Hey there! Sign in to join this conversationNew here? Join for free
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisismycatch22)
    i did answer. i don't care what you believe. i'm interested in your reasoning behind justifying it.
    i cant really justify what you think i believe. I cant get in your head, sorry, and i dont think i want to.



    i didn't say "no one".
    when you said 'hardly anyone' thats pretty close to meaning 'no one'. in fact the statement still applies even if you did mean 'hardly anyone'. find the cheese.


    where's your evidence that all medical schools are exactly equivalent in terms of quality?
    where is your evidence that i believe this?
    i'm not defending some codswallop that you thought up, no offence mate.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Gizmo!)
    i cant really justify what you think i believe. I cant get in your head, sorry, and i dont think i want to.




    when you said 'hardly anyone' thats pretty close to meaning 'no one'. in fact the statement still applies even if you did mean 'hardly anyone'. find the cheese.


    where is your evidence that i believe this?
    i'm not defending some codswallop that you thought up, no offence mate.
    so you'll just make blase statements arguing with people who think overall quality of teaching might be different between different schools and then dodge when pressed to justify it. can't say i'm surprised
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisismycatch22)
    so you'll just make blase statements arguing with people who think overall quality of teaching might be different between different schools and then dodge when pressed to justify it. can't say i'm surprised
    firstly, stop imagining things i've said, and then asking me why i've said these things you imagined.

    second, please quote my blase stuff if you can find it.

    until then butt out, you are getting boring writing down your daydreams about me.
    Offline

    3
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by thisismycatch22)
    overall quality of teaching might be different between different schools
    evidence?
    I believe quality of teaching is similar insofar as it can be when the same syllabus is not taught, until proven otherwise, that is
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by thisismycatch22)
    so you'll just make blase statements arguing with people who think overall quality of teaching might be different between different schools and then dodge when pressed to justify it. can't say i'm surprised
    Of course quality of teaching will vary from school to school.
    Difficulty is in 'measuring' the quality and quantity of useful teaching at each place, and consistency within a school.

    Easy enough to do at the undergraduate level, much harder to do when it comes to clinical school.

    Have had some appalling bad med students from UCL but then I've seen appalling F1s from KCL and Cambridge (my unis) so I don't think its unique to one place.

    Think we sometimes forget the steepness of the learning curve.
    Offline

    2
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Renal)
    Haha! That's one of the most sensible posts I've seen in this thread.

    However, you have to remember that, essentially, all medical courses are difficult, they just have different emphasis: some will suit great scientists, some will suit great communicators and some will suit great piss artists.
    lol, manchester

    im at manchester and its all a big worrying piss take. of the people i know, most are lazy and do the minimum. exams are marked on a normal distribution so only the bottom 30 odd students fail. and apparently the st andrews students who join us in clinicals wipe the floor with us

    pretty worried about the future, but cant complain that much as im one of the lazy ones
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    Difficulty is in 'measuring' the quality and quantity of useful teaching at each place, and consistency within a school.
    That is not just difficult, but probably impossible to measure.


    As for the discussion, unless you propose the quality and quantity of useful teaching within medical school x directly correlates to the quality of every single graduate then even bothering to try and measure it would simply give you a surrogate endpoint.

    Some self motivated and highly driven students will succeed and go on to become good doctors no matter how good, bad or indifferent teaching was. Similarly, poorly motivated students will not do well just because they are studying at a 'good' medical school.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Caponester)
    That is not just difficult, but probably impossible to measure.


    As for the discussion, unless you propose the quality and quantity of useful teaching within medical school x directly correlates to the quality of every single graduate then even bothering to try and measure it would simply give you a surrogate endpoint.

    Some self motivated and highly driven students will succeed and go on to become good doctors no matter how good, bad or indifferent teaching was. Similarly, poorly motivated students will not do well just because they are studying at a 'good' medical school.
    Actually I disagree strongly with this view.
    There is a lot of evidence to show that early interventions make a lot of difference.
    A university with a strong postural department who can spot struggling students and help them before they fall too far behind will do far better than one where students are largely left to their own devices excepting the annual exams.

    Thats why dropout rates at some unis are much lower than others.
    Certainly at places like oxbridge with their tutorial/supervision systems its VERY hard for a struggling student not to get identified and additional help given early on.

    And I'm sure quality and quantity of teaching correlates with that of the students.
    You don't have to prove it for each student, thats retarded.
    Just have to show it statistically improves the quality of students whether in exams, likelyhood to get through foundation years or likelyhood to get into specialty training.
    [Something that will be easier to measure once the london unis start awarding their own degrees]
    Offline

    10
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    Actually I disagree strongly with this view.
    There is a lot of evidence to show that early interventions make a lot of difference.
    You wouldn't happen to have any sources would you? I'm not being cheeky - I am genuinely interested. If aggressive identification of any problems or issues at undergraduate level improves student performance and future potential as a doctor then surely this would mean tutorial based learning is the way forward.

    I only say that because I think academic problems typically go unreported until they become inhibitory to day to day life at university.
    Offline

    18
    (Original post by Caponester)
    You wouldn't happen to have any sources would you? I'm not being cheeky - I am genuinely interested. If aggressive identification of any problems or issues at undergraduate level improves student performance and future potential as a doctor then surely this would mean tutorial based learning is the way forward.

    I only say that because I think academic problems typically go unreported until they become inhibitory to day to day life at university.
    Cant remember the names but there was an article in the sBMJ a few years ago reviewing some literature.
    Most literature is non medical but there have been some that have looked into med students and student docotrs and are the basis of the foundation programme 'educational supervisors', 'mentorship programmes and emphasis on pastoral care in uni.

    I'm a great believer in tuition based learning myself, but its very expensive and labour intensive. Most unis could never afford to do it.
    Offline

    18
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by Jamie)
    Actually I disagree strongly with this view.
    There is a lot of evidence to show that early interventions make a lot of difference.
    A university with a strong postural department who can spot struggling students and help them before they fall too far behind will do far better than one where students are largely left to their own devices excepting the annual exams.

    Thats why dropout rates at some unis are much lower than others.
    Certainly at places like oxbridge with their tutorial/supervision systems its VERY hard for a struggling student not to get identified and additional help given early on.

    And I'm sure quality and quantity of teaching correlates with that of the students.
    You don't have to prove it for each student, thats retarded.
    Just have to show it statistically improves the quality of students whether in exams, likelyhood to get through foundation years or likelyhood to get into specialty training.
    [Something that will be easier to measure once the london unis start awarding their own degrees]
    Very different to here where I have managed to avoid my tutor for over a year with nothing done, I have seen them once. Total.

    But then maybe intervention would kick in if I was struggling rather than just wanting to be left to my own devices.
    Ver
    Offline

    1
    ReputationRep:
    (Original post by bean87)
    exams are marked on a normal distribution so only the bottom 30 odd students fail.
    Only in years 1 and 2. The grade boundaries are all fixed from year 3 onwards.


    (Original post by bean87)
    and apparently the st andrews students who join us in clinicals wipe the floor with us
    Initially they seem to know more clinically, but it all evens out soon enough. They are good at their anatomy though!
 
 
 
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • Poll
    Brussels sprouts
  • See more of what you like on The Student Room

    You can personalise what you see on TSR. Tell us a little about yourself to get started.

  • The Student Room, Get Revising and Marked by Teachers are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

    Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: International House, Queens Road, Brighton, BN1 3XE

    Quick reply
    Reputation gems: You get these gems as you gain rep from other members for making good contributions and giving helpful advice.