Reading textbooks instead of powerpoints higher yield, faster, less frustrating

[realgraverobber]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

---

Members don't see this ad.

 

[dizzle69]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

The only class I thought this was true for was biochem. For the other classes, all I did was PPT study. For anatomy, I did both. Most professors tend to give exam questions based off the PPT (which hopefully they cover because it will be stuff on the boards -- i.e. thus be more HY). I only read the textbook for biochem for more understanding and took the book tests because our professor said he would take Qs from the book. For anatomy, I read the book because I never had the course before and it provided more detail for me to understand.

 

[pseudoknot]

Yes. I also don't understand why so many people think it's better to try to learn from syllabus material that's often in bullet form and poorly written, rather than professionally written and edited textbooks that have gone through multiple editions. I'm not saying books are always better but I do think that you're more likely to understand stuff that way.

 

[dizzle69]

Yes. I also don't understand why so many people think it's better to try to learn from syllabus material that's often in bullet form and poorly written, rather than professionally written and edited textbooks that have gone through multiple editions. I'm not saying books are always better but I do think that you're more likely to understand stuff that way.

Are they a quicker read though? Is it always HY? Textbooks often contain so much detail and minutae that it can lead to someone getting bogged down in detail rather than understanding the concept. PPTs help in this, except when all the PPTs have pictures, then if you are a person like me, you need some sort of text to understand the full essence of a pathway, etc.

 

[njbmd]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

Material is presented in medical school in many different forms. The one thing is that you find a learning style that works for you and you use it. A Powerpoint lecture is an outline at best. A text may or may not have good coverage of a topic. The syllabus is good for outlining learning objectives etc. There is not one source that will work for everyone. If the person above loves reading textbooks then Yahoo for them. Straight text reading doesn't work for everyone and isn't everyone's style.

The one thing for sure is that what got you successfully through undergrad will likely work in medical school if you ratchet it up a notch or two for the volume. No professor, myself included, cares if you memorize or don't memorize a Powerpoint or syllabus as long as you cover the material and master the knowledge. If you learn best by writing on bathroom walls, then do so.

The good thing about medical school is that there is no single source for anything and that "learning" does not take place in lecture.

 

[MastahRiz]

I only use books.

 

[Reimat]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

I would definitely disagree - at least where I am, PP are much more HY than going through a textbook. Additionally, most texts don't emphasize the same points that the profs want you to walk away from the lecture with. The exception is in classes where the prof wrote the text - in which case text > lecture > lecture notes/PP.

 

[Flaxmoore]

My experience varies, depending on the prof. There are some profs where studying the ppts is all you need. They're that detailed, that clear, and make studying the book a bit superfluous. In Biochem in particular, there were three profs where studying the book was a waste, as they specifically stated all exam questions were from the handout.

Anatomy is a blend. There are still a few profs who rely on ppts alone, and those are definitely key. The majority of our lectures from the first exam were handout-driven, with diagrams, and studying those was sufficient. Yet, there were two outliers. One prof didn't use either handouts or ppts, and simply lectured for two hours. With his material, reading the book and reviewing his lecture was key. For the other outlier, her ppt covered the material, but poorly. Hers required the book just to translate.

 

[drsadness88]

Yea. I hate studying from ppt. I'm a book person all the way. I never really understood how people manage to retain any information from that poorly written powerpoint thingy.

 

[notdeadyet]

My experience varies, depending on the prof.

Yeah, very much so. Not all professors got the memo that exams are supposed to be just high yield.

It also depends on the textbook. If you try to memorize all the detail in some of these texts, you're hosed. But if you try to walk into a test not having memorized the contents of the powerpoint, you're also hosed.

Books make for a great study tool, in my mind. As do powerpoints and lectures. Trying to nail exams without using all of them doesn't work well for me.

 

[PeepshowJohnny]

It really depends. At my school, in a lot of classes you aren't allowed to test on something you did not discuss in lecture or on your notes (and they like to have it in both). They're actually very strict on this, the course director will usually sit in for lectures in his subject area if he's unfamiliar with the lecturer and make note of everything he says. We've had lecturers have their questions rewritten because they lecture on one thing and send in questions on minute points that they didn't mention. So studying notes is very high yield.

