-
Welcome to MSO!
We are an online community for current and prospective medical, dental and allied health students and early career professionals from Australia and New Zealand.Please read: About MSO | Annual Welcome and Important Information | MSO Rules
Quick Links To Forums
Tests/Interviews: UCAT | GAMSAT | Interviews Entrance Discussion: Graduate Medicine | Undergraduate Medicine | Dentistry -
Please consider registering on MSO. Benefits of registering are:
- Able to post and participate in the forum
- After 10 posts: Private Message Other Users
- After 25 posts: Access to the Chatbox
- After 100 posts: Custom user titles and Ad-free experience
If you would like to get involved with MSO or have ideas, suggestions, comments, criticisms or other feedback please Contact Us
Auckland OLY1 chat - archive
- Thread starter Nealie
- Start date
- Status
kakarot
Member
I think the second half of semester 1 was much more interesting (and challenging in some ways i might add), and I don't tend to dream off in lectures, exception being Professor Scott Baker's ridiculously bland evolution lectures.
A lot of our lecturers also have a much better sense of humor. I quite enjoy muscles guy, and the blatant 101 guy who said the Nobel laureate Macleod was "a bit of a dick" (todays afternoon lec)
I dont do 101, but I do like our Muscles lecturer.
I do drift off on occasion during the more boring parts of the lecture but yeah I have enjoyed/engaged in this half of the semester more. Perhaps part of that is that i've finally adjusted to uni life...it was a huge culture shock for me! But now given that I spend most of my time studying, working and volunteering, I don't think I can ever go back to doing nothing on most days.
kakarot
Member
Too true...Uni for me was like a slap in the face everyday by reality until recently, but that's probably because I lived the "wrong" life in year 13
It was mostly the early mornings for me...now I just go to the afternoon lectures! Although staying awake and attentive is hard over 3 hours :S
the thing about lectures is that you're forced to learn at somebody elses pace and style. I have several lectures where I wander off but then am totally interested by the subject when I get home and read about it in my own time. not to mention the seats are awfully uncomfortable.
...with little personal space as I found out today:wacko:
Yeah, i think it's a function of two things - the first is that after OLY1 everyone is so used to competing, not only against one another, but sort of against themselves - to do the very best they can (& sacrificing things for it) & that attitude is hard to get rid of immediately. Also I think alot of the people who end up in med are a bit nutty (myself included) & that old A type perfectionist personality means that anything less than an A for some people is hard to make peace with. Personally I wish the course were Pass/Fail - then it just wouldn't matter what you scored. Of course the argument there is that it gives no incentive for people to strive - but I don't agree. Strive to know everything for the love of it, if that's what floats your boat. Or, if you just want to pass with a solid understanding of the basics and wait until the clinical years to hone your knowledge through practical application - then do that.
4everAlone
Regular Member
2013 could be interesting with progress testing...I assume you're pretty positive about that style? I'm pretty excited about it myself...
on the surface of it, yeah, i think it sounds cool! gotta admit though, i haven't looked into it & have no idea about the down sides....i do feel though that there has to be a better way to a) deliver the info b) filter the info for importance c) do a better job of assessing knowledge etc....
Hows this going to be implemented for you guys?
4everAlone
Regular Member
I wish I knew! We've basically been told nothing about it...other than it's happening. Pretty slack in my opinion. The only information I have is from papers on its effectiveness in the states.
There's a decent article on progress testing at Otago here if you're interested:
https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/...at-the-university-of-otago-medical-school.pdf
https://akoaotearoa.ac.nz/download/...at-the-university-of-otago-medical-school.pdf
IF it was pass/fail then there would be no discriminator. Research proves that interviews are not any better or any worse at predicting how "good" someone is as being a doctor. SOme sociopaths have slipped through the cracks before and there are some pretty shocking stories.
The UMAT is also useless
perhaps a lottery system haha?
The UMAT is also useless
perhaps a lottery system haha?
Lol i've tried to imagine what you look like LG...perhaps I shall find out if I strike the jackpot
I was thinking along the same lines...
I've actually noticed a change in my expectations since year 9...I went from worrying about how much I got right to worrying how much i've got wrong.
I'm sure people will drop the act soon, there's no one to compete with anymore but themselves.
