Originally posted by red fox:
I've been accepted to UCSF, and it's my top choice, but I am concerned about the new curriculum. Is it such a radical change from the existing curriculum that we're all going to be floundering? What's the feeling among current students regarding the change? Is the rest of UCSF worth being a guinea pig for a few years?
Thanks in advance for your candor.
That's a great question. I am actively involved in the new curriculum process as a technical advisor for the online ecurriculum.
Truthfully, if I were entering with the new curriculum's first year, I would be a little worried and hesitant about being the guinea pigs. But then again, I don't think I could pass up UCSF SOM, new curriculum and all.
Yes it's untried, but it can't be worse than the current curriculum, otherwise the SOM would never have embarked on its mission.
Of course, some of those things (like the pre-dissected Anatomy Lab) come with their disadvantages, there are many disadvantages to the current curriculum (but no one is complaining). For example, the current curriculum is separated by discipline and that has it's own problems. We were learning cardiovascular physiology and had to gloss over the pharmacology and immunology associated with the CV because we don't learn those until next year. And by the time we get to that stuff next year, we'll probably have forgotten much of the material... From a purely academic perspective, learning by discipline is probably the best way to get a complete picture of the systems. However, from a clinical perspective, integrating the systems and seeing how they interact will make the better doctor.
Yes, there may be a few awkward moments because it is the first live run-through for the faculty. But there are a number of reasons I'd still attend UCSF:
1) The faculty here are simply amazing and dynamic in their teaching style. Even if there may be logistical or administrative bugs, the core academic curriculum will still be taught effectively. Even now (this year's curriculum), we give feedback constantly to the faculty about how to improve the courses (random course/instructor evaluations sent to students, ~2/month).
2) Academic concerns other than curriculum. The resources behind UCSF are still there, they haven't gone away with the new curriculum. This means things like research, clinical exposure, and the new online electronic resources.
3) Non-academic concerns. Like the city, weather, student diversity/background, extracurricular interests, and your happiness.
Personally, the third item is the most important thing to me. When I was applying, I figured that the resources of all the top schools are fairly comprable (2), and you really can't go wrong with the way the material is taught (1: PBL, traditional, new curriculum), unless you know you can't learn in a certain manner.
My advice is to assess your rankings as if you would be in the "old curriculum." Those who fear the new curriculum change will degrade medical education at UCSF are crying wolf. There would be no way a top school would try something if it would detract from academic excellence. Being actively involved in the new curriculum process, I have to say there are some awesome changes coming about for you guys.