Some personal remarks on the ideal cursus studiorum for researchers in medical sciences

SOME PERSONAL REMARKS ON THE IDEAL CURSUS STUDIORUM FOR RESEARCHERS IN MEDICAL SCIENCES

I'm writing this page because I disagree many topics of teaching methods nowadays. I will try to be brief !

Later discoveries have caused further paradigm shifts, with consequences for teachers and textbook writers, not to mention students. One could mention the extensive advances in X-ray cristallography and computing that have given us the 3D structures of thousands of proteins, the technical advances that allowed genes to be cloned and DNA to be sequenced (often more easily than proteins) and the PCR , which changed the way that much of molecular biology was done. Where there were hormones, we now have a plethora of growth factor, receptors and a vast network of signalling pathways. When most of the teachers of today were learning their trade, none of these factors was a force in what we now call biochemistry and molecular biology, or a part of the education process. Education focused on knowledge, and an understanding of how knowledge had been obtained. And, largely, we are still in this situation today. Exams continue to test factual knowledge, and this has, in many ways, contributed to the problems that now we face. Current examination systems are geared towards testing the ability to emit learnt quanta accurately because it is efficient and easy to measure. The problem, as any atom that has emitted a quantum particle knows, is that once the particular particle is emitted it is gone forever until another quantum of the same kind collides with the atom ! There is now too much information around for anyone to know and memorize : do students really need to know the structure of prostaglandin E2, the formal kinetic mechanism of glutamate dehydrogenase, the list of skeleton muscles, the list of body blood vessels, so long as they know how to access this information if they need ?
Another important point is the research paradigm of teaching. It can be best approached with a quote from Paul Saltman : "One can be no better a teacher than one is a learner at any point in one's life". Teachers must, therefore, be active researchers. Being able to teach a topic is in a way the ultimate demonstration of understanding the topic. Preparing to teach a topic is an excellent way to thoroughly learning it.
Departments took students' complaints about mathematics, physics and chemistry to heart and reduced the proportion of such matters. How can someone with only a minimal grasp of such matters hope to explain biological phenomena at the molecular level ?!? In the courses of the future, students need to have the fundamentals constantly reinforced. But it is also very important to have learnt such a fundamentals in a reasoned order : so here is my ideal cursus studiorum for one whose aim is to become a good physician, compared to that I have been "forced" to follow in Italy from 1986 (when I started primary school) till today !

Age	Study level	My "forced" cursus studiorum	My ideal cursus studiorum
6	Primary school	Italian language Base-level mathematics History Geography	National language Base-level mathematics
7
8
9
10
11	Secondary school	Italian literature Medium-level mathematics English language	English language History Medium-level mathematics
12
13
14	Scientific High School		High-level mathematics
15			High-level mathematics
16			Physics
17			Chemistry
18			Phylosophy of science
19	Undergraduate course		Biochemistry, Cell Biology, Evolution theories, Taxonomy of living organisms
20			Hystology, Comparative embriology, Embryology of Homo sapiens
21			Anatomy of Homo sapiens, Physiology of Homo sapiens
22			Microbiology, Cytopathology
23			Special Pathology
24			Laboratory Medicine, Semeiology

As you see there is no need to force babies starting school at the age of 5 or even earlier ! I consider it just a sadistic choice having the opposite effect of the one intended.
In an "ideal" world, medicine students who want to become researchers should have the following skills by the time they have finished their undergraduate course :

understandig of the fundamentals of chemistry and biology and the key principles of biochemistry and molecular biology
awareness of the major issues at the forefront of the discipline
ability to assess primary papers critically
ability to dissect a problem into its key features
ability to design experiments and understand the limitations of what the experimental approach can and cannot tell you
ability to interpret experimental data and identify consistent and inconsistent components
ability to design the follow-up experiments
ability to work safely and effectively in a laboratory
awareness of the available resources and how to use them, including the ability to collaborate with other researchers
ability to think in an integrated manner and lool at problems from different perspectives
good "quantitative" skills

Search
for