Like this:
Be the first to like this post.
Tags: 1st
This entry was posted on January 3, 2010 at 9:19 pm and is filed under Uncategorized. You can follow any responses to this entry through the RSS 2.0 feed. You can leave a response, or trackback from your own site.
February 28, 2010 at 11:45 am |
Hey does anyone know if we have to know every single function of each neurotransmitter from the Rice lecture, or only the main starred ones??
March 2, 2010 at 1:24 am |
rice is unbelievably good at using big words to take something incredibly simple and blow it up into a pot of nonsense. i understand that some of these people are scholars in their field, but we need good LECTURERS, not just good scientists, to teach us.
February 24, 2010 at 8:58 pm |
Course Liaisons!
You’ve done a fantastic job this module monitoring the course blog, shlongs and all.
Thanks!
February 23, 2010 at 12:59 pm |
Could someone please inform Dr. Rice that trying to give a 50 minute lecture with 73 powerpoint slides is ineffective and unacceptable? (Even with a “late start”.) First rule of of Powerpoint 101: allot 1 minute per slide.
February 23, 2010 at 11:44 am |
Can someone please see if the notes for the Gustatory lecture can be uploaded properly? Currently, there are only 2 blank pages when one tries to click on the link.
February 23, 2010 at 11:55 am |
I’ll send an email asking about that.
February 24, 2010 at 2:51 am |
already asked… he said those pages were uploaded “by accident” and there are no additional notes available for that lecture. Thus, its simply the powerpoint and that’s it.
February 24, 2010 at 7:18 pm |
Rubinson gave me the same reply except he added:
“there are old (sometimes very old) notes available for many topics under Brain and Behavior (Nervous System) 2009 on ALEX. These are to be used with caution because of their vintage and the fact that some were not written by the current lecturers.”
Might be useful to check these out.
February 22, 2010 at 1:56 am |
So it has been about 3 weeks and an entire exam has passed and the ALEX team has yet to fix the ‘glitch’ in the Neuroscience courseware modules. What is taking so long!!? We NEED to access the forebrain section module for this exam. What is the purpose of even creating the modules if the students cannot view them? The length of time that this problem has been going on for is unacceptable. Rubinson’s forebrain lecture was good but I am afraid that this is going to turn into a situation similar to the last practical where all I had was the lecture and no pre-labeled slides to study from (ones that I can be sure are correct). Course liaisons, will this problem be fixed reasonably before our practical?
February 22, 2010 at 8:45 am |
PLEASE! i failed the last practical because these modules were not up and running. please fix this and if not, they need to offer us an alternative/solution.
February 22, 2010 at 12:43 pm |
YES, PLEASE! I do not want to fail the practical again. Why can’t NYU get anything together!?
This is so frustrating
February 22, 2010 at 12:48 pm |
$60K a year to wikipedia map every image
February 23, 2010 at 11:46 am |
We understand everyone’s frustration with the lack of resources, and I am working with Dr. Rubinson to get resources to replace those lost on the ALEX server.
I’m not exactly sure how all this server stuff works (thus my opting for medicine instead of computer science and engineering) but it is not the fault of ALEX, rather of IBM where ALEX has remote servers. They are the ones who lost the data and forgot to back it up. There was a detailed email sent out a couple weeks ago by the ALEX team which explains things better. Unfortunately, it also states that this problem could take weeks to resolve, which won’t help us in FM3.
That said, the pressure is being put on Dr. Rubinson to suggest alternate resources to the modules.
February 23, 2010 at 11:54 am |
Here is a website that was sent out earlier for brainstem sections, but it looks like they would be a good resource for forebrain sections and external gross anatomy as well.
http://isc.temple.edu/neuroanatomy/lab/gross_atlas/instructions.html
February 24, 2010 at 7:22 pm |
Dr. Rubinson approved of the site I mentioned in my previous post. He also wrote:
“I recommend the Wash U site suggested for Exam 2: http://www9.biostr.washington.edu/cgi-bin/DA/PageMaster?atlas:NeuroSyllabus+ffpathIndex:Splash^Page^Syllabus+2. Coronal (as well as horizontal and sagittal) sections are hidden under “Thalamus.”
February 21, 2010 at 3:52 am |
i didn’t want to seem like a brown-noser in emailing him, but can the liaisons thank rubinson for including our grade so far? i think it means a world of difference to students like me whose overall grade is right at the border and who have a clearer picture of what they have to do to make it. i really appreciated that.
February 23, 2010 at 2:38 pm |
We’ll bring this up at our next meeting on the 8th
February 20, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
I HATE THIS SCHOOOOOOOL. why wont the tell us what our grades mean? I got a 62 on the practical but my current average is an 85. does that mean I failed the practical and I have to retake it or am i ok? I hate hate hate hate HATE this damn school. how am I suppose to ID things on an exam if they’ve never been labeled for me anywhere?
February 20, 2010 at 9:17 pm |
okay, same boat… i emailed rubinson and he said that the practicals are cumulative, which basically means we need to ace the next one. argh.
February 20, 2010 at 9:19 pm |
oh and love how after everyone was complaining about how hard the practical was (rightfully so), the average was inexplicably over 80. wtf people?
February 23, 2010 at 9:44 pm |
I’ve learned to accept that this isn’t college anymore. you’re with the creme of the crop, and the average will almost *always* be high. Get used to it.
February 21, 2010 at 2:00 am |
You know….I never really visit this blog, but now that I have, I realize that all I hear is “whine, whine, whine, whine, whine.” Honestly people, more than 50% of medical school applicants who wish to be in your shoes, but didn’t get in, would give anything to be here, yet some that are here complain incessantly. Another reality check: people in Haiti (and all over the world) are suffering immensely because they have no clean water, food, clothes on their backs, and are dying by the hundreds….thousands. Your life really isn’t that bad, right?
February 21, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
Are you serious? It’s called the bitching blog for a reason, in that there is a catharsis that comes from complaining. Also, people might not feel comfortable openly discussing some of these issues, and this blog has the potential for people to realize that they are not alone. And how can you equate criticism of professors or curriculum organization with being ungrateful? Students are asking that the expectations for tests be clear, that we have the RESOURCES available to achieve those expectations, and that the workload be relatively evenly distributed over time. Students also request that they be treated with respect and that their questions are not met with snarky judgmental responses. None of these reasonable requests imply that anyone is ungrateful for being accepted. Your Haiti reference is unnecessary and histrionic.
February 21, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
well said. just because our comments on this blog (a blog created with the specific intent of providing us with a forum within which to voice our opinions/concerns/criticisms openly in the hopes that they might be considered by the faculty) have a microcosmic scope does not mean that this pertains to our respective outlooks as a whole. in what capacity does concern over one’s education equate with a lack of concern for anything else, especially such a tragedy as haiti? that comment was demoralizing at best, especially given that we are all (supposedly) working with the express intent of helping people in such peril. reconsider such broad statements before you seek to apply them to us all.
February 21, 2010 at 6:13 pm |
I would like to comment on the Haiti relief post… LOL. Was that a joke?
1. I would love to see all those people who “would die to get into medical school” get in and stay in. I guarantee that 3/4 of those people who didn’t make it would drop out anyhow. They didn’t get in for a reason – look how we are handling the work-load, imagine those who are not qualified (i.e. slackers, which I believe constitutes 3/4 of medical school applicants anyhow).
2. I can complain about the genocides that happen on a daily basis in central Africa… but do I? No, because if I were to think of my life in that manner then medical school would be a haven, and it’s not. I am not being ungrateful, I’m just being realistic.
February 22, 2010 at 1:55 am |
No, actually the Haiti comment was not a joke. Obviously, it’s a very serious statement and only an immature person would think it to be a joke. It’s meant to make people put their lives and circumstances into perspective. Another thing, many people don’t get into medical school, not because they’re “slackers” like you say 3/4′s of applicants are, but because there are not enough seats. If you know anything about the med school admissions process, you’d be fully aware that many people with a 4.0 and >35 on the MCAT get rejected all the time (I wouldn’t exactly call those people slackers). Anyhow, saying that you HATE the school and bashing the faculty isn’t exactly constructive criticism anymore. The word constructive implies “tending to build up…serve a useful purpose,” and that’s definitely not the end result of that kind of complaining. So yes, I stand by my initial point. Complaining, in such a way, is a form of ingratitude, whether you like it or not.
February 22, 2010 at 3:28 am |
We’re paying, what, 41,000 dollars a year to go here. I think a monetary sum like that can entitle us to some expectations of the product.
Of course we don’t think we are worse off than those in Haiti.
February 22, 2010 at 4:08 am |
The comparison to Haiti and this idea of “putting one’s life in perspective” have significant flaws. Being grateful for opportunities is one thing, but every person is born into their own world and it is unfair to apply the same absolute standards across the board. According to your suggestion, it would be perfectly ok to walk around NYC and go up to someone who was just in a car accident, got fired from their job, split up with their spouse, lost half their fortune in the stock market etc. etc. and say, “your life isn’t that bad because people are dying in haiti and children don’t have water to drink in burkina faso. put it in perspective.” The perspective we have depends on the micro-world we were born into, and while comparison helps us be grateful for what we have, “reality checks” just don’t apply the way you described.
February 22, 2010 at 6:39 am |
Wow I have to second the previous post. Very well said.
Also, I’m really disliking the original poster about the Haiti comparison. I don’t think it’s a fair comparison nor does it add any real value to this entire forum.
February 22, 2010 at 2:41 pm |
I just want to see if this column could get any narrower.
February 22, 2010 at 2:41 pm |
Can this column get any narrower?
February 22, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
I
I
I
I
I
February 22, 2010 at 8:12 pm
ddd!
February 22, 2010 at 8:50 pm |
Obviously, anyone can see that the “joke” comment was not meant for the Haiti situation. It was meant for your comparison of the situation to ours. With that, I would agree with that person in that your previous post makes no sense.
February 23, 2010 at 10:12 am |
I would like to follow up on the http://nyucourses.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/fm3-nervous-syshead-and-neck/#comment-935 post.
I feel you should NOT comment on this blog again.
Regards,
Everyone at NYU SOM
February 20, 2010 at 9:17 am |
for those of you who went to the forebrain sections lecture, what did kalman say at the end about the horizontal sections that are at the end of the slides? the end of the recording cut him off.
February 20, 2010 at 10:38 am |
“i shouldn’t have to go over these. do it yourself.”
February 23, 2010 at 11:38 am |
I asked him about these in Lab. He said the Horizontal sections shouldn’t be looked at until you learn the coronal sections, and at that point you should try to identify all the same things as the coronal section. He explained them to be an adjunct to test how well we knew the coronal sections to see if we could identify things in the horizontal sections.
He also said they would not be emphasized in the exam, but that it is important to learn them as horizontal section are used quite often in the clinical setting.
