WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
A number of medical schools (including Duke, Penn, Vanderbilt, Columbia, Baylor and NYU) have compressed (or "accelerated") the traditional 2 year preclinical curriculum to 1.5 years.

If the same basic information must be covered, does this mean that students have to work much harder in schools with a compressed curriculum to stay on top of the material?

Responses from current med students on this question would be most appreciated.
 
Last edited:

KLycos

ASA Member
10+ Year Member
Apr 13, 2009
485
24
Status
Resident [Any Field]
A number of medical schools (including Duke, Penn, Vanderbilt, Columbia and NYU) have compressed the traditional 2 year preclinical curriculum into 1.5 years.

If the same basic information must be covered, does this mean that students have to work much harder in schools with a compressed curriculum to stay on top of the material?

Responses from current med students on this question would be most appreciated.
At the Duke interview, it was explained that the students are in lectures for much longer hours, so YES. Screw that man, and it's all to fit in more research to make the school look good. Stupid IMO.
 

Dartmouth1230

7+ Year Member
Jun 6, 2011
144
36
Status
At the Duke interview, it was explained that the students are in lectures for much longer hours, so YES. Screw that man, and it's all to fit in more research to make the school look good. Stupid IMO.
Lecture hours at NYU were actually shortened. Material isn't being condensed, but rather redistributed throughout all four years (NYU feels that some material would be better off taught during/after clinical clerkships). This is one reason why NYU students take STEP 1 during their third year. A 1.5 year curriculum also provides an opportunity to pursue a variety of dual degrees in four years, as opposed to five.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbrocks15

ialwayslose

7+ Year Member
Dec 30, 2010
208
1
Status
At the Duke interview, it was explained that the students are in lectures for much longer hours, so YES. Screw that man, and it's all to fit in more research to make the school look good. Stupid IMO.
Duke is condensed into 1 year, which is even more extreme ---- BUT you get to start clinical rotations / potentially figure your future out a year earlier / have an entire year to pursue your own interests (ie you don't need to spend your (shorter) summers trying to get research in).

The condensed curriculum probably works for some people and not for others.
 
  • Like
Reactions: pbrocks15

LizzyM

the evil queen of numbers
10+ Year Member
Mar 7, 2005
22,925
31,495
Status
Academic Administration
Duke is condensed into 1 year, which is even more extreme ---- BUT you get to start clinical rotations / potentially figure your future out a year earlier / have an entire year to pursue your own interests (ie you don't need to spend your (shorter) summers trying to get research in).

The condensed curriculum probably works for some people and not for others.
This cycles back to the question, "Why [this school]?" An applicant should know something aobut the school's curriculum and be able to articulate why that approach fits with the applicant's learning style. Not every school is a good fit for every applicant.
 
Feb 15, 2012
15
0
Status
Pre-Medical
Baylor does this and the students I talked to there seemed to really like it. They said it was really helpful to get clinical experience in before taking Step 1. And if Baylor's Step 1 stats are any indication; I'd say it's working well.

It also seems like condensing the pre-clinical years allows for more flexibility in years 3-4. I talked to several students who were able to pursue research opportunities, complete extra sub-internships in their desired specialties, or even just take some time off completely in 4th year that wouldn't have been possible at some of the other programs with which I interviewed.

Like others have said, not every school is a fit for every student. Some would rather load up the front end to have more time in years 3-4, others would rather stick with the traditional route.
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
This cycles back to the question, "Why [this school]?" An applicant should know something aobut the school's curriculum and be able to articulate why that approach fits with the applicant's learning style. Not every school is a good fit for every applicant.
This is a good point, and it underscores the fact that it is equally important for schools to provide applicants with sufficient information to be able to answer such questions and to understand how a compressed preclinical curriculum will affect their lives on a day-to-day basis.

Saying "we have shortened the preclinical curriculum" does not give students nearly enough information to understand the real impact it will have. Questions that should be answered include:


  • Do students have to work harder to pass, and is there less time for extracurricular activities?
  • Are students more stressed because they have to go through the same material in less time?
  • Do exams happen more often or is there just more information on each exam?
  • If the latter, is the threshold for passing attendantly lowered to account for the fact that there is more information being tested?
  • Have students on the whole been more or less satisfied with the compressed curriculum than they were before it was implemented?
 
