<p>Yes, exactly here too.</p>
<p>I teach in a hospital based allied health program.
We have encountered students able to regurgitate mounds of data but they would not be successful.
We need students able to apply their knowledge, recognize discrepancies,
and resolve complicated problems to arrive at valid, supportable outcomes.</p>
<p>Do average high school students become doctors and vets?</p>
<p>It depends on why they were average in high school.</p>
<p>Average intelligence?
Above average intelligence but slid through high school with minimum effort?
Above average intelligence but deeply involved in one specific extracurricular activity?
Above average intelligence but unfocused?
Above average intelligence but dealing with difficult home life, illness or poverty?
Above average intelligence but involved in drugs, alcohol, and making poor choices?
.
.
.</p>
<p>So much depends on WHY the student was “average” in high school.</p>
<p>In my experience, a person with truly average intelligence, however it is defined, is not going to make it through the premed track and through med school. On the other hand, a person with above average intelligence, who has the kind of intelligence that lends itself to quick, long term memorization of many facts, and who has a great work ethic can certainly make it. Brilliance is not required. The right kinds of intelligence, and the ability to work very hard for a long term goal is required. (I consider myself to be smart, but I do not have the ability to memorize that would have made a quest for med or vet school anything but excruciating.)</p>
<p>I would also add that the kinds of intelligence, personality traits, and skills that lend themselves to success in the quest to get accepted to (and to make it through the first couple of years of) medical or vet school are not necessarily the traits and skills that we value in our physicians and vets.</p>
<p>There’s an increasing emphasis in med schools on getting those skills we value. Now the sort of intelligence needed to get through premed has to be shifted.</p>
<p>This “average” talk has a parallel with the standardized test argument (that it best measures kids best at testing.) Being strong in premed doesn’t tell that a kid can wrap the class lessons with the practical reality.</p>
<p>
You mean CourseRank and GradeInflation? CourseRank is self reported (sometimes averaged over 1000+ self reports in intro science classes). Grade Inflation is usually based on stats published by the college.</p>
<p>
I didn’t say ALL class were memorization of arbitrary facts. In fact I didn’t even say the majority of classes fit this description. Instead I only said that they exist among the pre-med classes. It was primarily a reference to the bio classes. Intro bio classes are frequently criticized for their focus on rote memorization, rather than more complex analysis, reasoning, problem solving, etc. For example, the study at [Just</a> the Facts? Introductory Undergraduate Biology Courses Focus on Low-Level Cognitive Skills](<a href=“http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC2995761/]Just”>Just the Facts? Introductory Undergraduate Biology Courses Focus on Low-Level Cognitive Skills - PMC) states “Undergraduate biology courses are widely criticized for overemphasizing details and rote memorization of facts” and concludes intro bio classes “overwhelmingly targeted lower cognitive levels.”</p>
<p>I did not think chem was primarily based on rote memorization, which is one of the reasons I enjoyed chem classes over intro biology.</p>
<p>Not our experience that bio was as simple as memorization. First, it can be based on learning. Second, it depends on whether the school is trying to weed, whether tests reflect material covered and/or available in texts and readings. Memorization is an aspect of learning bio, yes, but not the sole point. In fact, that’s counter-intellectual, no?</p>
<p>Are you in med school?</p>
<p>Introductory biology courses are widely criticized for overemphasizing details and rote memorization of facts. Data to support such claims, however, are surprisingly scarce.</p>
<p>Your link doesn’t prove. It examines.</p>
<p>Hmmm. I’m the one who brought up memorization in the first place and I can see it’s taken on a life of its own. Funny how things on CC do that. Memorization is a very useful skill in the beginning of med school, as I said. But it will only get you so far. In the clinical years remembering the Kreb cycle steps will not help you on the wards, but remembering principles of energy metabolism and how it might relate to metabolic disease does. In private practice, knowing which antibiotics act at which steps in bacterial cell metabolism helps you select the right drug. It all builds on each other as students become more proficient, and that’s appropriate. It’s easier in the beginning. At least I thought so. Some of that will depend on how each student-then-physician’s mind works.</p>
<p>^ and, imo, for many it doesn’t gel until into 4th year. Students can come in not even knowing the parts of a stethoscope and, when questioned in a pre-clinical setting, forgetting how the thigh bone connects to the hip bone. They can misread how former learning applies to the intuitive tasks. The best kids have some experience in a med setting, where they see, first hand, how the intellectual, fact-finding and intuitive blend. If you can’t get the symptoms, you can’t diagnose. I have to say, many don’t memorize the parts of a physical. All pretty interesting. It is a huge growth.</p>
<p>I’d consider a peer reviewed, published reference including an average of 9713 assessment items provided by 50 faculty over a large number of classes in many colleges to be a more reliable source than your or my personal experiences in one school. It is far from the only study that reaches this conclusion. One can find many more by searching the references and cited by.
