Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
You've stated that IMGs do well with clinical questions, whereas AMGs do better with Molecular biology. The May update to the USMLE was an injenction of, you guessed it, clinical questions. If anything, it should disadvantage AMGs, and hence shift the scoring curve lower since its generated from their scores. This would mean that IMG scores would go up rather than down. Since these are statistically generated scores, the actualy percentage of questions you get right is irrelevant, as long as the difficulty of the exam is reasonably uniform for all test takers. Which it is.
Which brings me to my next point. There are a lot of people who have taken the exam recently and scored really well, even 99s, and they've studied the exact same books we all study. If they havent been heavily tested on molecular biology, while others have been tested so much as to cause them to flunk, it is OBVIOUS that a level playing field doesnt exist. Which cant be true, of course. Which brings me to the human nature of remembering more of the "hard" questions than the easy ones. And to the fact that a lot of people cant accurately guage how well prepared they are.
My point is, its not possible for them to increase the weightage of molecular biology so much as to cause potential 99ers to fail. And its obvious they havent, because people are still beat 95 left and right, with the same old textbooks.
Your second point, which I'll quote verbatim:
"2. The Updates which r introduced or cited in the USMLE website is focused on the introduction of the Audio/Video items which are rarely troublesome. But the obvious thing which they arent gonna tell or rather they shudnt is that all the recent advancement in details (not minute ones or the very recent ) which have been updated in the core books will be asked."
This is all incorrect. First, you have no information base by which to judge the ease or difficulty of the A/V questions. I'm sure you might've heard from a few students who took the exam, but that in no way provides statistically sound information. The second sentence is even more distant from the truth. If theres a new drug, lets call it DrugX, for AIDS, and it kicks HIV ass, we're obviously required to study it. The USMLE website is certainly NOT going to say "Read about drugx cuz it'll be tested". Instead they'll probably ask us to read about anti-HIV therapy. That AUTOMATICALLY includes any new drugs that have found a place in frontline treatment. So if a new drug does come out, they neednt update their exam objectives. They're already accurate. Similarly, if they list they test drugs of choice for microbes, we are REQUIRED to know what they are, no matter how recent any changes might be.
The course outlines of the USMLE have never undergone sudden, steep changes without ample warning. Their method of testing mostly revolves around checking sound concepts and deep integration built around basic facts. They do not test obscure, obscure details to a massively score-altering degree in the exam.
And your comparison of review texts with textbooks is completely off. Both are updated regularly. However the former are updated only with new high yield information that could potentially be tested on the exam. While knowing Ganong inside out is obviously better than knowing Kaplans physio, doing textbooks really well even only for major subjects will require an ungodly amount of time.
And finally, by your own thinking, they thought to warn test takers of the possible inclusion of 5 A/V questions, despite them being very easy. Why then would they not let us know of a mind boggling amount of molecular biology, enough to cause well prepared students to flunk?
Edited by new_n_lost on 10/23/07 - 03:05 PM. Reason: secured the original post
|
| new_n_lost
Politically InCorrect
Topics: 652
Posts: 6,096
|
Data y do u have to shove ur opinion down my throat when u urself dont even have the slightest clue u r talking abt. Plz go thru my post again i didnt mean to offend u or argue with u i simply disagreed with a couple of ur points and i mentioned my own reasons for it. There is no need to get harsh or alll excited abt this, u will find times that u might be wrong as i have found that out many times.
Go thru ur own posts and the part where u have quoted me verbatim and then make sense of wht u have said and then compare it with wht i have said ( WE BOTH R SAYING THE SAME THING).
Hey buddy y such hostility plz calm down and relax this is a place to discuss not an ancient roman gladiator ground.   
PS. Plz dont edit ur post #41 cos i like it the way it is. infact let me help u with tht.
___________________
FORUM RULES-- Those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. I get enough exercise just by pushing my luck --P4U World.." The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple."
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
I'm neither excited nor miffed nor offended, and why would I be??? I can make smileys if you'd like. I suspect you might be, though, since you've taken the liberty of editing my post without highlighting the changes, and sent me a warning PM.
