The ill-prepared student

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

group_theory

EX-TER-MIN-ATE!'
Staff member
Administrator
Volunteer Staff
Lifetime Donor
20+ Year Member
Joined
Oct 2, 2002
Messages
4,870
Reaction score
2,261
Points
5,546
  1. Attending Physician
An interesting editorial by a chief resident at an academic medical center, recently published on NEJM Journal Watch.

http://blogs.jwatch.org/general-med.../the-era-of-the-ill-prepared-medical-student/

I think it would be wrong to generalize an entire class or generation, as there are hard working students, but I've definitely seen my share of poorly prepared disinterested students. Usually poorly prepared students lead to poorly prepared interns

I was just reading up on this yesterday. From the students you've seen on your service, would you say preparedness comes from a direct motivation from the student wanting to learn and do you think the schools curriculum type have any bearing on how well prepared the student is come clerkship year?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app
 
An interesting editorial by a chief resident at an academic medical center, recently published on NEJM Journal Watch.

http://blogs.jwatch.org/general-med.../the-era-of-the-ill-prepared-medical-student/

I think it would be wrong to generalize an entire class or generation, as there are hard working students, but I've definitely seen my share of poorly prepared disinterested students. Usually poorly prepared students lead to poorly prepared interns
The reasoning in the letter is interesting and makes some sense. If attendings don't give students real evaluations and grades which distinguish prepared and/or hard-working students from those who are not, then the expected outcome is that students will not try as hard. I would estimate that only about 1/3 of my evaluations have actually had any thought at all put into them, and it's worse at teaching hospitals than in preceptor-based rotations.
 
I was just reading up on this yesterday. From the students you've seen on your service, would you say preparedness comes from a direct motivation from the student wanting to learn and do you think the schools curriculum type have any bearing on how well prepared the student is come clerkship year?


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile app

I think being motivated is pretty tied into doing well or even approaching a matter with willingness to be interested. But when it comes down to it, when you're on your second month of IM, sleep deprived, feeling dumb as hell, and possibly not interested in that subject even in the slightest, chances are you won't be able to pay students to put in an effort beyond passing.

I'm certainly not trying to say the author is wrong. But I think he's simply not able to understand that the process of admissions these days is more and more skewed towards bringing in academically minded individuals than those interested in the process or art of helping others. And likewise I think the whole process especially now is more and more prone to burning people out.
 
It's the system we're forced through to blame, whether one wants to admit or not. There has been such an emphasis on grades, class rank and step scores that the only approach we can take is an objective one. Anything that can't be quantified just isn't high-yield.
 
"The children now love luxury. They have bad manners, contempt for authority; they show disrespect for elders and love chatter in place of exercise." -Socrates

The author also forgets that every person thinks they worked harder than the next.

This. "Kids these days..."

I do agree though that the article points towards a real problem with the evaluation of students, but I'm not sure how this would possibly be fixed. I also can't really tell what it was like in the past, because from what I've heard evaluations were just as subjective. I mean the ridiculous thing is you can have some residents and attending that generally are fair, others that give everyone 95-100 evals, and ones that have flat out said, "I don't give third years anything but 85". If everyone is getting 85, what will it matter if you're really prepared vs. not. I try to be prepared for my own benefit, but on some rotations with some attendings/residents it really feels pointless.

One additional reason, I suspect, is that exposure and hands-on training has really taken a backseat in clinicals in recent years (or at least that's what I gather from others). Med students in the past had a much more involved and direct part in the patient care process, and they were doing a lot more by themselves or under lenient supervision (see one, do one, teach one). With the loss of those responsibilities we're more or less stuck with periods of time where we do very little. This also leads to less prepared interns that have never done certain procedures (or even worked through certain paperwork) depending on how apprehensive their residents or attendings were.
 
Last edited:
I have to agree with @hallowmann . My evaluations have been an unpredictable hodge-podge of methods for completing them. Not to mention the way they are worded on the form is highly confusing and preceptors that were trying to give me high grades actually ended up giving me only passes.

Likewise, I have had rotations where I was highly involved, getting to do procedures like central lines by myself, and I was highly motivated because of that to put in long hours and to learn as much as I could. Then I had other rotations where I was literally told not to write notes, my presentations needed to be two sentences long, and I just acted as free nursing labor. It isn't hard to imagine that my effort was subpar on those rotations. Thus when I am doing my IM-based rotations intern year, I know I'm going to be subpar, because no-one ever actually wanted a proper effort out of me.

Now I know that plenty of medical students before me and concurrently with me have worked harder than I did, and many after me will certainly work harder than I did. But many will work even less as well. So it makes me wonder how much of his article is due to selective memory - it's easier to remember the 2 or 3 bad apples that make your life worse than the 6 or 7 solid students that integrated themselves well but maybe didn't stand out for one reason or another.
 