Last edited:

LizzyM

the evil queen of numbers
10+ Year Member
Mar 7, 2005
22,925
31,495
Status
Academic Administration
This is a good point, and it underscores the fact that it is equally important for schools to provide applicants with sufficient information to be able to answer such questions and to understand how a compressed preclinical curriculum will affect their lives on a day-to-day basis.

Saying "we have shortened the preclinical curriculum" does not give students nearly enough information to understand the real impact it will have. Questions that should be answered include:


  • Do students have to work harder to pass, and is there less time for extracurricular activities?
  • Are students more stressed because they have to go through the same material in less time?
  • Do exams happen more often or is there just more information on each exam?
  • If the latter, is the threshold for passing attendantly lowered to account for the fact that there is more information being tested?
  • Have students on the whole been more or less satisfied with the compressed curriculum than they were before it was implemented?
I was thinking of things more along the lines of number of hours of lecture per day/week, mandatory attendance vs voluntary, PBL and small group learning vs. large lecture (or the relative mix of the two), block scheduling, organ system based teaching vs subject specific courses (histology, physiology, etc), timing of clinical exposures within the 4 year curriculum, research: required v. encouraged v. available. Lectures available as podcasts? other materials available for students to review?

Mandatory attendance is a drag if you are a visual learner who learns best reviewing the material on your own and drawing concept maps, and would prefer just to show up for the exams. If you are the type who learns best by teaching/tutoring as a review of the material, then you might prefer a small group model over a lecture based format.

Is everything on the test and is the test hard is not, in my opinion, the way to judge your fit for a specific medical school.
 

Nymphicus

kane o ke kai
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
7+ Year Member
May 17, 2010
3,429
132
Status
Resident [Any Field]
The schools that I interviewed at with 1.5 seemed to actually have less class time than the "traditional" schools that I interviewed at.
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
I was thinking of things more along the lines of number of hours of lecture per day/week, mandatory attendance vs voluntary, PBL and small group learning vs. large lecture (or the relative mix of the two), block scheduling, organ system based teaching vs subject specific courses (histology, physiology, etc), timing of clinical exposures within the 4 year curriculum, research: required v. encouraged v. available. Lectures available as podcasts? other materials available for students to review?

Mandatory attendance is a drag if you are a visual learner who learns best reviewing the material on your own and drawing concept maps, and would prefer just to show up for the exams. If you are the type who learns best by teaching/tutoring as a review of the material, then you might prefer a small group model over a lecture based format.

Is everything on the test and is the test hard is not, in my opinion, the way to judge your fit for a specific medical school.
These things are important, but as someone who is able to adapt to multiple styles of learning and to different environments (as I believe most students able to get admitted to medical school are), what is most important to me in a med school is the ability to balance life and work. If school A requires me to be learning 10 hours a day due to the compressed curriculum but school B requires me to be learning 6 hours a day, I'll go with school B, all other things being equal. However, it is unclear to me whether the work requirements are indeed so much different. That's what I'm trying to figure out.
 
Last edited:

wanderer

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
1,979
30
Status
Medical Student
The schools that I interviewed at with 1.5 seemed to actually have less class time than the "traditional" schools that I interviewed at.
But often more PBL. PBL is a pretty inefficient way of learning.
 

mvenus929

10+ Year Member
Jul 6, 2006
6,855
1,629
Status
Fellow [Any Field]
My school (UVA) recently switched to a condensed curriculum (my class was the first class). We have lectures for 4 hours a day, and roughly half of them are required (it varies depending on the system). They cut the 8 weeks (or so) out from the 'traditional' curriculum they were on by reducing the amount of research and other not so high yield things from the first year, and making sure that everything that was taught was clinically relevant.

I don't have anything to compare it to, but I don't think we work any harder than students at other schools, and our P/F grading system makes it easy to have a life outside of med school without worrying about the grades.
 

Nymphicus

kane o ke kai
Moderator Emeritus
Lifetime Donor
7+ Year Member
May 17, 2010
3,429
132
Status
Resident [Any Field]
But often more PBL. PBL is a pretty inefficient way of learning.
Neither Vanderbilt or Baylor have all that much PBL. Very limited, I would say actually.

