Traditional curriculum vs. Systems based

[gatorsforchrist]

---

Members don't see this ad.

Howdy all!!

I searched these topics but did not find what I was looking for. I know there are pros and cons to both of these systems. I wanted to put this in the Allo forum but assumed it would be moved here.

Regarding the traditional, do you think that the repetition of material as seen in several classes helps with retention of the crazy amount of stuff that med students must know? Does this curriculum correlate directly to higher board scores or are board scores dependent on YOUR preparation?

Regarding systems based, does this seem to lead to a deeper, more thorough understanding of clinical medicine? For example, does the fact that you cover the GI system in a few weeks and then not see it again until you begin prep for the boards put you at a disadvantage?

How about any other facets that I missed?

Thanks everyone!!! The May 15th deadline is quickly approaching.... 👎

 

[TexasPhysician]

I am not a fan of the traditional curriculum because of the amount of hours. Too many professors go on and on about their own research -useless. I would ask schools about how many hours of lecture they have per day. I prefer about 4 hours, and I'll do the rest on my own. PBL and other stuff just doesn't matter to me.

No curriculum directly correlates to great board scores. Board scores are HIGHLY dependent on how much effort you put into it. I made a habit of studying for every test like it was the boards. Sometimes this meant researching extra information that was useless for my test. It paid off.

Everyone has preferences for different curriculi. What do you like best? People thrive in both environments. Wherever you go, just try to keep the lecture hours down. Studying on your own is much more effective in my opinion.

 

[maybee]

bump.
I'm curious as well, especially from people who are in med school already.