That said, still be comfortable studying from books. Clinical years you tend not to get the nice outlines and powerpoints.

 

[Haemulon]

I would count myself as a book reader. For Histology especially, I found it much more helpfull to read the book (read it twice actually). I definitely learned more, but the sacrifice is that it took A LOT more time then it would have just going through powerpoints and the syllabus. We all know that the one thing we don't have the luxury of is extra time. So it's a trade off.

I am finding that for Phys, it is also a big help to read the book (actually a couple of different books). Takes longer, sure, but the lectures are so poor that I will never really learn this stuff otherwise. Anatomy for me was all looking at pretty pictures and memorizing labels, then translating it to the not so pretty dissections in the lab. Powerpoints for all classes help me to focus studying when it comes to crunch time. For pretty much every class, the most high yield activity for me when cramming for exams is going through old tests or BRS type questions. Makes me think about the material in a different way, rather than more passive reading.

Anyway, that's just me. Everyone is different.

 

[realgraverobber]

Cause these benchwarmers made their junk ppt's 13 years ago when PowerPoint hit the streets and was supposed to make everything better.

Whoops on their part, and the near-15 years of education that have been a waste of time since.

Yes. I also don't understand why so many people think it's better to try to learn from syllabus material that's often in bullet form and poorly written, rather than professionally written and edited textbooks that have gone through multiple editions. I'm not saying books are always better but I do think that you're more likely to understand stuff that way.

 

[realgraverobber]

I would definitely disagree - at least where I am, PP are much more HY than going through a textbook. Additionally, most texts don't emphasize the same points that the profs want you to walk away from the lecture with. The exception is in classes where the prof wrote the text - in which case text > lecture > lecture notes/PP.

If this were the case here, it would be fine. I spend 3 hours just trying to sort out the cluster**** ppt's our profs are given to lecture on. Keep in mind, our profs inherited their ppt from the previous whomever, so there are a lot of stalling points where it's, "hmm, this is a table of stuff, you'll see on the left side ____, and on the right ____. Hmm, there is a relation probably here, look into this one. We will cover this later be another prof maybe. We covered this before elsewhere. repeat 2 years)."

What am I paying for?

 

[mashnuts]

Nope. Not for me.

First source is always the class syllabus.
Second source are the class PPTs.
Third source are brief review books. (e.g. BRS Series, High Yield Series)
Fourth source are backnotes, frontnotes, whatever your school happens to call them-notes.
Fifth source is a textbook.

If I find I'm reaching down to the 5th source for an explanation, I'm probably belaboring the point. I.E. It's not going to be tested.

 

[alphaholic06]

If this were the case here, it would be fine. I spend 3 hours just trying to sort out the cluster**** ppt's our profs are given to lecture on. Keep in mind, our profs inherited their ppt from the previous whomever, so there are a lot of stalling points where it's, "hmm, this is a table of stuff, you'll see on the left side ____, and on the right ____. Hmm, there is a relation probably here, look into this one. We will cover this later be another prof maybe. We covered this before elsewhere. repeat 2 years)."

What am I paying for?

Where the hell do you go to school?

 

[SeventhSon]

powerpoints are
1) text-based with few figures, or
2) have figures only and they want you to write down what they say to annotate them.

The former are high yield and generally are pretty logical, and the latter are completely useless because they require you to go to class and you are forced to write frantically instead of listen and understand.

Do whatever works for you. I got too frustrated trying to read crappy powerpoints and went with books. It may not get you a higher grade but if you like reading, you learn more

 

[lord_jeebus]

I like textbooks

Another thing to consider is that you'll be responsible for getting a lot of learning on your own from textbooks during residency, so it may be a good idea to develop a system for getting through such tomes now.

 

[typeB-md]

This thread is proof of the declining standards for intellectuals.