The curriculum dean actually told us at Vanderbilt that the reason they don't have a lot of PBL is that it is inefficient with all the material you are supposed to deliver to students.
 

dd128

10+ Year Member
May 30, 2007
2,044
6
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Baylor does this and the students I talked to there seemed to really like it. They said it was really helpful to get clinical experience in before taking Step 1. And if Baylor's Step 1 stats are any indication; I'd say it's working well.
The thing you need to keep in mind is that overall Baylor tends to take more competitive applicants than your average state school. They would probably do well on step no matter when they took step.
 

2010houston

10+ Year Member
Jun 17, 2009
319
103
Status
Attending Physician
I couldnt be happier w the 1.5yr preclinicals. I think taking step 1 during mid 3rd year after a full year of clinicals, with ample time off to study, is a huge advantage.
 

Thego2guy

7+ Year Member
Sep 19, 2011
725
193
NY
Status
Medical Student
But often more PBL. PBL is a pretty inefficient way of learning.
Can you please elaborate? Why do so many schools stick with it then? Maybe it works best in a hybrid system (like at Cornell), where its mostly lecture and then a little PBL?
 

Thego2guy

7+ Year Member
Sep 19, 2011
725
193
NY
Status
Medical Student
Isn't Cornell all PBL?
Nah dude, its a common misconception. Many people bitched on this forum before about this and that (about PBL at Cornell) and it has been pointed out multiple times on these threads by Cornell Med Students, as well as elsewhere (youtube, their website etc..) that PBL is a small part of their curriculum. They have lecture, group discussions, and PBL, so there are a variety of different learning methods apparently.
 

willen101383

10+ Year Member
Jul 22, 2004
2,711
43
Status
Resident [Any Field]
At my school we could EASILY have been done in 1.5 years. Our 3rd trimester consisted of a bunch of BS fluff classes that were EXTREMELY low yield and served no purpose other than to make us all miserable.
 
  • Like
Reactions: PhoenixFire

Thego2guy

7+ Year Member
Sep 19, 2011
725
193
NY
Status
Medical Student
At my school we could EASILY have been done in 1.5 years. Our 3rd trimester consisted of a bunch of BS fluff classes that were EXTREMELY low yield and served no purpose other than to make us all miserable.

Yeah I heard that there is much redundancy in med school, so it is totally feasible to cut some of that out. What kind of crap did they make you you do? Lol
 

NeuralNetwork

Pass the BDNF
May 19, 2011
600
2
New York
Status
Medical Student
A number of medical schools (including Duke, Penn, Vanderbilt, Columbia and NYU) have compressed (or "accelerated") the traditional 2 year preclinical curriculum to 1.5 years.

If the same basic information must be covered, does this mean that students have to work much harder in schools with a compressed curriculum to stay on top of the material?

Responses from current med students on this question would be most appreciated.
I had the same question, so during my interview day at NYU, I asked both the students and my interviewer. Their answers were pretty much the same: that the curriculum isn't condensed, but that instead a lot of the redundancies that used to exist in the curriculum were removed. The students also said they had a lot of free time, so I don't imagine that the curriculum change made them work harder to get more information in.
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
I had the same question, so during my interview day at NYU, I asked both the students and my interviewer. Their answers were pretty much the same: that the curriculum isn't condensed, but that instead a lot of the redundancies that used to exist in the curriculum were removed. The students also said they had a lot of free time, so I don't imagine that the curriculum change made them work harder to get more information in.
At the same time, it is often said that the learning that takes place in med school is through repetition. If the repetition is cut out, the logical consequence would seem to be that learning gets harder.
 

Charles_Carmichael

Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
May 11, 2008
4,078
41
Status
Non-Student
The difference between a traditional 2-year preclinical curriculum vs. a condensed one most likely just involves reduction in redundancy and the number of times you're exposed to a topic in class. Mine is a 2-year preclinical curriculum and, for example, we had a lecture on the topic of sleep probably 4 different times (in various classes) covering, for the most part, the same material. You'd be surprised how many times the same things are repeated in different classes. Is it necessary to spend a lecture talking about the renin-AngII-aldosterone system in the cardio unit, the renal unit, and the endocrine unit instead of discussing it at one point? Probably not.

Cut down on a lot of this redundancy and you have your condensed curriculum. I personally do like some of this redundancy though since it's pretty much beaten these concepts (and details) into my head whether I like it or not.

