classement prog medecine Usherb

[joseph]

Bonjour,

Comment classez vous le programme de medecine de l'université de Sherbrooke par rapport a celui de mcGill ou UM  et pourquoi 

MERCI

[Bambi]

However, there is life after death! Very hard work in first year and you will be fine.

[Snowmen]

15 hours ago, 1997 said:

Va a sherbrooke seulement si tu veux mourrir

Ça sert à rien de s'appitoyer sur son sort. Être en médecine signifie une charge de travail énorme, peu importe la présence d'un nouveau curriculum ou non. C'est complètement inutile de simplement blâmer celui-ci pour tous les maux du monde comme c'est apparemment pratique courante dans la nouvelle cohorte. Jamais ça va permettre de trouver des solutions. Au lieu, il faut apprendre à organiser son étude pour comprendre ce qui est important ou non et ainsi réduire la charge de travail sans réduire la qualité de la formation.

Ce n'est pas en blamant le nouveau curriculum pour tous les maux du monde que des solutions seront trouvées. Pour ça, il faut être pro-actif, tenter de faire des commentaires constructifs à la direction (qui est d'ailleurs énormément à l'écoute malgré ce que certains semblent croire) et surtout garder une attitude positive au lieu de capituler au premier obstacle.

Tu as peut-être des parrains qui pourront t'aider à te guider et à garder une attitude positive mais si ce n'est pas le cas, libre à toi de me contacter par MP et il me fera plaisir de te donner des cues pour t'adapter à la vie en médecine. Malheureusement, c'est exigeant et ce n'est pas à cause de la présence d'un nouveau curriculum.

[Haribo7173]

It's definitely been an adjustment so far and tbh, I'm still adjusting. There are a lot of positives about the new curriculum; I've enjoyed the APEs so far and I like that we start the clinical stuff really early and it seems to center around the material. You can tell a shit ton of work has gone into it. Ngl, it has been a bit of a shitshow hahaha and it's not like everyone in the cohorte is a bunch of spoiled crybabies that just want everything handed to them but I really do think there would be a lot less bitching going on if we could use the notes/question banks from the previous years. I talked to a few 3rd years who said that they realized that was absolutely a disadvantage for us. I feel like most people don't really know where they're going at this point. Having said that, it is what it is and I don't really think the workload is going to get any lighter; we're just gonna adapt and get better eventually. So far, I've been trying to base my studying/note-taking on the objectives, and been paying close attention and participating in the APPs and APEs to fill in any gaps. I can already tell there is a lot of useless shit in the readings that we will likely never be tested on (studies, stats, minute details that not even a practicing physician would know, etc etc). The first few exams will tell us A LOT anyway.

Oh and good news: preclerkship as well as clerkship will most likely be P/F for our cohorte and the ones to come!

 

[indefatigable]

You've got the right attitude - the retours will really help.  And P/F is a game changer - there's actually a fair bit of attrition and repetition so this will help that for sure.  Needing a P is very different - I can see the point of feedback still, but more clinical exposure is also more advantageous. Your group should be much happier considering the grading and other differences - making a good doctor isn't always synonymous with pre-clinical and I'm glad the faculty have recognized this.

[Arztin]

I'm sure being the first class year, you guys will be guinea pigs. But then, look at the advantages. Pass Fail is really a game changer.

Joseph, vraiment, un MD, c'est la formation de base. Au Canada, la qualité du MD est pas mal équivalente partout, et la qualité de formation est excellente partout.

[Snowmen]

Par souci de donner quelques éclaircissements, j'ai discuté avec quelques premières années et en gros ça semble être une question de pas être capable de cerner la matière importante (ie: ne pas suivre les objectifs) en plus d'essayer de tout apprendre par coeur comme si c'était le cégep. Certains se montent des "résumés" qui ont 20-30 pages de plus que le nombre de pages à lire (ex: des résumés de 100 pages pour 60-70 pages de lecture) dans les textbooks... C'est pas quelque chose qui peut être blamé sur le nouveau programme qui est simplement utilisé comme bouc émissaire.