February 19, 2010 at 11:16 am |
Wait, I forgot what we were talking about. lolzz
February 19, 2010 at 1:55 am |
where on Alex can we find the brain images that Kalmy said are still working?
February 19, 2010 at 1:44 am |
I am watching the Forebrain lecture right now and KR just told everybody to stop writing stuff down because it was all in the book. Which book is he talking about? Does he mean the atlas?
February 19, 2010 at 9:18 am |
He said it at the very beginning – back of the lab manual
February 19, 2010 at 9:54 am |
The ‘stuff’ that’s written down, though, is not very helpful unless you are already familiar with the other anatomical references used to describe each item, much like the manual itself.
February 18, 2010 at 11:44 am |
When will he post the grades and give us the average/passing rate?!?
February 18, 2010 at 12:52 pm |
Looks like this one’s going to be a lot more interesting than usual so for the sake of people who worry about passing, better to wait and have it done right than rush it.
February 18, 2010 at 12:43 am |
Kalman Protip: Don’t abbreviate the neuroanatomy in your lectures the first time around. It is confusing when we are first learning the structures.
February 18, 2010 at 10:34 am |
Along those lines…in the neocortex lecture, when speaking about nuclei with sub-cortical projections, he indicates: CM gets input from motor CTX/GP, projections to CN/Put
CM is centromedian nucleus, CTX is probably cortex.
Any ideas about GP and Put? He has been using CN instead of CNS, right? My notes aren’t any help here.
February 18, 2010 at 10:40 am |
Sorry, that was the RF/Thalamus lecture.
February 18, 2010 at 10:53 am |
Globus Pallidus and Putamen
February 18, 2010 at 10:54 am |
I think the GP is the globus pallidus and the Put is the putamen. I don’t think he described them much because I think these more relate to the basal ganglia system which we have a separate lecture on. So, I wouldn’t worry about those until Rice’s lecture on the basal ganglia.
February 18, 2010 at 11:01 am |
Thanks!
February 16, 2010 at 6:24 pm |
286 comments in 6 weeks. FM3 is obviously not a popular module.
February 17, 2010 at 1:16 pm |
that, and a lot of our class seems to be wound pretty tight. people getting worn out a bit, probably
February 16, 2010 at 4:31 pm |
Anyone know how, in ALEX, to get the FM3: Nervous System/Head and Neck Resources / Nervous System Courseware / Computer Animations of Brain Components to play? It requires quicktime but even with the latest updates, I’m having difficulty.
February 16, 2010 at 8:57 pm |
It is probably still not working due to the Alex server issue. I will ask Dr. Rubinson if he can provide us with alternate study resources.
February 18, 2010 at 8:08 pm |
I believe in lecture today he indicated that he thought this should be working. I still can’t get it to work. Any ideas? Has anyone else been able to get it to work?
February 16, 2010 at 1:38 pm |
So I didnt do so well on this last test either, but I disagree with a lot of the people posting here. Yes, Rubinson can be an ass, but the test was pretty fair – it did have a couple WTF questoins but so do most of the tests – even head and neck had a few of those questions. To me the bigger problem was the poor scheduling and lack of time to seriously get into the material which left a good deal of us less prepared than we might normally be for tests.
In summary, Rubinson isnt going to win any teaching awards, but not sure hes really to blame
February 16, 2010 at 2:12 pm |
I disagree with you completely. I actually DO think Rubinson is a good teacher in the sense that he conveys lectures and information more clearly than people like Llinas, whose classes were a complete mess. In that respect, Rubinson cannot be blamed.
The test was pretty fair? I really beg to differ. The one point I do agree with you on, and I’m sure most if not all would, is that the horrendous scheduling and lack of time. But we should not be blamed or held accountable for that.
February 16, 2010 at 3:02 pm |
I agree that Rubinson is a pretty good teacher – its just his attitude that is the problem. But reading this blog would make you think he had a personal vendetta against students, which is really pretty silly. Besides not being the nicest guy around, I feel the only legit complaint about Rubinson is that he wrote a tougher than normal test which we only had a little time to prepare for.
February 16, 2010 at 10:10 am |
I think that everyone who thinks that Rubinson is super condescending and rude should make sure to say so on the stupid surveys they give us (hopefully someone actually reads them), because he really isn’t a good enough lecturer to make up for the fact that he is rude and discourages student curiosity. So they should either somehow get through to him to be more understanding and better at answering questions, or bring someone new in. We are all at least in our 20′s, there is no reason to be treated like pathetic children (like he treats us).
February 16, 2010 at 11:29 am |
Will do, believe me. The man has a major attitude problem.
February 16, 2010 at 12:05 pm |
I will give him a terrible review but i wish i had the opportunity to SPEAK with the faculty as well about how terrible he is. honestly, the course liasons should tell vicky and mel to just watch that ‘review’ q and a and i think they’ll get the point.
February 16, 2010 at 12:41 pm |
early in the year weren’t we promised meeting with vicky and mel to discuss the curriculum? They said that because of the new curriculum, they would be inviting random students from our class to lunch/brunch to discuss the curriculum and changes that should be made, As far as I’ve heard, that has never happened.
February 16, 2010 at 2:40 am |
I know that for the last exam Dr. Rubinson didn’t schedule a post exam review and that it wasn’t feasible to get the faculty together after the fact (or so he said) but why can’t there be a review this time? Or at the very least another session where we can look at the actual test in the hallway. Not that the last time was very helpful but as I am in the same boat as many of the previous posters I want to see if my low score is a result of silly mistakes, bad questions, or a true lack of understanding so that I can see if I should change anything for the future. I feel like he will give the same answer and say it isn’t doable this time, so can he at least be asked to schedule a post exam review for the third exam now, way before the fact?
February 17, 2010 at 10:17 am |
I concur… I would really like to know where my mistakes on this previous exam were… and how to avoid them for future references.
February 15, 2010 at 12:59 pm |
1.) From looking at the course liaisons’ notes, it appears that not much will change. Could we ask that if they choose not to lecture on certain topics (such as they did for the larynx and pharynx) that they make it explicitly clear at the time of our initial lab covering the material that we are expected to know these topics anyway? Just send out a quick email telling us we need to know it, rather than telling us shortly before the exam. I am aware that the lab objectives mentioned it, but it’s difficult to keep track of all the objectives when you’re first learning the material.
2.) I agree, rubinson was awful, condescending, and in no way fostered a helpful learning environment.
3.) Is our 2nd year also going to be a trial year for a new curriculum or will it be similar to the current 2nd year structure? If it is more of this C21 crap, I would like to prepare myself for another year of this BS.
4.) Passing on this exam will be under 70 right?
February 15, 2010 at 7:05 am |
Just curious to know… how many people scored less than a 70 on this test…
I did.
I’m trying to gauge if I’m a retard or if that test was just ridiculous.
February 15, 2010 at 9:58 am |
I did.
February 15, 2010 at 10:42 am |
First, that is just the multiple choice, the cases get factored in for the total score I think? Second, I heard from a second-year that the passing for them dropped last year to the low 60s during this unit.
February 15, 2010 at 2:44 pm |
66
February 15, 2010 at 6:51 pm |
54, hopefully i did well on the short answer.
February 15, 2010 at 8:25 pm |
46? well, this stinks.
February 15, 2010 at 9:14 pm |
43. FM3 and I did not get along so well. the thing is, i was perfectly fine (average or slightly above) on EVERY test before this.
February 15, 2010 at 10:28 pm |
how did you get a 43 on an exam with 50 questions, each worth 2 points?
February 16, 2010 at 1:43 pm |
because it’s out of 80, not 100 points (essays = 20 points).
So, each MC question is NOT work 2 points and possible to get a odd-numbered score.
February 16, 2010 at 1:48 pm |
isn’t the total which we don’t know all of yet 70, not 80? and we’re only griping about the mult. choice here anyway because we can calculate that percentage ourselves.
February 16, 2010 at 1:55 pm |
I think in total this exam constitutes 55% of our FM3 grade. But I also think you need to “pass” each exam individually (i.e. you can’t do extremely crappy on one, then really well on another and be fine).
I distinctly remember the essay portion, all together, being worth 20 points total. That leaves the MC component with 80 points.
February 16, 2010 at 2:26 pm |
are you sure you’re not confusing points with percentage?
February 16, 2010 at 2:13 am |
youre right. typo. meant 42
February 15, 2010 at 11:12 pm |
40. I did really well on head and neck, I think I just burned out.
February 15, 2010 at 11:51 pm |
44. ugh
February 16, 2010 at 12:11 am |
i got a 42 on the multiple choice. come on down and join the 40s club! my one concern is that since i had a low 70s on the first exam, even if the passing level is low enough to pass us all, will it drop my overall grade enough so that i fail the fm3 unit? that would stink.
February 16, 2010 at 6:36 am |
60… sucks but I’m in the same situation as everyone else.. I scored fukin 90′s on the other tests… this Kalman ass is a fucker who just wants to see us fail. I agree with another post.. I can’t believe I’m paying for this shit~ I WANT MY MONEY BACK!
February 16, 2010 at 1:13 pm |
58. I’m unhappy.
February 16, 2010 at 5:03 pm |
50. sigh.
February 16, 2010 at 5:50 pm |
68…
February 16, 2010 at 6:26 pm |
64%…I usually score about 20 points higher.
Take a deep breath, the test was hard…things will work out.
February 16, 2010 at 7:36 pm |
sure, they’ll work out for you. i’m not so sure they’ll work out for the lower 40% people.
February 16, 2010 at 9:53 pm |
It seems like some people scored in the 40s who have otherwise been scoring fine. Yes, those people may have to meet with a faculty member… but even a 40 doesn’t seem like the end of the world, given it was a very difficult test with only a week and a half to study after a huge head and neck exam (and with an otherwise good record, it’s really hard to put all the blame on an individual student)
Just as long as no one has to meet with Rubinson,
February 16, 2010 at 10:45 pm |
96.
February 17, 2010 at 8:43 pm |
i was just perusing this blog when i came across this comment.
failing has many consequences, both academic and psychological. please don’t trivialize it to simply a quick meeting with a faculty member. i failed an exam as a first year, and i felt the academic ramifications of it for months. you don’t want to fail, trust me, you don’t know what it feels like until you’ve actually failed. psychologically, it can be very damaging even if it’s a one-time thing, and it makes you question both your intelligence and your place at the medical school. all these things might be irrational, but again, unless you’ve failed, please don’t minimize these students’ concerns. thanks.
February 16, 2010 at 10:55 pm |
I definitely feel you guy’s pain. I only got a 92 percent. That’s like twice as many questions as I normally miss. THANKS KALMAANNNN I am so mad
February 16, 2010 at 11:06 pm |
LOL
February 13, 2010 at 7:49 pm |
I really appreciate all that our course liaisons do; you guys work hard in dealing with all our BS and whining.