I also agree with hallowmann and want to add that as a third year, I did many rotations in a hospital that expected their students to write notes and write them well. I have done rotations at the exact same hospital in 4th year and their administration mandated that student notes can't go in the permanent chart in any way, therefore students aren't allowed to write notes. I definitely think this will make many people less prepared, but I don't think that's the student being lazy.
 
The "kids these days" way of thinking is really stupid. I am sure that each generation has thought that about the one coming up after them. I shudder thinking about a generation making "Biebs" their idol. I'm sure the generation before the Baby Boomers thought the same thing when they were doing shrooms and listening to Led Zeppelin.
 
What he's writing about is not "ill-prepared" as "not knowing how to do a physical or take notes" it's a poor work ethic. He's not the only senior clinician who has noticed this.

Basically, we now have an entire generation of medical school graduates for whom residency is literally their first job. Combine that with a high level of entitlement (which medical educators have also noticed), it makes for bad residents. Amongst my students, we noticed a sea change in attitude starting with our graduating Class of 2013. It's a very different mindset to go from studying hard to working hard.

I think we need a boot camp for grads to break them down and build them back up, a la the US military.

An interesting editorial by a chief resident at an academic medical center, recently published on NEJM Journal Watch.

http://blogs.jwatch.org/general-med.../the-era-of-the-ill-prepared-medical-student/

I think it would be wrong to generalize an entire class or generation, as there are hard working students, but I've definitely seen my share of poorly prepared disinterested students. Usually poorly prepared students lead to poorly prepared interns
 
Last edited:
What he's writing about is not "ill-prepared" as "not knowing how to do a physical or take notes" it's a poor work ethic. He's not the only senior clinician who has noticed this.

Basically, we now have an entire generation of medical school graduates for whom residency is literally their first job. Combine that with a high level of entitlement (which medical educators have also noticed), it makes for bad residents. Amongst my students, we noticed a sea chance in attitude starting with our graduating Class of 2013. It's a very different mindset to go from studying hard to working hard.

I think we need a boot camp for grads to break them down and build them back up, a la the US military.

Good point, Goro. I know the new job market stinks for grads and we have fallen into this sense of entitlement when we finish undergrad. A BS/BA doesn't entitle you to a 40K starting salary at a cush desk job anymore. I do think our problem is due to part laziness and part circumstantial. This generation of medical students has its flaws just like any other.

I think it is great when schools recruit guys and gals who have been out of school for a few years like me. Chances are that we have had a real job.

True story. I got really serious about improving my app for med school after my first cycle because I saw how lucky I am. I got waitlisted and while I was going through the application process, I worked for my dad's environmental services company because I couldn't really find anything else in my hometown. Basically, I was a trash man for one year. I grew up lot during that year and it gave me a great personal statement to boot. I won't mind doing "scut" during my rotations and residency because I've done real scut. Trust me, there are few things worse than getting up at 2 a.m. and riding on the back of a garbage truck for 6 hours; occasionally getting recently used condoms on you. Not tying to toot my own horn, it certainly paid off for me.
 
This thread makes me wonder if a push by med schools for non-trads will develop!

Good point, Goro. I know the new job market stinks for grads and we have fallen into this sense of entitlement when we finish undergrad. A BS/BA doesn't entitle you to a 40K starting salary at a cush desk job anymore. I do think our problem is due to part laziness and part circumstantial. This generation of medical students has its flaws just like any other.

I think it is great when schools recruit guys and gals who have been out of school for a few years like me. Chances are that we have had a real job.

True story. I got really serious about improving my app for med school after my first cycle because I saw how lucky I am. I got waitlisted and while I was going through the application process, I worked for my dad's environmental services company because I couldn't really find anything else in my hometown. Basically, I was a trash man for one year. I grew up lot during that year and it gave me a great personal statement to boot. I won't mind doing "scut" during my rotations and residency because I've done real scut. Trust me, there are few things worse than getting up at 2 a.m. and riding on the back of a garbage truck for 6 hours; occasionally getting recently used condoms on you. Not tying to toot my own horn, it certainly paid off for me.
 
This thread makes me wonder if a push by med schools for non-trads will develop!

My previous work experience in industry was a lengthy discussion point for every single med school interview I attended and I was subsequently accepted at each facility. Coming from industry has been a huge factor in which classmates I see eye-to-eye with, as well as how I look at the didactic part of medical school. Honestly, it's a double-edged sword.

I don't think there will be a push (because it is called "non-trad" for a reason), but I do think that nontraditional applicants in many ways already have a huge advantage over traditional applicants that can make up for low grades/test scores.

I am more interested to see if my work experience makes any difference for residency, or if anything before medical school is even considered. More likely, it was just a futile exercise in character building.
 
I suspect that your attendings and senior residents will appreciate you more once you're there working with them!


My previous work experience in industry was a lengthy discussion point for every single med school interview I attended and I was subsequently accepted at each facility. Coming from industry has been a huge factor in which classmates I see eye-to-eye with, as well as how I look at the didactic part of medical school. Honestly, it's a double-edged sword.

