Did anyone find gunner training NOT helpful?!

This forum made possible through the generous support of SDN members, donors, and sponsors. Thank you.

Bumbl3b33

Membership Revoked
Removed
10+ Year Member
Joined
Feb 12, 2011
Messages
522
Reaction score
2
I was look at the Step 1 2012 list and almost everyone who did GT was raving about it, save people who started doing it too late in the game and had too many cards piled up. So, as the title asks--did anyone do GT from the beginning and find it to not be helpful?

Members don't see this ad.
 
I didn't find it helpful. In fact, I pretty much hated it. I didn't find it to be a "fun game" like most people have said, and I didn't like that they lock you into completing a quiz / set of cards once you start. That is, there was one time I started like 12 pharm cards (or quiz, I can't remember), and I did 3, then wanted to look at something else, but they were trying to force me to finish the 9 remaining cards / quiz items. So I just never finished them and never used GT again. I'm also really impatient, so that too factors in.

However, I've noted that, throughout the year, some of the highest outcomes posted on the scores thread have been by people who had used GT. So my opinion has nothing to do with its usefulness; for some people, GT is the perfect study tool. Believe me, I wish I had liked GT, because I had seen at least three people with 270+ scores who had used it. I just personally hadn't found it to be user-friendly.
 
i agree with phloston-tried it and hated it

what i absolutely love though is mentalcase or some other computer based flashcard app. you make your own, can subdivide them into sections, and you can either set it with a memory algorithm like gunner training or skip around like phloston wants to do. i think this is far superior and excellent for things like pharmacology that are just brute force
 
I used it up to about 75% completed before it got to be too much for me. It's a big time commitment. If I had to do it over, I would selectively do it for anatomy, biochem, embryo, and microbio. I may still do that, but the idea of restarting those daily cards makes me kind of sick. That said, I've already paid for it. It's expensive. Not sure I'd pay for it again just to do those subjects
 
Members don't see this ad :)
However[/B], I've noted that, throughout the year, some of the highest outcomes posted on the scores thread have been by people who had used GT. So my opinion has nothing to do with its usefulness; for some people, GT is the perfect study tool. Believe me, I wish I had liked GT, because I had seen at least three people with 270+ scores who had used it. I just personally hadn't found it to be user-friendly.

I started with firecracker too, and it seems overwhelming and so time consuming right now, that i have no time for qbanks or reading FA.

Phloston, do you remember how these guys you know used GT? Because personally, i dont think you will have time for anything else, if you have banked all the cards in GT, and started to review. Did they do just that?
 
I used it up to about 75% completed before it got to be too much for me. It's a big time commitment. If I had to do it over, I would selectively do it for anatomy, biochem, embryo, and microbio. I may still do that, but the idea of restarting those daily cards makes me kind of sick. That said, I've already paid for it. It's expensive. Not sure I'd pay for it again just to do those subjects

How big of a time commitment are you talking about? Also, do you think that would have been the case if you started using it earlier?
 
How big of a time commitment are you talking about? Also, do you think that would have been the case if you started using it earlier?

Obviously, it's progressively more time consuming as you go. I started after fall semester of 1st year, so honestly very early. About a month and a half into second year, it was taking me about 3 hours a day, just to do the daily review without banking, which was too much for me. Over the course of all my GT time, it took an average of maybe an hour to an hour and a half a day for the daily review, again not factoring in banking time.

It was helpful. Having quit, I find there are things I think I'm learning for the first time that I happen to know pat because of having done it in GT at some point. I also think it will help a lot when I go back to review the things I had mastered in GT. But I couldn't keep up with it
 
Obviously, it's progressively more time consuming as you go. I started after fall semester of 1st year, so honestly very early. About a month and a half into second year, it was taking me about 3 hours a day, just to do the daily review without banking, which was too much for me. Over the course of all my GT time, it took an average of maybe an hour to an hour and a half a day for the daily review, again not factoring in banking time.