That being said, reading that email last night was very discouraging. Within the 5 pages,*almost* all of our legitimate concerns and complaints, were either met with a rebuttal or a defensive justification by the faculty. I do not really understand why they insist on doing certain planning, coordinating things, just for the sake of “continuing” how they’ve done it for 20 years….things change (most notably, this new curriculum). I wonder sometimes WHAT it will take for them to listen to anything we say/input we give.
February 14, 2010 at 6:52 pm |
Agreed. WTF is the point of bringing up issues and complaints to the faculty if all we’re going to get is a defensive slap in the face back??? This is the FIRST weekend we’ve had off since coming back to school Jan. 4th and even if I failed the last exam, at least I actually feel like a HUMAN BEING for the first time – not having to study for *gasp* an ENTIRE WEEKEND. “given the amount of material, anatomy tests will continue to be scheduled on Mondays to allow students maximum study time” a.k.a., the faculty wishes to continue shoving a pole up our butts for the remainder of the year. FML.
February 16, 2010 at 2:48 pm |
I agree. I expected to come to Med School and have all my weekends free. In fact, I am really surprised i’ve been asked to study at all… what ever happened to partying for four years and then receiving an MD?
February 16, 2010 at 4:36 pm |
Not necessary….
February 16, 2010 at 4:47 pm |
tool.
February 16, 2010 at 5:15 pm |
but so true
February 16, 2010 at 10:37 pm |
hahahaha, your comment proves the previous poster’s case in point. I love the dichotomy you force onto us: apparently, if we don’t want to study on weekends, it must mean that we want to party 100% of the time. clearly, it couldn’t possibly occur to us to want to spend some time in our lives doing neither.
strangely enough most second years I’ve talked to say that the majority of their tests were on Fridays…so I guess they must all be super slackers for not studying every weekend.
February 16, 2010 at 10:54 pm |
i feel as though nyu (in addition to the overarching stresses of med school in general) has forced us to compromise not only a semblance of an actual life (a nod to the last post… gasp! i don’t want to spend an evening cramming OR getting totally shit-faced?? how can that be? if i’m not an all-immersed drone or a raging party-goer, then i must have no identity whatsoever, right?), but also our general sense of sanity. sigh. i’m convinced that it’s possible to be a med student and maintain a degree of normalcy. if that means foregoing scores in the 90s (or hell, even 80s), so be it.
February 17, 2010 at 1:19 pm |
i dont necessarily agree with the original poster, but you guys seriously expected to come to med school and not have to study on the weekends? maybe i’m a nerd, but i figured i would have to do at least a decent amount of work pretty much every day, and i’m not about to run to a blog and complain about it if that is actually expected of me
February 18, 2010 at 5:15 pm |
To the most recent blogger on this topic.. are you joking??? You were expecting to have no life and study every single day for 4-10 hours?
I’m sorry but I was expecting to at least feel a little human (just as the OP said) by going out on the weekends and ENJOYING MY LIFE. Now, that doesn’t necessarily mean going out and partying until I get shit-faced… but it does mean going to the park, movies, or even to a nice museum without worrying about whether I have time to do another lecture later.
Oh and you seriously are a nerd.. obviously… if all you want to do is study.. you probably don’t even go to the bathroom without notes in your hand… isn’t time to hit the books again.. what are you doing on this blog????
February 18, 2010 at 9:54 pm |
i’m assuming you’re the same poster as http://nyucourses.wordpress.com/2010/01/03/fm3-nervous-syshead-and-neck/#comment-759 based on the insults, the gratuitous use of question marks and the horrendous grammar.
February 19, 2010 at 11:36 am |
Unfortunately, we are not the same person – although I did like that post. LOL. What is known without a doubt is that the author of the previous post is also the same person who posted on February 17, 2010 at 1:19 pm. Both of these posts have the same arrogant, ostentatious, and sophomoric remarks one can expect of a person who thinks too highly of him/herself.
February 12, 2010 at 5:59 pm |
Are the answers to this exam going to be posted on ALEX? Last time they only had the one hour posting in the building and never put them on ALEX.
February 12, 2010 at 9:45 pm |
Yeah, it even says on the paper from the exam they’ll be posted on ALEX. What gives?
February 13, 2010 at 10:51 pm |
where the fuck are the answers to this test???
BTW.. by show of posts…Does anyone like Kalman Rubinson???
Please rate.
1= Extremely loathe and want to punch in face
2= Extremely loathe with no punch in face
3= Can’t complain but he has an attitude problem
4= Eh, he’s ok
5= He’s good
My vote= 1
February 14, 2010 at 12:22 am |
1. Seriously, what an a*hole
February 14, 2010 at 12:26 am |
1
1
1
1
February 14, 2010 at 6:47 pm |
-1000000000
What a condescending, useless DBAG. He REFUSES to answer questions, treats us all like we’re retarded, and is overall the most useless, worthless, piece of crap I’ve ever met. I want my money back.
February 14, 2010 at 7:16 pm |
OKAY WHO IS THIS??? because we need to be best friends right now.
February 14, 2010 at 1:49 pm |
It looks like the multiple choice answers are up now. Under Nervous System Courseware.
February 12, 2010 at 3:50 pm |
What is a Kalman?
February 12, 2010 at 3:54 pm |
1. kalman -
a slacker or someone who never turns in their work and makes sad ass excuses to why they didn’t do it.
Student: I didn’t do my homework.
Teacher: You are such a kalman.
Student: i lIkE ChIcKeN.
-urbandictionary.com
February 12, 2010 at 2:09 pm |
Course Liasons-
I think the faculty need some feedback. Do you think we could arrange an ‘open meeting’ type thing were students can come and talk about the issues we’ve been having? even if nothing comes of it i think if we feel like our voices are being heard then people will feel better.
February 12, 2010 at 2:54 pm |
you want an open meeting with rubinson? did you come to the “review session” yesterday? i honestly think this would just result in a combative, non-productive medley of students bringing up significant points of contention about the way the course is run and then being systematically mocked or otherwise smacked down with snarky, condescending and sarcastic comments/gestures/bursts of disgusted laughter.
February 11, 2010 at 2:26 pm |
Hey Course Liasons,
Is there any way we could get a mini-course evaluation after this exam? I think a lot of things will be forgotten if we hold off on the course evaluations until we are done with this unit.
February 11, 2010 at 2:49 pm |
It would also be nice to be able to distinguish the head/neck anatomy from the neuro portion in our responses.
February 12, 2010 at 5:21 pm |
Head and Neck evaluations were supposed to come out this week. They will likely be sent out next week, but we can check on it.
February 11, 2010 at 2:09 pm |
I want to kick Rubinson in the nuts.
February 11, 2010 at 2:46 pm |
I have an idea: why don’t we all not show up tmrw morning?
February 11, 2010 at 1:17 pm |
why was rubinson so rude today?
February 11, 2010 at 1:33 pm |
If we’re holding a review, shouldn’t he actually answer our questions? Just because there’s a figure related to the question somewhere in the notes does not mean we understand the information.
February 11, 2010 at 2:01 pm |
I completely agree. There is no reason to act that way in a review. If you don’t want to answer questions, don’t hold a review, end of story. I didn’t ask my question because I didn’t want to be yelled at. I’ll ask classmates or email Dr. Lang, who has no qualms answering questions. A lot of the reason we are having problems right now is because of the poor time management when scheduling classes. Everyone is burnt out from the huge test last week and the last thing we want to do right now is try and cram a lot of hard material into our brains. I just don’t think they get it… (And by “they” I mean the neuro people).
February 11, 2010 at 3:21 pm |
Agree. He laughed/rolled his eyes/talked condescendingly about the majority of questions. I didn’t get much out of the session and I will not be going to a review before the third exam. Also, why did he go over the case last?
February 11, 2010 at 3:47 pm |
I agree, he was extremely rude.
Dr. Lang, on the other hand, answered questions very effectively. I wish he played a more central role in teaching this module.
February 11, 2010 at 6:33 pm |
Dr. Lang is fantastic and truly a TEACHER.
February 11, 2010 at 10:27 pm |
agreed!
February 11, 2010 at 7:20 pm |
It’s about time people noticed how uncouth and rude Rubinson is.
February 11, 2010 at 12:41 am |
this exam represents why i hate this school so much
February 11, 2010 at 1:51 am |
truer words have never been uttered
February 11, 2010 at 4:03 am |
That’s what everyone said about the last exam, and the average was an 85. Same thing will happen this time; lots of groaning and moaning about the test, and then the average ends up being 87 and the poor sucker (me) who got a 69 has to meet with rubinson and then stay over spring break.
February 11, 2010 at 7:44 pm |
honey, i’m right there with you.
February 12, 2010 at 1:00 am |
sadly, I am too
February 10, 2010 at 11:34 pm |
are the answers for the practice question up/going to go up?
February 11, 2010 at 12:56 am |
Dr. Rubinson posted the answers the the multiple choice questions earlier today (Nervous System Courseware, NS exam questions). The case study questions will be reviewed tomorrow at the Q and A session.
February 11, 2010 at 1:39 am |
Will the review tomorrow be recorded?
February 10, 2010 at 5:15 pm |
Are we supposed to be able to identify everything at the end of the spinal cord independent study list at the end of the lab book? Or do we just need to be able to differentiate the different sections (cervical vs thoracic, etc)?
February 11, 2010 at 1:59 am |
I’m sorry but if you don’t know this by now… well lets just say I am extremely concerned about your performance on this upcoming exam. You should know by now… that you must know everything about everything.
Hope this helps.
February 10, 2010 at 11:28 am |
Maybe I just missed this completely (although normally I’m pretty on top of things), but what is the format of this test? I was under the impression that it was 55 multiple choice questions (5/lecture), but then during some of the lectures, Rubinson mentions having cases on there and also having to draw lesions on outlines of parts of the brain. Does anyone have any idea?
February 10, 2010 at 12:57 pm |
Never mind. I think I found it. he just labeled the announcement something arbitrary, so I didn’t click on it. It says “The written exam, which will consist of multiple-choice questions and 2 case studies (similar to those in conference.” It still doesn’t say how many to expect, though.
February 9, 2010 at 11:58 pm |
Will the slide review be posted on iTunes? So far I only see the 9am lecture
February 10, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
Yeah, what is up with this? I asked the guy who tapes the courses whether it would be taped and he said yes. But it’s not there!
February 9, 2010 at 3:50 pm |
This whole thing with the brain slides is basically BS. First of all, if it’s such a major thing, how is it nowhere for us to learn it? The fact that it was taught as a lab seems pretty stupid, since a) no one was paying attention in the first place since we were all on the head/neck train for anatomy (the obtuse scheduling of this module has been touched on a hundred times so I won’t go back into it), b) it was just a lecture anyways, but one that we have no slides for and no videotape to rewatch, and c) it seems to have become a huge part of this little unit.
Now with the modules down, there’s nowhere to turn to learn this stuff. No slide decks from the lab (totally unbelievable), no review unit, no videotaped lecture, nothing. I find it pretty dumb. How hard could it be to post 4 or 5 labeled pictures if theres going to be an entire slide practical on them?