And I'm certainly not shoving my opinion down anyones throat, and nor are you. This isnt an infantile discussion between two high school kids. However, does our presence on a forum mean we cant disagree with each other, and explain the basis of our disagreement? I certainly dont mind your disagreeing with me, but your last post is devoid of substance. While I've backed up what I say based on the nature of standardized exams and information on usmle.org and in FA, you've responded by saying "You yourself dont even have the slightest clue what you're talking about". If I dont, educate me. Saying that in itself means nothing.
And no NNL, we both arent saying the same thing. Your stance is that previously low yield subjects, in particular molecular biology, have been upped in the USMLE to the extent it can cause well prepared students to score very poorly or even fail.
In the particular paragraph I quoted, you stated that announcements about A/V questions were made, despite them not being troublesome, and despite having a cap of 5 questions.
Do you see the conflict? They warn us about 5 easy questions, and leave us completely in the dark about changes that could potentially cause us to fail?
As a moderator and as someone who has posted here for a long time, what you write makes people think. Do you realize that when you suggested reading Ganong for Physiology, there might actually be people who do that? Or that a lot of people who read your post might be very, very tense now? What about people who had their exam a month away?
Any birds-eye analysis of the USMLE should be fair and objective. You've mentioned the USMLE was updated with new questions, as a result of which Molecular Biology is now much more important than before. However, both usmle.org and FA state that the May update was all of clinical questions. I mention that and suddenly its my opinion??
|
| silver
Forum Guru
Topics: 21
Posts: 792
|
Data wrote:
As a moderator and as someone who has posted here for a long time, what you write makes people think. Do you realize that when you suggested reading Ganong for Physiology, there might actually be people who do that? Or that a lot of people who read your post might be very, very tense now? What about people who had their exam a month away?
Data,
People studying for this exam are not naive nor are they little kids. Everyone knows what decisions to make and what not to. We all know that advice given to us is to be taken in perspective. So what if they're reading it? You make it sound as if there's something gravely wrong with reading a book that a vast majority uphold as not only relevant but extremely authentic. In fact, it's general knowledge that Ganong is an excellent reference book to consult.
I would have to agree with NNL somewhat that recently certain subjects have become high yield on step 1, such as mol. bio. IMGs having done their med. school from countries where mol. bio. is yet to be taught in-depth at the medical college level do feel a slight disadvantage because in their curriculum the last time they covered mol. bio in detail was in high school. This is a subject that until very recently has gained importance in medicine because of the new insights that research has shown us. Unfortunately not all countries have been able to integrate this subject into the medical studies as effectively as the US, therefore students from these countries do feel a hinderance but it's not impossible.
The fact that usmle.org has stated that recent updates have been only of clinical oriented questions, nevertheless, the experiences of recent test-takers cannot be ignored who have shared their experiences and said time and time again that mol bio is on the rise.
I agree that usmle.org does update its examinees on the recent changes in the exam, but I don't feel it's their headache or obligation to update us on the nitty gritty of the exam--some responsibility has to be shouldered by the examinee also. Our profession requires us to keep ourselves updated on the recent advances in our field--with information being literally at our fingertips now, we should be able to pick up on these recent advancements in no time at all.
Edited by silver on 10/25/07 - 08:12 AM
___________________
Every disaster hides an opportunity.
|
| new_n_lost
Politically InCorrect
Topics: 652
Posts: 6,096
|
Data wrote:
I'm neither excited nor miffed nor offended, and why would I be??? I can make smileys if you'd like. I suspect you might be, though, since you've taken the liberty of editing my post without highlighting the changes, and sent me a warning PM.
Once again u r mislead. Read that Msg Again and Read the reason i have provided u. I honestly havent made changes to ur post nor have i sent u r warning pm. The msg that u have received is An Automated Response, Now how hard is it to read that msg when it clearly states tht i have made no changes and i have secured ur original post. Stop Accusing falsely plz cos thts sooooo elementary. And plz read the notice its in English and no where does it say that i have sent u a warning. But once again i urge u not to misunderstand me as i have no ill will towards u.
Data wrote:
And I'm certainly not shoving my opinion down anyones throat, and nor are you. This isnt an infantile discussion between two high school kids. However, does our presence on a forum mean we cant disagree with each other, and explain the basis of our disagreement? I certainly dont mind your disagreeing with me, but your last post is devoid of substance. While I've backed up what I say based on the nature of standardized exams and information on usmle.org and in FA, you've responded by saying "You yourself dont even have the slightest clue what you're talking about". If I dont, educate me. Saying that in itself means nothing.
