- Joined
- Jun 22, 2004
- Messages
- 5
- Reaction score
- 0
Does anyone know if there's any significant difference in the board scores of students of different programs?
traditional vs. organ/system based
- Thread starter Strangelove MD
- Start date
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,261
- Reaction score
- 4
I thought Traditional was Systems Based?Strangelove said:
Hmmm... I think you mean Traditional vs. the Newer Integrative PathoPhys and Clinical Applications that is now be integrated longitudinally across the first two years.
Additionally, some schools that take this approach require a fourth year elective to be an advanced basic science to course to keep you in the scientific loop while working on your clinicals.
Sorry though, I'm not sure about score differences. For me though, the integrative approach is more appealing with its planned redundancy (reinforce important concepts), and elimination of redundant redundancy (minimize the crap) 😕 😉 . 😀
Any other SDNer's thoughts?
- Joined
- Aug 4, 2003
- Messages
- 1,380
- Reaction score
- 34
You mean, Systems vs. Discipline (Biochem, Phys)...
My opinion: It doesn't matter. For the boards, you're gonna need to know everything.
I prefer Systems and I go to a Systems school, but a lot of stuff fall through the cracks, or at least only get taught once or twice only, OR they repeat the same basic crap over and over again and leave out the higher level difficult crap. So for Biochem for example, you might get taught glycolysis one month and THEN 10 months later be asked to integrate that with fatty acid breakdown, protein synthesis and then 3 months later be taught nucleotide synthesis. Annoying. And at our school, pharm gets pushed aside into PBL sessions.
As far as Boards are concerned, I don't know the stats, but it is knowable. You can get on Ovid or Medline. Academic Medicine is one journal where people publish results from curricular shifts.
The other thing to remember is that there aren't that many Systems Based review books out there. Step Up is the only one and I recommend buying it on day 1 of your 1st Systems class, but other Step 1 review books like BRS, Lippincott, and First Aid are all organized by Disciplines... That said, these books have chapters organized by systems. So when you're reviewing for the Boards, you want to review the way you learned it which means means if you're at a System's school, you'll be flipping through a ****load of books to review it rather than reading 1 book at a time.
But in the end, it doesn't matter, because you have to know all the material anyways and be able to integrate it all and answer questions.
My opinion: It doesn't matter. For the boards, you're gonna need to know everything.
I prefer Systems and I go to a Systems school, but a lot of stuff fall through the cracks, or at least only get taught once or twice only, OR they repeat the same basic crap over and over again and leave out the higher level difficult crap. So for Biochem for example, you might get taught glycolysis one month and THEN 10 months later be asked to integrate that with fatty acid breakdown, protein synthesis and then 3 months later be taught nucleotide synthesis. Annoying. And at our school, pharm gets pushed aside into PBL sessions.
As far as Boards are concerned, I don't know the stats, but it is knowable. You can get on Ovid or Medline. Academic Medicine is one journal where people publish results from curricular shifts.
The other thing to remember is that there aren't that many Systems Based review books out there. Step Up is the only one and I recommend buying it on day 1 of your 1st Systems class, but other Step 1 review books like BRS, Lippincott, and First Aid are all organized by Disciplines... That said, these books have chapters organized by systems. So when you're reviewing for the Boards, you want to review the way you learned it which means means if you're at a System's school, you'll be flipping through a ****load of books to review it rather than reading 1 book at a time.
But in the end, it doesn't matter, because you have to know all the material anyways and be able to integrate it all and answer questions.
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,261
- Reaction score
- 4
Hmmm... What I was referring to is the LCME's recent (a few years ago) requirements that require horizontal and vertical integration in the Curriculum to take place by ~2005-6. Some schools hopped on this band wagon a while back, whilst others have yet to change the organization and structure of the curriculum:
"The phrase ?coherent and coordinated curriculum? implies that the program as a
whole will be designed to achieve the school?s overall educational objectives.
Evidence of coherence and coordination includes:
? Logical sequencing of the various segments of the curriculum.
? Content that is coordinated and integrated within and across the academic
periods of study (horizontal and vertical integration).
? Methods of pedagogy and student evaluation that are appropriate for the
achievement of the school?s educational objectives."
-->LCME Standards and Guidelines Page 21
"The phrase ?coherent and coordinated curriculum? implies that the program as a
whole will be designed to achieve the school?s overall educational objectives.
Evidence of coherence and coordination includes:
? Logical sequencing of the various segments of the curriculum.
? Content that is coordinated and integrated within and across the academic
periods of study (horizontal and vertical integration).
? Methods of pedagogy and student evaluation that are appropriate for the
achievement of the school?s educational objectives."
-->LCME Standards and Guidelines Page 21
- Joined
- Jul 10, 2003
- Messages
- 1,261
- Reaction score
- 4
As far as I know, the outcome of this change is that System's Based is a minimized a bit, and PBL with 'Clinical-Applications' classes are being taught along with.
- Joined
- Aug 24, 2001
- Messages
- 5,527
- Reaction score
- 1,683
Most schools are switching from a traditional, to a organ/systems based curriculum. My school 3 years ago, went from a traditional grades based curriculum, to an system based curriculum that was pass/fail. The board scores jumped 5 points in the first class to change. And you'll notice most of the top schools are Systems nowadays.
Another example. Baylor V. UCSD. They both get students that are about the same level (Baylor, 3.77, 11.2 MCAT, UCSD 3.73, 11.0 MCAT) Baylor is organ based, and their avg board scores are about a 232. UCSD is traditional, and they have a 225. Northwesten. 3.68 and 10.8 with a systems based. They get a 230. That's a pretty large statistical difference.
Another example. Baylor V. UCSD. They both get students that are about the same level (Baylor, 3.77, 11.2 MCAT, UCSD 3.73, 11.0 MCAT) Baylor is organ based, and their avg board scores are about a 232. UCSD is traditional, and they have a 225. Northwesten. 3.68 and 10.8 with a systems based. They get a 230. That's a pretty large statistical difference.
- Joined
- Nov 12, 2002
- Messages
- 1,187
- Reaction score
- 7
our school is trying to make the transition from discipline (eg. biochem, anatomy, etc.) to organ/system based.
a guy on the curriculum committee told me that there have been studies that show organ based students do score slightly better on step 1 than discipline based.
that's word of mouth, though, so take it for what its worth.
a guy on the curriculum committee told me that there have been studies that show organ based students do score slightly better on step 1 than discipline based.
that's word of mouth, though, so take it for what its worth.
