The most unique curriculums

[gotterdammerung]

Advertisement - Members don't see this ad

I was wondering what medical schools have the most unique curricula. I know that Duke does all of the basic sciences in one year and that Baylor does them in 18 months. What other schools go to the beat of their own drum?

 

[Irish Football]

Northwestern has a brand new curriculum that is a little different.

 

[gotterdammerung]

Just checked them out. Year one at Northwestern is similar to many of the new organ system based curricula I have seen. Year 2 however is very intriguing.

 

[Nymphicus]

Vanderbilt also has a 1yr basic science similar to Duke, Yale has a super flexible curriculum, NW, Case, and UVA are heavily PBL based, CCLCM is a 5 year, tuition free, research intensive curriculum, Mayo has a tiny class and an interesting curriculum with 2 week "selective" courses interspersed throughout, and NYU is also accelerated pre-clinical curriculum.

There's others as well but that's all I have off the top of my head at the moment.

 

[gotterdammerung]

Wow. I totally forgot that Vanderbilt was like that....Good thing to know considering I am applying there.

 

[thesauce]

I think Penn does 1.5 years of basic sciences (not positive).

Aside from being "interesting," there's probably very little benefit to any of these non-standard approaches.

 

[KinasePro]

I believe Emory has 1.5 years preclinical, as well.

 

[NickNaylor]

While you will of course think otherwise, these differences are pretty meaningless. The only substantive "interesting" curriculum organization that I've heard of is Columbia, where you take step 1 AFTER completion of the core clerkships. That would be hugely advantageous. Other than that I have yet to see anything that makes me think you would actually learn or perform better at one school than the next.

(sent from my phone)

 

[KinasePro]

While you will of course think otherwise, these differences are pretty meaningless. The only substantive "interesting" curriculum organization that I've heard of is Columbia, where you take step 1 AFTER completion of the core clerkships. That would be hugely advantageous. Other than that I have yet to see anything that makes me think you would actually learn or perform better at one school than the next.

(sent from my phone)

I generally agree, but the abbreviated preclinical curricula a la Baylor, Emory, Duke, Penn, UVa allow for dedicated research time which could have tangible benefits. Imagine having protected time and a research project with momentum put into your lap during third year, right when networking and research actually become important.

But I agree otherwise, most of the distinctions are just for marketing.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using SDN Mobile

 

[NickNaylor]

I generally agree, but the abbreviated preclinical curricula a la Baylor, Emory, Duke, Penn, UVa allow for dedicated research time which could have tangible benefits. Imagine having protected time and a research project with momentum put into your lap during third year, right when networking and research actually become important.

But I agree otherwise, most of the distinctions are just for marketing.

Sent from my Galaxy Nexus using SDN Mobile

That's true, if those setups allow for dedicated research time then those would be advantageous.

(sent from my phone)

 

[deleted472157]

Baylor also does the same thing as Columbia, which I can only imagine helps their Step 1 scores as well. As for the other schools, I'm not sure if/how the curricular changes would matter.

 

[thesauce]

While you will of course think otherwise, these differences are pretty meaningless. The only substantive "interesting" curriculum organization that I've heard of is Columbia, where you take step 1 AFTER completion of the core clerkships. That would be hugely advantageous. Other than that I have yet to see anything that makes me think you would actually learn or perform better at one school than the next.

(sent from my phone)

Many of the Duke students do the same. However, I disagree that it would be advantageous. I would want to take step 1 as soon after the basic sciences as possible since that's the substance that's being tested.

 

[mvenus929]

Vanderbilt also has a 1yr basic science similar to Duke, Yale has a super flexible curriculum, NW, Case, and UVA are heavily PBL based, CCLCM is a 5 year, tuition free, research intensive curriculum, Mayo has a tiny class and an interesting curriculum with 2 week "selective" courses interspersed throughout, and NYU is also accelerated pre-clinical curriculum.

There's others as well but that's all I have off the top of my head at the moment.

UVA is not heavily PBL based. PBL is where you're given a problem and expected to find the answer yourself. UVA gives you background reading and has you apply it to new problems.