The only reason i said that u were so aptly ready to cite the USMLE website and then say that they havent mentioned that the question content of the examination on molecular biology will be heavy or increased henceforth. While the Site specifically says that and i quote
"Each examination covers content related to the traditionally defined disciplines of anatomy, behavioral sciences, biochemistry, microbiology, pathology, pharmacology, and physiology, as well as to interdisciplinary areas including genetics, aging, immunology, nutrition, and molecular and cell biology. While not all topics listed in the content outline are included in every examination, overall content coverage is comparable in the various examination forms that will be taken by different examinees.
The Step 1 content outline describes the scope of the examination in detail but is not intended as a curriculum development or study guide. It provides a flexible structure for test construction that can readily accommodate new topics, emerging content domains, and shifts in emphasis. The categorizations and content coverage are subject to change. Broadly based learning that establishes a strong general understanding of concepts and principles in the basic sciences is the best preparation for the examination." http://usmle.org/Examinations/step1/step1_content...
Like how else would they give a disclaimer that the emerging trends in medicine will be adapted in the exm. So should i presume that i m mislead by their disclaimer or be naive and not see the trends.
Data wrote:
And no NNL, we both arent saying the same thing. Your stance is that previously low yield subjects, in particular molecular biology, have been upped in the USMLE to the extent it can cause well prepared students to score very poorly or even fail.
Do i really have to elaborate and specify where Molecular biology or lets the events occuring in diseases have been identified at the molecular level which previously were thought to be non existent. This is of course being referred to the changes made in the Early 2007 Textbook Editions.
Data wrote:
In the particular paragraph I quoted, you stated that announcements about A/V questions were made, despite them not being troublesome, and despite having a cap of 5 questions.
Do you see the conflict? They warn us about 5 easy questions, and leave us completely in the dark about changes that could potentially cause us to fail?
The introduction of the A/V questions was a change in the format of the Examination which was to be informed. The A/V questions introduced and given out as examples or practice material for STEP 2CK r mostly clinical. Which i m sure the Grads whether AMGs or IMGs will have no problems in solving or understanding. The A/V items will not appear in Step 1 or 3 until 2008 and there will be another announcement 2 months before such a question shows up. The conflict as u put it is that r they responsible for an examinee who fails to notice the fine print and expects them to inform him that his exam will be of such and such proportions.
Data wrote:
As a moderator and as someone who has posted here for a long time, what you write makes people think. Do you realize that when you suggested reading Ganong for Physiology, there might actually be people who do that? Or that a lot of people who read your post might be very, very tense now? What about people who had their exam a month away?
Did u actually go thru my posts ?? The ongoing discussion was that whether Kaplan is enuf or not and my specific reply was that no it isnt and i gave my answer or my opinion and the relevant areas where Kaplan sucks and why in post #12. And yes i always take in wht i say cos i have spent time over here and i try to give me opinion and if someone asks me for advice i try to give it so to the best of my capabilities. If they r IMGs whether Grads or Undergrads they should keep up with the current version of things in the field of medicine if they intend to score high on their Steps. I have asked the Older Grads to go thru Ganong and specifically those topics which r inadequate in Kaplan so that they have a full understanding of the topic whereas a Med student might not have to do so.
Data wrote:
Any birds-eye analysis of the USMLE should be fair and objective. You've mentioned the USMLE was updated with new questions, as a result of which Molecular Biology is now much more important than before. However, both usmle.org and FA state that the May update was all of clinical questions. I mention that and suddenly its my opinion??
Did u go thru my post where i have specifically said the emerging trend in Medicine is the intervention of disease at molecular level. Whether be it Molecular biology or its related or relative material in association with the diseases has become important.
Finally look around yourself and get urself updated in the relative changes in the US Med School policy changes. A lot of things are happening around in the US Medical Education. So i would suggest to wise up.
Once again i apologise if my posts have offended u or have hurt u in any way.
Edited by new_n_lost on 10/25/07 - 03:35 PM
___________________
FORUM RULES-- Those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. I get enough exercise just by pushing my luck --P4U World.." The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple."
