New Pathway and HST.

[pagemmapants]

Ok, so I just got Harvard's secondary a few days ago and have finally (on a Sunday morning, of course ) been able to take a look at the curricula. Being the procrastinator that I am, I'd only vaguely known that Harvard had two curricula, one of which was new-agey and one of which was mostly research-based. Now having read the descriptions of both, my gut response is "ugh!"

Is anyone else totally turned off by these curricula? Well, HST isn't so bad, but there's only 30 spots. And engineering?! I can't imagine withdrawing my app from HMS (who wants to be "that guy"?). . .

I guess what I'm asking (as each post really SHOULD be a question) is do you guys think PBL is actually worth it, and is anyone else as surprised by the New Pathway curriculum as I am?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dilated]

Ok, so I just got Harvard's secondary a few days ago and have finally (on a Sunday morning, of course ) been able to take a look at the curricula. Being the procrastinator that I am, I'd only vaguely known that Harvard had two curricula, one of which was new-agey and one of which was mostly research-based. Now having read the descriptions of both, my gut response is "ugh!"

Is anyone else totally turned off by these curricula? Well, HST isn't so bad, but there's only 30 spots. And engineering?! I can't imagine withdrawing my app from HMS (who wants to be "that guy"?). . .

I guess what I'm asking (as each post really SHOULD be a question) is do you guys think PBL is actually worth it, and is anyone else as surprised by the New Pathway curriculum as I am?

I actually didn't really read it either. I had PBL as an undergrad and found it pretty worthless. The catch to "learning via problem solving" is that you still have to memorize all the facts, you just have to do it in addition to looking up some stupid problem on pubmed. Still, I won't get in there so I'm not sweating it.

 

[dajimmers]

I'm actually pretty excited about the New Pathway curriculum. I haven't really had much PBL experience, but I like researching and figuring things out on my own, and interesting examples sound like fun. I've had four years of lecture, time for something else, and more related to what we'll be doing in clinical/residency/practice.

Also, diff eq requirement, engineering basis, and uber-research based HST turned me off. I like research, but don't want to be forced into it.

 

[DesiMcatAcer]

How does engineering fit into HST?

 

[Daichi Katase]

How does engineering fit into HST?

It emphasizes a very quantative approach to medicine. I really like it.

 

[DesiMcatAcer]

Awesome!
So, do they choose more engineers for this program?

 

[Chinorlz]

How does engineering fit into HST?

Well with the upper level math (diff eq) and other requirements, Harvard pretty much makes HST available to those that were engineers as undergrads. Otherwise you would have to have gone out of your way to complete those courses since most other majors don't need em.

As for the curruculum, it's a very foundational build-up sort of approach. For each organ they work from the biochemical level up through the anatomy/histo/path of said organ. Unlike other programs where year 1 is all how things function normally and year two being pathology, HST covers all aspects of each organ as they go along.

Also, anatomy/physiology is MUCH longer than New Pathways and way more in depth.

Although a bunch of people in my lab love to knock New Pathways (hehe, they're all either currently in HST or went through it), I'd still love it.

I don't get this dislike of PBL in this thread as just about every med school has adopted this method of teaching

-A

 

[GhungrooGuy]

Ok, so I just got Harvard's secondary a few days ago and have finally (on a Sunday morning, of course ) been able to take a look at the curricula. Being the procrastinator that I am, I'd only vaguely known that Harvard had two curricula, one of which was new-agey and one of which was mostly research-based. Now having read the descriptions of both, my gut response is "ugh!"

Is anyone else totally turned off by these curricula? Well, HST isn't so bad, but there's only 30 spots. And engineering?! I can't imagine withdrawing my app from HMS (who wants to be "that guy"?). . .

I guess what I'm asking (as each post really SHOULD be a question) is do you guys think PBL is actually worth it, and is anyone else as surprised by the New Pathway curriculum as I am?

There are advantages and disadvantages to both NP and HST at Harvard. I'm a first year New Pathway student, but from talking to my peers and older students here, I can tell you that the people in both programs really love them. They are VERY different from each other in emphasis -- NP does a lot of problem based learning, whereas HST does almost exclusively lectures; HST students are required to do a research project for graduation; NP has a longitudinal patient-doctor class throughout the first two years. There are a lot more distinctions you can read about online...

As to whether or not you think PBL is worth it, I too was initially sort of skeptical. After having experienced it, I'm glad we have it -- though I know some people find it frustrating or challenging (not necessarily a bad thing). Also, I think there's a misconception that NP is *exclusively* PBL-based. NOT TRUE. A typical day includes an hour or so of lecture, an hour of PBL tutorial, and 1-2 hours of lab for the first block (anatomy).

Whichever curriculum you think works best for you -- or whichever school you end up deciding on down the road -- just realize that either way, the people who put the most in will get the most out of it. So far, I can tell you that HMS is definitely meeting or surpassing all my expectations...

 

[DesiMcatAcer]

Thx for all your answers, they have been great help!...I have few more questions do any of you have the stats of how many people apply to NP and how many apply to HST and how many get into each of them? Also, can you apply to both or you have to apply to only one system? Where can you find the major differences between the two(where can you read more about them)? Thanks!

 

[fromthetips]

I was wondering about those requirements for the HST program. I am very interested in the program and have a great deal of great research experience, but my physics in college was not calculus based. I was wondering whether this completely eliminates you from consideration for admission. Should I bother writing the essay?

thanks

 

[Bluntman]

Thx for all your answers, they have been great help!...I have few more questions do any of you have the stats of how many people apply to NP and how many apply to HST and how many get into each of them? Also, can you apply to both or you have to apply to only one system? Where can you find the major differences between the two(where can you read more about them)? Thanks!

The application process to NP and HST is independent, and applying to one doesn't afffect your chances for getting into the other. All the info about the distinctions between the 2 programs is on HMS's website, check it out. Not sure about the application #s, but about 150 matriculate into NP and 30 into HST (give or take).

 

[Bluntman]

I was wondering about those requirements for the HST program. I am very interested in the program and have a great deal of great research experience, but my physics in college was not calculus based. I was wondering whether this completely eliminates you from consideration for admission. Should I bother writing the essay?

thanks

Give em a call...that is always the best bet. If worst comes to worst, you could always take a calc-based physics class next summer before you matriculate.

 

[fromthetips]

yeah you're right, ill just call them

thanks

 

[DesiMcatAcer]

Who here knows the stats for the number of people who apply to HST? Thanks!

 

[DesiMcatAcer]

Anyone?

 

[Bluntman]

Anyone?

Speaking anecdotally...

The number of aplicants to MSTP programs is roughly an order of magnitude less than a school's regular MD program...so for Harvard that would be around 5-600. Therefore I would say that at a minimum, 500 people applied to HST (since who in their right mind that was applying to MSTP would not apply to the similarly themed HST track!). The number is probably somewhat higher though, since HST lacks the imposing 8 year commitment of a full mdphd program. Anyway, that is my best educated guess.

 

[pseudoknot]

Another way to guess: most programs have about 50 applicants per slot. 30 HST students per class would then have about 1500 apps.