February 9, 2010 at 7:03 pm |
I agree. I understand the faculty cannot control ALEX/tech but this whole issue could be resolved by them putting up slides with labels for the sections we are expected to know.
February 10, 2010 at 12:20 pm |
I AGREE!!!!!
February 10, 2010 at 8:05 pm |
Well credit where it’s due for uploading this material.
February 9, 2010 at 2:30 pm |
does anyone know where we could access the spinal cord/brainstem slides from our third lab, as well as the slides that dr. lang went over today in the practice practical? it seemed to me that both presentation sets were standard powerpoint files, so i think the course directors should post them in the nervous system courseware folder on alex. we don’t have any of the modules because they run on fancy (and broken) servers, so can’t we at least have access to the slide we’ve seen from these two sessions? i think this would greatly help me and the rest of the class focus our studying in identifying all the terms on pp. 34-5. can the course laisons ask dr. rubinson to at least post these two powerpoint sets before the end of the day today?
February 9, 2010 at 2:49 pm |
There’s a pdf file with slides under the third lab, but it says its from 2008, and doesn’t look like its the same one that we had. I agree that getting the powerpoints they used in that lab would be really helpful – having my notes from the lab doesn’t really help when there’s nothing to look at.
February 9, 2010 at 2:56 pm |
under nervous system courseware there are also slides that say they’re from 2008. I thought they were the same as our lab presentation.
February 9, 2010 at 6:32 pm |
When some people in my lab group asked Dr. Rubinson said that the “2008″ file is the one he used this year, he didn’t change it or the date. So it is the one from lab.
February 9, 2010 at 9:11 am |
My brainstem/spinal cord modules are still down. I think they would be really helpful to study from…do any of the course liasons know how tech is coming along?
February 9, 2010 at 12:10 pm |
There is an announcement on ALEX informing us not to expect them up in time to be useful. Sorry to spread bad news, I was disappointed too. Links to websites with slides are posted also.
February 9, 2010 at 1:06 pm |
THIS IS TOTALLY UNACCEPTABLE. I think the course liaisons should email mel/vicky-someone. i at least want to see the things once before i’m tested on them. this should not be tolerated by the students. this is really a new low. course liaisons- can you please make a bigger issue of this? that module is the only place all those slides exist all in 1 place. plus there were helpful labeled diagrams etc. i dont mind studying- but at least give me the information to study from! seriously, i do not think we should tolerate this as students.
February 9, 2010 at 1:38 pm |
Mel has already been contacted and is well aware of the issue. We were in touch with ALEX staff over the weekend and they are doing the best they can to get the modules up and working. Both Mel and Dr. Rubinson asked ALEX staff to make this high priority, given that we have a big exam on Friday, and they’ve said that they are doing the best they can. It seems that Mel and Dr. Rubinson have done all they can at this point.
February 9, 2010 at 2:02 pm |
I understand this is a tech issue, and we may not have these modules to study from. Would it be possible to get a list of terms we’re expected to know/identify? Some of the other websites they offered have maybe more detail than we need to know.
February 9, 2010 at 2:17 pm |
I’m pretty sure that the list of terms we have to be able to identify are listed on pages 34-35 of the lab manual. This should help you figure out what’s important when you’re looking at sections. Also keep in mind that we’ll be shown sections from cervical, thorassic, lumbar, or sacral spinal levels and we’ll have to be able to ID which level we’re shown.
February 9, 2010 at 3:01 pm |
the list of terms alone isn’t helpful because we do not have a diagram with them labeled. Even the atlases do not use some of the terms they ask us to identify so we literally have no good study resource for the slide practical.
February 8, 2010 at 10:18 pm |
Which pages / sections in the Brain Atlas correspond to which sections that we are supposed to know, as outlined on pages 34-35 of the lab manual?
February 7, 2010 at 8:44 pm |
when are anatomy exam grades going to be up?
February 7, 2010 at 11:51 pm |
they’re up. and there is an announcement on alex with averages.
February 7, 2010 at 3:14 pm |
Are we only responsible for knowing the terms at the end of the brainstem section lab? Or are we expected to know everything we ever possibly covered in lectures and lab too?
February 7, 2010 at 2:56 am |
Will the neuroanatomy stuff (i.e. identifying corpus callosum on a human brain or identifying posterior cerebral artery on an x-ray) be on this upcoming exam???
February 7, 2010 at 10:13 am |
IDing on a brain is definitely not this exam
February 6, 2010 at 11:56 pm |
what does rubinson mean by, “Let me point out that the upcoming practical will not cover neurohistology as you have covered that in Anatomy.” what’s the neurohistology stuff again?
February 7, 2010 at 12:12 am |
for our purposes, that means the neurohistology module (which isn’t working now anyhow) won’t be needed. but several others will, hopefully ALEX will be fixed…
February 5, 2010 at 4:56 pm |
can it please be spoken about at the course liaison meeting that it is NOT ok for a lecturer to go 46 minutes over time when giving a lecture. we have enough to do without getting double lectures. please bring this up.
February 5, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
the lecture this morning was scheduled for an hour and a half
February 5, 2010 at 12:08 pm |
can someone please tell me where the brainstem sections that are going to be covered on the next exam are on alex? i’m very confused. are they labeled?
February 5, 2010 at 12:37 pm |
In the “Resources” folder for FM3 there is a folder labeled “Nervous System Courseware”. In this folder there are a plethora of resources having to do with Neuroanatomy.
Some of the modules are down at the moment (see post below) so I have emailed ALEX support to try to get those up and running. However, there are also modules that require a Shockwave Plug-in in order to view, and I believe these are the modules that have the sections.
February 5, 2010 at 1:23 pm |
Thanks for checking on this. The Shockwave ones give the same error message too unfortunately.
February 5, 2010 at 2:27 pm |
I’ve seen all of that but how do I know what we are responsible for?
February 8, 2010 at 5:13 pm |
If you click on the updates link of the home page of ALEX, it appears that the websites won’t be running until the end of this week? Is this true? Is there a way we can find out?
February 5, 2010 at 12:39 am |
At the end of Dr. Rubinson’s notes from the Brainstem/Spinal Cord Structure and Development lecture he says that there is a table at the end of the chapter that we must learn to understand the brainstem, but I don’t see a table anywhere. Am I missing something? Or can we get him to send out/post this table that is apparently very important?
February 8, 2010 at 10:29 pm |
I think the table he might be referring to is the one that is at the end of his powerpoint slides from the lecture on 1/20.
February 4, 2010 at 10:21 pm |
In a feeble attempt to kick-start studying, I tried to open the spinal cord module under nervous system courseware on ALEX, only to be shown an error message that the page is down for maintenance. Same happened for the other links in there as well – any word on when they will be back? It’s hard to practice for the slide practical this way! (and if there are sections to study from elsewhere, please direct me to them)
February 5, 2010 at 11:32 am |
The neurohistology module is the same.
February 5, 2010 at 11:58 am |
Thanks for the notice guys. I’ll email the powers that be to see if this is an ALEX problem or something else. Hopefully we can get these modules working soon.
February 5, 2010 at 12:12 pm |
I also noticed that the links for the “New Brain Views” and “Interactive MRI Neuroanatomy Modules” are not working either so I’ve asked ALEX about those as well.
I’ll update the blog as soon as I hear back from ALEX or Dr. Rubinson regarding this issue.
February 4, 2010 at 12:09 pm |
what exactly is being covered on this ‘slide practical’ on our next exam?
February 4, 2010 at 1:30 pm |
Dr. Rubinson told us he’d be sending out an email soon with details, but I believe we will see brainstem sections (as in what was covered in the most recent neuro lab). Keep an eye out for an email to confirm, though -
February 4, 2010 at 2:08 pm |
Jennifer, youre the best course liason ever. youre always on top of everything, thank you.
February 4, 2010 at 5:19 pm |
yes i agree thank you
February 4, 2010 at 6:12 pm |
agreed!!
February 4, 2010 at 7:38 pm |
Thanks guys!! And FYI: Dr. Rubinson made an announcement on ALEX about the next exam. It will cover the 10 lectures since the last exam, the conferences since the last exam, and brainstem sections.
February 3, 2010 at 12:48 pm |
did anything ever come of the last meeting the course liaisons had with mel and vicky? how come the course liaisons didn’t email the class what was brought up and what the resolutions/responses of the faculty where?
February 3, 2010 at 1:06 pm |
We are meeting with Mel and Dr. Ort this Friday to discuss things – suggestions for next module and for next year as well. We’ll send an email out Friday or early next week.
February 4, 2010 at 10:04 am |
Suggestion: does anyone think it would be a good idea to be given the opportunity to review our own, personal exams after receiving grades (particularly practical portions, and written essays) – especially in anatomy?
For FM4, which will have anatomy as well, I think I would learn a great deal from seeing how I performed, and where most of my errors were on FM2 and FM3. Can this please be brought up to the faculty?
February 4, 2010 at 10:25 am |
You do have the opportunity to review your own exam (I just confirmed). Contact Dr. Ort or other faculty and you can arrange a time to come in and see your test.
February 2, 2010 at 8:12 pm |
Okay I AM VERY UPSET with the scheduling of this module! They couldn’t put the conference on the brain tomorrow on Thursday or Friday when we only have one lecture on those days… no no.. they HAD to put it on the day after the exam in which none of us are really going to prepare for it since we are already burnt out from Rindler’s shitty lectures.
Also… for all of you who said we have nothing to do after Feb 2.. I like to see you say that now catching up with all the material that you skipped from last week since it wasn’t on this last exam. The scheduling here is a joke.. it makes no sense to put only one lecture a day on these upcoming days and 4 a day the previous week when we had a head and neck exam.
February 3, 2010 at 1:10 am |
I second that. I really do not understand the people who plan these schedules out; it is completely RIDICULOUS. Personally, I did not have PPS today after the exam, but several of my friends did. WHY is this being planned out so poorly?
I understand that’s medical school, and that the profession itself is hectic and has a very busy schedule, etc, but these horrendous scheduling issues seem to be avoidable – - – and of course we will be in uproar when they are so blatantly ridiculous, i.e. the 3 lectures this week, and many last week, the conference tmrw the day after the test, etc. Absolutely absurd.
February 3, 2010 at 11:00 pm |
Thanks for your comments guys. The poor organization and scheduling problems for this module are definitely points we are going to bring up to the faculty in our meeting Friday, so hopefully things will improve for future modules and for next year’s class.
February 1, 2010 at 9:17 pm |
Why are groups 3 and 4 being shafted by having their written exam interrupted, while all the other groups do the written in one sitting without interruption? I think this will turn out to be another unfair scheduling issue that the faculty unfortunately overlooked (remember 9am case studies for FM1?).
