After Exams (Part 1)

I have a peculiar habit of writing blog when I am not supposed to, e.g. during study week; and not writing blog when I am supposed to, e.g. after final exams. But I guess it exemplifies a common reason of writing blogs - wasting time when there are no better ways to waste it.

Before other ramblings, I would first like to summarize my exams, like what I did last time. The exam has been such a horrid dream that no one dared to mention it as soon as it's over. But since I had had one week of recuperation, maybe it's time for me to talk about one of the worst exams I ever had.

Note: This is merely a record for the uninspiring albeit memory-stimulating exams I had. If you have the least of interest in my studies, perhaps you shall stop at this point for the time being, and consider some other blogs, news or online articles. :) My blogroll and linkroll on the left might interest you.


6 November 2006 - CSGD Paper B
It's the first paper of the semester 4 exam, and in my opinion the relatively most benign paper among the four papers. It consisted of 100 multiple choice questions regarding our learning objectives in this semester, which are mainly medical knowledge of the nervous system, development, reproductive system and endocrinology. Although most of the questions in this paper were relatively hard, I think that I did a rather okay job, or at least better than the last semester. I actually came out of the exam hall reckoning that I could do pretty well in the exams overall. But I was to be disillusioned within the next few days - read on.

8 November 2006 - HP4
Health Practice is a subject in which we are taught the psychological, social and other not-so-scientific-related aspects of medicine. Understandably, such a subject is an essential component of any well-rounded medical education, but in some ways my university has failed to find the right way to do it. The HP paper illustrates the point I am mentioning here - either the lecturers have failed to impart the knowledge properly, or they simply intend everyone to screw up in the exam.

So, this paper turned out to be the most horrible, mean, inhumane paper I have ever had in my whole life. Consisting of 58 multiple choice questions and 10 short-answer questions, the 2-hour paper was such a killer that I think I am on the verge of failing. Sigh, nobody could comprehend the reasons our lecturers set all those insane questions. For example, we were supposed to know what Mandler's theory is, when that theory is just a random psychological theory which deserved a cursory mention in one of the fourteen lectures we had. And by cursory I mean at most 20 seconds' worth of description in a very noisy lecture hall, and sometimes even without a lecture note. As for some of the questions, nobody even had the memory of being taught about them at all!

It's simply nonsense to have us memorising things like that, when everything will be forgotten one week after the exam. Yes I have already forgotten most of the HP contents, after only 2 weeks. Instead of equipping us with some of the integral ideas of the course, the exam format only encouraged senseless rote memorisation, which means nothing in the long run.

I can't understand what's in their mind.

10 November 2006 - CSGD Paper A
To be frank it's not exactly very hard - the questions were reasonable, and there were not many oh-God-what-is-this questions. However, I felt that I did quite badly because I didn't do enough pre-exam cramming for some of the key topics, and for that I must have lost a substantial portion of marks. The traumatizing experience in HP was also one of the factors that affected my morale and hence my preparation.

As soon as the paper was over, I knew that I have lost the hope of securing a good result. Maybe that's a warning bell to me that medicine is not meant to be learnt by last-minute cramming alone.


To be continued...