Otago HSFY chat - archive

[Public Liability]

Hey SASOL,

I think I'm gonna do what I did with HSFY and ask older students whats good and not, many of those books are labelled as 'Recommended' instead of 'Highly Recommended' anyway.

And we know from HSFY 'Recommended' means 'useless'.

I'm actually not keen on buying textbooks, as I never really used them in first year. And in the rare times I did need to use them, I could have just gone to the library instead. Wbu?

EDIT: Those lecture handouts were fantastic for biochem! (y) Kudos to the department..I wish CELS had that

Ugh..remember all that crap about mitochondria and choloroplasts with the electron transport chain in CELS?(n) I don't know if you guys liked it, but that was hell and wish I had a good lecture handout that helped guide me to learn what I needed to know in what detail.

I remember people in my hall learning the citric acid cycle for CELS!!! :wacko:

 

[greenglacier]

EDIT: Those lecture handouts were fantastic for biochem! (y) Kudos to the department..I wish CELS had that

Ugh..remember all that crap about mitochondria and choloroplasts with the electron transport chain in CELS?(n) I don't know if you guys liked it, but that was hell and wish I had a good lecture handout that helped guide me to learn what I needed to know in what detail.

I remember people in my hall learning the citric acid cycle for CELS!!! :wacko:

I disagree to some extent here. I loved the lecture handouts in biochem, but I don't think it was a bad thing that we didn't get them for CELS. If we get detailed handouts covering exactly what we need to know, then we develop bad learning habits. Ultimately by graduation we should (especially in medicine, but I think also in pharmacy) be able to work out for ourselves what we need to know and go about finding that information. Giving out such handouts is contrary to that ultimate goal.

Personally I really enjoyed the electron transport chain part of CELS, and if people at your hall were learning the citric acid cycle then that isn't all bad. Generally I would regard extra learning as a good thing.

 

[Public Liability]

You mean we shouldn't get used to being spoon fed? Yeah, but CELS and BIOC seemed like linked departments, and I would taken it as a friendly gesture from CELS lol.

Interestingly, a med student who did HSFY I think 6 years ago said that they got spoon fed, they were supplied with printed lecture slides and everything

 

[skyglow1]

I disagree to some extent here. I loved the lecture handouts in biochem, but I don't think it was a bad thing that we didn't get them for CELS. If we get detailed handouts covering exactly what we need to know, then we develop bad learning habits. Ultimately by graduation we should (especially in medicine, but I think also in pharmacy) be able to work out for ourselves what we need to know and go about finding that information. Giving out such handouts is contrary to that ultimate goal.

Personally I really enjoyed the electron transport chain part of CELS, and if people at your hall were learning the citric acid cycle then that isn't all bad. Generally I would regard extra learning as a good thing.

I think not being told what we need to know and what we don't is unfair in the HSFY setting. Many of the papers are about little details and fighting for every single mark you can. They can't make the tests like that and then withhold information on what's going to be tested, whilst pretending that the course promotes learning how to think for ourselves. HSFY is anything BUT learning how to think for ourselves. It's just a crapload of information shoved down the throats of students, and unless the course style changes, then students should be told what they need to know and what they don't.

I'm also confident that students that do make it into med can also think independently and work out what they need to know for themselves in the medical course. Not fostering this independence of learning in HSFY is not very harmful. I don't feel the med students would develop bad learning habits from HSFY.

 

[I'mOnABoat]

I think not being told what we need to know and what we don't is unfair in the HSFY setting. Many of the papers are about little details and fighting for every single mark you can. They can't make the tests like that and then withhold information on what's going to be tested, whilst pretending that the course promotes learning how to think for ourselves. HSFY is anything BUT learning how to think for ourselves. It's just a crapload of information shoved down the throats of students, and unless the course style changes, then students should be told what they need to know and what they don't.

I'm also confident that students that do make it into med can also think independently and work out what they need to know for themselves in the medical course. Not fostering this independence of learning in HSFY is not very harmful. I don't feel the med students would develop bad learning habits from HSFY.