I dont think pass/fail would stop people from striving either...med students tend to be naturally driven to do well regardless of the marking schedule? I'm not the most intelligent or competitive but even I enjoy being perfect..
yes but with pass/fail you wont know whether you passed with 50% or 100%, which would discourage that kind of perfectionism. Conversely, it could also mean people do only the bare minimum in order to pass, which could mean we're less prepared for clinical years (dont know what the correlation is there.)
On this topic one of my friends was telling me about a girl he talked to that day who was saying how her friend had got an A for the first time in the musculo test, and how she was really disappointed, and how (first girl) she couldn't imagine what it would be like getting an A. Talk about hardcore.
A relative whos a doctor has told me that those who get A+ all the time are disappointing when it comes to the clinical- supposedly because they only know how to memorise but cant actually synthesise the appropriate info needed. again dont know how true this is- maybe LG could shed some light?
My sincere apologies I thought you were referring to OLY1 hence I thought it was a little bizzare.
How did you know I was interested in teaching?
Anyways as an aside I'm still not fully one way or the other when it comes to pass/fail assessments in the pre-clinical year. I see merits in it because it is theoretically supposed to reduce competition and stress etc. However, the vast majority of people in the program are all type A personalities, driven by competition to achieve and embrace their learning. I don't think that removing grades is going to change much because there will be internal competition. I actually think some competition is healthy and in the pre-clinical years a lot of the competition is with oneself. Wanting to achieve well I don't see as detrimental.
The clinical years are predominantly pass/fail and for good reason. The assessment structure is a lot more subjective and at the end of the day you are looking at clinical competency, something which cannot be measured purely with numbers. distinction/pass/fail I think is a very good model for that.
It takes a while to grow out of the mentality where you beat yourself up because you didn't get an A+ or whatever but ultimately at the end of the day you get a result and you think, I did what I could and I'm satisfied. If it just says pass I'm not always satisfied because I want to know how much did I pass by, where did I go wrong and more importantly how I could improve myself
regarding people who get A+s and for a lack of a better description being clinically incompetent I think it's difficult to assess. I don't think there is a direct relationship between the two but I have noticed that some students who achieve highly academically have the interpersonal skills of a rock. Alternatively, some poorly achieving students also have the interpersonal skills of a rock. It's a stereotype at the end of the day and you need to remember that high grades do not mean you will be a good physician. How you develop clinically will make you a better physician
How did you know I was interested in teaching?
Anyways as an aside I'm still not fully one way or the other when it comes to pass/fail assessments in the pre-clinical year. I see merits in it because it is theoretically supposed to reduce competition and stress etc. However, the vast majority of people in the program are all type A personalities, driven by competition to achieve and embrace their learning. I don't think that removing grades is going to change much because there will be internal competition. I actually think some competition is healthy and in the pre-clinical years a lot of the competition is with oneself. Wanting to achieve well I don't see as detrimental.
The clinical years are predominantly pass/fail and for good reason. The assessment structure is a lot more subjective and at the end of the day you are looking at clinical competency, something which cannot be measured purely with numbers. distinction/pass/fail I think is a very good model for that.
It takes a while to grow out of the mentality where you beat yourself up because you didn't get an A+ or whatever but ultimately at the end of the day you get a result and you think, I did what I could and I'm satisfied. If it just says pass I'm not always satisfied because I want to know how much did I pass by, where did I go wrong and more importantly how I could improve myself
regarding people who get A+s and for a lack of a better description being clinically incompetent I think it's difficult to assess. I don't think there is a direct relationship between the two but I have noticed that some students who achieve highly academically have the interpersonal skills of a rock. Alternatively, some poorly achieving students also have the interpersonal skills of a rock. It's a stereotype at the end of the day and you need to remember that high grades do not mean you will be a good physician. How you develop clinically will make you a better physician
Otago did a big study on this when they changed from grades to pass/fail. I don't have a link to the paper on hand, but from memory the findings were something on the lines of students did just as much work in a pass/fail system as they did under a graded system, but there was a thematic shift in motivation from "studying to do well in the exam" to "studying to become a good doctor", which was seen as a beneficial enough effect to justify the change. Interestingly (and against expectations), the study found no impact on the "competitiveness" of students.
- Status