I don't think there will be a push (because it is called "non-trad" for a reason), but I do think that nontraditional applicants in many ways already have a huge advantage over traditional applicants that can make up for low grades/test scores.

I am more interested to see if my work experience makes any difference for residency, or if anything before medical school is even considered. More likely, it was just a futile exercise in character building.
 
LOL the older generation complaining about "them kids" as if they didn't raise us or put the standards in play. Medical schools can continue the game they play where everything is about how high your GPA/MCAT is and how many hours of XYZ activity you put in as their way to evaluate us, but that comes at the price of creating a pool of students that are inadequate to be physicians because they spent every weekend doing O.Chem homework rather than experiencing life. Then students go to get pimped and be demeaned. Well that worked well for the kids in the 60s, but this generation gets turned off by this crap because its the same crap they heard from their helicopter parent that made them lose any genuine interest on anything. So much for decades of research showing how being supportive is a more productive way to motivate students. Now this guy is advocating to crush students through grades. Great idea.
 
The pre-reqs haven't changed in close to 100 years.


LOL the older generation complaining about "them kids" as if they didn't raise us or put the standards in play. Medical schools can continue the game they play where everything is about how high your GPA/MCAT is and how many hours of XYZ activity you put in as their way to evaluate us, but that comes at the price of creating a pool of students that are inadequate to be physicians because they spent every weekend doing O.Chem homework rather than experiencing life. Then students go to get pimped and be demeaned. Well that worked well for the kids in the 60s, but this generation gets turned off by this crap because its the same crap they heard from their helicopter parent that made them lose any genuine interest on anything. So much for decades of research showing how being supportive is a more productive way to motivate students. Now this guy is advocating to crush students through grades. Great idea.
 
The pre-reqs haven't changed in close to 100 years.
That's a pretty dishonest assessment of the reality. 20 years ago you didn't need to have all these crazy hours of volunteer work, 4.0s, ridiculous MCAT, leadership, research, etc. etc. etc. "Pre-reqs" or the minimums will not get anyone into a medical school. You boast about your schools ~30 MCAT average but twenty years ago a 27 would have been an honor to interview.
 
That's a pretty dishonest assessment of the reality. 20 years ago you didn't need to have all these crazy hours of volunteer work, 4.0s, ridiculous MCAT, leadership, research, etc. etc. etc. "Pre-reqs" or the minimums will not get anyone into a medical school. You boast about your schools ~30 MCAT average but twenty years ago a 27 would have been an honor to interview.

20 years? Try 5 years ago. We saw the application system become exponentially more difficult within less than a decade.
 
20 years? Try 5 years ago. We saw the application system become exponentially more difficult within less than a decade.

Around 3-4 years ago the average MCAT score for KCU was 26, now it is at 29 (and will probably be higher this crop of students). In 2005, it was around a 25 MCAT. That's a pretty accurate assessment on the DO side.
 
Around 3-4 years ago the average MCAT score for KCU was 26, now it is at 29 (and will probably be higher this crop of students). In 2005, it was around a 25 MCAT. That's a pretty accurate assessment on the DO side.

Even some new schools like ACOM are shooting up really fast. 4 years ago, their first class had an average of a 25 MCAT. Their 4th class will have an average of a 28. Just goes to show that even the new schools are getting competitive very quickly.


Sent from my iPhone using SDN mobile
 
It's a seller's market. You want to be a doctor? Earn it.


That's a pretty dishonest assessment of the reality. 20 years ago you didn't need to have all these crazy hours of volunteer work, 4.0s, ridiculous MCAT, leadership, research, etc. etc. etc. "Pre-reqs" or the minimums will not get anyone into a medical school. You boast about your schools ~30 MCAT average but twenty years ago a 27 would have been an honor to interview.
 
I do think that nontraditional applicants in many ways already have a huge advantage over traditional applicants that can make up for low grades/test scores.

Very anecdotally, I've been told that non-trads often have a difficult time adjusting to MS-1, but have a big advantage adjusting to MS-3. Granted, this was told to me by one faculty member, and may have been exaggerated a bit to encourage me when I was a struggling "old" first year, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's frequently true.

Edited: typo
 
Last edited:
It's a seller's market. You want to be a doctor? Earn it.


Which is a wonderful system for PhDs. But a horrible system for selecting out people who are actually going to practice their field well and know how to be good with patients.
 
Very anecdotally, I've been told that non-trade often have a difficult time adjusting to MS-1, but have a big advantage adjusting to MS-3. Granted, this was told to me by one faculty member, and may have been exaggerated a bit to encourage me when I was a struggling "old" first year, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's frequently true.

I think there's a lot of stuff beyond just struggling to get back into biochem. Medical school as a non-trad is complicated by the reality that it possesses external factors that make it harder, i.e a family or kids.
 
Very anecdotally, I've been told that non-trads often have a difficult time adjusting to MS-1, but have a big advantage adjusting to MS-3. Granted, this was told to me by one faculty member, and may have been exaggerated a bit to encourage me when I was a struggling "old" first year, but it wouldn't surprise me if it's frequently true.

