preclinical gunners = gunners in ms3 and ms4?

[PeepshowJohnny]

My opinion (and I never get tired of saying it because it dispells a lot of stereotypes students have) is that preclinical to clinical "flips" (superstar becomes bottom of the class or visa versa) are VANISHINGLY rare. There is definitely some flux and true "flips" do happen, but mostly you should assume your class rank is going to look pretty similar after Step 1.

The thing is, the natural abilities plus dedication that allow the student at the top of his class to memorize glycolysis, blood clotting pathways, the brachial plexus ETC are the same skills that allow them to shine on the clinical rotations. When they're on a surgery rotation and can bust out an extensive diff. diagnosis for belly pain because they've been reading, that's impressive. When they're on peds and they rattle off a ton about leukemias because they remember it from second year, that impresses people.

Now, as for the "people person" aspects, honestly, it's overblown. As longas you A) Show up on time B) Know when to keep your mouth shut and when to talk C) Have no major hygeine or style catastrophes, you're okay. Yes, if you're a perennial "Big man on campus" type guy or a Seinfeld level comedian you're probably going to be better liked by your evaluators. But how much does that matter in your grade? Not enough to turn the "average" student into honors by itslef.
***
As for Gunners, here's my take. Maybe I go to a sheltered school, but the
Dr. Moriarty/Snidely Whiplash/Gordon Geckos seem to a fairy tale. Sure I've heard the rumors about how "so and so ripped pages out of the library book so no one else could use it" but they're never substantiated and rarely make sense ("Uh, but there's another copy right there in pristine condition").

I think a lot of the stories of "gunnerism" are overblown. For example, let's say Tom and Jim are both studying for an embryo test. Tom is a top student, Jim isn't. Jim asks Tom what he's studying. Tom mentions he's trying to memorize what week certain changes happen. Jim thinks that's a good idea and tries to memorize it too. Well, it turns out it's not focused on the test. Tom gets a good grade, Jim gets an average grade.

Now Jim might think "That bastard. He told me to study something that would waste my time". But in all honesty, that's probably baloney. Tom probably DID think it would be on the test and studied it, but he probably also studied everything else too.

The same thing goes for gunners feeding "wrong answers". How many of those are probably just honest mistakes and not malice? Like I said, maybe my school is different but stories of "Gunners" sound like the smae old nebulous conspiracy theories about the government suppressing the car that gets 80 miles to a gallon.

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[Law2Doc]

They aren't an assistant to the other mods. It's like the title "assistant professor". It means they are just the initial "rank" of SDN moderator. It comes with being a relatively new moderator.

Or an old moderator who declined the additional responsibility.

An assistant moderator gets the same pay, but doesn't have equal access to the company jet.

 

[Neuronix]

An assistant moderator gets the same pay, but doesn't have equal access to the company jet.

Ohhhh when do I get to use the company jet? I think we have equal access on that one

 

[smq123]

Anybody in the top 10% of their class is a gunner. Quit being such a fascist about it. L2D, you're such a Nazi/Communist.

Apparently humor is not allowed on this forum. I actually got warned for this post. I will refrain from name-calling and any attempt at a joke when dealing with L2D in the future.

Dre - Let that be a lesson to you that humor is only welcome on SDN when it is accompanied by AT LEAST 3 emoticons that indicate that you are joking. In the event that you are unable to find 3 emoticons that are to your liking, you may substitute one emoticon with a "(just kidding!!)" or a "[/sarcasm]." (Please note that the two exclamation points after the word 'kidding' are crucial.)

In other words, you may need to make your posts friendly for the sense-of-humor impaired, by beating them over the head with the fact that you were being sarcastic. Even this may not work, but at least you have documentation of your sarcasm.

 

[DrDre311]

Duly noted.

 

[vtucci]

Many people apply the term in a derisive manner to those at the top of their medical school classes, regardless of whether those people actively try to make themselves look better than their peers. But I do like the more specific definition better, the one with the connotation of being a tool.

Dre- How do you know who is in the top of your class unless they (or your school) are advertising it somehow? Virtually no one at my school discusses grades. It is the rare individuals who do well and advertise that fact that are looked down upon because it often appears as if they are seeking praise by doing so. When AOA lists come up, sometimes there are some real surprises among students that no one realized where doing so well because they just worked hard and were good team members.

Amory- what did I mean by clinically relevant... I will grant you that it is not always easy to tell as an MS1. However, I looked at pathology- disease processes (i.e., median nerve entrapment carpal tunnel type relationships) not esoteric factoids that make the difference between honors and pass (with a 4 point spread separating the top 20% of the class from the bottom 20%, this becomes much more important) like the numbers of nanometers in a particular type of nerve fiber (yes the choices were 50, 70, 120 etc). After having had pathology, I understand why there is a difference but even now, I think there are far more important concepts to hit home than this.

I also know my strengths and weaknesses. Telling me to go home memorize 1000 structures in two weeks- never going to happen without putting it into context. As a result, my anatomy grade was all over the place depending on how much time I had and had much context (i.e., pathology) there was to illustrate the need to memorize the endless number of structures. For me, everything is about context. Also, covering the cadaver up and not allowing students to get their orientation is unrealistic- ditto on twisting the heart upsidedown for practicals and not allowing students to touch or move the structure. I grant you that there are aberrations with structures and they do not always follow the prescribed path and understanding these nuances may be important. However,if you are operating (even if lap), you are able to touch and move things to orient yourself.

If anatomy was taught in the context of surgery, it makes sense and I'll remember it. Otherwise, I remember clinical associations (i.e., winged scapula and long thoracic nerve etc.). Surgery was still horribly boring to me but it made clinical sense. I like solving problems, coming up with diagnoses (House's intellectual prowess is my model if not his tempermant) and then hand off to someone else.

Teach the embryology tracts during peds with pedi malformations (e.g., DiGeorge)-- then it makes sense. There needs to be clinical integration or it is just memorize and regurgitate, which works just fine for many students. Color me crazy but I like to know the why and not just the what.

 

[DrDre311]

Dre- How do you know who is in the top of your class unless they (or your school) are advertising it somehow? Virtually no one at my school discusses grades. It is the rare individuals who do well and advertise that fact that are looked down upon because it often appears as if they are seeking praise by doing so. When AOA lists come up, sometimes there are some real surprises among students that no one realized where doing so well because they just worked hard and were good team members.

Yeah, there were some surprises when the AOA list came out. But there were also those people who you just knew were super smart through questions they'd ask in class, or people who sort of let it be known that they crushed a test (with or without being arrogant about it, case by case--say when people got together to bitch about a test some students would just sort of stand back and you could tell they really didn't think it was that bad). It's not like anybody knew their actual class rank--there was just a small group of people that everyone sort of knew comprised the top tier of the class.

The middle-of-the-pack types branded everyone who was perceived to be part of that top tier, deserving or not, as "gunners" but not necessarily with the negative connotation it seems to carry on this thread.