[indefatigable]

.

[Snowmen]

24 minutes ago, calcan said:

Quand même, je ne pense que ça serait tellement différents avec les autres promos.  C'est pas comme il y a eu un grand changement de sélection au niveau des étudiants - les notes sont très utiles pour plusieurs, même la plupart, et je ne vois rien de mal avec ça (des autres facultés utilise des PowerPoints par exemple et font des bons médecins).    

Effectivement mais les cohortes précédentes n'ont pas eu un nouveau curriculum à utiliser comme bouc émissaire et ont donc dues s'adapter.

[indefatigable]

.

[Snowmen]

1 minute ago, 1997 said:

Yeah I totally agree with this. I have friends in other medical schools (McGill, notably) and I feel like I have to spend sooooo much more time to gain the same knowledge. Having already synthesized and organized notes or a lecture could REALLY help, especially with the extremely vague objectives. And in most cases, lectures present the material in a way that is more "human" and so you retain the information much better. There is nothing more boring and passive than reading a dry textbook with not pictures or diagrams.

Another issue I have with Sherbrooke is that I don't know who to ask questions to. For example, I have a question that is not answered in my readings... I ask my tuteur and they don't know! Why? Because they are not a specialist in this field. There is no question forum, I don't know any specialists in this field, etc. It's really bringing "independent learning" to a whole other level. 

If OP has the option to go to a school with lectures, they should because it makes learning much more efficient. 

I'm praying so hard that the program becomes P/F

Guess what? In two years, you'll be a clerk and there won't be fancy lectures to help you learn and you won't be able to ask your attending or resident for the answer because you're expected to find it yourself unless it is very advanced knowledge. You'll have to open your textbook or read the research and find it yourself because you pretty much aren't allowed to not know something twice. That's what PBL is preparing you for and I can guarantee you that you'd rather fall flat on your face during the first month of pre-clerkship than during the first month of clerkship.

I also have a hard time believing that your tutor wouldn't know the answer to a question unless that's a pointless and irrelevant detail that has nothing to do with clinical practice. Even if they're not a specialist in the exact field the problem is about (which I also doubt), they already have a tutor's guide with the answers to any questions that are relevant to the subject that's covered by the problem. If they don't have the answer, be happy: it means it's irrelevant to the exam or clinical practice and therefore not something you should know.

This isn't CEGEP, you can't learn everything and even attendings have to search for information.

[Arztin]

On 9/13/2017 at 7:39 PM, 1997 said:

Yeah I totally agree with this. I have friends in other medical schools (McGill, notably) and I feel like I have to spend sooooo much more time to gain the same knowledge. Having already synthesized and organized notes or a lecture could REALLY help, especially with the extremely vague objectives. And in most cases, lectures present the material in a way that is more "human" and so you retain the information much better. There is nothing more boring and passive than reading a dry textbook with not pictures or diagrams.

Another issue I have with Sherbrooke is that I don't know who to ask questions to. For example, I have a question that is not answered in my readings... I ask my tuteur and they don't know! Why? Because they are not a specialist in this field. There is no question forum, I don't know any specialists in this field, etc. It's really bringing "independent learning" to a whole other level. 

If OP has the option to go to a school with lectures, they should because it makes learning much more efficient. 

I'm praying so hard that the program becomes P/F

C'est pas mieux, les powerpoints. Les profs souvent botch les cours et les présentations. Tu te rammasses à être obligé à rester sur le campus plus longtemps + devoir écouter des cours mal faits et apprendre des slides qui n'ont pas de sens pour les recracher à l'examen. Ça te donne pas mal moins de temps de lire et de te préparer pour tes APP. Tu penses peut-être que c'est mieux, mais vraiment, ce n'est pas mieux

[Clapton]

On 20 septembre 2017 at 9:00 AM, 1997 said:

