How much did you study in undergrad?

<p>So my first round of exams haven't been going too well. Specifically with chemistry and calculus. </p>

<p>Most of the professors just said that I should study more to do well and i'm a little unsure as to how much studying most premeds did on average.</p>

<p>I am being told that I should be studying around 4-6 hours for every 1 hour class but with the 5 classes i'm taking that comes out to about 10 hours a day if I divide things up right. It seems doable but certainly a little excessive. Is that a normal amount?</p>

<p>I also need to find new ways to study/review and get help cause what i've done up till this point hasn't been completely succesfull and i'm a little lost on how to approach the next set of tests/assignments.</p>

<p>the trouble with trying to respond to your a question is that many premeds come from top high schools with strong AP scores but are nevertheless repeating the course. Thus, I have no doubt that you have kids in your class that earned an 5 on AP Chem but are retaking it for the “easy A.” Ditto Calculus. Obviously, their study needs are much less than someone who had a crappy college prep Chem course in HS.</p>

<p>These classes are conceptual, you got to understand very well. D is working for Gen. Chem Prof as Supplemental Instructor (paid tutor). She said that a lot of kids are trying to memorize more then needed because they do not fully understand concept. She did not have AP Chem. but was offerred a job because all of her Chem tests were over 100%. I would advise to seek help with specific questions. General suggestion about working hard is not enough. The hours suggested sound excessive. There are requirements of being involved, having ECs in addition to high GPA.</p>

<p>Just an example. At back to school night, my DD’s HS AP Chem teacher told the parents that his class requires about 10 hrs/week of homework (add to that study time). He admitted some kids would need to increase those numbers to do well. He strongly recommended study groups, esp to go over problems sets as kids tend to learn from one another. I can only assume college classes demand more time. </p>

<p>Hopefully you balanced your semester schedule out and didn’t load up on sciences like the semester my son took 4 sciences (orgo, 2 neuro and Physics) at once. He learned to throw in some humanities classes.</p>

<p>It depends on teacher. D’s HS and college Chem were one of her easiest classes. She credits her HS teacher for that. She has never spent as much time on that conceptual class as she needed for Orgo or Bio. These are trully time consuming with a lot of memorization.</p>

<p>Try the “excessive” route for the first semester, and then cut down. </p>

<p>I opted to not repeat classes. I’ve been studying math for about 4-5 hours a night. It landed me a 100 on my Honors Linear Algebra mid-term. Everything else, anywhere from 1-4. I try to think of being a full-time college student, as having a full-time job, with at least 40 hours altogether throughout my week being devoted to academics, and sometimes, generous overtime hours. There’re some classes you need to review, (at least, I do) every, single, day. Even on your days “off.”</p>

<p>It all depends. People vary. I don’t think I’ve ever studied more than 4-5 hrs/wk for a single class (on average). Other people would need three times that to get similar results, though. While it may sound like an easy question to answer, it’s really not because people vary so much. Some general ideas can be taken from cognitive psych:</p>

<ul>
<li>Know depth of material over breadth (the more background you have and the better you understand why X is true and Y isn’t, the better you’ll remember what you’ve studied)</li>
<li>Study evenly over long periods of time (1 hr/day for 2 wks far exceeds the effect of 20 hrs of studying in the 2-3 days before the test – note that the first option is actually less time overall!)</li>
<li>**DO NOT **study while caffeinated (or drunk or on any stimulant)</li>
<li>**DO NOT **go to class on caffeine, alcohol, or any other drug</li>
<li>If you are on drugs while studying (including caffeine or alcohol), you should take the test while on the same dosage levels of the drug cocktail which you were under the influence of while studying and attending class</li>
<li>Study in an environment as similar to the testing environment as possible</li>
<li>Study systematically</li>
<li>Understand, don’t memorize</li>
</ul>

<p>Apumic’s methods make sense if you’re ever naturally smart. But, since I’m stupid, the only way I can ever manage the 3.85 to get into med school with a chemical engineering degree, and then not get harassed for having affirmative action on my side, is to study, and study hard. I’m damn proud of that 100, especially since before I ever took calculus, I was a C+ math student. If you have gaps to overcome, time spent studying, and studying a lot, is important. It is equally as important to attempt to learn conceptually.</p>