February 1, 2010 at 9:25 pm |
Totally agree, just hoping that this remains the format and others have this experience for later exams. That’s the only fair explanation I’ve come up with.
February 1, 2010 at 10:08 pm |
If it helps, I’ve heard from multiple second years that they didn’t mind taking the practical in the middle of the exam. It was a change of thinking and sometimes seeing the bodies helped answer questions on the written. (So possibly a good thing?)
February 2, 2010 at 4:23 pm |
Now that it’s over, I can certainly say the interruption was a pain and I feel like I did worse on both the written and the practical because of it. I struggled with the early practical just to get into practical mode and I struggled even more when I got back to the exam room. I don’t think this was a fair aspect of the test, no matter what the faculty have done before.
February 2, 2010 at 9:40 pm |
I agree with the original post. Having the practical in the middle of the written definitely threw me off.
February 1, 2010 at 9:12 pm |
I think I’m dropping out of med school…. I want to open up my own coffee shop on the corner of 31st and 1st.. I feel my life will be a lot more meaningful helping people wake up in the morning as opposed to memorizing futile Rindler arch mesenchyme/endoderm/ectoderm BS.
Who’s with me?
February 1, 2010 at 9:14 pm |
i think he made fairly clear at the review today that he doesn’t want you to memorize that but rather focus on the diseases and know generally what structures derive from the arches, which you have to know anyways for fibers of the nerves.
February 1, 2010 at 10:45 pm |
i’m totally with the original blogger. i’ve had enough.
February 1, 2010 at 11:06 pm |
rindler is a joke. period.
February 1, 2010 at 11:07 pm |
i don’t understand. then why are you in med school to begin with? you want to jump right into clinical diagnosis without an understanding of anything fundamental?
February 1, 2010 at 11:34 pm |
Is there even a 31st and 1st?
February 2, 2010 at 1:16 am |
oh your right because jumping into my clinicals without knowing about neural crest cells will be detrimental to my clinical skills.
And let me guess… you came to med school because you wanted to change the world?? Make it better place and help 10^12 people? Possibly even discover a novel protein that will cure a relatively unknown illness?
Give me a break we all know why your here…
February 2, 2010 at 4:32 pm |
relax. i didn’t say it would be detrimental to your skills. but it would result in a lack of a foundation in your profession. learning about disease process in humans without learning the fundamentals of humans is pretty pointless. well, i won’t say it’s pointless: it’s hollow. which is, by the way, why we spend the first year mostly on the normal human condition before going into pathology 2nd year.
February 15, 2010 at 3:06 am |
Just perusin’ the course blog, saw this interesting exchange of words…I’m with the original blogger as well. Why did you feel the need to assert yourself in such a self-righteous and defensive manner about the perceived “value” of our first year education?? Sometimes students just need to be able to vent and be frustrated about school…it doesn’t mean we care any less about learning the material and HELPING people in the end, which I certainly hope is reason we all want to be physicians in the first place.
February 15, 2010 at 3:57 am |
i didn’t speak about “value” or not caring.. don’t know where you’re quoting that from. please read my words carefully as you have unfortunately misunderstood what i was trying to say.
February 1, 2010 at 11:15 am |
Sorry if this makes me sound ridiculous, but when and where are the various parts of this exam tomorrow?? I’ve never missed an e-mail before, let alone something important like this. Thanks.
January 31, 2010 at 7:24 pm |
Someone emailed out notes from Dr. Ort’s last case. I had Bogart and NONE of these facts were remotely mentioned.
January 31, 2010 at 1:04 am |
I’m feeling extremely overwhelmed enough with anatomy, without Rindler’s pharyngeal craziness. What are people going to take away from this lecture/chapter? (aka, what do you think we need to know from all that crazy detail?)
January 30, 2010 at 11:57 pm |
Is Rindler for real…..?
January 31, 2010 at 6:18 pm |
sadly, yes.
January 27, 2010 at 12:57 pm |
I HATE SCHOOL AND I HATE ALL OF YOU! I’M NEVER COMING BACK TO SCHOOL, NEVER!
January 27, 2010 at 7:24 pm |
best comic relief i’ve had in a while… this and the masochistic demagogue of 1:09.
January 27, 2010 at 9:58 pm |
ditto!!!
January 27, 2010 at 9:56 am |
I and everyone else in the class got Dr. Ort’s email about how we will be tested on the larynx, pharynx, and oral cavity despite not having lectures on them. I actually think this is acceptable as long as the expectations are reasonable. If the questions really do relate to things we could easily find in lab (which was not much) and match up with the objectives given in the manual then this seems fair, provided the objectives are reasonable. I did however sense that Dr. Ort was getting defensive and the faculty seem to think we are trying to get out of having to know things. This is discouraging. The faculty need to realize that while we are upset at not having lectures, it is the fact that we have worthless lectures instead that are making students upset. If there really was no time to fit in a larynx lecture it would be more acceptable. However given that we had 2 lectures on triangles of the neck (with Bogart’s being unrelated and not very worthwhile) and a long lecture on the pterygopalantine fossa which we don’t even dissect, it seems ridiculous that we couldn’t have lectures on larynx, pharynx, and mouth. These seem like more important regions.
January 27, 2010 at 11:53 am |
I agree. Especially given that, according to 1:09, those hypothetical lectures on the larynx, pharynx, and tharynx would be “excellent” and “very coherent.”
January 27, 2010 at 11:54 am |
yes
January 27, 2010 at 3:47 pm |
glad i was not the only one to sense the faculty turning defensive. i agree with this post.
January 27, 2010 at 4:21 pm |
I agree with this post completely. I would also like to point out that many of the anatomy faculty in lab with us have seemed shocked when we told them we didn’t have lectures on the larynx, pharynx, and oral cavity. So it appears that things haven’t always been done this way and adds to my general impression this year is an unsuccessful trial year for C21.
January 27, 2010 at 7:08 pm |
As a “team taught” module, there seems to be a huge disconnect between faculty members. The biggest problem with FM3 is the lack of coordination between faculty members, including material covered and scheduling problems.
In order for an integrated curriculum to work, there needs to be communication between faculty. You can’t simply rearrange the order of the lectures and expect the curriculum to work. The faculty should sit down as a group, discuss what each lecture is to accomplish and verify that all bases are covered. Establish learning objectives, make sure faculty are aware of what we’ve already covered, and it would be a great idea to have a gyromouse workshop.
Why did we not have a lecture on the larynx, but two lectures on the triangles of the neck? When a student asked Dr. Bogart if we were responsible for the larynx, he seemed surprised and simply referred us to another faculty member.
Why do we have both head and neck anatomy and neuroanatomy at the same time? We don’t have anatomy next month, so why wasn’t brain lab scheduled then? This is also the time when deadlines for summer fellowships and research start approaching, and is a particularly bad time to be overloaded.
During FM1 the faculty all seemed to be on the same page, and obviously were well informed about what was going on. In contrast, the lecturers of FM3 seem like they’re all part of a poorly coordinated lecture series, rather than a unified curriculum.
January 27, 2010 at 7:44 pm |
Someone give this poster a medal AND a chest to pin it on. Spot on.
January 30, 2010 at 8:08 pm |
another example of the material not being coordinated; the radiology case study seemed to assume a familiarity with the anatomy of the auditory system, but we haven’t yet had any lectures on the auditory system per se save for discussion of the vestibulocochlear nerve.
January 28, 2010 at 6:31 pm |
My favorite part about anatomy lab this module is that on two separate labs for my group and still another lab for a neighboring group, we had a faculty member come over at one point and assist to identify several structures only to have another faculty member come over later in the lab and identify those same structures differently. If they’re not even all on the same page about the content, I can’t say I’m too surprised that they’re not on the same page about scheduling.
January 26, 2010 at 9:47 pm |
In considering our schedule for the week – I think it should be brought up to the instructors that placing a Spinal Cord conference the week before our final anatomy exam when we already have a 2 hour brain lab, a cranial nerve anatomy conference, days filled with lab and lecture while we are all miserably attempting to catch up with anatomy due to the heavy course load the past few weeks is a bit insane. It would seem more reasonable to place this at any time during the next few weeks in February when we have extremely limited class time. These conferences are supposed to give us the opportunity to enhance our learning, but it seems that very few of us have any time to prepare and therefore won’t really receive the benefit that the conferences were designed to provide us with.
Maybe it would be a better “design” to have just head and neck anatomy, embryo and radiology the first few weeks of january and then when that is done let us move on to neuro.
January 26, 2010 at 10:20 pm |
agreed. this scheduling really makes no sense. i’m sure most people havent even begun to look at the material from these neuro lectures in conference tomorrow
January 26, 2010 at 10:39 pm |
This is definitely my biggest complaint with Head and Neck. While I will be thrilled to be able to relax a little bit in February, it would have made a ton more sense to spread this stuff out.
January 26, 2010 at 11:03 pm |
I also think the scheduling sucks. personally ill be walking into conference tomorrow without having attended any brain labs or neuro lectures since the last exam. It’s going to be a total waste of two hours
January 27, 2010 at 12:19 am |
I agree. this is actually my number 1 complaint about this school. the scheduling is terrible. also, the original blogger forgot to mention that we have the worst PPS session ever scheduled for this week! couldn’t that have also been after the head and neck exam? the lack of organization in the schedule makes me feel like the faculty is not trying to help us learn the information.
January 27, 2010 at 12:24 am |
agreed on all points. i too will be in conference without having attended any of the lectures. i’m going to crash course brain and neuro after tuesday’s exam. the scheduling is horrendous.
January 27, 2010 at 9:49 am |
This is in regards to this post but also in regards to anatomy case studies. The faculty in the neuro cases are being more stern about everyone participating and really are taking note of who says what (how this figures into a grade I don’t know but . . .), consequently they are getting more annoyed when we come in unprepared. I understand their frustration but we just don’t have the time. So it really would be better for everyone if these conferences were scheduled closer to their corresponding exams. Similarly the anatomy faculty were annoyed that most people weren’t prepared for the thyroid case study during which I know my faculty member asked questions about the larynx and other structures as well. Again this was a poorly placed case study and it was made worse by the fact that we aren’t having lectures on the majority of the material. The scheduling really needs to be rethought. Students are benefiting and the faculty is annoyed making them less tolerant of questions in general.
January 27, 2010 at 9:57 am |
Should say “students are not benefiting”
January 26, 2010 at 5:25 pm |
haha i just like that the “1:09 post” (as we are calling it) was at 1:09 because that means he/she either decided not to go to the “beautifully coherent” neuroscience lecture…or decided blogging during it would be a better use of time.
Let’s be honest…Dr. Bogart is very nice and knows more about anatomy than most of us would even aspire to…but he mumbles and trails off when he speaks in lecture…even if he was saying something helpful we probably wouldn’t know because he is mumbling a lot of the time…so it isn’t about his lectures being “dry”..it is about them being unintelligible at times.