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
NNL, stop making this discussion juvenile and bellicose by repeatedly questioning my comprehension of your posts with condescending statements such as "its in English"and then masking it with apologies. If you disagree with something I've said, pertaining to the discussion at hand, say so, and then give us your reasons. Afterall, any bilaterally useful debate is about information exchange.
"Each examination covers content related to the traditionally defined disciplines of anatomy, behavioral sciences, biochemistry, microbiology, pathology, pharmacology, and physiology, as well as to interdisciplinary areas including genetics, aging, immunology, nutrition, and molecular and cell biology. While not all topics listed in the content outline are included in every examination, overall content coverage is comparable in the various examination forms that will be taken by different examinees.
The Step 1 content outline describes the scope of the examination in detail but is not intended as a curriculum development or study guide. It provides a flexible structure for test construction that can readily accommodate new topics, emerging content domains, and shifts in emphasis. The categorizations and content coverage are subject to change. Broadly based learning that establishes a strong general understanding of concepts and principles in the basic sciences is the best preparation for the examination."
Thats what the USMLE website says, correct? Whats more, this is exactly what I've said. I already made it clear that it goes without saying that all new advancements in the subjects we're supposed to read, and that are considered to be fundamental enough to be read and learnt by medical students, are required to be known for the exam. To this end, the USMLE review texts and qbanks regularly update themselves. If an examinee finds a particular review book not detailed enough, or that it doesnt "explain" well, he can look for another, more detailed, review text. But I assure you, there is NOT the need to read entire textbooks, such as Ganong, for any subject. This is a point you have failed to address after your first post.
Furthermore, they say that the categorizations and content coverage are subject to change. Well duh. We all know that is so. But these changes are not suddenly included to the extent it changes the face of the exam and possibly causes excellent students to flunk the exam. I fail to see how it supports your argument. Yes, the USMLE is ever-changing. Yes, we're required to know the newest advancements in each subject. No, they do not introduce massive, radical changes without ample warning.
Furthermore, I'll point to the statement "...overall content coverage is comparable in the various examination forms that will be taken by different examinees..." We all know this is so, since the percentage of questions varies from person to person. However, pathology/pathophysiology are generally considered to be the biggest single component of the exam. If someone who takes the exam and complains only 5 out of 350 questions were from pathology, I wouldnt buy it. This means that variation does exist, but not to the extent of flunking students.
In any case, you've stated "The only reason i said that u were so aptly ready to cite the USMLE website and then say that they havent mentioned that the question content of the examination on molecular biology will be heavy or increased henceforth. While the Site specifically says that and i quote ". But the quote below it says nothing of the sort about molecular biology. It speaks in general about all subjects.
Furthermore, it states "Broadly based learning that establishes a strong general understanding of concepts and principles in the basic sciences is the best preparation for the examination", which is EXACTLY what I'm trying to say. Focus on "broadly based". Focus on the part about strong comprehension of concepts and principles.
It goes without saying that its possible we miss out on newer advancements by studying from older editions. I know some people have studied with the 2000 or 2002 editions of Kaplan, but I have always been a proponent of getting the newest available books.
And if Kaplan is insufficient for any subject, and this must be judged by each student himself, there are review books from other series, such as BRS and HY, available, that are more detailed. But studying Ganong for Physiology is a crackpot idea. For reference, yes, but as a primary text, certainly not.
And finally the statement "The conflict as u put it is that r they responsible for an examinee who fails to notice the fine print and expects them to inform him that his exam will be of such and such proportions". Really? You really think its THEIR responsibility to inform us of the exam changes? And havent they already done that by putting that information on their website? You can even sign up for their bulletin and get regular emails. What else are they supposed to do? Personally email all of us? Regular mail us? Come see us? If the information is on their website, we should know it, and they have no further responsibility, period. Its ludicrious to suggest otherwise for an exam that is so extensively taken the world over.
So in conclusion, Kaplan + qbank + FA + possible supplementation with other review books + reference from textbooks, if done well, guarantees good scores. Scores will fluctuate due to the variability of the exam proportions, but never so much as to cause a well prepared student to flunk.