It was helpful. Having quit, I find there are things I think I'm learning for the first time that I happen to know pat because of having done it in GT at some point. I also think it will help a lot when I go back to review the things I had mastered in GT. But I couldn't keep up with it

I'd like to offer my contrasting experience to show that you might just have to try GT for yourself to see how time consuming it is. I'm at around 90% banked and I spend about 2 hours per day, tops, including banking cards to get to 100%. For reference, I started at the end of MS1. Keeping an even banking rate is huge, because a large bolus of review questions has the tendency to come back all at the same time in waves over the coming months.
 
I'd like to offer my contrasting experience to show that you might just have to try GT for yourself to see how time consuming it is. I'm at around 90% banked and I spend about 2 hours per day, tops, including banking cards to get to 100%. For reference, I started at the end of MS1. Keeping an even banking rate is huge, because a large bolus of review questions has the tendency to come back all at the same time in waves over the coming months.

What is the "banking rate" that you're doing/what is your methodology to banking?
 
I can't remember when the post was, but some kid with a 274 on the scores thread earlier this year wrote a detailed summary of how he went through GT. As far as I can recall, he had started early in MS2 and worked at a high intensity rate. I do know that he got through UWorld, but I'm not sure about Kaplan or USMLE Rx. He had said his school advised against starting prep early, but that he didn't listen, and having begun GT early was the best thing he could have done.

It's apparent though that some people have learned to stack the cards on a daily basis in such a fashion that the program makes for the ultimate reinforcement. I wish I liked GT because I was aware that it worked extremely well for some people, but I couldn't deal with them locking you into a quiz without letting you jump around. If the interface is consonant with your study-style, you're golden. But the traditional multi-QBank method is preferable to most.
 
It's definitely helped me to remember some things that I wouldn't otherwise know, but I think that other things might have helped me just as much or more with the same investment of time (and perhaps money, though really the cost of Step 1 materials isn't much compared to med school itself).

I stopped because I realized there was no way I could get through the whole thing in a while also passing my classes. I also think it's getting less useful over time, because they have added too many multiple-choice questions (which aren't worth repeating in the same way as flashcards) and are neglecting the site in favor of firecracker (which is still a work-in-progress.)
 
It's definitely helped me to remember some things that I wouldn't otherwise know, but I think that other things might have helped me just as much or more with the same investment of time (and perhaps money, though really the cost of Step 1 materials isn't much compared to med school itself).

I stopped because I realized there was no way I could get through the whole thing in a while also passing my classes. I also think it's getting less useful over time, because they have added too many multiple-choice questions (which aren't worth repeating in the same way as flashcards) and are neglecting the site in favor of firecracker (which is still a work-in-progress.)

To counterpoint also, there is no way in HELL I could have made myself put in the step prep time I did with GT without the daily commitment of having those cards to do. At least not first year. I'll be putting in significant time now. I agree though, that their reliance on MC questions greatly reduced the value of the time put in
 
It's apparent though that some people have learned to stack the cards on a daily basis in such a fashion that the program makes for the ultimate reinforcement. I wish I liked GT because I was aware that it worked extremely well for some people, but I couldn't deal with them locking you into a quiz without letting you jump around. If the interface is consonant with your study-style, you're golden. But the traditional multi-QBank method is preferable to most.

The only quiz you can't exit in the middle of is when you bank cards for the first time. This is because the system prioritizes the entry of banked questions en bloc, and can't separate the questions from the card (e.g. if you bank a card with 10 questions, the system needs you to rate all 10).

When you're doing a daily review, you're free to move about and bank more cards or just take a rest for a while. Firecracker, the sequel program, doesn't have this problem (as far as I know).
 
Members don't see this ad :)
Hated after 1 year. Works? Sure.

Prob takes twice as long and...... replaces nothing. That's right, those 270 scores used GT plus all qbanks and other sources.

Super inefficient past 50% banked.
 
Where can you find the GT schedule? I read a few pages of the Gunner Training thread and didn't find it.
 
It was just straight memorizing. I tried it for two weeks and just wasted my whole subscription because it wasn't helping me learn how and why. It might work for some people but I feel it just is not what u should be doing for a super high score.
 
It was just straight memorizing. I tried it for two weeks and just wasted my whole subscription because it wasn't helping me learn how and why. It might work for some people but I feel it just is not what u should be doing for a super high score.