Misconception. Même si on a pas de cours, on reste assis dans les salles de cours pendant environ 6 heures par jour, donc on a pas tant de temps pour lire... Ils sont très bons à gaspiller notre temps... 2h de "cours" pour discuter les méthodes d'évaluations quand ça pourrait tout être synthétisé en 1 page max dans un syllabus... Quand j'étais à McGill, les cours été enregistrés et je devais seulement aller à l'école environ 9h/semaine au total. C'était le gros luxe

6h par jour de cours c'est rien. Mais essaie de t'adapter au nouveau mode d'apprentissage, synthétise l'info, passe pas 4h à étudier des trucs inutiles, etc. C'est certain que c'est une grosse adaptation mais c'est important que tu as adapte ta méthode d'étude. Dans mon programme, certaines personnes essaient littéralement d'apprendre tous les détails par coeur, sauf que le problème c'est que quand ta 8h de cours par jour, tu n'as pas le temps de t'attarder à des trucs superflus. Parfois les objectifs sont flous, mais tu dois faire toi-même un "tri" et adapter tes techniques pour être un peu plus autodidacte. Je suis pas dans un programme aussi "autodidacte" que le nouveau programme de méd de Sherbrooke, mais je te dirais que le même principe doit s'appliquer, il faut s'adapter et être un peu moins "OCD".

Tk bon courage, et je suis certain que tu vas rapidement finir par t'adapter. Et surtout, n'hésites-pas à envoyer bcp de feedback à la faculté pour qu'ils puissent adapter le programme d'une manière plus optimale pour les prochaines cohortes (ou les prochaines années).

 

[Snowmen]

J'ai checker leur horaire, tu peux pas dire que t'as 6h de cours par jour quand ça arrive une fois dans la semaine.

[Vanity Smurf]

I think the initial question was about the program's classification. Somehow that degenerated into a discussion about the merits of the new «experimental» curriculum. Being a clever and sensible premed who has the ability to read between the lines, I'm sure you've realized that the best course of action is to stay away until this ****storm at Sherby blows over. The new curriculum really does suck that much.

[Snowmen]

2 hours ago, Vanity Smurf said:

I think the initial question was about the program's classification. Somehow that degenerated into a discussion about the merits of the new «experimental» curriculum. Being a clever and sensible premed who has the ability to read between the lines, I'm sure you've realized that the best course of action is to stay away until this ****storm at Sherby blows over. The new curriculum really does suck that much.

That's a strong first post.

[Arztin]

On 9/20/2017 at 9:00 AM, 1997 said:

Misconception. Même si on a pas de cours, on reste assis dans les salles de cours pendant environ 6 heures par jour, donc on a pas tant de temps pour lire... Ils sont très bons à gaspiller notre temps... 2h de "cours" pour discuter les méthodes d'évaluations quand ça pourrait tout être synthétisé en 1 page max dans un syllabus... Quand j'étais à McGill, les cours été enregistrés et je devais seulement aller à l'école environ 9h/semaine au total. C'était le gros luxe

Tu compares un programme de MD à un programme de B.Sc.... La comparaison n'est absolument pas valable.

En préclinique à McGill, on avait des 9-4 4 jours sur 5 par semaine et une demie-journée l'autre jour (en moyenne. Certains blocs pires, certains blocs plus légers). Les matins, c'était des cours théoriques, et les aprem c'était des APP, TP, labos etc... (en moyenne 2-3 APP par semaine).

[Vanity Smurf]

On 2017-09-23 at 8:05 PM, Snowmen said:

That's a strong first post.