But yeah, UVA also has an 18-month pre-clerkship curriculum.

Many of the Duke students do the same. However, I disagree that it would be advantageous. I would want to take step 1 as soon after the basic sciences as possible since that's the substance that's being tested.

Eh... Step 1 and Step 2 are being combined and mixed around within the next few years, so it probably doesn't make that much difference in the long run.

 

[thesauce]

Eh... Step 1 and Step 2 are being combined and mixed around within the next few years, so it probably doesn't make that much difference in the long run.

They've been talking about doing this for almost 10 years now. Many have their doubts that it'll ever happen.

 

[darkjedi]

Baylor, Vanderbilt, Emory, Penn, Columbia and NYU all have 1.5 year curriculums.

Both Penn and Columbia have their students take boards after core clinical rotations. From what I understand, both these schools have among the highest average board scores in the country.

 

[ShenanigansMD]

Am I the only guy looking for a traditional curriculum? I feel like PBL would just lead to groups spending too much time socializing and not learning the material.

Or I guess PBL is the hip new thing.

 

[KinasePro]

Am I the only guy looking for a traditional curriculum? I feel like PBL would just lead to groups spending too much time socializing and not learning the material.

Or I guess PBL is the hip new thing.

You're a smart man. PBL is an epic waste of time.

 

[notbobtrustme]

ugh, I hate PBL/small group learning.

1 or 1.5 year pre-clinical sounds absolutely insane but more power ot those schools that can successful get that material into their students.

 

[thesauce]

Baylor, Vanderbilt, Emory, Penn, Columbia and NYU all have 1.5 year curriculums.

Both Penn and Columbia have their students take boards after core clinical rotations. From what I understand, both these schools have among the highest average board scores in the country.

And those schools have some of the highest entrance stats as it is. I doubt their curriculum has much to do with it.

 

[gotterdammerung]

Yeah schools like Vanderbilt and Baylor flaunt their high Step 1 scores and attribute it to their curriculum, but you can't really buy into that so much because they accept better test-takers to begin with...

 

[Swartzlehman]

X

 

[mvenus929]

Am I the only guy looking for a traditional curriculum? I feel like PBL would just lead to groups spending too much time socializing and not learning the material.

Or I guess PBL is the hip new thing.

IIRC, the LCME is starting to require less traditional lecture format for accreditation. Hence, more and more schools are starting to offer it.

 

[kfsa1]

There hasn't been much information posted on the website but Central Michigan's seems pretty unique. They claim to incorporate the clinical years in the first two years and the basic sciences in the last two years.

 

[ShenanigansMD]

There hasn't been much information posted on the website but Central Michigan's seems pretty unique. They claim to incorporate the clinical years in the first two years and the basic sciences in the last two years.

Wouldn't that make Step 1 a bit tough?

 

[kfsa1]

Wouldn't that make Step 1 a bit tough?

Yea I'm not sure how it works really....

Here is the link to the school's webpage that talks about their innovative curriculum

http://www.cmich.edu/academics/medicine/about/evolution/Pages/College_of_Medicine_Summary.aspx

I was trying to access their academic schedule to see what they mean by the basic science experience being incorporated into the last two years...but the website denies me access.

My guess though is that they will basically emphasize clinical experience all 4 years during school. I think the basic science experience just means that you get to see these fundamentals come into play in real-time clinical cases.

 

[LizzyM]

Am I the only guy looking for a traditional curriculum? I feel like PBL would just lead to groups spending too much time socializing and not learning the material.

Or I guess PBL is the hip new thing.

Some schools have been using PBL for 15+ years.

If done right, it puts basic science material in context. The small group (6-9 students) have an faculty member who guides the students in selecting learning issues and guiding students if they get too far off track.

The point is not to figure out what is wrong but why things are happening... why does this patient have acidosis? why did this patient with a negative skin test have a positive chest x-ray?

 

[NickNaylor]

Some schools have been using PBL for 15+ years.

