grad vs. med school science classes

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

OpalOnyx

Full Member
10+ Year Member
15+ Year Member
Joined
Aug 15, 2008
Messages
561
Reaction score
2
how do grad school classes compare to med school (M1) classes? - in terms of difficulty, content, time spent studying...

I took a year of grad school classes in a SMP and am wondering how the transition from those two science class types is gonna be..
 
I would imagine it varies by school.

I did the Georgetown SMP, and the grad classes there were a complete joke compared to the med school classes. In general, the grad classes were done at a much slower pace than the med school classes. The grad school tests also covered less material.
 
probably not very similar...i'm sure it varies quite a bit by subject matter, but i would suspect that, in general, grad school is more focused on theory/mechanism with med school focused on sheer volume of material that can be crammed into a curriculum. both can be quite hard........
 
IMO, grad school classes are more interesting than med school classes.

Like another poster said, grad school = more theory, more "why" things are the way they are. Med school = more detail-oriented, less big picture.

The relative lack of theory in med school really bugs the crap out of me, actually.

People say med school is "harder" aaaaaand it is. But only in the sense that not having any conceptual frameworks to organize info makes memorization such a humongous chore that it's painful.

Grad school is "harder" in the sense that it requires more thinking and reasoning and all the yummy byproducts of thinking and reasoning.

Take your pick. Some people actually seem to prefer the "memorize trivia" style of learning that = med school... I guess it does make us "sound" smarter when we can regurgitate lots of little details at the drop of a hat. Just don't ask us WHY anything is the way it is or press too hard...
 
IMO, grad school classes are more interesting than med school classes.

Like another poster said, grad school = more theory, more "why" things are the way they are. Med school = more detail-oriented, less big picture.

The relative lack of theory in med school really bugs the crap out of me, actually.

People say med school is "harder" aaaaaand it is. But only in the sense that not having any conceptual frameworks to organize info makes memorization such a humongous chore that it's painful.

Grad school is "harder" in the sense that it requires more thinking and reasoning and all the yummy byproducts of thinking and reasoning.

Take your pick. Some people actually seem to prefer the "memorize trivia" style of learning that = med school... I guess it does make us "sound" smarter when we can regurgitate lots of little details at the drop of a hat. Just don't ask us WHY anything is the way it is or press too hard...

I disagree that med school ignores the "why." That's what physiology is all about.
 
In grad school, you generally don't have to remember the details. Most of the classes I took, it was essay type conceptual question. More why, and you can look up the what if you need it. And not just physiology, either. In every class.

I personally think it results in a superior education, but that's my opinion. No one will remember the what six months after boards.
 
In my ideal visions - I go into med school tests feeling prepared, having studied as much as possible, and ready as can be. haha I know this doesn't happen for my grad school classes.

The school I got into doesn't have block scheduling. And I'm concerned about juggling studying for two tests on the same day... didn't find myself in that situation much in under grad or grad school. Do you guys feel prepared before taking tests?

sometimes I feel like no matter how much I study, I just don't feel prepared. maybe that's just a personality issue, wondering if it's common or normal haha
 
med school should be all about the details. you don't need to know why a patient gets a disease, but you need to know the most minute drug indication and contradition for treatment.
 
I dunno what ya'll are talking about details vs concepts.. for me it's either knowing the information or not knowing the information. Nearly all details in med school are part of a bigger overall concept and the only way (for me) to remember the details is to understand the background and think through various situations with a big-picture approach. If you learn endless details with no overall correlation your retention will be very low; if you learn details but correlate each to a certain condition, using enforced basic science principals to reason out why the disease occurs, why it has this chromosome abnormality, ETC then you will remember the details.
 
Yeah I feel like I learn better when I know the "why" or see the links between two concepts. Chunking is goooood 👍
 
I did a research-based master's and it was the easiest time of my life (class wise). All graduate level courses are a joke... What's difficult about graduate school (research ones) is the amount of independent and undirected learning that must go on.
 
IMO, grad school classes are more interesting than med school classes.

Like another poster said, grad school = more theory, more "why" things are the way they are. Med school = more detail-oriented, less big picture.

The relative lack of theory in med school really bugs the crap out of me, actually.