LOL. It is my first post and you're certainly free to agree or ironically imply that you disagree with it. Nevertheless, I'm currently taking a break from my readings, so I'll take some more time to vent  . I'll start with what I see as the good... All the tutors so far have been great. The upper years are generally very helpful. The clinical activities have been very well organized and are a pleasure. However, if I understand correctly, those are the things that have been passed over to us from the old curriculum. Now, on to the things have have sucked so far... There are no lectures. I repeat, NO LECTURES (i.e. Pas de cours magistraux!!!). We are supposed to learn everything on our own, then have a quick question-answer session where our understanding of the concepts is  supposedly verified by an instructor, and on we go. Had anyone explained that system to me before I got admitted, I would have certainly thought that the whole concept is a bit sketchy. I still think it's sketchy. However, despite all that, somehow we've managed to do it so far - mostly by working hard and with the help of notes from upper years (not always useful). It's certainly possible to study this way. But, is it the best way to study? I think not. It's a system that offers 0 flexibility and wastes hours of precious time on class discussions. The readings are bad - just plain bad. They're badly organized and badly written. The faculty seems to think that 10 pages of these readings would take about 1 hour to read. I think the faculty may have slightly overestimated our abilities. Even if I drugged myself silly on Ritalin, I still doubt I could manage 10 pages per hour. BTW, when I say read, I mean read and make notes, because just reading something is completely useless... We're not dealing with fiction here. These readings are about as non-fictiony as it gets, meaning that they're very condensed. Perhaps if the readings were actually chosen with care and had more pictures and schematics instead of essay-form descriptions of biochemical pathways... Seriously, would it have killed the authors to add more picétures and tables? When it comes to all the group activities (i.e. The APÉ and the various other acronyms that we have to deal with on a daily basis), there's just way too many of them. A lot of them seem unnecessary. In short, I completely agree with what 1997 had to say on the subject. Peace out!  

[Vanity Smurf]

Also, most of the readings are in English and our exams are in French... This may not be a problem for people who have lectures in French, however for us it's a problem because we HAVE NO LECTURES.

[indefatigable]

.

[Praise_Kek]

53 minutes ago, Vanity Smurf said:

Had anyone explained that system to me before I got admitted, I would have certainly thought that the whole concept is a bit sketchy. 

I agree with your post.

However, this part is ridiculous. Sherbrooke has been that way since forever. You should have read about it before even trying to get in.

[Snowmen]

Sherbrooke has been mainly PBL based since 1987 so it's a bit hard to believe that you didn't know what you were getting into. If you genuinely didn't know, you only have yourself to blame for not looking a little bit. That system has worked for 30 years at Sherbrooke and just as long at other medical schools like McMaster for just as long if not longer so I have a hard time believing that this is the core problem. Perhaps it isn't the best way to learn but you should have made a bit of research about that before going to Sherbrooke then.

Now regarding the flexibility, I have a hard time understanding you since PBLs give you a lot more flexiblity than a lecture-based curriculum.

Regarding the amount of reading, I'll repeat to you what I've been telling everyone:

1) As Arztin mentioned, you're in medicine, not cegep or undergrad so you better get used to reading and get used to it fast or your LMCC, boards and so on will be a nightmare.

2) Not all the pages are pertinent. If you lack basic skimming abilities to identify what is important and what isn't, that is on you.

3) Medical textbooks are gonna be dry, they're not fairy tales. Unfortunately, while understanding is important, medicine requires you to learn a ton of dry facts by heart such as treatments, diagnostic algorithms and what not. You can't get by without that and if that isn't something that fits your personnality or learning style, perhaps medicine wasn't for you. Again, you should have made more research.

Even if you think they are boring, Harrison's Principles of Internal Medicine and other textbooks are the gold standards for medicine and are used all over the world. Don't blame Sherbrooke for using the most recognized references. Also, you'll do your reading in english for the rest of your career. By the time medical textbooks are translated from english, they're often outdated so get used to it.

What's unfortunately happening at Sherbrooke this year is that many new students are using the new curriculum as a scapegoat. The first few months in medicine are a shock for everyone and everyone adjusts but they have an obvious scapegoat and are using it instead of realising they have shortcomings like everyone and working on those. CEGEP and undergrad may have been easy but now, this is the real deal. You're going to be handling people's lives in the very near future so you'll have to pick up the pace sooner or later.

[Vanity Smurf]

43 minutes ago, calcan said:

Lectures have never been a major part of the curriculum and do not cover the material enough.  It's an interesting complaint regarding English - the retours are in French, but you could try petitioning the faculty to ask to write exams in English or in French (Ottawa allows this).  I think the notes are still probably providing a foundation though since not everyone is comfortable in English.  

