Systems Based Learning

Could anyone please tell me which medical schools use systems based learning instead of like full anatomy, physiology etc modules? And would you say systems based learning is a better system? Does it make much of a difference which way it's taught? I'm trying to work out the order of the med schools for my CAO, and according to a few colleges I've been to open days of SBL is the bee's knees...

milly4ever

qub medicine is systems based.

eagle_&_bear

UL is problem-based learning.

As far as I'm aware, UCD/TCD and RCSI are still systems based

flerb22

preclinical teaching shouldnt be your number 1 priority in choosing between medical schools in my opinion

Carsinian Thau

I'm fully open to correction on this but as far as I'm aware, NUIG, UCC, UCD, TCD, RCSI use systems based learning.

I can't comment on UL because I genuinely don't know but as far as the OP is concerned, every medical school that they can apply for uses SBL at the moment (UL being excluded because it is solely for GEM right now).

Carsinian Thau

Carsinian Thau wrote: »

I'm fully open to correction on this but as far as I'm aware, NUIG, UCC, UCD, TCD, RCSI use systems based learning.

I can't comment on UL because I genuinely don't know but as far as the OP is concerned, every medical school that they can apply for uses SBL at the moment (UL being excluded because it is solely for GEM right now).

Thank you! RCSI and UCD make it sound like they were the only ones who used it, glad to get some clarification.

A Neurotic

I'm in first year in Trinity and as far as I can ascertain we're not doing Systems Based Learning... it's not a term I've come across before. If someone could clarify the term a little further I'd be more sure?

We also do some PBL.

raver22

Systems based learning is where the subjects of anatomy, physiology biochem are integrated in the same module based around a particular system, eg cardiovascular

UCC definitely teaches this way

Jessibelle

A Neurotic wrote: »

I'm in first year in Trinity and as far as I can ascertain we're not doing Systems Based Learning... it's not a term I've come across before. If someone could clarify the term a little further I'd be more sure?

It's learning everything about a particular system top to toe all at once, so, for example, the cardio-vascular system, all lectures/anatomy practicals centred round that till you move onto the next one...

Jessibelle

raver22 wrote: »

Systems based learning is where the subjects of anatomy, physiology biochem are integrated in the same module based around a particular system, eg cardiovascular

Gosh darn it Raver22, great minds and all that

A Neurotic

Yeah, I'd figured as much, and no, that's not how we learn in Trinity.

It sounds more interesting though

mardybumbum

Its definitely not how its done in Trinity.
The PBL programme is intended to promote active learning, which in theory sounds great.
However, for many students, myself included, PBL was a quick gander of wikipedia the night before.
Thank christ we dont have it in second year.
Although I hear the students that entered this year have it up until 5th year.
Ha.

Carsinian Thau

mardybumbum wrote: »

Its definitely not how its done in Trinity.
The PBL programme is intended to promote active learning, which in theory sounds great.
However, for many students, myself included, PBL was a quick gander of wikipedia the night before.
Thank christ we dont have it in second year.
Although I hear the students that entered this year have it up until 5th year.
Ha.

Then what do you use instead of SBL?

NUIG has PBL as well. I personally think it's a huge waste of time and if I ever rise to a position whereby I could affect the teaching methods of a medical school, it'll be the first thing to go.

But I should point out that the majority of NUIG's preclinical teaching utilises a systems based approach.

mardybumbum

Carsinian Thau wrote: »

Then what do you use instead of SBL?

NUIG has PBL as well. I personally think it's a huge waste of time and if I ever rise to a position whereby I could affect the teaching methods of a medical school, it'll be the first thing to go.

But I should point out that the majority of NUIG's preclinical teaching utilises a systems based approach.

Im not sure what it would be called. The traditional system perhaps.
For example, in a systemic approach to anatomy, you would learn the anatomy of a whole system at once.
If we take the digestive system for example, Im guessing you would start off with the oral cavity, then the pharynx, oesophagus, stomach, intestines, rectum, anus.
We took a more regional approach.
We would review the anatomy of the oesophagus when we were studying the thorax.
Then we would go over the stomach, intestines and associated glands when we were studying the abdomen.
Then study the end of the digestive tract when we moved onto the perineum.
We didnt go over the oral cavity and pharynx until we started head and neck anatomy this year.

There did seem to an attempt to sync our physiology lectures with our anatomy course.
If I remember clearly we had our CVS and respiratory physiology lectures while we were studying the anatomy of the thorax ( heart + lungs ).
Gastrointestinal physiology while studying the anatomy of the GIT, e.t.c

I hope I have explained that ok.