Yup. I did it longer and agree. But the #1 annoying thing is how their users treat the program like a religion and get defensive against any criticisms. Hence the group think, positive reinforcement bs that goes on in their thread.
 
Yup. I did it longer and agree. But the #1 annoying thing is how their users treat the program like a religion and get defensive against any criticisms. Hence the group think, positive reinforcement bs that goes on in their thread.

Well that went from constructive criticism to ad hominem fast.
 
Yup. I did it longer and agree. But the #1 annoying thing is how their users treat the program like a religion and get defensive against any criticisms. Hence the group think, positive reinforcement bs that goes on in their thread.

Personally, I think that's a pretty d*ck-ish thing to say about a big group of people.

Anyway, here's my take on it: I agree, gunnertraining IS pure memorization. That's its point. It's not supposed (at least in my mind) to replace a QBank. It's analogous (albeit more in depth) to First Aid, which, in the exact same way, is NOT meant to teach you -- it's used to memorize everything you need to know for Step 1, but it's not a great understanding tool. I could never memorize everything in FA via reading...I need the constant banging it into my head that GT provides.

I plan on taking Step 1 in April, and before then I want to finish GT (actually, I'm hoping to finish it this month) and really get my mastery up. That way, I know that I'll have seen almost everything (if not everything and more) from FA even before my dedicated study period, in a way I *never* would have without GT.

The key part of GT (I think the part that goes misunderstood and is never focused on enough) is to get your mastery up along with your banking. Never ever ever bank way outside of the speed of your mastery, because that is when GT gets to be too much. I learned this the hard way at the beginning (I've been doing GT since April of last year, banking on and off but unfortunately not consistently enough). Currently, I'm at 63% banked, 43.8% mastery. I try to keep my mastery and banking within about 10% of each other, but since I'm doing a big banking push right now, they're almost at 20%. That's the most I would ever want between them, though, because that is when the questions start to add up.

I'm attaching a file with my review schedule included. You'll notice that today and tomorrow royally suck...I have about 400-500 questions each day. That's simply because I let myself get very behind last week between last minute Christmas shopping and going home to hang out with friends and family. Outside of these days, I almost always (if I haven't let myself get backed up) have fewer than 150 cards on a given day. You can see that most days are actually down under 100 (the next week still has more because I spread some cards out over those days after not wanting to do them on Christmas). Since I can do ~200 questions/hour if I'm really focusing, that puts me at about *half an hour* of doing review questions when I haven't been banking cards. If I'm steadily banking cards (and therefore have some extra review questions), I maybe have an hour of questions and an hour or so of banking per day. Maybe that's too much for some people, but it's almost everything I do to study for med school (outside of lectures and the last few days before a test), and it's helped me a bunch on my med school exams.

I haven't done many QBank questions yet, but I know that I needed a solid knowledge background before starting them, and I think GT is providing me that. My two key pieces of advice are these: 1) Always keep your percent mastery relatively close to your percent banking. Never rapidly outbank your mastery, because that is when cards start to add up. and 2) At the same time, do your best to consistently bank. I did them in spurts (right before test time, etc), but I do not think that this was the best way...it's left me at 63% banking when I wanted to be at 100% by the time this break was over. Consistent banking is key, and it too keeps your review questions from getting way out of control like mine will be once I bank 50 cards today.

Anyway, I know this was long, but I hope it was helpful. I love GT. I am aware of its shortcomings (despite what MCATguy might say), but I think that IF you use it correctly and if you accept it for what it is (a memorization tool), it can be one of your best resources for Step 1 and for coursework. I know it has been for me.
 

Attachments

  • Screen Shot 2012-12-30 at 8.39.48 AM.png
    Screen Shot 2012-12-30 at 8.39.48 AM.png
    27.5 KB · Views: 215
Thank you posting that, hrain--it actually answered a lot of questions I was going to ask around for regarding the system.

Although, I am curious---there are people who say they are doing hundreds of questions on a daily basis, but your screen shot suggests and you're going to be doing less than 100 per day. Is your low number a function of having less information banked? I'm not entirely sure how the system works--do you choose what you think is high yield or something you want to remember, bank it, and then it gets added to your review questions? Or is it more like every topic has an associated card to it, which you bank, and then the associated questions get placed into review pile?

