Description

The Undergraduate-Postgraduate Interface

As one who teaches at both levels, I am frequently struck by the difference in approach to learning of the relevant group of ‘students’. However much we in the profession dislike it, the prime aim of an undergraduate student is to pass finals – to get that piece of paper called a degree! I have observed somewhat cynically in the past that learning about dentistry may even hinder that objective. Finals, and most of the examination sprinkled through the course, seek primarily to test memory and regurgitation of the facts handed down graciously during lectures. Someone once stated that lectures were the easiest way of transferring facts from the notes of the lecturer to the notes of the student without involving the brains of either! Most students absorb the facts without question, and often regurgitate them without understanding.

Those who only teach vocational trainees may not recognise this picture. These ‘students’ are usually keen to learn about dentistry, quick to challenge unsupported statements, and may be harshly intolerant of the poor teacher. They seize new techniques with interest, take part in heated discussion both with the session teacher and amongst themselves, in short they are keen to learn.

I find myself asking why this is, and what we can do to rectify the situation. Is it that the undergraduate curriculum is not interesting? Is it not what they expected? Is it not relevant to their perceived needs? Indeed is the undergraduate curriculum relevant to today’s clinical practice, given that some 85% will enter general dental practice? Would some-one like to undertake a survey of the procedures carried out in general practice, and the amount of time spent on each, compared with the time devoted to their teaching at undergraduate level?

Not all undergraduates are like this, of course, and I am delighted to include in this issue a paper written whilst the author was a final year student. It gives a comprehensive review of the subject, and demonstrates excellent wider reading and understanding. I have often questioned whether the endo-perio lesion is indeed an entity or merely the convenient title for a chapter in a text book. I thought that this paper addressed the matter superbly, and would be of great value to those preparing for higher dental examinations. I would be pleased to receive similar papers from vocational training scheme organisers, and those who judge essay competitions. And I would be pleased to receive observations on the undergraduate dental curriculum!