I think you are wrong Skyglow. Not being told exactly what we need to know in HSFY is what separated you and me and the rest of our class from the rest. That and UMAT. You had a keen eye for what you think might come up and what you thought you had to know. I think that is important that the department doesn't come out and say 'this will be in the exam'.

 

[SASOL]

Hey SASOL,

I think I'm gonna do what I did with HSFY and ask older students whats good and not, many of those books are labelled as 'Recommended' instead of 'Highly Recommended' anyway.

And we know from HSFY 'Recommended' means 'useless'.

I'm actually not keen on buying textbooks, as I never really used them in first year. And in the rare times I did need to use them, I could have just gone to the library instead. Wbu?

EDIT: Those lecture handouts were fantastic for biochem! (y) Kudos to the department..I wish CELS had that

Ugh..remember all that crap about mitochondria and choloroplasts with the electron transport chain in CELS?(n) I don't know if you guys liked it, but that was hell and wish I had a good lecture handout that helped guide me to learn what I needed to know in what detail.

I remember people in my hall learning the citric acid cycle for CELS!!! :wacko:

I'm gunna wait and see what textbooks are helpfull before buying them.

Ahh I hated that mito/chloroplast/e-transport crap! I didnt get it at all, mainly because I didnt think they would go so indepth, especially since in the lecture they didnt focus too much on it. Consequently I screwed up the mid semester test majorly. Haha it was easier to understand in bioc, even if Craig Marshall was teaching it.:lols:

 

[skyglow1]

I think you are wrong Skyglow. Not being told exactly what we need to know in HSFY is what separated you and me and the rest of our class from the rest. That and UMAT. You had a keen eye for what you think might come up and what you thought you had to know. I think that is important that the department doesn't come out and say 'this will be in the exam'.

Hmmmm...sure there was a bit of interpretation on what we were told we needed to know and independent thinking on the students' part, and that made a small difference in marks, but that independent consideration of what to learn was done not for learning's sake, but for marks' sake if you get what I mean. I just think the HSFY course on the whole is quite shallow and superficial when it comes to the learning aspect.

 

[Public Liability]

I think not being told what we need to know and what we don't is unfair in the HSFY setting. Many of the papers are about little details and fighting for every single mark you can. They can't make the tests like that and then withhold information on what's going to be tested, whilst pretending that the course promotes learning how to think for ourselves. HSFY is anything BUT learning how to think for ourselves. It's just a crapload of information shoved down the throats of students, and unless the course style changes, then students should be told what they need to know and what they don't.

I'm also confident that students that do make it into med can also think independently and work out what they need to know for themselves in the medical course. Not fostering this independence of learning in HSFY is not very harmful. I don't feel the med students would develop bad learning habits from HSFY.

Thank you skyglow.

I'm gunna wait and see what textbooks are helpfull before buying them.

Ahh I hated that mito/chloroplast/e-transport crap! I didnt get it at all, mainly because I didnt think they would go so indepth, especially since in the lecture they didnt focus too much on it. Consequently I screwed up the mid semester test majorly. Haha it was easier to understand in bioc, even if Craig Marshall was teaching it.:lols:

And thank you SASOL lol

Two guys that share my point of view on these two things. Oh and SASOL it seems I started a "let's blame Craig Marshell" thing here

Skyglow can certainly speak on this issue of learning in HSFY, as he learnt, uh, EVERYTHING lol (except some random dates and stuff I think, but you don't really have to be a genius independent thinker to not learn that)

 

[SASOL]

I think you are wrong Skyglow. Not being told exactly what we need to know in HSFY is what separated you and me and the rest of our class from the rest. That and UMAT. You had a keen eye for what you think might come up and what you thought you had to know. I think that is important that the department doesn't come out and say 'this will be in the exam'.

Isn't it better to have a comprehensive understanding of the content that is focussed on most rather than anticipating whether or not they are going to ask about a minor detail that was hardly mentioned (a la the answer to the epi question in the footnotes)? Its all well and good knowing every detail, but you need to know the limit. Good example is the people studing the citric acid cycle in CELS! Didnt need to know it, but they learnt it because they feared it would come up and didnt want to get caught out. At the end of the day thats not really smart learning, is it?