I guess what I'm not seeing is how some people, who have been using it for numerous months to a year, are managing lower numbers per day while others seem to be getting utterly demolished and overwhelmed with the work.
 
The schedule numbers can be deceptive in that if you have unmastered cards you've gotten wrong several times, they roll over on a daily basis. My schedule when I got overwhelmed didn't look terrible dissimilar, although it sounds like he's managing it better than I was. Its definitely important to not let your banked and mastered get too far apart
 
Thank you posting that, hrain--it actually answered a lot of questions I was going to ask around for regarding the system.

Although, I am curious---there are people who say they are doing hundreds of questions on a daily basis, but your screen shot suggests and you're going to be doing less than 100 per day. Is your low number a function of having less information banked? I'm not entirely sure how the system works--do you choose what you think is high yield or something you want to remember, bank it, and then it gets added to your review questions? Or is it more like every topic has an associated card to it, which you bank, and then the associated questions get placed into review pile?

I guess what I'm not seeing is how some people, who have been using it for numerous months to a year, are managing lower numbers per day while others seem to be getting utterly demolished and overwhelmed with the work.

Your %banked is not as important for daily review as the difference between %banked and %mastered. I'm at around 94% banked, but with only a 5% difference to mastered. My daily question load for the next month is an average of 112 questions a day. There are two important points here. 1) There are probably about 9000 questions in the GT bank, so if you have everything mastered and perfectly spread out, you'll still see 100 questions/day. 2) My average load this week is 185q/day, 4 weeks from now its 95q/day. A lot of the questions I'll see this coming week are going to be punted two days at a time, rolling over constantly because I still haven't gotten it (damn you, pharm!). If you're consistently banking, you can assume you're gonna do 200+q/day average weeks.
 
This might be a really stupid point to bring up but people should probably mention whether they are using "lite" mode or "detailed" mode, or whatever they are called.

I started out with GT in the spring semester of my 2nd year and at first I was doing detailed mode and thought it was awesome. As people have said, it is pure memorization but that is exactly what I needed help with. I would only try to do the cards/questions that covered the lectures I had had. This was working great for the first two months of the semester, but then when new courses appeared, the detailed mode became too much. I'm just not as fast as a previous poster, but 200 questions is way more than one hour of work and that was the number I was hitting each day before adding the new stuff. I switched over to lite mode and it became a lot more manageable for a few weeks (now I would have only 50 questions of old stuff) but my mind is a little more one-track in the early stages of my studying than GT allows. I didn't like having to review the old material so much. My classes also stopped fitting neatly into the GT cards so I eventually just stopped around spring break and never looked back.
 
Your %banked is not as important for daily review as the difference between %banked and %mastered. I'm at around 94% banked, but with only a 5% difference to mastered. My daily question load for the next month is an average of 112 questions a day. There are two important points here. 1) There are probably about 9000 questions in the GT bank, so if you have everything mastered and perfectly spread out, you'll still see 100 questions/day. 2) My average load this week is 185q/day, 4 weeks from now its 95q/day. A lot of the questions I'll see this coming week are going to be punted two days at a time, rolling over constantly because I still haven't gotten it (damn you, pharm!). If you're consistently banking, you can assume you're gonna do 200+q/day average weeks.

So should you not bank more cards until your %mastered is within a reasonable distance to %mastered? Sidenote, how is %mastered calculated?
 
So should you not bank more cards until your %mastered is within a reasonable distance to %mastered? Sidenote, how is %mastered calculated?

Within reason, I try not to let %banked-%mastered be greater than about 10%. Depending on when your exam is, and how many cards you have left, that may or may not be possible. I basically took my rough test date, subtracted about 2 months, and found out how many days were between now and that date. Then I found out how many cards I had to bank per day to get to 100% mastery about 2 months before my test date. If you want to bank a certain number of cards per day but your mastery differential is getting too high, seek to bank cards with information you already know. That way you get those questions into the system but they probably won't stick around in your daily turnover pile for a month.