People say med school is "harder" aaaaaand it is. But only in the sense that not having any conceptual frameworks to organize info makes memorization such a humongous chore that it's painful.

Grad school is "harder" in the sense that it requires more thinking and reasoning and all the yummy byproducts of thinking and reasoning.

Take your pick. Some people actually seem to prefer the "memorize trivia" style of learning that = med school... I guess it does make us "sound" smarter when we can regurgitate lots of little details at the drop of a hat. Just don't ask us WHY anything is the way it is or press too hard...

Yeah, my experience has not been like this either. I go to a PBL school and we have to understand the theory behind most subjects. We read textbooks like crazy and are bound to pick up theory when reading Robbins pathology, Boron physiology, Kandell Neuroscience, and Goodman & Gillman Pharmacology for two years. Granted, most med schools are not PBL, but because I have to understand 'why' to remember anything (I hate factoids), I chose a school where I would receive it.
 
This varies a good deal from school to school. When I was in Rochester's grad program, the depth of many of their neuro classes blew medical school right out of the water. In Oregon, I've heard that many of the neuro grad courses are not more detailed than the medical ones (I'm not doing neuro in Oregon, so I can't compare directly).

However, I can say that one huge difference is the FORMAT of the exams. In medical school, our exams are multiple choice, and as long as you can recognize the correct answer/term/etc, you can do just fine. Graduate school exams, on the other hand, are overwhelmingly essay based. You need to actually remember the words and pathways in their entirety to avoid sounding like an idiot. In medical school, you can usually skip a few steps (e.g. drug X works on receptor Y, and way downstream things A, B, and C happen). In grad school, you may not have to know the effects of the drug, but if you don't know its functional pathway from start to finish, you are SOL. Both programs may pull out dumb, overly-detailed specifics that require rote memorization. Both may also test big concepts. The big difference is how they are tested.

So, even if you attend a school where difficulty of the material is comparable, if you are better with multiple choice, I would guess that you would find grad school more challenging. On the other hand, if you are better with essays, you may find medical school more difficult.
 
I dunno what ya'll are talking about details vs concepts.. for me it's either knowing the information or not knowing the information. Nearly all details in med school are part of a bigger overall concept and the only way (for me) to remember the details is to understand the background and think through various situations with a big-picture approach. If you learn endless details with no overall correlation your retention will be very low; if you learn details but correlate each to a certain condition, using enforced basic science principals to reason out why the disease occurs, why it has this chromosome abnormality, ETC then you will remember the details.

mesovarium, suspensory ligament and the ovarian-utero ligament all suspend the ovary. I fail to see the clinical relevance of knowing which ligament is which unless you are going to be a surgeon.
 
mesovarium, suspensory ligament and the ovarian-utero ligament all suspend the ovary. I fail to see the clinical relevance of knowing which ligament is which unless you are going to be a surgeon.

There could be any number of other reasons to know that information.

Honestly, you guys sound like the 7th grader complaining about learning algebra because "I'll never use this in real life."
 
I disagree that med school ignores the "why." That's what physiology is all about.

That's only one class. Which I haven't taken yet. Which I'm very much looking forward to taking 😉

For some reason, I had this notion that med school would be mostly about the sort of things one would learn in physio ("why"/"how" things work, etc.)... but it's really not. Frustrating at the moment. But I'm sure when I do get to take physio, I'll be one happy camper.
 
med school should be all about the details. you don't need to know why a patient gets a disease, but you need to know the most minute drug indication and contradition for treatment.

Isn't that what computers are for? If that were the extent of medicine, computer programs do a far superior job of finding drug indications/contraindications than any one of us can possibly do. Especially when a patient is taking 10-15 drugs simultaneously (as many of them do).

Without understanding, we are just automatons. And poor ones at that.
 
Isn't that what computers are for? If that were the extent of medicine, computer programs do a far superior job of finding drug indications/contraindications than any one of us can possibly do. Especially when a patient is taking 10-15 drugs simultaneously (as many of them do).

Without understanding, we are just automatons. And poor ones at that.

we need understand and details, that's what I am trying to say. If you fail to see the big picture you will not do well on the boards.
 
how do grad school classes compare to med school (M1) classes? - in terms of difficulty, content, time spent studying...