<p>The suggestions I gave should help anyone, not just “naturally smart people.” “Naturaly smart people” can often get by on just a couple of hours of studying the night before a test as long as they went to class in the first place (which is part of what makes them “smart people”) because they tend to pick things up the first time they hear them, which makes review quite easy. In that sense, “naturally smart people” don’t really need to follow certain suggestions above (i.e., study an hour daily at least 2 wks before a test). The suggestions I bolded are esp. important to remember as many, many college students make those mistakes and can never quite figure out why, after all that studying, they still can’t ever seem to remember everything and/or apply what they’ve studied on an actual exam.</p>

<p>4-6 hours of studying per hour in class? I’ve always heard 3, and I think even that is ridiculous. Not only is it entirely dependent on the class and your abilities, 3 hours per credit hour is way too much studying for most classes. I don’t study nearly that much. It’s all about studying smart, not studying hard. I would echo most of what apumic has said.</p>

<p>OP, you should not be studying 10 hours a day. That would be ludicrous.</p>

<p>I am very skeptical about “naturally smart” label. I strongly believe in work ethic which not necessarily means that you need to spend 4 hours on a subject. Sometime, it might mean to make sure that your understand of concept is correct and if you are not so sure and seek help. Some subjects require just that (Gen. Chem, Physics, any math), with other, yes, there is no way around but memorize (Orgo, Bio). Some D’s Orgo exams required at least 30 hours to prep just for that one exam. She needed to catch up with other work later. She would go over exam material in her head even while walking from one class to another. This just at example of what it took her to get her A in Orgo, while others might have labeled her “naturally smart” for having straight As.</p>

<p>^^Don’t be too skeptical. Sure, everyone has a different learning style regardless of “smarts”. Bio is mostly memorization so for most “smart” kids, it’s just a PIA, but not difficult. Physics/Calc (and perhaps Geom), however, requires the ability to visualize the problem/issue, i.e., it requires spatial-temporal reasoning (something CB tests for on the SAT). Many “smart” kids can and will struggle in this area bcos their brain may not work that way or they haven’t sufficiently trained it to do so. Chem is between Bio and Physics – some conceptual, some memorization.</p>

<p>There is gifted, highly gifted, and freakin’ smart, i.e., twice-thrice gifted. In general, those kids in the first category are gonna have to study harder than those in the latter two. (Those in the latter two are also more likely to have gotten into combined programs! Congrats to you D, btw.)</p>

<p>As a general rule, successful premeds should be ones working about as hard as the other premeds (which is to say, pretty hard) but using natural intelligence to gain their edge. Outworking all the other premeds is not a sustainable path to success, since you’re going to get demolished by standardized testing and then medical school itself.</p>

<p>If you have to work twice as hard as everybody else to get 10% better grades, it means that this is the wrong career path. Trust me, everybody works hard in medical school. You won’t be capable of doubling the average effort.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Who said that (bolded)?! I said I generally spend, on average, about 4-5 hrs for an entire 4 or 5-unit class studying/wk. That breaks down to about 1 hr/unit/wk. For me, that consistently earns me a 95%+ in classes of all levels (but I always begin by overstudying and then let things relax once I have secured a few solid A+s on exams, quizzes, and projects since every class is different). Some people need 2-3 times that to achieve an A. I would agree that it is all about studying smart. You have to “know” what’s important and study that systematically. When I have done “experiments” on my own studying, I have actually noted no difference in performance between studying a total of about 10 hrs in a given class for a given exam vs. studying 20 hrs for an equivalent exam in the same class. Granted, it’s a case study (n=1) and no two tests are exactly equivalent but it’s evident to me that smart studying (and, perhaps, some natural ability as well) is largely what makes the difference. Study smart, not long.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Sorry, but this flies in the face of modern scientific knowledge. It flies in the face of certain underlying theories of biology (i.e., evolution and genetic variability). Of course some people are naturally gifted in different areas. We also know this from psychology. Where do you think they get tests of intelligence? Do you think they pull test questions w/ high reliability coefficients (i.e., 0.7-0.9 typically) out of their butts? No… despite the limitations of intelligence testing, of which I am very well-aware, the tests do appear to be testing some factors that have strong predictive power for presumably related things such as future career success in certain industries, etc. This statement is like saying a 5’ tall kid can join the NBA if he tries hard enough! It’s simply not going to happen no matter how hard he practices!!!</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>Well, kind of. You’re actually confusing where someone with a high G (general intelligence) would struggle. While memorization may be helped modestly by the G factor, it is only modestly correlated. Memorization is most helped by depth of understanding, which is where a high G might be of assistance (i.e., greater interest in learning due to enjoyment of intellectual challenge due to need to stimulate high problem solving ability leads to greater depth and breadth of knowledge). It is noteworthy, however, that if that individual has no background in the area and lacks the time to gain such a background, s/he will be in the same boat as anyone else (i.e., someone of average intelligence). On the other hand, problem-solving is greatly assisted by G, as it is essentially what G is measuring. Whereas memorization is a form of crystallized intelligence, problem-solving is related to fluid intelligence, which is closely associated w/ G. Someone with excellent fluid intelligence will do far better at problem-solving that someone of average or slightly below-average intelligence.</p>