Carsinian Thau

mardybumbum wrote: »

Im not sure what it would be called. The traditional system perhaps.
For example, in a systemic approach to anatomy, you would learn the anatomy of a whole system at once.
If we take the digestive system for example, Im guessing you would start off with the oral cavity, then the pharynx, oesophagus, stomach, intestines, rectum, anus.
We took a more regional approach.
We would review the anatomy of the oesophagus when we were studying the thorax.
Then we would go over the stomach, intestines and associated glands when we were studying the abdomen.
Then study the end of the digestive tract when we moved onto the perineum.
We didnt go over the oral cavity and pharynx until we started head and neck anatomy this year.

There did seem to an attempt to sync our physiology lectures with our anatomy course.
If I remember clearly we had our CVS and respiratory physiology lectures while we were studying the anatomy of the thorax ( heart + lungs ).
Gastrointestinal physiology while studying the anatomy of the GIT, e.t.c

I hope I have explained that ok.

Yes, I think I get it. It honestly doesn't so different from SBL. But we had complete synchronisation from the physiology department when we did the anatomy of a system.

SBL is good but there's no difference at all between our respective teachings when we have the preclinical stuff done.

A Neurotic

mardybumbum wrote: »

Its definitely not how its done in Trinity.
The PBL programme is intended to promote active learning, which in theory sounds great.
However, for many students, myself included, PBL was a quick gander of wikipedia the night before.
Thank christ we dont have it in second year.
Although I hear the students that entered this year have it up until 5th year.
Ha.

...

HQvhs

mardybumbum wrote: »

Im not sure what it would be called. The traditional system perhaps.
For example, in a systemic approach to anatomy, you would learn the anatomy of a whole system at once.
If we take the digestive system for example, Im guessing you would start off with the oral cavity, then the pharynx, oesophagus, stomach, intestines, rectum, anus.
We took a more regional approach.
We would review the anatomy of the oesophagus when we were studying the thorax.
Then we would go over the stomach, intestines and associated glands when we were studying the abdomen.
Then study the end of the digestive tract when we moved onto the perineum.
We didnt go over the oral cavity and pharynx until we started head and neck anatomy this year.

There did seem to an attempt to sync our physiology lectures with our anatomy course.
If I remember clearly we had our CVS and respiratory physiology lectures while we were studying the anatomy of the thorax ( heart + lungs ).
Gastrointestinal physiology while studying the anatomy of the GIT, e.t.c

I hope I have explained that ok.

Well just on the topic of the anatomy..
In RCSI anyway, we do have SBL. But this means that we don't have a "Physiology" module, or a "Physiology" exam. Instead, the modules would be things like "Alimentary System" and "Haemopoietic and Immune Systems" etc. where you would study all the relevant physiology, biochem, pharmacology etc. together and, in theory, have a better idea of what actually happens in the body.
Anatomy is a little different. While it is studied within these modules, we don't do it by system, per se, but in the traditional regions. I suppose this is because anatomy is as much about orientating yourself with the body so you need to know where things are located in relation to other things. So, for example, in the Alimentary System module we covered the abdomen and perineum, along with a small bit of detail on the pharnyx, upper oesophagus etc. And in Neuromuscular you cover limbs, vertebrae, the back etc.
In addition, there is also a module that covers all the introductory stuff for subjects such as biochemistry that wouldn't fit elsewhere.

Like any method, this has it's flaws to be sure. And I havent' experienced the more traditional approach of TCD, nor do we have PBL. However, I think on balance SBL is a worthwhile method of medical school teaching because it keeps everything very relevant and much more interesting. With biochem, for example, I find it easier to appreciate metabolism and it's role in the body by doing it along with GIT physiology and anatomy, along with pharmacology. I imagine it would be very easy to get (even more!) lost in biochemistry if you were doing it as a stand alone subject, because it would be harder to make it relevant. However, that's just my opinion, and obviously there are a lot of schools of thought on this!

Carsinian Thau

HQvhs wrote: »

Like any method, this has it's flaws to be sure. And I havent' experienced the more traditional approach of TCD, nor do we have PBL. However, I think on balance SBL is a worthwhile method of medical school teaching because it keeps everything very relevant and much more interesting. With biochem, for example, I find it easier to appreciate metabolism and it's role in the body by doing it along with GIT physiology and anatomy, along with pharmacology. I imagine it would be very easy to get (even more!) lost in biochemistry if you were doing it as a stand alone subject, because it would be harder to make it relevant. However, that's just my opinion, and obviously there are a lot of schools of thought on this!

Well said.

And you're very lucky not to have PBL.