I'm not positive about exactly how %mastered is calculated. It's vaguely the percentage of review questions that you've ranked >4 out of all the review questions that exist. I believe, however, that ranking as a 5 gives you a "fuller" or "more complete" %mastered than just 4s. For example, I don't think an entire subject ranked entirely at 4s will give you 100% mastery in that subject.

As a random aside, there's a glitch somewhere in the calculation because your mastery can go above 100%.

EDIT: %mastery is out of the total question pool, not just the cards/questions you've banked (i.e. you can reach 50% banked, 50% mastery and not 50% banked, 100% mastery).

EDIT2: To clarify, I'm on comprehensive mode.
 
Last edited:
I typed out a response but then realized I don't care and am not going to explain why there are simpler and more effective ways to do well on the exam.

Gt people don't listen usually anyhow. Do what you guys want and report back. I think qbanks and fa are much better... after having used gt to 50%.

Also, the defensiveness is ridiculous. Gt is like a cult. If someone said a qbank sucked then a simple one line retort would suffice... I.e. oh, I like Kaplan qbank and thought the qs were good. Yet insult gt and you get a novel response, seriously like a crazy cult because it takes over your life doing questions everyday. Becomes like a religion
 
Last edited:
I typed out a response but then realized I don't care and am not going to explain why there are simpler and more effective ways to do well on the exam.

Gt people don't listen usually anyhow. Do what you guys want and report back. I think qbanks and fa are much better... after having used gt to 50%.

Also, the defensiveness is ridiculous. Gt is like a cult. If someone said a qbank sucked then a simple one line retort would suffice... I.e. oh, I like Kaplan qbank and thought the qs were good. Yet insult gt and you get a novel response, seriously like a crazy cult because it takes over your life doing questions everyday. Becomes like a religion

I think the more appropriate analogy would be to say you personally attacked the users of a particular qbank, not the qbank itself. There are many criticisms to be had about GT and FC, and they are not perfect programs even if you accept the premise of the approach (which you don't). All the same, I haven't seen anyone else attack the users of Kaplan or USMLERx the same way you have criticized a group of users of GT. It's simply unnecessary and uncivil.
 
I typed out a response but then realized I don't care and am not going to explain why there are simpler and more effective ways to do well on the exam.

Gt people don't listen usually anyhow. Do what you guys want and report back. I think qbanks and fa are much better... after having used gt to 50%.

Also, the defensiveness is ridiculous. Gt is like a cult. If someone said a qbank sucked then a simple one line retort would suffice... I.e. oh, I like Kaplan qbank and thought the qs were good. Yet insult gt and you get a novel response, seriously like a crazy cult because it takes over your life doing questions everyday. Becomes like a religion

You get long responses because GT is a big program and those answering want to give good advice. Most people giving the answers looked for the same advice before using it and just want to give back. I think it should be a compliment that such long answers are given--unless you're going to go into the Step1 experiences thread and criticize those people that give detailed accounts of their experiences.

You also see a decent amount of criticism of GT in the thread too, but it only makes sense there are more positive accounts than negative. Most of the people on the thread are still using and obviously believe in it. Those that have given up probably aren't following the thread as hardcore as you; that's why this thread was a good idea for the OP. Most of your criticisms of GT are spot on but you can give your "advice" and move on. People can read and make their own decisions. Honestly it just sounds like you're bitter about GT, which makes sense since you got to 50% banked and gave it up...I would be really pissed. GT isn't for everyone; everyone learns best in different ways.

I hope the OP doesn't hate me for writing more than 5 words.
 
I typed out a response but then realized I don't care and am not going to explain why there are simpler and more effective ways to do well on the exam.

Gt people don't listen usually anyhow. Do what you guys want and report back. I think qbanks and fa are much better... after having used gt to 50%.

Also, the defensiveness is ridiculous. Gt is like a cult. If someone said a qbank sucked then a simple one line retort would suffice... I.e. oh, I like Kaplan qbank and thought the qs were good. Yet insult gt and you get a novel response, seriously like a crazy cult because it takes over your life doing questions everyday. Becomes like a religion

dude, your simply wrong. I've been using GT for a while and if you'd bother looking into the GT thread, you will notice how often regular users complain about GTs shortcomings.
I have personally complained numerous times and very loudly at that, it is not perfect and not for everyone.