If done right, it puts basic science material in context. The small group (6-9 students) have an faculty member who guides the students in selecting learning issues and guiding students if they get too far off track.

The point is not to figure out what is wrong but why things are happening... why does this patient have acidosis? why did this patient with a negative skin test have a positive chest x-ray?

The problem in my experience is that it is seldom "done right" (though I don't go to a PBL-based school). The problem with PBL is that the quality of the teaching is dependent almost entirely on factors external to you. A poor mentor will cause you to waste time discussing unimportant details or, worse, won't tell you what's actually important. A poor group means you have to do more work in order to make up for their slacking.

I think there's a place for PBL, but using it as the first shot at learning the material is a very inefficient and ineffective way of learning IMO. It should be used more as an enrichment technique rather than for first-time teaching.

 

[LizzyM]

The problem in my experience is that it is seldom "done right" (though I don't go to a PBL-based school). The problem with PBL is that the quality of the teaching is dependent almost entirely on factors external to you. A poor mentor will cause you to waste time discussing unimportant details or, worse, won't tell you what's actually important. A poor group means you have to do more work in order to make up for their slacking.

I think there's a place for PBL, but using it as the first shot at learning the material is a very inefficient and ineffective way of learning IMO. It should be used more as an enrichment technique rather than for first-time teaching.

I agree. If it is done right, the cases parallel the basic science lectures so that a case of weakness, fatigue, swollen ankles, and shortness of breath in a 85 year old woman falls during the organ based lectures on cardiopulmonary system. It is an opportunity to review what you've heard in lecture and apply what you've learned to answer a question -- what's going on in this patient and why are they having these symptoms, why aren't they responding to the medication, etc.

 

[notbobtrustme]

PBL is like putting a bunch of kindergartners in front of War and Peace and expecting them to work together to read it.

 

[KinasePro]

I think there's a place for PBL, but using it as the first shot at learning the material is a very inefficient and ineffective way of learning IMO. It should be used more as an enrichment technique rather than for first-time teaching.

Bingo. The problem is that most schools don't utilize PBL in this manner. I can't even count how many of our PBL's were blatantly putting the cart before the horse and introducing material for the first time. And don't get me wrong, we do learn the material when it's presented that way... but our understanding is littered with holes and misconceptions, and given the wide range of facilitator quality, some groups fare better than others. The net result is a frustrating learning experience the could be achieved far more efficiently in a lecture format.

The benefit of PBL IMO is that it serves as an introduction to pimping on differentials, work-ups, treatments, etc... But I think reading through case studies a la NEJM/JAMA provides all the pedagogical benefits of PBL without the clumsy experience you see in a lot of medical schools.

 

[NickNaylor]

PBL is like putting a bunch of kindergartners in front of War and Peace and expecting them to work together to read it.

Yeah, exactly - which really highlights the importance of having effective mentors if PBL is going to be used as a first-time teaching method. Otherwise it's people that don't know anything trying to teach other people that don't know anything.

 

[TXKnight]

Even though this is in the allopathic forum, I will answer the OP's question by mentioning an osteopathic school. Why? because I have not heard of any other curriculum that is as different as this one, whether it is an allo or osteo med school. If any of you guys know somewhere else where something like this curriculum is going on would you let us know, plz?

The school I'm talking about is ATSU in Arizona (SOMA). They have a 1 yr basic science, on-site at their Arizona campus and for years 2-4 they ship you out to a location (which you will know from day 1) where you work and learn at an affiliated clinic (CHC) system. That is, you start functioning as a 3rd year while still on your 2nd year. Now, there is still basic science studying going on, one still needs to take the boards. However, these classes are taken at the CHC or hospital or wherever you are assigned and then go learn the pathology in the context of real patients. Even though there is lecture and reading going on, there is a heavy amount time on the wards too

This is how I understand their curriculum. Does it work? Anecdotically I hear that yes. I heard that during 3rd and 4th year rotations, some of these student function almost as interns when compared to students from traditional 2+2 curricula.
In any case, whether you agree with this approach or not, it certainly is different from other curricula out there.

This is my .02