Upon entering college, I had originally been interested in engineering. My adviser, recommended that engineering students take the same intro chem classes as the pre-med students during freshman year, so chem was my first experience with the pre-med track. I found chem to be very interesting & enjoyable and received high grades with less effort than other classes on my schedule. So I continued with the pre-med track along with the engineering track because of this positive experience. In my second year, I took the intro bio classes. I didn’t have as positive an experience in biology, like I did with chemistry. I enjoyed some of the material, particularly Sapolsky’s lectures and books. His books are the type that many without a bio background read for fun (check out reviews on Amazon). I am quite grateful to have had the opportunity to hear and meet him in person. However, I did not enjoy the classes that emphasized rote memorization of things that did not interest me, such as the biology of plants. At the same time, I took my first intro to EE class and loved it. This led to entering a double coterminal masters program focused on engineering entrepreneurship at Stanford (combining grad degrees in engineering tech with engineering business management), rather than applying to med school.</p>
<p>Data, you like data, I like data. But it’s important to carefully put findings in context and question whether they represent universals or just inquiries. And whether they apply to the questions at hand. Same for our experiences. That’s all.</p>
<p>Do I believe average hs kids can do well in med school- well, not average as in limited native capacities for high level challenges. If all you go on is the apparent record, by 17-18, one could miss many kids with great potential. Likewise, if you assume a strong high school record is all it takes to predict…</p>
<p>I would never memorize the parts of a physical, lol. That’s what I mean. By then, in the clinical years, the other parts of your intelligence/synthesizing brain flex its muscles. That’s when the fun begins.</p>
<p>
My point was the linked study was not just an inquiry. It was a legitimate study that tried to determine whether the referenced common criticisms about the intro biology classes emphasizing rote memorization were accurate or not by analyzing nearly 10,000 assessment items provided by 50 faculty who teach a large number of classes at a large number of schools. They concluded that most of the assessment items corresponded to the lowest possible level of Bloom’s cognitive scale – essentially parroting back information without required understanding of the information. Only 7% of the assessment items corresponded to the upper 2/3 of the cognitive levels – application, analysis, synthesis, and evaluation. </p>
<p>I agree that med school is a different story and requires different skills to succeed than undergrad intro biology classes.</p>
<p>By the way, my username is a reference to a nickname I received based on the character from Star Trek, rather than a love for data.</p>
<p>Data…the character from Star Trek thrived on data…just saying.</p>
<p>Carry on!</p>
<p>Jaylynn: “Hmmm. I’m the one who brought up memorization in the first place. . .”</p>
<p>Ability to memorize vast quantities of information was mentioned at least as early as #55. :)</p>
<p>Ability to memorize is just the beginning. Of course students will have to apply what they learned. But they have to know the information first, before they even have an opportunity to apply it.</p>
<p>Oh, good. I was starting to think I’d gotten the thread off track…! I still believe the ability to memorize is key to some of the first couple of years of med school, that it’s not necessarily a reflection of superior intelligence, and that it won’t get you through the most important parts of med school, residency or one’s career. Carry on!</p>
<p>Knowing some doctors I’d say many are quite average in intelligence, and some make me wonder how on earth they got through. Being determined and being able to memorize voluminous amounts of information certainly are the two extremely important factors.</p>
<p>Now that the prestige of medicine is going down, not to mention the financial incentive, I suspect you’ll see way more of the smart ones choosing computers over medicine.</p>
<p>I don’t believe there are any physicians practicing in the United States who are of <em>average</em> intelligence.</p>
<p>I think perhaps some people expect physicians should be brilliant. They are not necessarily brilliant, but I personally have never met any who are of “average” intelligence. They may not have great people skills, they may not run their practices in the best way, they may make mistakes, they may be terrible at explaining things, terrible at connecting warmly with patients, terrible at many things that are not related to intelligence. </p>
<p>(Speaking as a person with many physicians in the family, and whose husband teaches at a major medical center, I have known my fair share of physicians, in all their imperfections. None are of “average” intelligence.)</p>
<p>The work load in either med school or residency eliminates even the very bright but you better be at the top of your high school and college classes to get a shot at med school. Even if they can pass med school, the hours and stress in residency weeds out even smart aspires. I admire anyone who can reach MD. People skills or not, doctors are amazing human beings.</p>
<p>
I agree with the general sentiment of a MD requiring a lot of effort, time, and in most cases quality grades, but I do not agree with the details. One does not need to be at the top of one’s high school class to get a shot a med school. Med schools look at college grades, not high school grades; and med schools do not limit admissions to persons who attended highly selective colleges for undergrad. While most persons attending med schools did achieve quality grades in undergrad, some did not, in a similar way to how some students attend selective colleges without stellar HS grades. I know persons who were admitted to med school that were far below the top of their class… I know ones who were admitted with a GPA below the middle of my college class. The overall average undergrad GPA for the freshman class at med schools ranges from ~3.3 to ~3.9, depending on the specific medical school. However, the AAMC mentions successful admissions at significantly lower rates than the average, down to the minimum listed range of 1.47 to 1.99 GPA. They report some URMs have a >50% acceptance rate with a 2.4 GPA and ~average MCAT. Med schools do not have a large portion of students failing out. The AAMC mentions a 96% long-term graduation rate with less than 2% withdrawing for academic reasons. I expect this high graduation rate relates to the selection process and choosing capable students who are expected to succeed.</p>
<p>
</p>
<p>That seems to be an unusually large amount of credit for introductory biology with lab. Were both the course and lab significantly more in-depth than the introductory biology with lab courses at other schools which typically give 4 or 5 units total (whether the lab is part of the course, or the course is split into lecture/discussion and lab courses) for the quarter or semester.</p>