January 26, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
(Side note: the timing on the blog looks off…but considering the first point on the 1:09 post, it is still a little funny that it is paired with that time”
January 26, 2010 at 5:06 pm |
I feel it necessary to respond to the post at 1:09, because it is utterly absurd.
1. Have you been to a neuroscience lecture? Do you even know anything about neuroscience? I happen to have studied the field in college, and hence have an understanding of what a coherent neuro lecture is. We have rarely heard any. Certainly the extracellular pH lecture was coherent, but not many more. Also, I want to go into urology. Please explain to me how understanding extracellular pH fluctuations in the brain is going to enhance my ability to treat male urinary tract infections.
2. “LOL”? Is this blog a joke to you? This blog is the rare venue in which medical students can express themselves in a serious way, so please keep your “LOL”‘s between you and your imaginary friend.
Dr. Bogart is certainly an intelligent and nice man, but it’s really frustrating trying to weed out the occasional relevant point amidst the sea of extraneous information…
Anyway, I just felt I had to respond to the 1:09 post. I certainly hope that 1:09 wasn’t just being facetious, because such an act is an affront to contemplative dialogue as we know it. That would be the greatest shame.
That said, back to work!
January 26, 2010 at 8:45 pm |
Not to be too obnoxious, but maybe the extracellular pH stuff (and all the other info that seems unnecessary/irrelevant right now) will help us later when we take Step 1…but then again, maybe not!
January 26, 2010 at 3:38 pm |
I must say that Dr. Bogart’s anatomy book is among the best in the field. The sentence structure is beautifully worked with seamless transitions between subjects and predicates. The organization is well thought out and once I start a chapter I have a hard time putting it down, it’s such a teaser. And as for the illustrations, they really are the creme of the crop in terms of detail and clarity, I’ve actually started ripping some of the drawings out to have framed and hung over my fireplace at home, they’re just that good.
January 27, 2010 at 3:55 pm |
this post is not only genius, it gives me hope for our class.
January 26, 2010 at 2:18 pm |
lol @ the last post loving Dr. Bogart. Today in lecture Bogart told us the maxillary nerve was motor and called nerves arteries for at least 10 minutes. He gives amazingly incoherent lectures.
January 26, 2010 at 3:34 pm |
agreed.
January 26, 2010 at 1:09 pm |
Personally, I just want to say a couple of things about what I have discovered in FM3 so far. I actually think the course is beautifully run.
1.) The neuroscience lectures are very coherent and although the content does not exactly follow the book, I think this is a good thing. We are given the opportunity to add to our knowledge from the book with the lectures(or vice-versa) rather than just learning the same exact thing from two different sources. Also, although it appears that we are learning very experimental theory in neuroscience I actually think it is excellent that this is the way it is being presented. I know that not all of us will go into neuroscience, but I do believe that the basis for what we are learning is very useful because knowing it will serve us better in our future practice.
2) In regards to the anatomy lectures, I think they are excellent. I know that people have a lot of negative things to say about Dr. Bogart and his style of teaching but personally I think that it is wonderful. I know at times that it can seem as if he is trailing off or going on a tangent (such as when he speaks about his brother’s football playing days LOL) but I think that he really does get to the heart of the material. I mean, let’s face it. Anatomy is a pretty dry subject and is very difficult to make interesting but he is doing the best he can. And I believe that he does explain things much more clearly than what he’s given credit for.
3) I also think that the neuroanatomy lab is excellent. It is definitely confusing at times but I think that the course book that they have written for us is very helpful. They could have just written “here is a list of terms, now go find them”. But the book goes through the anatomy step by step in a very clear way. And with the help of the Brain Atlas I believe that it becomes very clear where everything is. In addition, I find the faculty to be very helpful. I can’t speak for everybody, but in my section both the professor and the TA work tirelessly to point out every structure to everybody. It would be wonderful if everybody could have their own personal professor but I realize this is not possible and I believe what the school has provided for us is excellent.
I know that this is a little different than most of the other blog posts, but I think that the course has been run excellently and just want to thank the FM3 coordinators.
January 26, 2010 at 2:29 pm |
whoever wrote this is in the EXTREME minority.
January 26, 2010 at 3:33 pm |
is a joke?
January 26, 2010 at 3:35 pm |
is this bruce bogart posting?
January 26, 2010 at 8:01 pm |
hahahaha i’m cracking up
January 26, 2010 at 8:17 pm |
couldn’t be bogart… this post was at least readable
January 26, 2010 at 9:07 pm |
I thought this whole post was just a sarcastic joke, but I reached the end and there was no punchline. Are you serious?? That entire post is the exact opposite of what every single person I know in the class thinks. It sounds like it’s from an infomercial for NYU.
January 25, 2010 at 4:42 pm |
This isn’t really FM3 related, but it is really a pain in the ass when Coles 301 (or whatever room the printing lab is) is occupied with meetings from 8-5 during the day from random departments throughout the hospital. It has happened before, and it appears to be happening again this week. You can’t tell me that there isn’t another conference room in this entire hospital that they can use (in fact, I’ve never seen anyone in the Founder’s Conference Room). Not living on campus, I’m not always around early in the morning or late at night to print, and if I want to take notes by hand (yes, I still do that…) I need to be able to have something printed to write on. Today, there was a sticker on the door that said “Meeting in Progress Until Noon. Come back later.” I just went back (at 3:30) and they ripped off the ‘Until Noon” part, so now it just says “Meeting in Progress”. So now, despite having set aside time to watch some neuro lectures, I am going to have to rework my study schedule. Yes, it is partially my fault for not having printed it all before, but come on. Is there anyone we can complain to or write a letter to so that that room is never scheduled for meetings that aren’t directly related to class or student organizations? It is just frustrating to not have access to it when needed.
January 25, 2010 at 9:28 pm |
Also related to the printing room, the printers were broken all of yesterday as wella s this evening when I went in. I realize these times are outside of work hours for calling IT, but is there someway we can fix this? With meetings in that room all day, we can’t get in during normal hours. And since we don’t have slides printed, this has a huge impact on my day/adds lots of unnecessary stress in not going to class because I can’t print slides
Additionally, if they do have the room reserved can we make sure they can’t kick us out before/after the times it’s reserved? They tend to kick people out before the meeting starts and then run late. If we try to go in when they run late, they make snide comments that are not appreciated.
Sorry, I realize this probably isn’t the place for these comments, but wasn’t sure where to say this.
January 26, 2010 at 9:10 pm |
I believe you can direct any complaints or suggestions for fixing the printing problem to Ilina, or any student council member.
January 27, 2010 at 8:52 am |
Hi Guys,
Student Council is keenly aware of these problems and has been bringing them up with the administration almost every week. As for the recent take-over, we are writing a statement to people in higher places to see if we can get anything done immediately to fix the problem, but then realize we need a more permanent solution. As of now, anyone is allowed the reserve the room all day, and that is a problem with policy which we are trying to get changed but has been slow and difficult. Sorry for the inconvenience.
January 26, 2010 at 9:19 pm |
Yeah this is a huge problem for me too. It’s really annoying.
January 24, 2010 at 11:14 pm |
I think one of the biggest problems in this module is access to professors in the anatomy lab. With the limb anatomy, the structures were larger so when there were not enough anatomy professors in lab it was at least possible to figure out most of what you were looking out with an atlas/people at neighboring tables. The structures in head/neck are so small, often times ripped, and are super close/look exactly like other structures, so sometimes with an atlas and the help of several other students, it still feels impossible to find what we are looking for. I think for future modules we should have assigned times with faculty in the labs so that we can ask questions and find things in smaller groups. Honestly, the only reason I like case study is because I am excited to have a faculty member to help find things! I think the ability to ask questions in smallish groups should be built into our curriculum.
January 25, 2010 at 2:09 pm |
I agree. Adding to the issue is that since only half the heads are bisected you have 6 people or more crowding around a cadaver instead of 3 so it is impossible for everyone to see even if there is a faculty member at the table.
January 24, 2010 at 10:14 pm |
WHAT ON EARTH AM I SUPPOSE TO KNOW ABOUT RADIOLOGY!!! ahhh. can the course liaisons please email maria shaiu or whatever her name is and ask us what on earth will be on the practical and written portions of the exam because i’m overwhelmed with material and i think it would be nice if I could just know what is expected of me.
January 26, 2010 at 8:09 pm |
SO SORRY this was not answered until now – I just emailed Dr. Shiau and asked if she could clarify things for us like she did before the last exam. If she doesn’t email the class directly, I’ll send an email out myself.
January 28, 2010 at 11:46 pm |
Thanks for emailing her. Last time, though, I thought she was very misleading with what she told us. Hopefully this time we will be better off. Thanks for asking, though!
January 24, 2010 at 1:49 pm |
do we have a practice practical before our head and neck exam? I can’t find one on our schedule? if one is not scheduled, i think everyone would find that to be extremely helpful.
January 24, 2010 at 8:18 pm |
It simply says “Anatomy Faculty in Lab” from 10 – 12 next monday.
That’ll be a joke – Jean Pierre telling us what we should know if he taught the course.
Then again, probably will be as helpful, or more, than FM2′s practice practical. Name all 8 pins, functions, and fibers in 60 seconds.
January 25, 2010 at 2:40 pm |
I just emailed Dr. Ort to check – I’ll post back here when I hear back.
January 25, 2010 at 3:02 pm |
Sorry guys, no practice practical this time. There’s no time in the schedule. Unlike with FM2, however, I think we know now what to expect with the practical. The faculty will be in the lab on Monday to answer questions.
January 23, 2010 at 9:31 pm |
Professors are still posting slides in pdf. I’d really appreciate it if ppt format is posted too.
January 26, 2010 at 8:14 pm |
I thought we addressed this before, but I guess they went back to PDFs! I just sent an email requesting (again) that the slides be posted in Powerpoint format. Thanks for the heads up -
January 22, 2010 at 8:50 am |
when are the course liaisons scheduled to meet with the FM3 faculty? I feel like this is the worst, most poorly organized, hardest module yet and I think the faulty needs some serious feedback.
January 22, 2010 at 6:49 pm |
Our next meeting with faculty is not yet scheduled, but I imagine it will be soon. Keep posting your comments on here, or send one of us an email. We’ll definitely bring issues up the next time we meet. It helps if you have specific suggestions on how to improve things, but feel free to send anything our way!
January 22, 2010 at 6:50 pm |
The post above is from me…not anonymous.
January 24, 2010 at 1:56 pm |
ok here are some specific ways to improve things:
(1) I think one big problem with the last exam was that the lectures and lecture notes were very confusing and complicated and the assigned neuroscience textbook literally did not cover anything the went over. I think a lot of frustration and confusion would dissolve if they could assign a textbook that mirrors what is covered in lecture. the lecture notes are not enough because they were confusing too.
(2) we did not have an exam review for people to ask questions to faculty and to review material that was very conceptual. I think we should have an exam review before the next neurophys exam so that everyone can ask questions and everyone can hear the professor’s answers.