At the same time, it is often said that the learning that takes place in med school is through repetition. If the repetition is cut out, the logical consequence would seem to be that learning gets harder.
Most of this repetition should be done in your own time, not class time. By the time you get to an exam, you've ideally gone through the material several times already. Cutting down redundancies in lectures doesn't necessarily have to mean that you're exposed to fewer repetitions of the content. Does that make sense?
 

sliceofbread136

7+ Year Member
Nov 5, 2011
4,813
2,705
Yeah I heard that there is much redundancy in med school, so it is totally feasible to cut some of that out. What kind of crap did they make you you do? Lol
I'm guessing it was OOM. If I had to spend my time learning something like that I would probably rage quit.

Sliceofbread136 has left the game.
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
Most of this repetition should be done in your own time, not class time. By the time you get to an exam, you've ideally gone through the material several times already. Cutting down redundancies in lectures doesn't necessarily have to mean that you're exposed to fewer repetitions of the content. Does that make sense?
It does make sense, but it also seems to clearly imply that you will be working harder, since you will have the same number of hours in lecture per day (if not more) than a student in a non-compressed curriculum, but there will be by design more new (as opposed to review) material in each hour of lecture. This seems to mean more material to master every day of your preclinical years. Am I right in thinking this?

If you are covering the same body of fresh material, but there are 25% less days in which to cover it, I don't see how that can't mean that studying during those years becomes 25% more difficult/time-consuming.
 
Last edited:

wanderer

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
1,979
30
Status
Medical Student
The difference between a traditional 2-year preclinical curriculum vs. a condensed one most likely just involves reduction in redundancy and the number of times you're exposed to a topic in class. Mine is a 2-year preclinical curriculum and, for example, we had a lecture on the topic of sleep probably 4 different times (in various classes) covering, for the most part, the same material. You'd be surprised how many times the same things are repeated in different classes. Is it necessary to spend a lecture talking about the renin-AngII-aldosterone system in the cardio unit, the renal unit, and the endocrine unit instead of discussing it at one point? Probably not.

Cut down on a lot of this redundancy and you have your condensed curriculum. I personally do like some of this redundancy though since it's pretty much beaten these concepts (and details) into my head whether I like it or not.



Most of this repetition should be done in your own time, not class time. By the time you get to an exam, you've ideally gone through the material several times already. Cutting down redundancies in lectures doesn't necessarily have to mean that you're exposed to fewer repetitions of the content. Does that make sense?
I think that's how you remember the more important things. The first two years it's like you're learning a new language, and the best way to learn a new language is by repetition. And having the same topic in different courses makes you look at it through different perspectives, thereby solidifying your knowledge.
 

loveoforganic

-Account Deactivated-
10+ Year Member
Jan 30, 2009
4,222
13
Status
I think that's how you remember the more important things. The first two years it's like you're learning a new language, and the best way to learn a new language is by repetition. And having the same topic in different courses makes you look at it through different perspectives, thereby solidifying your knowledge.
agree, particularly since it's not usually "exactly the same" but slightly building up or integrating with other material - you hear the information again and tie it into something else
 

Morsetlis

I wish I were a dentist
7+ Year Member
Jan 22, 2010
4,924
39
31
The "Garden" State
Status
Resident [Any Field]
A number of medical schools (including Duke, Penn, Vanderbilt, Columbia, Baylor and NYU) have compressed (or "accelerated") the traditional 2 year preclinical curriculum to 1.5 years.

If the same basic information must be covered, does this mean that students have to work much harder in schools with a compressed curriculum to stay on top of the material?

Responses from current med students on this question would be most appreciated.
A lot of the materials are re-taught and there's redundancy. There could definitely be more efficiency in my 2-year program (that, and it's SGU, lol).

Really don't need to spend 5 different lectures going over RAAS. Better to spend 2 hours on it, then go do practice problems for 3 hours, by yourself.
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
A lot of the materials are re-taught and there's redundancy. There could definitely be more efficiency in my 2-year program (that, and it's SGU, lol).
If you are covering the same body of fresh material, but there are 25% less days in which to cover it, I don't see how that can't imply that studying during those years becomes 25% more difficult/time-consuming.
 

wanderer

10+ Year Member
5+ Year Member
Dec 14, 2008
1,979
30
Status
Medical Student
Is there something missing here?
Nope. These schools think they're awesome for being new and innovative as if there's any evidence their new graduates will be any better than their current/previous graduates.
 

