Reply to thread

Hi Guest: Check out our new article here: It Pays to Be an Early (Financial) Bird

About the Ads

Message: <blockquote data-quote="DislikeRadBio" data-source="post: 19221390" data-attributes="member: 872248">I made this account just to post on radbio.That exam was very poorly done. The questions were either too easy and simplistic or too hard in reference to everything else available as a study guide or resource, or used ambiguous wording and overly tricky choices such that language, not concepts, were tested. I mean no personal disrespect, but that exam was not designed well.Let me give you some background. I have years and publications from a wet lab. I love biology, molecular genetics, pathways. Of the two courses I enjoyed studying for radbio and I studied intently. Still have the paper sheet - on the last arro review exam I took, I had 21 wrong out of however many total questions (200 to 250ish)? I knew not only the basic pathways, but the extra paths not in hall but which the Astro or Astro guides devoted whole page explanations to. I thought I would crush his exam. I walked out feeling I failed.That exam did not test concepts, in my opinion. And the Angla method is flawed when the body of people on the panel are not reasonable. I do not think they wrote the questions with enough consideration, or had people on the panel who wrote exam questions in the past ( I have no inside knowledge). I designed graduate level written exams before. Language needs to be specific and used consistently. Questions are about understanding concepts and not word choices. The radbio exam I took did Not embrace that, while at the same time have 20 or 30 questions so ridiculously easy it was insulting they were included and barely specific to radbio.If you use the panel method, and they think half the exam should have 95% correct answers, that can set an unreasonably high bar which is not valid. And I respect those who said rad bio was easy- I may be sour grapes, but man I nailed those practice exams and did all of them. Maybe I paid too much attention to little things in the arro guides - but I thought that was the point of them - to supplement hall.Now again, I could just be a whiny resident, but there is an internal control here. Physics. I am not a physics guy. I do not have a background in physics. I did not particularly like physics studying. Those questions were difficult, but fair, written clearly, with questions focused on concept and not guessing the specificity of language or word choices. I could have failed physics, but I'm not angry about it. The extremely poor way radbio was put together makes me angry.And there is so much potential for a good rad bio exam. A committee could select papers on recent topics, release them as a guide with some brief overview, and actually teach new and relevant molecular developments or synergistic immune research.But I am not surprised it is delayed. Completely respect those who say radbio was easy but to me that exam was not well designed and should be looked at by an independent committee ( no personal offense to those who worked on it). It, in my opinion, was mostly an invalid exam.</blockquote>

This thread is more than 2 years old.

Your message may be considered spam for the following reasons:

Your new thread title is very short, and likely is unhelpful.
Your reply is very short and likely does not add anything to the thread.
Your reply is very long and likely does not add anything to the thread.
It is very likely that it does not need any further discussion and thus bumping it serves no purpose.
Your message is mostly quotes or spoilers.
Your reply has occurred very quickly after a previous reply and likely does not add anything to the thread.
This thread is locked.

Verification

Search

Search

Reply to thread

Search