I think you may have slightly misunderstood what I was trying to say. J'ai aucun problème avec des examens en français en tant que tels. Le problème est qu'on apprend nos termes en anglais, mais à l'examen il va falloir les écrire en français. Je veux pas faire mes retours en anglais, je veux apprendre la médicine en français, mdr. Puis, quand je fais mes notes, je suis obligé de les traduire et ça prend du temps... et il faut inclure ça dans les calculs lorsque la faculté prépare nos lectures.

 

42 minutes ago, Praise_Kek said:

I agree with your post.

However, this part is ridiculous. Sherbrooke has been that way since forever. You should have read about it before even trying to get in.

I may not be the authority on Sherbrooke's evolution as a teaching institution, but... If it has been like this since forever then why is everyone so giddy about the program that I'm in right now, which is supposedly all new?

 

3 minutes ago, Snowmen said:

 

Now regarding the flexibility, I have a hard time understanding you since PBLs give you a lot more flexiblity than a lecture-based curriculum.

 

I love it when people use blanket statements without backing them up... I also like how you diverted the argument from Sherbrooke's version of PBL to PBL in general. I really don't know how to respond to your argument because it doesn't really address any of the things that I wrote in my post. So, POTATO!

You don't need to talk down to me. I know that medical textbooks are dry. In fact, most textbooks are dry; it's just that some are better written than others, that's all. I've read my share of dry literature, so I dare-say I know what I'm talking about. I'm not complaining about medical textbooks per se, just the ones that were chosen for us. I have not studied medicine before, but I do know that every school has options when choosing its mandatory texts, and I feel like my school has not exercised that option wisely, given the structure of its program. You can certainly continue to hammer away at the idea that I and some of my classmates are just a bunch of crybabies who are using the new curriculum as a scapegoat. The fact of the matter is that you are not in my year and have not tried to study according to the new curriculum, so your opinions are of little value on that basis. Please feel free to defend the new program to the hilt, even though your understanding of it is through things like "J'ai checker leur horaire et appris que..."

[Praise_Kek]

4 hours ago, Vanity Smurf said:

I think you may have slightly misunderstood what I was trying to say. J'ai aucun problème avec des examens en français en tant que tels. Le problème est qu'on apprend nos termes en anglais, mais à l'examen il va falloir les écrire en français. Je veux pas faire mes retours en anglais, je veux apprendre la médicine en français, mdr. Puis, quand je fais mes notes, je suis obligé de les traduire et ça prend du temps... et il faut inclure ça dans les calculs lorsque la faculté prépare nos lectures.

 

I may not be the authority on Sherbrooke's evolution as a teaching institution, but... If it has been like this since forever then why is everyone so giddy about the program that I'm in right now, which is supposedly all new?

 

I love it when people use blanket statements without backing them up... I also like how you diverted the argument from Sherbrooke's version of PBL to PBL in general. I really don't know how to respond to your argument because it doesn't really address any of the things that I wrote in my post. So, POTATO!

You don't need to talk down to me. I know that medical textbooks are dry. In fact, most textbooks are dry; it's just that some are better written than others, that's all. I've read my share of dry literature, so I dare-say I know what I'm talking about. I'm not complaining about medical textbooks per se, just the ones that were chosen for us. I have not studied medicine before, but I do know that every school has options when choosing its mandatory texts, and I feel like my school has not exercised that option wisely, given the structure of its program. You can certainly continue to hammer away at the idea that I and some of my classmates are just a bunch of crybabies who are using the new curriculum as a scapegoat. The fact of the matter is that you are not in my year and have not tried to study according to the new curriculum, so your opinions are of little value on that basis. Please feel free to defend the new program to the hilt, even though your understanding of it is through things like "J'ai checker leur horaire et appris que..."

Sherbrooke vante le fait qu'il utilise uniquement la formule APP depuis des années... c'est connu qu'il n'y ait pas de lectures

[indefatigable]

.