I took a year of grad school classes in a SMP and am wondering how the transition from those two science class types is gonna be..

I would say that the principle difference can be embodied in the aphorism that it is probably easier for a hardworking but not really gifted student to excel in med school, whereas a lazy but truly bright student generally has zero trouble earning a PhD, but would fail straight out of med school.
 
darn it

lazy and somewhat bright student here. I got home today and couldn't touch my lectures for nearly 4 hours. Battle battle battle

and thx for the insightful posts... one thing i hadn't considered before is the change in testing style. can't say I like one or the other. i despise multiple choice and essay tests equally (how nice of me, i know)
 
Having been through a PhD and most of the PhD curriculum for Neuroscience at my undergrad, I would say that grad school courses in biomedical science are a joke compared to med school courses in general. In grad school the average grade is typically a A-, the exams are easier, and the amount of time you need to study outside of class is far, far less.
 
Actually, learning concepts is how you become a great diagnostician. Pattern recognition is a very complex phenomenon that relies heavily on unconscious neural frameworks that you build by studying to learn the reasoning behind a given pathology. For example. "A patient complains of a rash that covers part of his lower back. He states that it came on recently, but that the area felt painful before the rash began. Painkillers don't help." Now, most first year medical students know "rash=infectious disease" and "muscle pain=trauma", but they have no way of connecting the two. A 3rd year medical student understands that the pathophysiology of herpes zoster results in a dermatome specific spread of the virus into the nerve fiber, resulting in a very painful feeling that mimics a muscle strain. And that since the virus is inside the cell, painkillers won't have the same effect as an inflammatory induced phenomenon. Anatomy, infectious diseases, neuro, and pharmacology all combined into one concept. I hardly ever memorize anything explicitly in medical school. If you study hard enough, you don't have to do much beyond the occasional drug side effect that does not really make sense.
 
Actually, learning concepts is how you become a great diagnostician. Pattern recognition is a very complex phenomenon that relies heavily on unconscious neural frameworks that you build by studying to learn the reasoning behind a given pathology. For example. "A patient complains of a rash that covers part of his lower back. He states that it came on recently, but that the area felt painful before the rash began. Painkillers don't help." Now, most first year medical students know "rash=infectious disease" and "muscle pain=trauma", but they have no way of connecting the two. A 3rd year medical student understands that the pathophysiology of herpes zoster results in a dermatome specific spread of the virus into the nerve fiber, resulting in a very painful feeling that mimics a muscle strain. And that since the virus is inside the cell, painkillers won't have the same effect as an inflammatory induced phenomenon. Anatomy, infectious diseases, neuro, and pharmacology all combined into one concept. I hardly ever memorize anything explicitly in medical school. If you study hard enough, you don't have to do much beyond the occasional drug side effect that does not really make sense.

wow that sounds awesome
 
how do grad school classes compare to med school (M1) classes? - in terms of difficulty, content, time spent studying...

I took a year of grad school classes in a SMP and am wondering how the transition from those two science class types is gonna be..


we have some grad students in our physiology course so in some cases they can take the same courses.
 
My experience (I was in grad school while my husband was in med school) was that med school was a much larger volume of information, but the approach was very different. I think the biggest practical difference was the way we were tested--he always had multiple choice tests, whereas the grad school tests were all essays about mechanism and designing ways to test various hypotheses and such. The grad school tests weren't long but took a very long time to complete, because they required a lot of creative thinking. Mostly they were also open-book at least to some degree, which helped in terms of not having to remember all of the specific information, but if you didn't have a firm grasp of the material there was no way you'd be able to answer the questions at all, much less finish in time. I saw students start crying during one grad school test in particular. The whole approach was also evident in coursework like critiques of published papers. It was really more about problem-solving than about learning a large volume of info. In med school, the majority of the first two years is learning a huge amount of information, with perhaps a little problem-solving thrown in but generally not tested on. Also, it's a broader variety of info in med school--I was in grad school in immunology, and also took a cell bio course as part of that, but what I was learning was really fairly narrowly focused, and all laboratory-based (including the exams).

So...in my personal experience the two are just quite different.
 
Top