Here to fulfill a personal desire to procrastinate and entertain…
Who teaches what for MS1 (at least the first semester)? I know from reading this thread that there are multiple lecturers for the same class, but could you break it down for us?
Biochem is a hodge podge of passers-by. Leon (who you can see hanging out with us at parties on facebook) is the director, but he only lectures a few of the weeks. We think he has stock in the makers of Inspiration software and gout drugs.
Gross Anatomy is run by four cell biology professors who were called "The Four Horsemen" by one of our notegroup writers. They are Chung (course director), Dan McNeill, Dan O'Donoghue (who we call "O'Don"), and Dandajena. McNeill is the only one who you won't see in the lab much. Chung is the only full-time faculty member. Dandajena is an orthodontist who got a Ph.D. in anatomy under Chung. McNeill and O'Don are PA-C/Ph.D.'s. McNeill is the director of the PA program and doesn't have that big of a role, but he is also a neuroanatomy expert. O'Don's father is a doc, and he actually has only been a PA for about ten years. He'd had a successful career as a Ph.D. neuroanatomist before becoming a clinician.
Who is a good lecturer? Is there anyone that could teach you the phone book and make it interesting? Who is isn't so good?
Last year Sanjay Bidichandani (biochem) was voted the teaching award. He was good, but I know him personally so I'm a little biased. Fuller's section of biochem (hormones) will be taken over by somebody else next year. For biochem, I thought Weigel was also good.
The phone book? How about gross anatomy? It's a list of stuff to commit to rote memory. I don't know anyone who thought that they got a lot out of any of the gross lectures.
In general, med school faculty are not hired for their teaching ability at any place. They are needed to accrue research funding, supposedly to keep our tuition at only 3% of the operating budget. Our courses run by Cell Biology are decent because they have faculty who teach only; and Chung is our resident "guy who wrote a board review book." (OSU has Goljan whose book is a better seller since his path material is higher yield for the USMLE than anatomy.)
Who has more material on tests and whose material is harder?
All of our exams are built from question banks established over many years. Profs just sample from the bank. For biochem, the different lectures submitted questions from their sections. The most obscure teacher IMHO was Hanas—very much branches and not trees if you ask me.
Gross is pretty uniform throughout the first semester. This year, Chung went on sick leave for the last exam, so we got an O'Don sampling from the Q bank that was a little more challenging by most people's estimations.
Since you guys are talking about competitive specialties, does anyone know OU's average score on Step 1 & 2 (specifically Step 1)? I asked during my interview and all I could get was: "Our pass rate is on par with the rest of the US, and that won't be a problem for you." I wasn't really satisfied. You can pass by one point but if, say, 3/4 of the class barely passes that says something about the school's curriculum.
In other SDN threads, it was determined that no school publishes that information. USN&WR would go crazy with that kind of statistic. I think that the Texas schools tell applicants that stuff because those houses are ultimately much more competitive with each other due to the nature of the TMDSAS match system, but I've never heard of anyone mentioning it here.
"Our pass rate is on par with the rest of the US."
The percentiles of the scores change every year, so the admissions people will be quick to point out that "it wouldn't mean much anyway."
The vast majority of our students pass the first time. In fact, all accredited US allo schools will tell you the same thing. Since curricula are standardized across the board, this stands to reason. The thing is, though, you can't retake it if you pass. So we are more worried about our score than passing.
I know that one can work hard and overcome, but like the Wiz, I don't want to be limited in what specialty I ultimately go into because of my first two years.
Well I think that a lot of it is in our heads and stems from the natural competitive nature of people who get accepted to medical school. Anyone who wants to do internal med, family practice, psych, neurology, pm&r, ped's, etc. can. In those cases, selection will be at the level of fellowship (step 2/3 and research dependent) and have little to do with MS 1/2.
What most experienced docs tell me is that almost everyone gets to do what they want to do in the long run. There are more residency spots than there are American grads, so going to a U.S. allo school already gives you a leg up. It is true that you may have to interview at 30 different houses to get a match in some of the top ones, but most people can get what they want. Most schools will also tell you that 80+ percent got one of their top 3 choices in the match. Again, this statistic is useless for many students.
I do know a couple of people who were "promised" derm matches but later had to scramble for internal med, but derm is competitive both because of the lifestyle/salary and the relative lack of programs. If the demand for derms rises in the U.S., then, well, we just have to wait longer for an appointment or shift the caseload to PA's. Man last year, there was only one MS 4 who matched ORL, and she had to apply to 90 programs. I guess she REALLY wanted to do it.
I don't particularly like listening to you guys fight - it damages my image of everyone getting along & liking each other. I like to hold onto my misconceptions as long as possible.
We're all friends here. It is very much like a barbershop. Besides, we've decided that it's Freeze's fault.
My 5 year old asked me where my penis was and how I pee if I don't have one
I must admit that this also puzzled me for years. I'm still not sure how it works.
I should run for something. Do we have a poetry chair?