High yield is a term created by idiots who seek nothing more than to do well on a test. Intellectuals, on the other hand, will read books and learn material so that they can UNDERSTAND a subject; not so that they can do well on a test.

This isn't surprising, though, given the current state of education. Memorize this, memorize that... nobody actually cares if you're learning so long as you pass the multiple choice tests and boards. And god forbid you question a professor as to the importance of studying a subject. Haven't you heard? Only heretics ask questions.

So we will continue 'learning' biochemistry reactions and obscure genetic references as presented to us on powerpoint. We will memorize to our heart's content and pass not only class tests but also national boards with flying colors. You don't need to actually think about the relevance of a subject you're studying and you SURELY don't need to know anything beyond what your professor presents in lecture. Thorough understanding of an important subject is overrated. Memorizing useless subjects, however, is much more rewarding.

The bottom line is just be sure to ace your test on biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology so that you can one day become that great dermatologist or plastic surgeon you've always dreamed of becoming.

 

[sprinkibrio]

Are they a quicker read though? Is it always HY? Textbooks often contain so much detail and minutae that it can lead to someone getting bogged down in detail rather than understanding the concept. PPTs help in this, except when all the PPTs have pictures, then if you are a person like me, you need some sort of text to understand the full essence of a pathway, etc.

Syllabi are 100% details.... bullet points with no concept. I don't get it ??

 

[Law2Doc]

Syllabi are 100% details.... bullet points with no concept. I don't get it ??

Agree. If you want to know the information the prof is going to put on your test, you need to stick with the syllabi and power points and whatever he said in lecture. That is what s/he thinks is important and will test you on. Then there's the board review books which are good to read along with the class because that is what is going to be highest yield for the USMLE. Textbooks only really enter into the equation if you aren't satisfied with the prior two resources, need something said a different way for it to click, or just want a better written presentation of the material. But the texts have tons of info you will never be tested on, so time-wise it is never the most efficient starting point. It's a nice place to "pick up the spare" after you've gone through the other stuff and feel like you still left one or two pins up.

Truth of the matter is that you could read an entire library on a subject, but in most cases that isn't going to get you a better grade than the guy who knows the class-notes/power points well, because the latter is what the prof thinks you should know.

 

[thePathOfMed]

1

 

[Law2Doc]

Not going to class and reading the book exclusively has helped me out with the verbal section of MCATS like no other. Scoring 13-14s on practice tests. Grades on the other hand.... browse over the notes and make sure the book covers it.

Some profs want to feel special and make you come to class so they will lecture on something not covered and not post it online... lame for learning, good for ego

Um, this is a thread about med school courses. The MCAT already came and went successfully for folks on this thread, and so what worked for them isn't particularly relevant. Med school is quite different than undergrad, where you are generally assigned a textbook which is used throughout the course -- in med school texts are usually optional, secondary resources.

 

[45408]

This thread is proof of the declining standards for intellectuals.

High yield is a term created by idiots who seek nothing more than to do well on a test. Intellectuals, on the other hand, will read books and learn material so that they can UNDERSTAND a subject; not so that they can do well on a test.

That might be ideal, but most medical students don't have enough time to learn and absorb all the facets of a topic they were just introduced to 3 days before an exam. High yield is a term that reflects its usefulness in test taking.

This isn't surprising, though, given the current state of education. Memorize this, memorize that... nobody actually cares if you're learning so long as you pass the multiple choice tests and boards.

how would you test their knowledge? oral boards? The goal is not PhD-level knowledge of topics.

 

[rgarrig]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

100% agreed.

 

[tony montana]

I guess you guys don't have scribe service...

 

[45408]

I guess you guys don't have scribe service...

We do have a co-op, but if the lectures were transcribed, some of those um would be um even worse than their um um powerpoints.

 

[Doctor Bagel]

We do have a co-op, but if the lectures were transcribed, some of those um would be um even worse than their um um powerpoints.

Seriously. I can't imagine anything more painful than trying to read a direct transcript of some of our lectures, or actually most of our lectures. We do have notegroups, but I get bugged when those are longer than 2 pages/lecture.