 

[skyglow1]

Isn't it better to have a comprehensive understanding of the content that is focussed on most rather than anticipating whether or not they are going to ask about a minor detail that was hardly mentioned (a la the answer to the epi question in the footnotes)? Its all well and good knowing every detail, but you need to know the limit. Good example is the people studing the citric acid cycle in CELS! Didnt need to know it, but they learnt it because they feared it would come up and didnt want to get caught out. At the end of the day thats not really smart learning, is it?

I think the discussion here isn't really about what is the optimal method to get the highest mark in HSFY.

I wanted to discuss greenglacier's statement: "If we get detailed handouts covering exactly what we need to know, then we develop bad learning habits. Ultimately by graduation we should (especially in medicine, but I think also in pharmacy) be able to work out for ourselves what we need to know and go about finding that information. Giving out such handouts is contrary to that ultimate goal."

What I'm trying to get across is that, the course structure of HSFY is so geared towards memorising little facts and fight for every mark, that lecturers withholding information on what we need to know would be little more than a superficial attempt to look like HSFY promotes student-directed learning. You would need a complete overhaul of the HSFY course structure before withholding that information from students is actually meaningful.

 

[Public Liability]

Hmmm now if we turn towards the 'cerebral aqueduct' incident in HUBS191, that fact wasn't in the lecture slides and plus it was the one of many names in the stupid essential reading that weren't in the lecture slides.

Sure SASOl once mentioned it would have been easy to correctly guess the right option due to the other options being obscure, but this course isn't about guessing..

 

[I'mOnABoat]

I think the issue with HSFY is that, being an entry into professional courses, the various departments know that there is a high likelihood that the people in the lectures are never going to study the course. So they decide to throw the book at you in a way to try and cover everything that their individual courses cover to better educate everybody.

The importance behind whether or not they should give out handouts with objectives or whether you learnt the CAC comes back to the individual themselves. This ultimately comes back to whether they are learning specifically trying to get their way into a professional course or whether they want to have a more complete view on certain topics. Being a broad learner is not necessarily a bad thing. In HSFY, you may argue that the time spent learning the CAC could have been better spent doing something else but in my opinion knowledge is everything. So I learn everything.

I don't think that HSFY was geared towards the little details. I think if you know the bigger picture you can work out the details.

 

[SASOL]

Sure SASOl once mentioned it would have been easy to correctly guess the right option due to the other options being obscure, but this course isn't about guessing..

Very true. Though in this case it was expected we knew everything in the readings, we were told.

 

[skyglow1]

Hmmm now if we turn towards the 'cerebral aqueduct' incident in HUBS191, that fact wasn't in the lecture slides and plus it was the one of many names in the stupid essential reading that weren't in the lecture slides.

Sure SASOl once mentioned it would have been easy to correctly guess the right option due to the other options being obscure, but this course isn't about guessing..

That question is an interesting example. The question itself is testing on a relatively small detail in HUBS. The lecturers clearly said that you needed to do essential readings. The students will learn the material from the textbook for the sake of getting the highest marks.

Lets say we had the same question, but instead the HUBS lecturers gave far less information on what you needed to learn, and the question comes up on an early test in the year. I think the majority of HSFY students (only my educated guess!!!) are thinking "how do I get the highest marks to improve my chances" rather than "what do I need to learn to give myself a good appreciation of this subject". The student may guess that they do not need to know material explicit to the textbook, and so they get the question wrong. They realise that textbook material can be examined, and thus for the rest of the year learn the material from the textbook for the sake of getting the highest marks.

My point here is that, most of the time, withholding that information has done nothing to stop our hypothetical student from learning the material for the sake of getting marks. The large majority of students do not have the luxury of learning things they want to because they find it interesting, or learning for the sake of learning. That is the reality of a course that rewards the small details, and a course which is highly competitive and cut-throat. The course in a sense promotes "bad learning habits". Students feel that if they do anything but aim for the highest marks, they're going to fall behind the competition.

This is all only my opinion of course and how I see the course. I went into the course with the mentality of "I want to maximise my chances of getting into medicine". It would have been nice to learn about things that would have given me a more complete view of the subject area, or things that I found more interesting, but I felt that those things needed to wait until I actually got into the med course, because I could not afford to "waste" any time on things that I didn't need to learn. You could say I had a very narrow view on my education in HSFY, but I did what I thought was best for getting into medicine.

 

[Public Liability]

^ I knew my example would have lit a spark haha

 

[greenglacier]

Yeah, there was still a bit of "big picture" in HSFY. I remember being slightly annoyed when Tony Zaharic completely went over nitrogen transport in a revision lecture, because that was something I already knew but hardly anyone else seemed to, and was definately more of a big picture thing.

Given that success in medicine definately requires independent learning ability, and given that HSFY is trying to predict success in medicine, I hardly think it a bad thing if HSFY rewards people who are prepared to learn outside the lecture material, and who are prepared to further investigate areas that interest them. I get what you are saying skyglow - if such things are tested then people will learn outside the material for the sake of good marks and HSFY will no longer be testing genuine motivation to do this. At the same time, it's hardly easy to learn outside a structured environment. Also, it's not like a senior doctor gets much choice - they have to engage in independent learning to maintain their professional competancy. So, I would propose that more independent learning in HSFY would firstly benefit those with a genuine interest in learning outside the strict lecture material, then secondly benefit those who are able to do this well. Both of those outcomes are preferable (in terms of effective learning and the outcome of medical admissions) to the current "spoonfeed the students then take in whoever can memorise the greatest quantity of simple facts".

 

[Public Liability]

Yes but remember skyglow pointed out the time factor. You simply had to make efficient use of your time to learn what had to have the highest chance of being tested

 

[SASOL]

This is all only my opinion of course and how I see the course. I went into the course with the mentality of "I want to maximise my chances of getting into medicine". It would have been nice to learn about things that would have given me a more complete view of the subject area, or things that I found more interesting, but I felt that those things needed to wait until I actually got into the med course, because I could not afford to "waste" any time on things that I didn't need to learn. You could say I had a very narrow view on my education in HSFY, but I did what I thought I was best for getting into medicine.

Can't agree more with you. I found in HUBS there was a lot of stuff I wanted to know more about, purely out of interest, but never did because I needed to learn more important crap like CAC. Is med more relaxed in this sense?

 

[Public Liability]

crap like CAC, yeah! :lols: Craig Marshell!!

 

[skyglow1]

Given that success in medicine definately requires independent learning ability, and given that HSFY is trying to predict success in medicine, I hardly think it a bad thing if HSFY rewards people who are prepared to learn outside the lecture material, and who are prepared to further investigate areas that interest them.

This is only my opinion, but I feel as if the current course structure almost punishes students who are prepared to learn outside lecture material and go further with their learning. There is too much on the line, and those few marks could be the difference between getting and not getting in. You could not fault a student for thinking that he should focus on getting those marks only. Or maybe that's just paranoia on my part? I think greenglacier you're not the best example because you're far above the typical healthsci student, whereas I'm referring to the above average student, who doesn't have the confidence to both get the basic facts from lectures down solidly, and learn stuff additional to that. You were going to gain admission anyway, with or without doing independent learning.

So, I would propose that more independent learning in HSFY would firstly benefit those with a genuine interest in learning outside the strict lecture material, then secondly benefit those who are able to do this well. Both of those outcomes are preferable (in terms of effective learning and the outcome of medical admissions) to the current "spoonfeed the students then take in whoever can memorise the greatest quantity of simple facts".

Yes I agree that the current structure of HSFY is flawed. I would love to see more independent learning, but not in the form of "we won't tell you what's gonna come up in the exams". One of the most important things is that the exams themselves need to change in the way they are written and what they test on. Then we could really start giving the students more freedom in their learning.

Can't agree more with you. I found in HUBS there was a lot of stuff I wanted to know more about, purely out of interest, but never did because I needed to learn more important crap like CAC. Is med more relaxed in this sense?

It sure is! This freedom in med is absolutely great if the students use it correctly and not slack off instead. You can see some students in tutorials who have read further and researched more deeply because they found something really interesting, and they contribute that to the group. It's great that I can look up interesting stuff that isn't in the course, and know that I won't somehow be disadvantaged by doing so.