Edited by Data on 10/25/07 - 11:05 PM
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
And to Silver:
Your statement that Ganong is an excellent reference book to consult is exactly what I'm supporting. It can and must be used for reference. What I disagree with is NNLs sentiment that the USMLE has reached a stage where Ganong must be your core book.
Your statement that the usmle.org is not obligated to update us on the nitty gritty is something I agree with as well. Their website states the exam objectives. Its understood that all recent advancements in any of those should be known by exam takers, which I've already explained in an earlier post.
As far as the exam experience of test takers is concerned, they vary a lot. We know that there have been a fair bit of people who've scored really well recently. Some people I know personally have scored 99s with Kaplan + either BRS or Goljan for Pathology. On the other hand, we have students who've skinned themselves reading from several detailed sources, and failed to score well. Rather than focussing only on the latter, we should consider it along with the former, as well as the information that the USMLE gives us. FA is another good option, they always list changing trends. How would I use the information provided by the fact that some people arent doing well? By realizing that everyone has weak areas, and so probably will I. Therefore a fundamental of a good preparation would be to identify your weak areas, through taking qbanks or whatever, and supplement them. In other words, you and I are both saying books such as Ganong are excellent for REFERENCE and for filling in holes, whereas NNL is arguing it must for the CORE book of our preparation.
All this, of course, goes along with studying from the newewst possible editions.
|
| new_n_lost
Politically InCorrect
Topics: 652
Posts: 6,096
|
Data, Read my post again when u have calmed down and then urz.
I m so sorry that but its getting really impossible to make u understand wht i have said and it appears to me that u dont really want to listen to it. Well my dear friend i have from the very begining said the same thing again and again. Pointed out my arguments. Pointed out the areas weakness of most IMGs ( including me). Have insisted which areas to touch in Ganong and a lot more areas from elsewhere.
But i guess u have twisted my every word into something i have not said. U have called me making the juvenile discussion. Well i m simply not gonna prove the discrepancies in ur posts. Cos seriously i cant make someone understand or atleast help them make a valid counter arguement when they have decided they are not going to listen to the other person no matter what. Whenever u have calmed down go thru all my posts and then immediately ur post and hopefully then u might get wht i have said. Hopefully.
Next time put some effort in ur arguments.
PS Its ur opinion and u r entitled to it as much as i m to mine.
___________________
FORUM RULES-- Those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. I get enough exercise just by pushing my luck --P4U World.." The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple."
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
The post above is redundant.
In any case, I've said what I want to on this subject. If this discussion carries on, it'll do so without begetting further replies from me on the issue.
Be smart about how you prepare.
And NNL, you shouldnt have edited your own posts in this thread for the sake of fairness.
|
| new_n_lost
Politically InCorrect
Topics: 652
Posts: 6,096
|
Stop being a kid DATA
Read the time stamps between the original posts and Edited post time.
Oh Plz Stop acting as if u r in Elementary. For Godsake's dude atleast read and see before start off with another line of thinking.
___________________
FORUM RULES-- Those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. I get enough exercise just by pushing my luck --P4U World.." The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple."
|
| youngone
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 35
| | 10/25/07 - 11:37 PM
0 of 2 forum leaders found this post helpful
| #11 |
522 topics, 4,488 posts and NNL failed by 1 point.
You don't need to be a neurosurgeon to figures this one out.
Say what you want, but blaming your troubles on "outdated" resources
is really not the way to go. I dont think you are in the position to give anybody
advice as if it was the law of USMLE.
Some of the posts on this thread ONLY are looooooooooooooooong.
Don't you have anything better to do? Isn't there a big test you should be
getting ready for?
Do what you want with this post, your attitude, frankly DISGUSTS ME.
I have been on this site for over a year now and seeing you mislead and provoke
confrontations is just plain sad.
Study up and GROW UP!
I'm out!
P.S. please, no warnings or threats, my time here is done.
P.S.S. Dont worry guys, Ill come back and post my experience in detail
once a take the test, with this or with other alias.
|
| youngone
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 35
|
HY CELL AND MOLECULAR BIOLOGY IS GREAT AS ARE THE KAPLAN LECTURES
BY DR. DAVID SEASTONE!
|
| new_n_lost
Politically InCorrect
Topics: 652
Posts: 6,096
|
youngone wrote:
522 topics, 4,488 posts and NNL failed by 1 point.
