pancakes Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 I understand that learning styles are different for everyone, and clearly, both types of curriculums have proven to be successful, but for currently practicing PAs, do you guys ever wonder what it would've been like to go to a program that had a different approach in teaching methods than the program you attended? Have you guys faced any pros or cons in the workforce based on the way you were taught? Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
overthehorizen Posted January 25, 2017 Share Posted January 25, 2017 PBL has too many variables that are not under your control. If you get a group that isn't particular great, you won't have a great education. If your group facilitator doesn't know what he is doing, you won't have a great education. At least with classroom instruction, most PAs know the professors are generally average to poor. You just go to class only if mandatory. It is more efficient to learn medicine from online sources rather than from Professors or classmates themselves. This has only become a truism in the last five years. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
jwells78 Posted January 26, 2017 Share Posted January 26, 2017 When I went through back on '07, UW was trying out a PBL course that combined UW medical students with the PA students. I thought it was a great idea as a tool for learning, but wouldn't say it provided enough material to be a primary source of PA education. I liked the departure from typical lecture and death by powerpoint. It was a good way to develop critical thinking; added bonus of rubbing elbows with the MD students (and hopefully make a lasting impression). Bottom line- suffering through months of pathophys and lecture is a necessary evil. IMO. Link to comment Share on other sites More sharing options...
Recommended Posts
Archived
This topic is now archived and is closed to further replies.