(3) I think our schedules are planned very poorly. One reason why everyone got so behind in anatomy is because they planned a lab right after our exam! I think this is totally unacceptable and should not be allowed to happen in the future. all they do by doing that is make us more behind.
(4) I think its crazy that we have neuroanatomy labs at the same time as all the rest of this. neuroanatomy should be its own little module. no one knows whats going on and considering we aren’t being tested on it until months from now, no one is going to study for it, especially while we have so much other work. it takes up a lot of time and is a big problem.
(5) I agree with other posters that said neuroanatomy lab should be structured like histo lab. It is really difficult to go into lab with no background other than the poorly-written lab manuel.
(6) radiology is extremely confusing. no one everyknows what we are suppose to be taking away from each lecture. also, they go over structures we havn’t even done in anatomy lab! I think they need to get their act together. for example, before the last exam when the professor told us which images we were responsible for knowing, it was extremely helpful. why can’t she do that again, just this time, not 2 days before the test? will she even do that again? I dont know but i think we should know what we are expected to know about radiology sooner.
(7) anatomy lectures should be AT LEAST audio-captured. it would be very helpful for me to be able to go back and re-listen to parts that i did not get.
January 25, 2010 at 2:42 pm |
Thanks for your feedback. It helps a lot -
January 21, 2010 at 11:28 pm |
I find neuroanatomy lab to be very frustrating. When we were identifying structures on bones and in histo slides previously we a) were given guidelines on how to locate things, i.e. a foramen is a hole, a process is a bump, to help us have a clue of what to look for and for and b) had a lecture before where they put up slides or ppts and showed us the structures before asking us to find them on our own. I think neuroanatomy lectures where they just showed us structures would be really helpful. As it is now the labs are overcrowed with 6 or 7 people all trying to look at one brain, and there are only 2 faculty in some rooms. Since we have no idea what anything is (no one ever explained what a peduncle is) there is a lot of wasted time just waiting for an instructor to be free and come over.
January 22, 2010 at 8:44 am |
I agree strongly!
January 22, 2010 at 9:01 am |
I agree too. Schedule it like histo with a lecture and then lab time right afterwards. This way it is more productive and we get the reinforcement.
January 23, 2010 at 12:39 am |
this lab is a waste of time, it’d be so much easier to do all the material if we had lectures about it as the previous poster mentioned and if we actually knew what these things DO!
January 21, 2010 at 3:28 pm |
I really think today’s radiology lecture needs to be brought up to faculty. Perhaps next week once we have done pharynx stuff it would have made sense, but the lecture went wayyy too fast and into detail for stuff we have not heard of yet. I think that the lead faculty members for each section of our module need to communicate better if they are really going to “integrate” things.
January 20, 2010 at 9:56 pm |
The links for the study guides for the root of the neck/parotid lab don’t seem to be working. Is there a different way to access them?
January 20, 2010 at 1:17 pm |
Wait. Why can’t someone who sits in the front of Coles 109 just turn his/her laptop microphone on and record the lecture audio. This really does not require a high-tech intervention from A/V. I’m pretty sure MacBooks have decent microphones for capturing speech from 6 feet away.
January 22, 2010 at 8:47 am |
This is exactly why radiology is so annoying. The goals of what we are supose to take away from the lectures should be more clear and more integrated with what we are doing in anatomy. I agree that this needs to be brought up with the faculty. for example, the last radiolgy lecture we had on the dura etc was amazing because it was straightforward and we had actually previously done all that stuff in anatomy! otherwise, the only goal they are accomplishing is making me hate radiology and wish it had never been invented.
January 23, 2010 at 12:38 am |
impeach shiau!
January 19, 2010 at 4:17 pm |
can the faculty be encouraged to sent out exam answers a little earlier? why can’t it be sent when the test is over? it’s 35 letters.
January 18, 2010 at 11:21 pm |
The idea of having all the notes for each lecture bound in a little book for the module is cool. The fact that they screwed it up so terribly is ridiculous. Walton’s lecture note are on ALEX, but have no figures which are referred to dozens of times. The neurotransmitter lecture has no notes anywhere. This would be less of a problem but all our lecturers spent their time discussing things that are not covered in the textbook, so you really only have their notes to go with.
Also the practice question on reserpine better not be indicative of the level we need to know for the neurotransmitter lecture. That word never once came out of her mouth. There are about 100 questions that seem more relevant to what we learned/need to know than that one. Its only present in the TINIEST typeface on a slide packed with enzymes and other crap I am assuming we don’t need to know, since it was glossed over.
January 18, 2010 at 10:13 pm |
Just wanted to thank all the posters for your feedback regarding the lackluster quality of the lectures, text references, and resources for the physiology component of FM3. We will definitely bring up your concerns and comments to the faculty at our next meeting.
Also, we also invite you to include these comments on the course evaluations for the module. Believe it or not, the faculty really appreciates your feedback and the course evaluations are an important source of ways to improve the module.
January 18, 2010 at 12:49 pm |
Since this exam involves understanding concepts more than memorizing information, I think it would have been really helpful to hold a review session where we could have asked questions either Friday or today. From talking to other students, there are some big concepts that we all don’t really understand.
January 18, 2010 at 4:28 pm |
This is a great idea. Can we set up a review for the next neurophys exam?
January 18, 2010 at 12:47 pm |
Can anyone explain..
(1) Why do you only see the m spike antidromically? why does its spike appear first?
(2) what is the difference between the SD spike and what he refers to as ‘dendritic spikes’- aka dendritic action potentials?
January 18, 2010 at 2:01 pm |
As I understand it,
1. M spike is the depolarization at the very first node. Because Na channels become inactivated during depolarization when going from soma–>down axon, you do not get an m spike because that has already been depolarized/inactivated. You can get m spikes experimentally however when you depolarize at, for example, the center of the axon. It is therefore first when going from some area of the axon–>soma. This only happens experimentally since it is really rare to have synapses on the axon in vivo.
2. This one I am less sure of, but I think dendritic spikes refer to when dendrites are either depolarized by an action potential, or in special cases, when dendrites can produce their own action potential. SD occurs in action potentials because the soma and subsequently dendrites are depolarized when the EPSP’s are summed at the axon hillock and as an action potential is generated (said in another way, an axon potential depolarizes surrounding areas…so down the axon as well as the soma–>dendrites.). This can happen because soma’s do not have high concentrations of channels that inactivate as they do in nodes.
January 18, 2010 at 2:35 pm |
i think another difference is that the dendritic spikes are ca-channel based while SD are na-channel based. correct me if im wrong.
January 18, 2010 at 2:37 pm |
one more: you can get signal strengthening in dendrites at bifurcation points, and this mechanism doesn’t really have analogs in the soma.
January 18, 2010 at 2:51 pm |
signal strengthening at the bifurcations of dendrites is limited to purkinje cells.
January 18, 2010 at 12:32 pm |
It would have been very helpful for this exam if they had actually assigned a reference book that covered the information in the lecture. The fact that I cannot even find anywhere to read about what these silly lecturers covered is a problem for me. The least these teachers can do if they aren’t going to teach is assign a reasonable textbook. the textbook it is at a way lower level that what we are expected to learn and does not help me at all.
January 18, 2010 at 12:32 pm |
Maybe for future exams they could suggest a better and more applicable textbook?
January 17, 2010 at 5:41 pm |
I’m really sorry but the quality of the lectures for this exam is disgusting. My undergraduate professors were MUCH better at teaching. Is it really that hard to give a semi-coherent lecture? at this stage in the year, I do realize that a coherent lecture is too much to ask for- but maybe one that kind of maybe makes a little sense would be nice. This is by far the worst group of lectures- so far- and that is quite a title given what else we’ve been exposed to.
January 17, 2010 at 5:38 pm |
What are the figure numbers in Walton’s notes referring to? I can connect some of them to figures in the lecture, but not all of them.
January 17, 2010 at 4:37 pm |
are we responsible for the chapters in the book that relate to lecture? That reserpine question on the practice test wasnt in the lecture on neurotransmitters, but it was in the book. Or am i missing something and it was in the lecture?
January 17, 2010 at 5:36 pm |
this is a good question, does anyone know the answer?
January 17, 2010 at 7:34 pm |
Reserpine is written in small type on slide 22 (Noradrenergic Synapse), and in the midst of a lot of information that may or may not have been mentioned, so technically I guess it’s fair game either way. But I’m relying mostly on the book in general.
January 17, 2010 at 7:48 pm |
In the book, reserpine was in Box 6 of Chapter 6, not even in the body of the text… Glad to know that I need to go back and read all those boxes now…
January 17, 2010 at 7:50 pm |
Edit: Box E. Sorry
January 17, 2010 at 2:17 pm |
I’m frustrated that Dr. Walton showed up a half hour late and then sped through her lecture. I didn’t get much out of it as a result, and now unfortunately have to teach it all to myself before this test. She also seemed misinformed that we had been lectured about slow and fast muscle fibers before, which goes to show the lack of communication.
January 18, 2010 at 5:07 am |
that really was indefensible. we really shouldn’t be held to the material she zoomed through, minus the stuff that was review. if i wanted to simply learn the material by reading the textbook, i would have never bothered with school and saved 50k a year.
January 17, 2010 at 12:37 pm |
I think it is a little ridiculous that we are being taught and probably tested (based on a lot of the practice questions) like PhD students. The vast majority of us aren’t getting a PhD (and for me, at least, I’m not getting one on purpose). In the long run, what does it really matter how many subunits GABA-B has? I have felt this way in the past (especially during parts of FM1), but I feel like FM3 has been taught the most “scientific”, with lectures being on experiments, with less on clinical concepts and solutions. For example, instead of having to memorize a table of rate limiting steps and biochemistry for neurotransmitters, Dr. Rice could have made it a very good (and clinical) lecture, explaining what each NT does, what happens if there is too much/not enough, etc etc, without worrying about the exact structures of the NT and channel and the biochemistry behind how they are made. Because most of our professors got PhDs and not MDs, I don’t really expect the teaching style to change any time soon, but if there was any way to get some of these lectures to be more clinically oriented (and less about rote memorization and random experiments), it would be nice.
January 17, 2010 at 2:15 pm |
Agreed. I’m not sure why we are learning about experiments that don’t happen in real life with no medical relevance, it seems unnecessary to me. I would have preferred to just have the main concepts presented in a condensed manner, instead of explaining how they figured these things out because honestly I don’t really care.
January 18, 2010 at 5:09 am |
i agree on both points above. i’ve had it with this sort of lecture and test. i did it for 4 years as an undergrad. teach me medically relevant things, not the history of experiments. the md/phds can have their own little fun session on their own.
January 17, 2010 at 12:07 pm |
Will we get answers to the practice questions?