I'm with the op in preferring to read texts over powerpoints and class notes. I find looking through endless powerpoints to be really tedious whereas reading a long section in a book doesn't bother me much. I've actually separated out my learning this year from our official curriculum, and it's been pretty neat so far.

 

[realgraverobber]

This thread is proof of the declining standards for intellectuals.

High yield is a term created by idiots who seek nothing more than to do well on a test. Intellectuals, on the other hand, will read books and learn material so that they can UNDERSTAND a subject; not so that they can do well on a test.

This isn't surprising, though, given the current state of education. Memorize this, memorize that... nobody actually cares if you're learning so long as you pass the multiple choice tests and boards. And god forbid you question a professor as to the importance of studying a subject. Haven't you heard? Only heretics ask questions.

So we will continue 'learning' biochemistry reactions and obscure genetic references as presented to us on powerpoint. We will memorize to our heart's content and pass not only class tests but also national boards with flying colors. You don't need to actually think about the relevance of a subject you're studying and you SURELY don't need to know anything beyond what your professor presents in lecture. Thorough understanding of an important subject is overrated. Memorizing useless subjects, however, is much more rewarding.

The bottom line is just be sure to ace your test on biochemistry, genetics, and molecular biology so that you can one day become that great dermatologist or plastic surgeon you've always dreamed of becoming.

This is 100% correct. However, our profs are such burned-out dinosaurs that they only want passed multiple choicey tests, and paycheck on friday.

I hate lazy baby boomers.

 

[rgarrig]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

The real problem here is NOT textbooks vs. power points vs. lectures, it's this:

The first two years of medical school are highly inefficient and should be eliminated and replaced by self-study and the USMLE step 1. Despite what medical educators think (and despite how powerful their roles may make them feel), the entire pre-clinical curriculum is no more complex than any physics/comp sci/etc. major is used to, and is simply an excuse to charge students $100,000 for about a week's worth of valuable clinical experience, and countless hours of self-study tacked on to everything else. **** that. Some subjects, e.g. philosophy, require reading AND interaction (e.g. debates) to fully get into. Pre-clinical medicine requires no such thing.

Pre-meds should be given a list of topics/prep books and then allowed to sit for the USMLE - this score should replace the MCAT, and medical school should be shortened to 2.5 years of intense clinical education (including Anatomy).

Hell, I already teach myself everything. Lectures, power points, (choke) PBL - it's all a giant waste of time. Give me a weekend with Robbins and I'll do a week's worth of work, AND I will actually enjoy it because I'm not trying to fill-in the giant gaps inherent in power point slides/rushed lecture notes. I genuinely look forward to my time with Robbins, Wheaters Histo, my Phy books; something about 'professional authors', 'professional editors', and 'professional reviewers' just seems to bring about more pedagogical Quality than Joe PhD is capable of between running her assays and gels and trying to get published.

Dear Medical School,

I love you, and I know I will love my clinical years, but please give me my $100,000 back, and I'll just do the whole pre-clinical thing on my own. I'm a capable self-learner - honest!

Thank you.
-Broke Med Student

 

[tony montana]

We do have a co-op, but if the lectures were transcribed, some of those um would be um even worse than their um um powerpoints.

That's not how ours are. Ours aren't word by word like a transcription, they are scribes with all the points made by the professor minus the lecture talk. Just the summary total of what they say.

While a given lecture may require about 28 pages from Harrison, the scribes at most are like 10 pages per lecture (they range from 3 pages to 10, mostly being about 6).

I prefer doing 6 pages of pure professor stuff (with some random textbook assist from time to time) to doing 28 pages/per hour of lecture, of textbook while trying to figure out what's high yield at the same time.

 

[Re3iRtH]

The real problem here is NOT textbooks vs. power points vs. lectures, it's this:

The first two years of medical school are highly inefficient and should be eliminated and replaced by self-study and the USMLE step 1. Despite what medical educators think (and despite how powerful their roles may make them feel), the entire pre-clinical curriculum is no more complex than any physics/comp sci/etc. major is used to, and is simply an excuse to charge students $100,000 for about a week's worth of valuable clinical experience, and countless hours of self-study tacked on to everything else. **** that. Some subjects, e.g. philosophy, require reading AND interaction (e.g. debates) to fully get into. Pre-clinical medicine requires no such thing.