My point is GT users are very open to constructive criticism but it's not constructive to compare GT to a religion.
 
My "novel response" was not a response to your post...that was just the first line. My response was for the OP (and other readers) who are looking for advice about GT. Like the previous poster said, they're little tidbits that I picked up along the way and wish someone had told me straight-up, because I think it would have saved me a lot of time.

Anywho, OP...as for your question about my question numbers vs. others, I definitely think it's primarily based on the % difference between banked and mastered. It's also true that I still have ~35% of cards left to bank, so obviously that plays a part. But the key thing is just to keep your mastery up.

And yeah, a few of my questions will pass over into this week...but at this point, if I have 500 questions to do today, probably 100 of them will pass into this week (and be spread out among the days) while the remaining 400 will be spread out over the next 3 months. This still makes it not too bad, at least in my opinion.

Good luck! If you have any more questions, shoot me a PM...I may not be following individual threads too closely this semester as I start to focus more on Step studying.
 
I have no horse in this race. I happened to try it all and learned a few things in the process. People are intrigued by this program and I understand why, as I was too. But having tried multiple paths, I'm very sure there are better ways. But do what you will. I don't really care.

Whoever said I was bitter is right. 300$ and daily cards for 5-8 months (can't remember) was the most inefficient time I've spent. But its more than that. I'm hoping a few people don't get duped like I was. I do this for the kids.

I'm done. Good luck, do what you want. You never know what's working u til you start taking full lengths anyway. Ask that pholston guy, he even said that.
 
Last edited:
i hate GT/FC. I wasted so much time first year using it and it was pretty useless. It tests blatant recall with little reasoning mixed in. I only use it now for the micro sections.
 
i hate GT/FC. I wasted so much time first year using it and it was pretty useless. It tests blatant recall with little reasoning mixed in. I only use it now for the micro sections.

Out of curiousity, why would you continue to use something you hate?

This thread is so wrought with emotion! The only thing I'm getting from it is that GT works for some --not everyone-- but some.
 
Out of curiousity, why would you continue to use something you hate?

This thread is so wrought with emotion! The only thing I'm getting from it is that GT works for some --not everyone-- but some.

Some parts of medicine are pure memorization.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the main point of GT/FC to help you nail down the details of the major concepts you've learned throughout the first two years.

I've used Anki so far for the same purpose, and the thought of having pre made cards sounds really appealing. If there is a more efficient way to go about it, please let me know. Like it or not, I've resigned to the fact that a significant amount of memorization is a necessary part of doing well on Step 1, and in medical school in general. With that being the case, GT/FC sounds like an effective strategy. When I started using Anki I watched my grades go from the mid B level to high A's, even making a couple of perfect scores towards the end of the semester. If Step 1 is anything like med school exams, then I certainly want to incorporate some type of flashcard/memorization strategy into my study plans.
 
Correct me if I'm wrong, but isn't the main point of GT/FC to help you nail down the details of the major concepts you've learned throughout the first two years.

I've used Anki so far for the same purpose, and the thought of having pre made cards sounds really appealing. If there is a more efficient way to go about it, please let me know. Like it or not, I've resigned to the fact that a significant amount of memorization is a necessary part of doing well on Step 1, and in medical school in general. With that being the case, GT/FC sounds like an effective strategy. When I started using Anki I watched my grades go from the mid B level to high A's, even making a couple of perfect scores towards the end of the semester. If Step 1 is anything like med school exams, then I certainly want to incorporate some type of flashcard/memorization strategy into my study plans.

GT/FC is an attempt at a spaced repetition program (e.g. Anki) with a premade set of questions geared towards Step 1. On the one hand, you don't have to make your own cards. On the other, you have to both trust their cards and their implementation of the spacing algorithm. Both situations leave something to be desired.