January 17, 2010 at 2:12 pm |
There is an answer key in the same folder
January 15, 2010 at 1:39 am |
My Tuesday schedule is absurd. I think it’s silly that we have lab the day of an exam, but here is my schedule:
9-11: exam
11-12: mandatory meeting with advisor
12-1:30: lab
1:30-3: conference
3-5: pps
9-5 with an exam, a lab and no lunch break is just brutal. If they’re going to “integrate” the curriculum, can they at least make sure the schedules are decent?
January 15, 2010 at 11:09 am |
I also have this schedule and it really is ridiculous. I don’t understand why we have a constant problem with scheduling where nobody seems to look at our schedule.
Lab after an exam is poor planning because we aren’t going to be prepared and won’t learn much. Now some of us also have to worry about how to fit lunch it around this crazy schedule.
January 15, 2010 at 6:05 pm |
Same problem.
I already know I’m just gonna skip half this crap, which is a shame
January 14, 2010 at 2:54 am |
I have to say that Dr. Hagiwara’s lecture is the most logical and easy to understand, so she definitely deserved the praise at the end. I hope all our lectures can be like that.
January 14, 2010 at 9:56 am |
I absolutely agree!
January 14, 2010 at 4:24 pm |
Is there any way she can come back and give more lectures (even if they are just anatomy ones)? I liked her a lot
January 15, 2010 at 3:43 am |
I disagree. She spent most of the time speaking about something we already have learned ad nauseam (cranial nerves) and then rapid fired through the diseases. And it was only 30 minutes? She didn’t stop to take questions during the lecture, which several people had. Dunno what all the hype is about.
January 15, 2010 at 7:47 am |
I agree with the above poster. I think the only reason everyone enjoyed her lecture was because we had already studied all the material. If she had lectured new material at that rapid speed, no one right would be happy at all. In fact, everyone would be pissed off.
January 15, 2010 at 2:01 pm |
But it was helpful review! I agree with those who are pleased, it’s just supposed to be images of things we’ve already learned. Are we actually held responsible for pathology? Last time we were just shown images of normal anatomy, in which case it’s a review…using images. I’d be happy to attend other lectures that also accomplish this.
January 15, 2010 at 4:14 pm |
And, when we were lectured on it the first time, never once were we given a list of the 12 cranial nerves, what foramen they came out of, etc. So, if you were able to teach it to yourself, good for you. But I know that this helped clarify a lot. For me, it acted as a good review and helped fill in a lot of gaps in my knowledge base
January 13, 2010 at 1:14 am |
Could the faculty be asked/reminded to use the gyromouse? 50 minute lectures don’t work for everyone, and I know a whole bunch of people who watch the lectures entirely from home, but the point of uploading the video/audio is sort of lost when the lecturer uses a pointer for convenience.
January 13, 2010 at 12:00 pm |
Agreed…I’ll see what I can do.
January 13, 2010 at 3:03 pm |
thanks
January 13, 2010 at 8:49 pm |
Spoke with Dr. Rubinson and he says he’ll remind the neuro lecturers again to use the gyromouse or the touchpad mouse (which is also screen captured). He understands it is frustrating for students when the lecturers don’t use the gyromouse…so hopefully there will be a change.
January 12, 2010 at 5:28 pm |
I don’t appreciate Dr. Shiau suddenly dropping 5 labs worth of radiology material on us. It flies in the face of the integrated curriculum when we have to all of a sudden study the radiology of facial muscles 10 days and 4 labs later, and it hints at disorganization, something that I feel was present in December as well.
January 12, 2010 at 7:51 pm |
Her email wasn’t written in complete sentences. When is all of that due? I’m already overwhelmed, and really don’t feel like I have time for more lab garbage
January 12, 2010 at 8:30 pm |
Not that I’m disagreeing, but I’m pretty sure these aren’t “due,” they’re just supplemental info as they are in the individual lab folders as opposed to official LAMS. Liaisons, please set me straight if I’m wrong but I think we had the same kind available in December besides the required LAMS.
January 13, 2010 at 12:48 am |
OK. Thanks. I hadn’t really looked into it. I was just going off the email. It is prob like the spreadsheet from last time which is just the movies that go with the labs. Didn’t even think of that. Thanks
January 13, 2010 at 1:12 am |
well but the lams are made up pretty much of various aspects of the lab radiology things. they stress different aspects but given that the last exam did not solely test from lams, i figure these are mandatory to some extent.
January 13, 2010 at 9:22 am |
Sure, but I think these aren’t LAMS. just short modules for each lab.
January 13, 2010 at 10:42 pm |
These Radiology Modules are indeed the same as the “narrated flash presentations” made available in FM2 to supplement the on-line dissection manual. There is more information in the FM2 syllabus regarding radiology, and I’m pretty sure the manner in which we will be tested will remain consistent throughout anatomy.
I will confirm all this with Dr. Shiau, of course, but I am pretty certain these labs are not required, as in no one is going to check if you completed them, but the material on them is fair game for an exam.
January 14, 2010 at 1:54 am |
Can you find out if we will have radiology LAMS for FM3 when you email her, please?
January 14, 2010 at 12:15 pm |
Here is Dr. Shiau’s response to my email.
“I believe that the modules are fair game– to a certain extent. Basic concepts, well demonstrated structures, and redundant material covered elsewhere– lectures, small groups will be emphasized/tested .
The exam format will be the same – practical slide examination with questions. I hope this answers your questions.”
January 11, 2010 at 7:42 pm |
In the neuroanatomy lab manual on page iii it lists a compound action potential tutorial that we are required to do. What is this and where can it be found?
January 11, 2010 at 7:48 pm |
Under FM3 Resources, click on Nervous System Courseware. The Compound Action Potential information is in there. Not a tutorial – just reading, but still worthwhile.
January 11, 2010 at 9:42 pm |
A couple of things from Mel:
Mel has offered to hold a cranial nerve review session before the last case study (1/28), which would give everyone a bit more time to put things together. Also, on Wednesday they’re handing out a Cranial Nerve Addendum which should clarify what we’re responsible for and explain all the pathways (as will the case study this week). Mel also said that the parasympathetic system/splanchnic nerves are more important for thorax/abdomen/pelvis and not so much for the head/neck.
If there’s anything else that folks wants reviewed, please be specific and post it on here. I will let Mel what the consensus is – he said he’s happy to generate a review session based on what everyone is looking for.
Post away!!
January 11, 2010 at 9:42 pm |
Oops…meant to post this on the thread below…
January 12, 2010 at 12:04 am |
cranial nerve review sounds awesome, hope he means he’s including the fiber type too. thanks for your work
January 7, 2010 at 12:54 pm |
Can we get mel to give us another review on parasympathetics etc in the head and neck? I found his review very helpful last time.
January 10, 2010 at 9:26 pm |
2nded
January 10, 2010 at 10:21 pm |
I third this. Any review on the parasympathetics/GSA/GSE would be helpful (and kind of necessary – I don’t know anyone who understands this stuff)
January 11, 2010 at 7:52 pm |
Looking into it – I’ll post again when I hear something back
January 18, 2010 at 3:33 am |
Thanks to Jennifer’s request, Mel will be holding two more reviews in the near future. Details TBA.
January 7, 2010 at 1:18 am |
Where is the lecture on cranial nerves being held? No location is listed on ALEX.
January 7, 2010 at 8:31 am |
I’m assuming the lecture is in Schwartz F, but I just sent an email to double check.
January 7, 2010 at 9:48 am |
Lecture in F
January 6, 2010 at 8:18 pm |
The lectures with Dr. Llinas are beyond incomprehensible. Not only do his slides not match the ones made available to us on ALEX, but the professor can not communicate concepts clearly, and I literally have no idea whatsoever about what he is teaching.
I think it would be helpful if the slides put on ALEX were made sure to be in ppt format, and the same slides used by prof. Llinas. It would also be beneficial if Dr. Llinas spent more time explaining the core concepts of his lectures to us in a clearer manner.
January 6, 2010 at 10:41 pm |
Agreed big time. The printed notes in the FM3 coursebook save me from utter disaster but even they cause partial disaster. Less time about why he likes these topics and more on why he shows us so many graphs would be helpful.
January 6, 2010 at 5:31 pm |
It’s pretty annoying when professors post powerpoints in pdf format, since I can’t type notes directly on the pdf. Is there a way to make sure that they always post in ppt format?
January 7, 2010 at 11:15 am |
PLEASE GET THIS GUY TO GIVE US PPTs. THAT IS HALF THE REASON WHY I CANT FOLLOW HIM!!!!
January 7, 2010 at 11:24 pm |
We are working on this!
January 8, 2010 at 1:13 am |
From Dr. Rubinson: We had been told by the Dean’s Office that PDFs were preferred since Mac users sometimes had trouble with the PPTs and that is why we were posting them. In the future, beginning next week, we will post both formats except in the cases where the lecturers are unwilling to post PPTs.
January 5, 2010 at 12:02 pm |
Never thought this would be the case but today’s lecture had me wishing for Dr. Walton.
On a somewhat unrelated and more constructive note the neuroanatomy course packs are helpful, but I think since they only include a section of the FM3 module there is confusion about what else is left (like the exam on Feb. 2nd). I think an FM3 course pack like the FM2 one that included everything would be helpful. Or at least a course pack for the lectures, labs and conferences not included under the neuroanatomy “course”.
January 5, 2010 at 1:30 pm |
I actually missed Dr Walton too. This morning’s lecture was really confusing and all over the place.
January 5, 2010 at 2:41 pm |
Agreed. As for physio, check out the typed notes for this lecture though, they’re a lot better than what I witnessed this morning.
January 6, 2010 at 3:44 pm |
The FM3 coursebook is really helpful. Having all the notes in one place makes it much easier to keep everything straight. And I appreciated the introduction on Monday to the neuro course and the explanation of what it covers and how we’ll be tested on it. If someone could also do that for the head and neck anatomy part of the course, I would feel better able to handle everything.
And I agree with the physio course book comment. His notes pretty much go through his slides and explain them. Very helpful.
January 5, 2010 at 12:38 am |
i honestly think the faculty is denying us this despite being able to as a means of getting us to go to lecture. let’s be honest here: if it was available, how many students would be in coles at 9 am to hear bogart talk for 90 minutes?
the other option, of course, is to have one student audio capture it on their laptop and email the mp3 to the class.
January 5, 2010 at 2:02 pm |
maybe less people would go but more students would actually learn from it.
January 4, 2010 at 6:07 pm |
Would it be possible to get our anatomy lectures audio recorded? I know that in coles they do not have the necessary technology to video-record but I also know that we have had audio recorded lectures in many rooms outside schwartz F. I find it very hard to understand everything that is said because the material is so dense. i think it would be very helpful if i could re-listen to an audiotaped lecture. is this possible?
January 4, 2010 at 8:54 pm |
i agree.
January 16, 2010 at 9:33 am |
We will bring this up at the meeting, yet gain, this coming week. Maybe persistence will win and they will start to record them.