You don't need to be a neurosurgeon to figures this one out.
Say what you want, but blaming your troubles on "outdated" resources is really not the way to go. I dont think you are in the position to give anybody advice as if it was the law of USMLE.
Some of the posts on this thread ONLY are looooooooooooooooong.
Don't you have anything better to do? Isn't there a big test you should be getting ready for?
Do what you want with this post, your attitude, frankly DISGUSTS ME.
I have been on this site for over a year now and seeing you mislead and provoke confrontations is just plain sad.
Study up and GROW UP!
I'm out!
P.S. please, no warnings or threats, my time here is done.
P.S.S. Dont worry guys, Ill come back and post my experience in detail once a take the test, with this or with other alias.
Thank u for ur comments Youngone.
I have never blamed my troubles on anyone or anything. It was my doing but whtever i have said isnt the law or anything. And if u have taken anything as such then PLZ DONT. I havent provoken anyone or started a fight but if u perceive it as such then i cant say much. I have always said wht i have felt, u can disagree with it.
I seriously dont care if u r disgusted by my opinion or feel something else.
As far as my result goes yes that is a fact that i have to live with and i m proud with wht i have done or achieved in my life and quite frankly I dont have to tell each and everyone abt wht i have had prepared. My preparation was on this forum and for all to see. My result was for all to see and I have bravely posted my result, i cud have swung it anyway i wanted it but i didnt.
I told the truth and said wht i felt. Disagree, feel disgusted or feel annoyed by it ur issue not mine.
___________________
FORUM RULES-- Those who believe in telekinesis, raise my hand. I get enough exercise just by pushing my luck --P4U World.." The pure and simple truth is rarely pure and never simple."
|
| P4a99
Forum Fanatic
Topics: 37
Posts: 2,339
|
youngone wrote:
522 topics, 4,488 posts and NNL failed by 1 point.
You don't need to be a neurosurgeon to figures this one out.
Say what you want, but blaming your troubles on "outdated" resources
is really not the way to go. I dont think you are in the position to give anybody
advice as if it was the law of USMLE.
Some of the posts on this thread ONLY are looooooooooooooooong.
Don't you have anything better to do? Isn't there a big test you should be
getting ready for?
Do what you want with this post, your attitude, frankly DISGUSTS ME.
I have been on this site for over a year now and seeing you mislead and provoke
confrontations is just plain sad.
Study up and GROW UP!
I'm out!
P.S. please, no warnings or threats, my time here is done.
P.S.S. Dont worry guys, Ill come back and post my experience in detail
once a take the test, with this or with other alias.
Dude this is completely unacceptable. Who said you where qualified to judge others? If you are really concerned about NNL's performance on the exam vs. # of posts, please go through his posts and count how many hundreds of them are on explaining, answering and clarifying Qs and details. And while you're at it please count how many hundred posts he has on helping others with understanding some unclear facts.
With about 30 posts i assume you dont really know NNL well.
- He did NOT blame the review books ... he is just making it clear that there are some gaps in them ... I think this is obvious to most of us ... but the problem that i have is are these gaps intended?
- Even if your a neurosurgeun you cant conclude that a multithousand member is more likely to fail than others, for your information there are other multithousand post members whom got 99s.
- Most of the regular members around here know NNL very well. Personaly I rather take advice and ask help from someone that i knew for some time, confidant of his intelligence, sure of his honesty, and has been preparing for some time.
- "Dont you have anything else to do" .... man, this is sickening rude. Dude, if it wasnt for these couple of moderators, this forum would not even be worth looking at.
- "Do what you want with this post, your attitude, frankly DISGUSTS ME", Oh, i see you are so honest and open! OK Ill be to, : your post disgusts me big time!
- "I have been on this site for over a year now and seeing you mislead and provoke
confrontations is just plain sad", Well if you were really a superhero or at lease really concerned about anyone misleading others why did you wait so long to interfere and rescue your poor fellows from these evil members?!
- "Dont worry guys, Ill come back and post my experience in detail once a take the test", who said anyone was so worried you wont???!
- "Study up and GROW UP", this is some good advice for all of us on this thread.
This thread was so informative in the beginning but too bad it looks like its better to be deleted now.