Their cards are generally good, covering most of the information from FA and other sources in an efficient way. The review questions, however, are a pretty major letdown. Spaced repetition flashcards are about pure memorization of information broken into its smallest discrete bits. A good flashcard has one unambiguous answer to one fact-based question, and can be answered as fast as you can read it, given you know the answer. Some GT/FC flashcards fit this description, and are thus useful. Many flashcards, however, ask you to list 10+ things. This is a really dumb flashcard model and only reinforces the 8 or so things you always get right from the list, and does little to help you remember those last few you always seem to forget. Even worse are the multiple choice questions. The first time you see a tricky one, it's helpful because you realize that they can ask you a topic in a particular tricky way and it's illuminating. The 5th time you see it, however, you're just answering based off rote memorization of the paragraph and its answer; you're not longer really going through that full thought process to answer it. This is the same reason why people advocate against doing multiple runs of one question bank too quickly (or at all). Lastly, their algorithm is limited (having a maximum review interval of 90 days. But this last issue is small compared to the issues I outlined above.

All of that being said, I personally think the tradeoff is worth it (and even worth paying for). The money is an incentive to get my money's worth, and if I weren't doing GT you can bet I would never have made hundreds (much less thousands) of personal flashcards.
 
Out of curiousity, why would you continue to use something you hate?

This thread is so wrought with emotion! The only thing I'm getting from it is that GT works for some --not everyone-- but some.

i don't use the question mode, I just take notes in the margins of the flashcards and read them along with the notes.

Yeah, I don't understand why people are getting their panties up in a bunch. Everyone has different learning styles and it would behoove medical students to embrace this. Also, I think people here have sand in their vaginas.
 
i don't use the question mode, I just take notes in the margins of the flashcards and read them along with the notes.

Yeah, I don't understand why people are getting their panties up in a bunch. Everyone has different learning styles and it would behoove medical students to embrace this. Also, I think people here have sand in their vaginas.

Oh, there's a non-question-mode-mode? didn't know that. So essentially you'd be paying for pre-made flashcards of FA material? Doesn't sound too shabby
 
Whoever said I was bitter is right. 300$ and daily cards for 5-8 months (can't remember) was the most inefficient time I've spent. But its more than that. I'm hoping a few people don't get duped like I was. I do this for the kids.

I appreciate this. I guess my thinking is that, worse comes to worst, $300 dollars for a disappointing study aid that ends up being money poorly spent isn't the end of the world. Having said that, I still want to make some sort of educated consumer decision--so, I appreciate your insight.
 
GT/FC is an attempt at a spaced repetition program (e.g. Anki) with a premade set of questions geared towards Step 1. On the one hand, you don't have to make your own cards. On the other, you have to both trust their cards and their implementation of the spacing algorithm. Both situations leave something to be desired.

Their cards are generally good, covering most of the information from FA and other sources in an efficient way. The review questions, however, are a pretty major letdown. Spaced repetition flashcards are about pure memorization of information broken into its smallest discrete bits. A good flashcard has one unambiguous answer to one fact-based question, and can be answered as fast as you can read it, given you know the answer. Some GT/FC flashcards fit this description, and are thus useful. Many flashcards, however, ask you to list 10+ things. This is a really dumb flashcard model and only reinforces the 8 or so things you always get right from the list, and does little to help you remember those last few you always seem to forget. Even worse are the multiple choice questions. The first time you see a tricky one, it's helpful because you realize that they can ask you a topic in a particular tricky way and it's illuminating. The 5th time you see it, however, you're just answering based off rote memorization of the paragraph and its answer; you're not longer really going through that full thought process to answer it. This is the same reason why people advocate against doing multiple runs of one question bank too quickly (or at all). Lastly, their algorithm is limited (having a maximum review interval of 90 days. But this last issue is small compared to the issues I outlined above.

All of that being said, I personally think the tradeoff is worth it (and even worth paying for). The money is an incentive to get my money's worth, and if I weren't doing GT you can bet I would never have made hundreds (much less thousands) of personal flashcards.

You bring up something I've been struggling with. I'd like to have the personalization options of anki, especially as it pertains to writing more effective prompts. In writing my own cards, I try to pack a lot of information in the question prompt but then only have one or a few word answers. That way I can run through the cards quickly but still pick up a ton of information. However, I think the cards I'm making for my classes are way too detailed for Step 1, and the thought of having to pound out thousands of additional cards makes me queazy.

Like you, I'll probably end up taking the GT/FC route and dealing with its issues.The payoff seems too large to pass up.
 
Top