Edited: typo
Am old. Can confirm.
 
That's why we have the service and patient contact ECs as requirements.

Which is a wonderful system for PhDs. But a horrible system for selecting out people who are actually going to practice their field well and know how to be good with patients.
 
One thing I am concerned about is now with so many students applying to medical school and many more spots being available as more schools become available, is how do we preserve the quality of students becoming doctors? Or is it even possible? I know we have standardized tests and other things standing in the way. Even with the medical education system set up the way it is, some sub-par doctors still slip through cracks and you could argue that increasing the number of docs created each year increases the number of sub-par one slipping through the cracks.

I'm still confused why the number applicants has increased so dramatically? Most people don't know what they are getting into anyways.
 
One thing I am concerned about is now with so many students applying to medical school and many more spots being available as more schools become available, is how do we preserve the quality of students becoming doctors? Or is it even possible? I know we have standardized tests and other things standing in the way. Even with the medical education system set up the way it is, some sub-par doctors still slip through cracks and you could argue that increasing the number of docs created each year increases the number of sub-par one slipping through the cracks.

I'm still confused why the number applicants has increased so dramatically? Most people don't know what they are getting into anyways.

There will always be those student who fall through the cracks through the fault of themselves. However, it really starts to become an issue when a large amount of them start to do become sub-par graduates. A large problem from what I have seen students comment about is that there is a large amount of subjectivity in grading during clinical rotations. A medical student probably could put it in better terms than myself. I think what would help is to ask residency directors what they would like to see in minimum competency and those metrics be emphasized in clinical education. This maybe one way in making sure students are prepare for the rigors of residency. In order to make clinical education better, it would mean a more standardization of evaluation and clinical educators need to truly understand what those bench marks mean (not just following their own bench marks). Of course, this the commentary of a pre-medical student, so take it with a grain of salt.

The increase of applications is in part due to the job glut that we have seen since 2007. People see the medical field as one of the safe recession proof careers that will give them some level of job security and good financial income. This is why applications will keep on rising until there other avenues start opening up that provide good financial security with less effort.
 
That's why we have the service and patient contact ECs as requirements.
And tell me how has that been working out for you? Because it seems that you guys are complaining about students presently who are under your system, but allow me to dispel this myth about service and patient contact. Unless a student already meets the GPA/MCAT cutoff, his application will rarely be reviewed for EC. In fact, you just created a new set of problems. Now students have even less time to be able to experience life, a job, etc. And besides, most "patient contact" is absolute BS. I know people who cheated hours and others who just spent 4 hours a week getting water cups to patients in emergency rooms. You guys want your cake and eat it too.

As a non-trad, I'll tell you I learned a lot more in my first job than my glorified "patient contact" where I was a cleaning gurneys and getting pillows. Hell, I could have sat down all day and play tetris on my phone and nurses wouldn't have cared.

What medical schools need to do is set a standard. We know that once you hit 3.4/27, you pretty much have what it takes to do the job. Meet the cutoff? Then you can move onto finding students that are well rounded in other aspects. Stop publishing rankings about how your students come in with a 3.9/42 and maybe schools will stop having to compete to impress US News and might shockingly start creating physicians that are well-rounded, hardworking and representative of the community, which should, you know, be the priority in healthcare.
 
Well, they all show us who will be good medical students and who can be good doctors, but they don't demonstrate good job ethics, nor do they give us any hints of the entitlement attitude that is befouling your generation. I should mosey over to the Psychology school and ask them if they can come up with an assessment that can screen for the latter. The work issues med schools can fix by favoring people who have had to actually work for a living.

BTW, I remember my pre-med classmates of 40+ years ago doing the common ECs, shadowing, AND working. Plus getting good grades.


What triggered this venom all of a sudden???? You've never gone into loose cannon land before.


And tell me how has that been working out for you? Because it seems that you guys are complaining about students presently who are under your system, but allow me to dispel this myth about service and patient contact. Unless a student already meets the GPA/MCAT cutoff, his application will rarely be reviewed for EC. In fact, you just created a new set of problems. Now students have even less time to be able to experience life, a job, etc. And besides, most "patient contact" is absolute BS. I know people who cheated hours and others who just spent 4 hours a week getting water cups to patients in emergency rooms. You guys want your cake and eat it too.

As a non-trad, I'll tell you I learned a lot more in my first job than my glorified "patient contact" where I was a cleaning gurneys and getting pillows. Hell, I could have sat down all day and play tetris on my phone and nurses wouldn't have cared.

What medical schools need to do is set a standard. We know that once you hit 3.4/27, you pretty much have what it takes to do the job. Meet the cutoff? Then you can move onto finding students that are well rounded in other aspects. Stop publishing rankings about how your students come in with a 3.9/42 and maybe schools will stop having to compete to impress US News and might shockingly start creating physicians that are well-rounded, hardworking and representative of the community, which should, you know, be the priority in healthcare.
 