Pre-meds should be given a list of topics/prep books and then allowed to sit for the USMLE - this score should replace the MCAT, and medical school should be shortened to 2.5 years of intense clinical education (including Anatomy).

Hell, I already teach myself everything. Lectures, power points, (choke) PBL - it's all a giant waste of time. Give me a weekend with Robbins and I'll do a week's worth of work, AND I will actually enjoy it because I'm not trying to fill-in the giant gaps inherent in power point slides/rushed lecture notes. I genuinely look forward to my time with Robbins, Wheaters Histo, my Phy books; something about 'professional authors', 'professional editors', and 'professional reviewers' just seems to bring about more pedagogical Quality than Joe PhD is capable of between running her assays and gels and trying to get published.

Dear Medical School,

I love you, and I know I will love my clinical years, but please give me my $100,000 back, and I'll just do the whole pre-clinical thing on my own. I'm a capable self-learner - honest!

Thank you.
-Broke Med Student

Not a problem with medical education, it's a problem with your med school.
I think I get equal value with an hour at school compared to an hour
of my own time.

 

[kdburton]

Anyone else discover this phenomenon?

Feeling like a blue-haired person saying, "reading books works well, just like in the old days..."

I can read a medical-level textbook in the time spent decoding some baby boomer's snafu powerpoint and learn/understand more.

Yikes.

Anyone else finding this happening?

It depends on the prof, but in some cases if the PPT/syllabus notes are thorough and I can actually understand what the general picture is on, then I typically remember the material for a long period of time. If its just facts and snippets here and there in the notes (just what we need to know for the test) then I learn it for the test and forget it right after. I like the whole textbook idea in the absence of good notes even though it may be a little less efficient. The way that I look at it is the more you actually learn [for retention] in your first two years will more than pay off in efficiency when studying for Step one and also for clinical understanding. This may be at the expense of the high marks you can get for memorizing PPT slides and regurgitating them on a test, but your grades during the first two years are worth almost nothing when compared to your board scores and your understanding of whats going on with your patients during 3rd and 4th year.

 

[rgarrig]

sad

 

[Law2Doc]

The act of sitting in a classroom and listening to a lecture is just inefficient,

Well, I'd say how one learns, and what is efficient, is going to depend more on the student than anything else. About half of the people I know attended class regularly and found it helpful. The other half didn't and found doing that helpful. The lecture can be quite a good learning tool if you prepare ahead of time, are engaged during the lecture (rather than distracted, playing games on the web, sending IMs), and then review the notes afterwards. Those three passes through the material in quick succession help a lot of people lock in concepts.

If you don't go to class, that creates its own set of advantages, since you will have more time during the day and can probably read faster than someone can speak (hopefully), but are perhaps even more subject to distraction when you aren't sitting in a lecture hall. I know folks who self studied and saw their grades improve, but I also know folks who crashed and burned because they found that they lacked discipline, and wasted the day if they didn't have to get up for a morning class. So I think inefficiency is in the eye of the beholder.

I can't really comment on PBL because I haven't done much of it, but it probably approximates the "go home and read up on XYZ disease" you are going to get during rotations. Which isn't a terrible way to learn, just not targeted.

 

[LegacyDoctress]

I'm becoming more and more successful with books, rather than powerpoint. I've found that my eyes are strained and tired by noon.

My school uses PPT for every class imaginable...LITERALLY goes a lil' something like this- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLpjrHzgSRM

 

[Re3iRtH]

I'm becoming more and more successful with books, rather than powerpoint. I've found that my eyes are strained and tired by noon.

My school uses PPT for every class imaginable...LITERALLY goes a lil' something like this- http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=HLpjrHzgSRM

Hahhaha thats awesome 👍