___________________
2008 Step 1 Study Plan Discussion ..... I am a moderator not a source for download links. Please do not ask me for any.
|
| paheli
It'sAllAboutGoodKarma
Topics: 177
Posts: 2,472
|
praying4a99 wrote:
it looks like its better to be deleted now.
or at the very least, unpinned, so it can sink for good, and not be seen right there at the top, for posterity!
___________________
Prepare as if you're the worst, Perform as if you're the best! As you dream, so you manifest. So, DREAM BIG!! When you face hardship, remember, God never gives you more than you can handle. Keep your face to the sunshine and you cannot see the shadows.
|
| Doc750
transfer:step 3 prison
Topics: 52
Posts: 636
|
hey youngone, that was just a dickhead move
you owe the guy an apology
___________________
Experience is a hard teacher because she gives the test first, and the lesson afterwards.
|
| GoodGirl
_________
Topics: 96
Posts: 1,274
|
What is the purpose of this thread, can anyone kindly remind to me? 
___________________
Prioritize & simplify.
|
| youngone
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 35
| | 10/26/07 - 10:05 AM
0 of 2 forum leaders found this post helpful
| #18 |
Failed by 1 point.
Over 3,000 posts.
I stand by my statements.
NNL IS FULL OF IT.
|
| bioguy
Forum Guru
Topics: 57
Posts: 903
|
guys, pls get back to your work. forget all this. it will lead to nowhere! people have different thoughts, different opinions, and they disagree on each other. but this doesn't have to end up in throwing crap at each other. forget all this.
|
| Jackofknives
Ipwnpoker.com
Topics: 91
Posts: 714
|
OMG flame war! Eat my fire blast, fireball, flamestrike! Scorch, scorch, scorch, pyroblast! Now, charging blastwave and flamestrike ... boom! dragon's breath! ok, now I am out of mana... getting back to work now ggg
___________________
There are many things in this world that can’t be changed no matter how hard you try. That’s why you must not hesitate when the time comes where you have to give it all you’ve got.
|
| paheli
It'sAllAboutGoodKarma
Topics: 177
Posts: 2,472
|
Jackofknives wrote:OMG flame war! Eat my fire blast, fireball, flamestrike! Scorch, scorch, scorch, pyroblast! Now, charging blastwave and flamestrike ... boom! dragon's breath! ok, now I am out of mana... getting back to work now ggg
lol!!! jack, you forgot to provide us with the audio sfx.
___________________
Prepare as if you're the worst, Perform as if you're the best! As you dream, so you manifest. So, DREAM BIG!! When you face hardship, remember, God never gives you more than you can handle. Keep your face to the sunshine and you cannot see the shadows.
|
| ROCK&ROLL
Forum Newbie
Topics: 1
Posts: 6
|
WOW!
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
| | 10/26/07 - 03:46 PM
2 of 2 forum leaders found this post helpful
| #23 |
Youngones post seems pretty out of line to me. I wasnt aware NNL had even taken the exam, but for Youngones to use the formers result as a crutch for insensitive insults is pretty sad.
Lets strat afresh, without any underhanded jibes. In a bid for clarity, I'll summarize.
These are my contentions:
1) The USMLE is perpetually being updated with new questions.
2) Most of these questions will concern the same basic knowledge our review books already contain.
3) Some will reflect the newest advances in medical fields, but only that are deemed to be "student" or "pre-residency" level. What I mean by this is that highly advanced, highly minute advanced in sub specialties wont be tested.
4) The USMLE clearly outlines the objectives of the test. However, these objectives only broadly define tested material, which means that specific advancements wont be alluded to.
5a) The statement at USMLE.org about broad based learning being the best method for the exam stresses that minute details will not be tested to a significant degree, and that strong conceptual fundamentals are the key.
5b) The balance between various topics might also shift, but always gradually. Never so suddenly so as to kill off the accuracy of the exam.
6) Both textbooks and review books are updated regularly. For all we think we know about the exam, via speaking with seniors and fellow exam takers, test specialists like Kaplan know more. The preface to goljan's pathology, for example, clarifies that. These people have spoken to a ton more students than all of us combined. Unless, of course, if we have a lurker with a fetish for USMLE students.