Well, they all show us who will be good medical students and who can be good doctors, but they don't demonstrate good job ethics, nor do they give us any hints of the entitlement attitude that is befouling your generation. I should mosey over to the Psychology school and ask them if they can come up with an assessment that can screen for the latter. The work issues med schools can fix by favoring people who have had to actually work for a living.

BTW, I remember my pre-med classmates of 40+ years ago doing the common ECs, shadowing, AND working. Plus getting good grades.


What triggered this venom all of a sudden???? You've never gone into loose cannon land before.
Shadowing was not even invented until about 20 years ago, and it certainly would have been easier to work if a 2.5 GPA was all that was needed to get into DO.

I'm disagreeing with your comments and offering a rebuttal. I think you're overanalyzing my comments.
 
Our school is suffering the same fate of student as described above. The poster has a point though Goro, you can't really complain about selecting for exceptionally high achievers then wondering why they lack in people skills or bemoan their ill-begotten view point of being hot stuff. Schools are parading their stats across the land. As a fellow non-trad who was 10 years removed from school, I had my share of struggles in MS-1 and I personally feel like I will struggle on step/level 1, but I know for a fact that I will run circles around students in MS-3 (and do much better on a clinically oriented test like step 2). Is that going to land me a top flight residency? According to SDN, no. I need a high step/level 1 for that. Despite my work ethic and ability to communicate with patients, a potentially low step 1 score is all I will be judged by.

This is the bed that medicine has made and something needs to be done to correct it. If you want good physicians with a work ethic and great communication skills, residencies had better start looking beyond step 1 scores and at the whole candidate. Isn't that what DO schools are supposed to be all about?


Well, they all show us who will be good medical students and who can be good doctors, but they don't demonstrate good job ethics, nor do they give us any hints of the entitlement attitude that is befouling your generation. I should mosey over to the Psychology school and ask them if they can come up with an assessment that can screen for the latter. The work issues med schools can fix by favoring people who have had to actually work for a living.

BTW, I remember my pre-med classmates of 40+ years ago doing the common ECs, shadowing, AND working. Plus getting good grades.


What triggered this venom all of a sudden???? You've never gone into loose cannon land before.
 
it's your tone that's raising a red flag for me, not your viewpoints.

I remember my long ago colleagues shadowing.
Shadowing was not even invented until about 20 years ago, and it certainly would have been easier to work if a 2.5 GPA was all that was needed to get into DO.

I'm disagreeing with your comments and offering a rebuttal. I think you're overanalyzing my comments.
 
Oh the lack of[people skills we screen out at interviews. My students are great...just that some apparently are unfamiliar with the concept of, say, not asking for vacation when you're only one week into a job, or stuff like those pointed out in the OP's link. But they do have a high sense of entitlement, not ego. Luckily The two latest classes have been much better in these regards.

On a completely different note, I have to crow somewhere...my Class of 16 matched well. VERY well.





Our school is suffering the same fate of student as described above. The poster has a point though Goro, you can't really complain about selecting for exceptionally high achievers then wondering why they lack in people skills or bemoan their ill-begotten view point of being hot stuff. Schools are parading their stats across the land. As a fellow non-trad who was 10 years removed from school, I had my share of struggles in MS-1 and I personally feel like I will struggle on step/level 1, but I know for a fact that I will run circles around students in MS-3 (and do much better on a clinically oriented test like step 2). Is that going to land me a top flight residency? According to SDN, no. I need a high step/level 1 for that. Despite my work ethic and ability to communicate with patients, a potentially low step 1 score is all I will be judged by.

This is the bed that medicine has made and something needs to be done to correct it. If you want good physicians with a work ethic and great communication skills, residencies had better start looking beyond step 1 scores and at the whole candidate. Isn't that what DO schools are supposed to be all about?
 
Well, they all show us who will be good medical students and who can be good doctors, but they don't demonstrate good job ethics, nor do they give us any hints of the entitlement attitude that is befouling your generation. I should mosey over to the Psychology school and ask them if they can come up with an assessment that can screen for the latter. The work issues med schools can fix by favoring people who have had to actually work for a living.

BTW, I remember my pre-med classmates of 40+ years ago doing the common ECs, shadowing, AND working. Plus getting good grades.

I think this is why I received multiple interviews and acceptances. Sure my MCAT and GPA weren't up to "MD standards," but I busted my ass working 8 summers in lumber yards between school starting at age 16. At one point after graduating, I was working more than 30 hours a week, studying for the MCAT, retaking a class online, and volunteering 4 hours a week. It is definitely doable.

I completely agree with what this article said. Some of the smartest people I know are absolutely worthless because they have zero work ethic and no ambition.
 
I think this is why I received multiple interviews and acceptances. Sure my MCAT and GPA weren't up to "MD standards," but I busted my ass working 8 summers in lumber yards between school starting at age 16. At one point after graduating, I was working more than 30 hours a week, studying for the MCAT, retaking a class online, and volunteering 4 hours a week. It is definitely doable.

I completely agree with what this article said. Some of the smartest people I know are absolutely worthless because they have zero work ethic and no ambition.

I see a lot of that as well. Such a waste of talents and god gifts. I really don't understand that.
 
Test scores do not translate to clinical skills. I've seen presumably high-scoring interns from reputable places misdiagnose patients, choke during a code, screw up an order, and piss off attendings and co-residents with their performance/attendance/attitude issues. The sense of entitlement is odious, but they're smart enough to not get fired (oftentimes by avoiding hard decisions and manipulating other people into doing the work/thinking for them). Unfortunately these people have a powerful protector, usually a strong family connection, and they will be unleashed on the public on schedule. (If they're stupid enough to get on the M & M radar screen, they'll just get a transfer.)

It is actually difficult for a program to screen out these people, when the typical med student I see is great at reciting textbook but has little real work experience in their sheltered lives outside of CV padding and medical tourism - so their common sense and people skills were never really tested. Unless you give them actual responsibilities e.g. in a sub-I, or see them in action as a resident, it's hard to tell if they're going to be a great doctor or a mediocre jerk. The bogus/boilerplate rotation evals don't help either.
 
It's about finding what is right for them and doing what works for them. There's no right way to living life.
I agree with what you said. I have a lot of respect for people who think and live this way. The ones I'm talking about are they're smart, want more but quit as soon as the stuff hit the fans. For example, 2 of my coworkers want further degree. They took couple classes for 1 or 2 semesters then quit. They still complain about wanting more. That I don't understand. If you want it, work on it. There's no easy way. It seem to me that people afraid of hard work and have a lot of fears following their passions. In the end, we all end up in the same place. Talented and smart are over rated imo. Persistence/hardwork always beat other two unless you want to be the top 1 percent then you need all.
 
I agree with what you said. I have a lot of respect for people who think and live this way. The ones I'm talking about are they're smart, want more but quit as soon as the stuff hit the fans. For example, 2 of my coworkers want further degree. They took couple classes for 1 or 2 semesters then quit. They still complain about wanting more. That I don't understand. If you want it, work on it. There's no easy way. It seem to me that people afraid of hard work and have a lot of fears following their passions. In the end, we all end up in the same place. Talented and smart are over rated imo. Persistence/hardwork always beat other two unless you want to be the top 1 percent then you need all.

It goes more to show the point that different people are at different points in their life and that as a result the amount they want something is not fully developed and there. It's kinda in my opinion one of the issues with sending kids at 18 straight to college. Many of them are going to flop because they don't know what they want and haven't gotten to a point in their life where they can really know what they want or how much they're willing to put in for it.

But regardless in medical school this isn't the case. In medical school it's about self-preservation. Sometimes it's better to concede and not burn out than to put everything into something and still probably not get an A. Which is why for example I am personally happy with how I'm doing in medical school. I have time for myself and also enough to do well, sure I'm not in the top quartile, but I'm high enough to know what I'm doing and that I'm doing it right.
 
So I agree and disagree with a lot posted in this thread.

I'm doing an ICU rotation now in the same time/same place as I did it last year. The crew of med students I had 1 year ago were superb - highly motivated, knowledgeable, helpful, and all around awesome.

This year, to put it bluntly, the med student crop sucks balls. They don't give a rip, show up late, write ****ty notes, present the patients in such a half-assed way that I look like an idiot (despite me coaching them repeatedly), act like myself and the interns are idiots (they're all doing surgery and we're medicine, so apparently we must be dumb), try to pimp *me* in front of the attending (this doesn't end well for them when I answer every question easily) and don't even remotely approach the standard set by last year's students. There is one neurosurgery dude who seems to have his head on straight, but the rest are out to lunch.

There is at least one of the four who I'd fail if I could do it without having to attend multiple meetings etc to defend it. (I may be reaching for the dreaded 'low pass' instead.)

I was preparing to grind my teeth when I read the essay, but instead I agree with almost all of it. When I was a med student (in the apparently far simpler era circa 2011-2013), you showed up and busted your balls. I went out of my way to help residents, look good in front of attendings, and kick ass. I have had many crops of med students since then who cannot be bothered to do this. In fact, the # med students sucking >> # med students kicking ass on the floor teams I've either led or been a part of, and my co-residents agree too. (It makes it easier for good students to stand out now - they really sparkle among the slackers.)

“Why get to work early and learn about my patient when my test score and a review of ‘high yield’ facts from a review book will further my career more effectively than learning how to do a good physical exam?” “What is the point of having a well-prepared presentation for rounds when I will get the same score as my colleague who spent the morning going through review questions?” “What is the point of impressing my attendings when all that really matters is my grade and class rank?”

Admittedly, I can't argue with this reasoning when some of my medical students' rotations count the shelf for 80% of the final grade, OSCE for 10%, and the actual clinical for 10%. Whoever came up with such a grading scheme has his/her head entirely up their ass.

Well, they all show us who will be good medical students and who can be good doctors, but they don't demonstrate good job ethics, nor do they give us any hints of the entitlement attitude that is befouling your generation. I should mosey over to the Psychology school and ask them if they can come up with an assessment that can screen for the latter. The work issues med schools can fix by favoring people who have had to actually work for a living.

BTW, I remember my pre-med classmates of 40+ years ago doing the common ECs, shadowing, AND working. Plus getting good grades.


What triggered this venom all of a sudden???? You've never gone into loose cannon land before.

Enough with the nontrad cheerleading already. As a resident, I've had good nontrad students/interns...and I've had really ****ty nontrad students/interns too.

In my med school class, some of the people who whined the loudest about the workload were nontrads. "There's no job out there that would treat you like this! We'd just get up and leave!' Etc etc etc ad nauseam. There were a handful of nontrads who were doing very well academically, but there were also more than a few nontrads at the bottom of the curve who were repeating classes etc.

The whole 'nontrads are better' argument is another item of SDN conventional wisdom that simply hasn't panned out in my experience (right up there with the 'FMGs are so much smarter and better than AMGs' trope).

Oh the lack of[people skills we screen out at interviews. My students are great...just that some apparently are unfamiliar with the concept of, say, not asking for vacation when you're only one week into a job, or stuff like those pointed out in the OP's link. But they do have a high sense of entitlement, not ego. Luckily The two latest classes have been much better in these regards.

On a completely different note, I have to crow somewhere...my Class of 16 matched well. VERY well.

I don't disagree here.

There is a 3rd year away rotator (not sure how this happened, but ya) on our ICU service right now. Kid seems smart enough but is just a total awkward weirdo:

- He spends much of his time in the team room doing review questions, even when we're busy.
- He's always stepping on my feet and is somehow in my way whenever I'm trying to demonstrate or do anything (including procedures).
- As a group, we were looking at a CT the other day and he had somehow parked his head within inches of mine so that when I turned to ask an intern something I smashed my face into his
- He has no sense of the appropriate flow of conversation...always butting in with weird, off topic questions during case presentations and other discussions
- Just talks about weird stuff at length, like the precise composition of the lethal injection cocktails used in various states
- He interrupted me when I was presenting a pt just to show me some obscure bit of tangentially related medical information on his phone
- Shows up absolutely stinking of cologne every day...the smell fills our whole team room

And so on. I think the kid is sincere and means well, but he just annoys the daylights out of me (and much of the rest of the team) and doesn't even seem to realize he's doing it. I guess he qualifies as 'aspie' etc, but I have some of these traits too and I've gone a long way to attenuate them and be appropriately social. His bedside manner can't possibly be good...as I told our PD, this is the type of goofy would-be doctor who's going to get dragged before the board someday for making inappropriate comments to pts, and I hope our residency's name isn't in his credentials.
 
Am old. Can confirm.
Im anon trad and adjusted fine in first year. I was top 15% of my class and have stayed around that. What I did have a problem adjusting to was the whining and complaining / entitlement I observed every day from my younger classmates. There were notable exceptions but they were the exception. I have continued to observe this in 3rd and 4th year and dont see it stopping in residency. To me this was the biggest shock of medical school / medical education.
 
The reasoning in the letter is interesting and makes some sense. If attendings don't give students real evaluations and grades which distinguish prepared and/or hard-working students from those who are not, then the expected outcome is that students will not try as hard. I would estimate that only about 1/3 of my evaluations have actually had any thought at all put into them, and it's worse at teaching hospitals than in preceptor-based rotations.

I worked with an ortho attending who explained that he wasn't permitted to fail crappy students/residents. Even if someone were very subpar, but just shy of dangerous, he would give them a A for the rotation. Someone who made patient endangering mistakes was simply isolated from the opportunity to do so... and given a B anyway. He said that the last time he had given a C, he'd been chewed out for it. So, why swim upstream alone?

EDIT: Before anyone corrects me on the grading scale, I'm just quoting him, and I know nothing about the actual grading system that was in use.
 
  • Like
Reactions: GUH
Shoot, from the reaction of one of my interviewers (academic professor, not clinical) I thought I had too much clinical experience. Luckily, the other interviewer was a hospitalest and related to the scenarios. Apparently, it was shocking that people die in a hospital and you can stumble on to them at 3 am because the coroner hasnt picked them up yet and the nurse didnt cancel the patients blood draws for lab (they get upset when you call a code blue as well) :rollseyes:
 
Shoot, from the reaction of one of my interviewers (academic professor, not clinical) I thought I had too much clinical experience. Luckily, the other interviewer was a hospitalest and related to the scenarios. Apparently, it was shocking that people die in a hospital and you can stumble on to them at 3 am because the coroner hasnt picked them up yet and the nurse didnt cancel the patients blood draws for lab (they get upset when you call a code blue as well) :rollseyes:

The important thing is - were you able to obtain lab for the morning?
 
Around 3-4 years ago the average MCAT score for KCU was 26, now it is at 29 (and will probably be higher this crop of students). In 2005, it was around a 25 MCAT. That's a pretty accurate assessment on the DO side.

Part of the problem is an Arms Race between testing and test prep companies.

When I was in high school, it was rare for people to actually attend SAT prep classses/course. People would buy The Princeton Review, or Barons, and study that ... maybe take 1 or 2 prep tests before the real thing. Now there are a plethora of SAT/ACT prep classes/courses

Same for MCAT. Not a lot of people took prep classes. Averages were below 30 (for those who took it) and the saying was that scores above 30 was good enough for most MD schools. Average for DO school around the time was around 24-25.

USMLE was the same - scores above 220 were competitive (and scores above 230 were really competitive), while scores above 200 put you in the race for mid-term IM programs. There weren't as many board review courses as there are now - Goljan lectures were just starting to make its way amongst DO students, and there weren't any board review books specific for COMLEX. You studied for COMLEX by studying for USMLE + OMM (and everyone had First Aid)

As board review companies sprung up, and more students took advantage of them, the average started to go up, and on paper it appears more competitive. The caliber of students are the same ... but the scores are higher (as well as GPA due to grade inflation ... if you talk to some adjunct professors, they are pressured to give higher grades to students to please the parents and get good evaluations from students so that the school admin will renew their contract)

The previous generation will always complain about the next generation. And each complaint is legitimate - but it won't bring down civilization. But we're seeing more and more sheltered students-->residents who haven't experience life's challenges or difficulties, or expect the system to cater to their needs because up until now, it has catered to their needs. I'm talking about students who show up to residency interviews with their parents (checking out the hospital/work environment, asking program directors what resources are in place to help their kid reach their full potential), students doing an ELECTIVE rotation asking me to convince them that this is where they should go (and should specialize in my field), or students who have to deal with the "public" for the first time and realize the noble patient portrayed on TV movies or TV drama series aren't the typical patients you encounter on a day to day basis (esp in the ED). And there are students who don't know how to present, how to organize information, have severe fundamental knowledge deficit, and when they don't get honors on the rotation, ask me to explain to them why (despite multiple feedback sessions during the rotation) and that "I've tried real hard and put a lot of effort and energy - I think I deserve at least high pass if not honors"

However, I think with time, and demands of residency (the chief is not going to reshuffle the schedule to fit your needs, having a meeting or two with the program director if patient care suffers due to work ethics, realizing you can't rest on your laurels if you want that coveted fellowship in a desirable location, etc. I once had an intern ask on rounds why the senior residents and fellows don't have to pre-round ... the look on the seniors and fellow's faces were priceless ... no verbal answer needed to be given. (believe it or not, I already know the patients, their numbers, vitals, etc. It's what I do in the morning when I arrive, but before I show up to "round"). That intern grew up quickly during intern year and when she returned as a senior resident the following year, was a strong senior (and realized as a senior, she had to pre-round on all the patients before rounds started, as a check/backup for the interns).

Plus once you're done with training - you can't slack off. You're the new guy/gal at work - if you join a partnership track - you have to work hard for the partners to think it is worthwhile to offer you a partnership. If you're an employee, you will have to work hard so that you won't get fired or contract non-renewed during your annual or biannual review. If you're in academia, if you are tenure-tracked, you have to work hard to be promoted during your upcoming P&T review. If you are not on a tenure-track, you will have to work hard to get your contract renewed every few years. If you are starting your own independent business, you will have to work hard to keep that business operating and generating income.
 
This. "Kids these days..."

I do agree though that the article points towards a real problem with the evaluation of students, but I'm not sure how this would possibly be fixed. I also can't really tell what it was like in the past, because from what I've heard evaluations were just as subjective. I mean the ridiculous thing is you can have some residents and attending that generally are fair, others that give everyone 95-100 evals, and ones that have flat out said, "I don't give third years anything but 85". If everyone is getting 85, what will it matter if you're really prepared vs. not. I try to be prepared for my own benefit, but on some rotations with some attendings/residents it really feels pointless.

One additional reason, I suspect, is that exposure and hands-on training has really taken a backseat in clinicals in recent years (or at least that's what I gather from others). Med students in the past had a much more involved and direct part in the patient care process, and they were doing a lot more by themselves or under lenient supervision (see one, do one, teach one). With the loss of those responsibilities we're more or less stuck with periods of time where we do very little. This also leads to less prepared interns that have never done certain procedures (or even worked through certain paperwork) depending on how apprehensive their residents or attendings were.


Instead of seeing real patients, just have them see simulated patients!!!!! (Forehead slap)
 
The important thing is - were you able to obtain lab for the morning?

the important thing is - I was accepted. Funny story though, involves a deceased ICU patient (all of 45 minutes), pacific islander lab technician, and a seasoned ICU nurse who can find humor in everything.. long story short nurse walks in the room after noticing the lab technician trying to obtain blood and breaks the news to her that she's dead. She said the poor girl ran out so fast she left her phlebotomy tray behind.

And no, she did not get the lab work
 
Last edited:
Top Bottom