<p>I heard from some psychologist that scores on IQ tests (which I am very skeptical also) increase with level of education. So, is it Intelligence that is being tested or total amount of learning that person is done in his life?
I do not belief that you can be successful in Med. School without strong work ethic. However, none of these kids are studying all the time, they usually have a lot of activities that they involve themselves outside of academics. And, again studying hard does not always mean studying long hours, in many cases it means being efficient at it, fully understand material, recognize gaps in understanding and seek help when needed</p>

<p>I find that I have to study math especially for long periods of time, due to gaps in my education. I went from Algebra II, to Calculus, and, retrospectively, it was a mistake. Ergo, it takes me (long) periods of time to understand Linear Algebra, and perhaps even longer to do some of trickier problems in Differential Equations. If I’m not working slowly, I tend to feel I’m missing something, especially when (for me) the material is conceptually demanding. </p>

<p>BDM, is there a positive correlation between kids who study many hours and poor standardized test scores? I believe that I study efficiently, but also, from what most people here are saying, too much. I managed a 2390 on my SAT, and 5s on physics, english, chem, and the AP BC exams. I did not take an SAT course nor buy one of those books, and I completely attribute this to working hard throughout high school (in English, and basic math classes) and, as a result, I gained some critical thinking skills. </p>

<p>It’s depressing to think I’ll do poorly on the MCAT, because I don’t have that “naturally smart” edge that successful pre-meds do, combined with a strong work ethic. Also depressing to think so many people do so well without putting in the effort that I do. Such is life, my back-up is teaching, or if I can keep my grades up, engineering.</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>You sure it was a psychologist who said this (and not a mental health worker of some other variety or a psychiatrist)? Was it someone in psychometrics or cognitive psych? IQ test scores increase due to the testing effect and averages increase over time. It is a myth that education significantly changes IQ scores, although you could certainly invalidate such a test by practicing the test questions, which is why the actual test questions are unavailable to all but licensed, doctoral-level psychologists.
The problem with your assertion about a lack of variability in intelligence and the need for high levels of intelligence to succeed in medical school and in medicine doesn’t fit reality. We know people vary on intelligence, just like they vary on height. Secondly, we know that of the most common occupations, MD/DOs have the highest average IQ at ~121 (112-128), which means an MD is, on average, about 1.5 SD above the mean intelligence score or in the top 6.7% of the population. I do not want to sound elitest here, but since there are basically no MD/DOs whatsoever (including FMGs/IMGs) with an IQ below 105, it is quite evident that people have to be of above-average intelligence to enter this field. The reality is that this field requires high levels of natural ability just like many other highly-selective fields (such as the professional NBA player example I mentioned).</p>

<p>

</p>

<p>As long as you are able to get to a point where you can perform the requisite skills quickly and efficiently, you will be fine on the MCAT. Speed and intelligence are not necessarily correlated. (Actually, the more one knows about a subject, the slower their processing times will be.) The real question is whether you will be able to keep up in medical school, which BDM would be much more able to speak to.</p>

<p>I would think that in some populations (high-grade premeds) there probably is a correlation. E.g. of all the kids who get A’s in organic, the smarter kids are studying less than the average kids.</p>

<p>A 2390 means you’re good at standardized testing. You should start studying less.</p>

<p>Nevermind…</p>

<p>Techy233,
Do not discount your brains, just find somebody who can help you undertanding math concepts. Gap in math is not a good thing to have. Fill your gaps and you will find out that math is easy and does not requre much time. The key is in good instructor.</p>