7) While textbooks and review books are both updated with fundamental information considered necessary to be known by students, textbooks also contain a lot of detail that is not required for the exam. This means two things: 1) Textbooks serve the purpose of being a reference only and 2) Any review books you study should be as recent as possible.
8) A lot of people under or overestimate the number of questions they had on a particular subject. We all know we always remember the hard, bad questions more after an exam. The accounts of such people certainly should be considered, but it forms only one, and not the sole, source of information.
9) A lot of people arent a good judge of how adequately prepared they are, and fail to identify their weaker areas. Perhaps I will be one of them too.
10) A certain amount of variability certainly exists in the exam, as pointed out at their site, and as test takers will tell us. While this variability is enough to cause a reasonable fluctuation in scores, it isnt so extreme as to cause well prepared students to fail.
11) Kaplan is still the best core material for the exam, combined with either BRS or Goljan for Pathology. Qbank, USMLEworld, and FA will reinforce and supplement all areas. I believe this preparation in itself should be adequate. However, if one wishes to, he/she can switch to thicker review texts for certain subjects.
I base my information on:
1) Information on usmle.org
2) Information in FA
3) Information I gained by speaking to American doctors during my electives
4) Information I gained by speaking with local people in my city and from my college who have taken the exam
In the interest of drawing accurate conclusions, I realize that 1) and 2) are more objective and more reflective of reality. 1) comes from usmle.org, and they certainly wont mislead us. 2) I am willing to trust as well, since they're the top ranked usmle source. 3) I trust reasonably as well. 4) I consider, but always with a grain of salt.
It is also understood that no review book contains ALL the information we need. They're composed to strike an excellent balance between brevity and detail. If someone could do full textbooks for the exam, and do them inside out, he would certainly be at an advantage. However this would take an inordinate investment of time.
One final point. AMGs almost always match. I think the figure is 93 point something %. My guess is the AMGs that dont match really, really suck. In other words, AMGs are going to steal a set amount of positions away. The residency slots that remain are competed for by IMGs. In essence, we all compete against each other, not against AMGs. You have to do substantially better than an AMG to have an equally appealing application.
Since all IMGs have the same "weak" areas, ie molecular biology and possibly behavioral sciences, the playing field remains level. Furthermore, the breakdown of scores has been analyzed for both AMGs and IMGs and American programs are well aware of where IMGs falter. The trend has been IMGs doing better in pathology, AMGs better in behavioral sciences. Finally, the USMLE scores are stastically generated, and variation in the difficulty of the exam is compensated for.
I dont care to "prove" anything here. But I find it distasteful when people harm themselves by hinging on something too hard. I acknowledge the assessment by certain test takers that molecular biology screwed them over. However, to me, this offers the following possible explanations:
1) They really were asked so much molecular biology so as to hit their score very hard
2) Their assessment of how many questions they had was innaccurate. While the exam might have had the upper limit of the "norm", the fact that the test taker was unable to answer a lot of them has caused him to inflate their number
3) A mix of points 1 and 2
Now, my analysis is that 1) is a subjective assessment of the exam. Im sure as hell I wont remember exactly how many questions I got from any subject when I walk out of a stressful 8 hour exam. We also have the problem of recall bias. Point 2), on the other hand, has an objective and reliable basis. While they both contribute to my analysis, they dont do so equally.
NNL, I've read through all your posts. Your main contention is that you know several people who have taken the exam recently and complained of an undue amount of molecular biology. I havent denied this at any point. However, I know many who have only read kaplan + goljan and scored ridiculously well, all after the May update. In this conflict of evidence, should we blame a computer generated exam for being inaccurate, or conclude that it was faulty preparation, nerves, and possibly the presence of the exams inherent, but limited, variety that caused the divide?
|
| Data
Forum Newbie
Topics: 0
Posts: 16
|
All right that wasnt a summary.
|
| unique1
InGodITrust
Topics: 19
Posts: 1,405
|
youngone wrote:
Failed by 1 point.
Over 3,000 posts.
I stand by my statements.
NNL IS FULL OF IT.
Youngone, you do not have any right to insult any one.
This is very rude and arrogant   .
___________________
I can't change the direction of the wind, but I can adjust my sails to always reach my destination.
|
|
| |
| | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | | |
