I am just not the most diligent reader, but it seems as though that is not what you were trying to say.....whatsoever.

 

[OSUdoc08]

Oh, so thats what you meant when you wrote the following "
I'm convinced that Dr. Goljan has told all his medical students at OSU to tell everyone this information. Having listened to the audio several times, read the Goljan Rapid Review, read the Goljan notes he passes out at his lectures, and taken a peak at his STARS book...this advice is bull. The notes are not like the book and the book is not correlative with the audio. The notes do correlate with the audio, not in the correct order, but they do correlate. Anyone else agree?"
Maybe I am just not the most diligent reader, but it seems as though that is not what you were trying to say.....whatsoever.

Thanks, I'm simply confused by the purpose of this contradiction.

 

[whispers]

No professor follows his/ her lectures word for word. I've had him as a lecturer. RR follows his notes extremely well. Everything he says in lectures and more follow rr. I've started third year and as I sit through lectures during the day I smile and laugh because all the questions that I answer have ALL been based off of something I've learned from goljan. I'm not saying to buy the book because he told me to tell you so. I'm saying it because if you want to learn, understand, and be a good doc it is the way to go.
TB

😀

Thanks, I'm simply confused by the purpose of this contradiction.

 

[OSUdoc08]

No professor follows his/ her lectures word for word. I've had him as a lecturer. RR follows his notes extremely well. Everything he says in lectures and more follow rr. I've started third year and as I sit through lectures during the day I smile and laugh because all the questions that I answer have ALL been based off of something I've learned from goljan. I'm not saying to buy the book because he told me to tell you so. I'm saying it because if you want to learn, understand, and be a good doc it is the way to go.
TB

😀

Well I'd have to say Goljan comes pretty close.

 

[Chief Resident]

If they are the same then why are his notes over 500 pages, which I believe is longer than the RR book? Is it simply a matter of font and page layout making the RR book shorter than the notes?

 

[Pox in a box]

If they are the same then why are his notes over 500 pages, which I believe is longer than the RR book? Is it simply a matter of font and page layout making the RR book shorter than the notes?

No, it's not a matter of font and layout. The Rapid Review and the 500 page notes are different.

 

[Pox in a box]

You'll want to review my posts, attesting to the fact that they are the same.

I know. I disagree with you. They are not the same.

 

[OSUdoc08]

If they are the same then why are his notes over 500 pages, which I believe is longer than the RR book? Is it simply a matter of font and page layout making the RR book shorter than the notes?

The rapid review has the exact same information in the same format, but is a little bit more summarized.

The way the information is presented is the same, and you'll notice that all of the bold words, which are guaranteed board questions, are the exact same on both.

 

[OSUdoc08]

I know. I disagree with you. They are not the same.

Then why did you contradict yourself in this post earlier by saying that they are the same?

I am completely baffled by your contradictions. I will even quote what you said earlier:


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaRockk
"I have both his 2005 Kaplan Lecture notes and his Rapid Review book, it's the same book. Lecture notes have slightly more overall info, but RR is way better organized. You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement."


Pox: "I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact."

 

[Chief Resident]

No, it's not a matter of font and layout. The Rapid Review and the 500 page notes are different.

Pox, can you please elaborate on how they are different?

 

[bulletproof]

Then why did you contradict yourself in this post earlier by saying that they are the same?

I am completely baffled by your contradictions. I will even quote what you said earlier:


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaRockk
"I have both his 2005 Kaplan Lecture notes and his Rapid Review book, it's the same book. Lecture notes have slightly more overall info, but RR is way better organized. You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement."


Pox: "I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact."

bump

 

[Pox in a box]

Then why did you contradict yourself in this post earlier by saying that they are the same?

I am completely baffled by your contradictions. I will even quote what you said earlier:


Quote:
Originally Posted by DaRockk
"I have both his 2005 Kaplan Lecture notes and his Rapid Review book, it's the same book. Lecture notes have slightly more overall info, but RR is way better organized. You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement."


Pox: "I've been trying to say that but all the OSU folks keep discounting this fact."

I finally understand the confusion...I was agreeing with this statement: "You're not missing out by just having the Rapid Review book. Do his audio after you're finished, great complement." So now does that make more sense? Sorry.

 

[Pox in a box]

Pox, can you please elaborate on how they are different?

The 500 page notes have many more high yield boardworthy facts. The presentation is not very pretty but there is much more inside these 500 pages than what is in Rapid Review. I don't know how to compare them without you just taking a look for yourself. If you've actually read both, then I don't see how you can say that they are the same. I think the 500 page notes are much more high yield than the Rapid Review book.

 

[OSUdoc08]

The 500 page notes have many more high yield boardworthy facts. The presentation is not very pretty but there is much more inside these 500 pages than what is in Rapid Review. I don't know how to compare them without you just taking a look for yourself. If you've actually read both, then I don't see how you can say that they are the same. I think the 500 page notes are much more high yield than the Rapid Review book.

However, Goljan thinks otherwise. The high yield information for the boards is all found in the rapid review book, in a legal form.

 

[Chief Resident]

If you had to choose which one would you use?

I have the 500 page notes (from a couple years ago), but I could get the new RR from a friend.

 

[Pox in a box]

However, Goljan thinks otherwise. The high yield information for the boards is all found in the rapid review book, in a legal form.

There were items in the 500 pages that were not in the Rapid Review. There were items in the 500 pages not in the Rapid Review that were on Step 1. You choose which one you'd like to read. That's my opinion.

 

[BlackNDecker]

If you had to choose which one would you use?

I have the 500 page notes (from a couple years ago), but I could get the new RR from a friend.

Why don't you just read both? I have RR and agree that there is more in the 500 pages...I can't yet say whether the 500p. is more HY. They are good for skimming, albeit not quickly, after having read and reread the pertinent material in RR. I bought RR this summer and I think the copyright was 2003, so whichever you choose is not necessarily "hot off the press."

Pox is right, the organization is a little daunting...

 

[Chief Resident]

Why don't you just read both?

I'd rather not read two of the same book if there is not much difference between them. Hence why I'd like to know if it is worth reading the RR over the Notes, or vice versa.

 

[theDr.]

I have a copy of the older Pahology Review (brown w/ grey in the middle cover) which is basically an outline of his Pathology textbook. Should I get the Rapid Review for Path (white cover) or are the two review books basically the same? anybody seen both...thanks.

 

[Long Dong]

I have a copy of the older Pahology Review (brown w/ grey in the middle cover) which is basically an outline of his Pathology textbook. Should I get the Rapid Review for Path (white cover) or are the two review books basically the same? anybody seen both...thanks.

I used this book and it was fine combined with first aid path, his lecutres, and robbins review of path. Didn't even open a text book for second year. He's notes just seem to cluttered for me to read and 500 pages was 200 pages more to memorize then his tried and tested review book.

 

[MD999]

The 500 pages are definantly more HY than his Rapid Review. It hits ALL the key points that he mentions in his lectures. The Rapid Review is somewhat of an outline form of his notes. The STARS Path Review Book (that brown book from 1998) is good if you want a more detailed approach than his lecture notes and the RR.

The 500 page notes have been used by a countless number of medical students and they all state that its the highest yield of the HY.

Whatever book you use ,just keep in mind that you have to be able to understand WHY something is HY.
Goljan's definantly the man when it comes to USMLE Review.

 

[Pox in a box]

I'd rather not read two of the same book if there is not much difference between them. Hence why I'd like to know if it is worth reading the RR over the Notes, or vice versa.

Pick up a copy of each and read both for 10 minutes. You'll see a quick difference.

 

[theDr.]

Pox,
well i have to order the other...what would you recommend.