Charles_Carmichael

Moderator Emeritus
10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
May 11, 2008
4,078
41
Status
Non-Student
I think that's how you remember the more important things. The first two years it's like you're learning a new language, and the best way to learn a new language is by repetition. And having the same topic in different courses makes you look at it through different perspectives, thereby solidifying your knowledge.
agree, particularly since it's not usually "exactly the same" but slightly building up or integrating with other material - you hear the information again and tie it into something else
I don't know if I'd say I've gotten different perspectives on the topic each time. It's been, more or less, the same. Maybe it'll be different during M2 year when there's lots of things that could lead to similar pathology?

I do agree with the idea of repetition. I generally see the material around 7 times by the time I get to the actual exam. The nice thing about having repeat lectures in different courses is that when I see something we already covered in a prior course, I pretty much go "Oh awesome, skipping this lecture since we already learned it!" instead of actually going over it again. Or I'll just skim through it really quickly to see if there's anything new added.

With my previous post, I just meant that I don't think cutting redundancies in the basic sciences (like the schools with condensed curricula do) significantly hurts the students. That's just my opinion as an M1, so take that with a grain of salt.

Really don't need to spend 5 different lectures going over RAAS. Better to spend 2 hours on it, then go do practice problems for 3 hours, by yourself.
That's generally been my philosophy as well. Practice problems really help reinforce the important concepts/details. This is really where I've learned to integrate material.

Different strokes for different folks. :shrug:
 

mmmcdowe

Duke of minimal vowels
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Donor
10+ Year Member
Sep 13, 2008
9,782
1,580
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Baylor's had a 1.5-year preclinical curriculum for over 30 years.
Columbia had a 1.5 year pre-clinical curriculum for decades too a long time ago, but then like Baylor and all other schools they switched to the 2 year and now things have come full circle and some schools are switching back. McGill was the first to switch back about 15 years ago. Penn was the first US school to switch back.

To answer your question OP, some stuff was condensed (for Columbia the big condensation was going from 1 year of anatomy to 1/2 year like most schools), and some things were reorganized. For example, we do phys, path, and pharm by system rather than doing a semester long class of phys, then path, then pharm. I think that saves time as well. Columbia has some PBL/TBL, but it is mostly non mandatory except for the occasional group quiz.

I personally think that most schools will switch to the 1.5 year pre-clinical or some variant of it. I think it reflects the current trends in our healthcare system for more clinical experience before starting residency. The biggest advantages of such a curriculum are 1) You finish clinical year with 6 months, more or less, before you have to seriously start preparing for residency. This is great because it gives you more time to figure out what you want to do, more time to prepare once you know, and it also gives you time to apply for year off grants (which have deadlines typically in January); and 2) More clinical experience to bring to bear against the step 1. I personally thought it helped me, and I finished the exam 1.5 hours early despite taking an hour of breaks. I didn't find it easy, but I did find that I was able to jump to the answers quickly because the diseases tended to be so obvious. There really isn't any way to know objectively, but schools report higher step 1 scores after the transition. For Columbia, our highest average step 1 was 237/100% pass rate and in the first year of the new curriculum taking the step 1 our new highest average step 1 is 241/100% pass rate for MD students (240 for MD/PhDs who didn't do clinical year before the step 1).
 
Last edited:

maymay

10+ Year Member
7+ Year Member
Dec 24, 2008
15
2
Status
Medical Student
pre-answer disclaimer: n=1 from BCM
  • Do students have to work harder to pass, and is there less time for extracurricular activities?
    In the 1.5 pre-clinical years, people generally work very hard. Compared to undergrad, there is a lot more to learn. However, when comparing how hard we work to students in a traditional two-year program across the street, I don't think our shortened curriculum is a particular burden. That lecture is only 4 hours/day, is available via streaming, and isn't mandatory attendance helps. We have a lot of free time, and after the first few months, most people figure out how to maximize their efficiency learning the material.

    I definitely don't think there's been less time for extracurriculars; people who want to research/work in the free clinic/do something entirely unrelated to med school have the time to do so. The only thing that seems limited is traveling during that time - we only get one month off after first year, where I think most other places have two or three.

  • Are students more stressed because they have to go through the same material in less time?
    I don't think people are more stressed here (assuming a baseline level of stress inherent to medical school). Switching to P/F for the preclinical years probably helped with that. I never felt rushed during the blocks I kept up with the material on. I will say there might be less slack in allowing yourself to fall behind - I got lazy during a block in Fall 2 and the cramming was brutal.

  • Do exams happen more often or is there just more information on each exam?
  • If the latter, is the threshold for passing attendantly lowered to account for the fact that there is more information being tested?
    Exams are school specific. We happen to have them for each class at the end of each block - so, 3-4 exams every ~6 weeks for first year. It never seemed like there was an unfair amount of information on the exams (well, maybe infectious disease. But that's the nature of that beast). The threshold for passing is always 70%. Very few people fail.

  • Have students on the whole been more or less satisfied with the compressed curriculum than they were before it was implemented?
    I don't know anyone who doesn't like preclinicals being 1.5 years, and it's a primary reason many of us chose to come here. I'm really glad I'll have a year of clinicals under my belt before I get two months off to start studying for Step 1; I remember so much more of what seemed like useless trivia during the first 1.5 years after seeing it in clinics. Plus, I get an extra six months to play around with - so I can take two off for step study, another during interview season, and still have time for three extra electives/away rotations
That's just my perspective, though. I'm sure there are advantages to both systems, and as an earlier poster said - there's probably some selection bias based on who the school accepts and who chooses to come here. The people who are happier with the traditional system aren't here to give you the lowdown on their experience.

Wow, that got long. tl;dr I like my 1.5 year school; feel free to PM with specific questions
 

235788

God Complex
10+ Year Member
Dec 5, 2008
5,368
15
The Slab
Status
Medical Student
At the Duke interview, it was explained that the students are in lectures for much longer hours, so YES. Screw that man, and it's all to fit in more research to make the school look good. Stupid IMO.

agree. Research should be optional... My school is moving towards that also. :mad:.

Research is self-selecting... Those who need it for competitve residencies will be doing it, and those who don't NEED it and are set on peds/fm/internal(just IM) will be thrown into the mix - congesting projects and PIs. Totally lame!
 
OP
W

WiredEntropy

5+ Year Member
Jul 31, 2011
111
15
Florida
Is there time to do research in the 1.5 yr preclinical potion in such schools or do they recommend waiting until after to do it?
 

theWUbear

EM PGY2
10+ Year Member
Jun 7, 2009
1,828
44
Status
Medical Student
Baylor does this and the students I talked to there seemed to really like it. They said it was really helpful to get clinical experience in before taking Step 1.
Does clinical experience even have any relevance to STEP 1?
 

mmmcdowe

Duke of minimal vowels
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Donor
10+ Year Member
Sep 13, 2008
9,782
1,580
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Does clinical experience even have any relevance to STEP 1?
I found it super helpful for the images and for the auscultation questions where they make you listen to murmurs as part of the question stem. I also found it helpful in terms of having a much firmer grounding in various diseases than I did in pre-clinicals. This was useful because it gave me a better framework to relearn the basic science stuff that I didn't remember a day after the exams, let alone a year after.
 

theWUbear

EM PGY2
10+ Year Member
Jun 7, 2009
1,828
44
Status
Medical Student
I found it super helpful for the images and for the auscultation questions where they make you listen to murmurs as part of the question stem. I also found it helpful in terms of having a much firmer grounding in various diseases than I did in pre-clinicals. This was useful because it gave me a better framework to relearn the basic science stuff that I didn't remember a day after the exams, let alone a year after.
Nice. That makes sense
 

Bro Dude

Subaquatic Creel Engineer
Dec 16, 2011
334
4
Status
Is there a comprehensive list of schools offering 1.5yr preclinicals anywhere?
There aren't that many. Columbia, Penn, Vanderbilt, UVa, NYU, Emory, Baylor, and UVM. Duke has 1.0 years for pre-clinical coursework and Vandy will shorten it's pre-clinicals to 1.0 years starting next year or so.
 

wanderedtoolong

7+ Year Member
May 22, 2011
656
19
Status
Medical Student
There aren't that many. Columbia, Penn, Vanderbilt, UVa, NYU, Emory, Baylor, and UVM. Duke has 1.0 years for pre-clinical coursework and Vandy will shorten it's pre-clinicals to 1.0 years starting next year or so.
Thanks! It's a very appealing option and I'll be tweaking my school list a bit to include most of those.
 

mmmcdowe

Duke of minimal vowels
Staff member
Administrator
Gold Donor
10+ Year Member
Sep 13, 2008
9,782
1,580
Status
Resident [Any Field]
Did Sinai switch to a 1.5 yet?