PBL vs. rote and learning Herbal Medicine

[Guest guest]

Hi Jason and all

 

A few thoughts on my experiences learning Herbal Medicine.

First, I made it my business to start studying herbs from day one.

As first year students, we observed the interns in clinic, studied

acupoint locations and energetics, theory etc but no herbs

mentioned. I bought the Materia Medica and Formulas and Strategies

and made an effort to take note of the formula name, read the

indications and commentary for each patient we saw. No one told me

to do this. I did some exploration of the single herbs as well but

mostly stuck to the above information for the first year. No worrys

about single herbs contained for the most part or instructions on

cooking the formula yet. By the second year after learning the

basics of syndrome differentiation, I had also some working

knowledge of the basic formulas in each chapter and when to use

them. In second year we learned single herbs and this made a whole

lot more sense knowing a little about the formulas in which they

appeared and I started to link up this information as I learned the

singles. I bought some little 2 " x2 " Ziploc baggies (available at

head shops of all places!) and taped a collection right into my

notebook so as I studied my handwritten notebook, I also got a

glimpse of the herbs themselves and could even taste and smell them.

This made the arduous task of learning the rote information of

single herbs much easier. All my contemporaries thought I was crazy

and said they would just learn them in the curriculum advised order

and way. Of course, for the most part, they did not learn them at

all in any meaningful, lasting fashion.

By the time we got to Formulas and Internal Medicine, I was well on

my way to integrating the information and learning at a much higher

level then the others in my class with a lot less effort overall. I

was using the formulas in clinic alongside the acupuncture very

effectively and starting to combine formulas and make additions and

subtractions.

I believe that using any and all means at our disposal to learn

herbs including " computer games " can be very informative. However, I

also feel that what may be most important is viewing the whole from

the very beginning to make the process meaningful (patient, diff dx,

formula, points) and that one is actually wasting time by not making

the extra effort in the beginning to explore Formulas and Strategies

especially with respect to each patient seen. By doing this, I also

had a working knowledge of pin yin and herb names from the formula

names before I ever had one herb class. This method, for me at

least, made the process of learning Herbal Medicine and TCM in

general really come to life. The NCAA exam was nothing. Trying to

learn in a linear fashion by building on prior information just

doesn't work here. Studying for the test without learning how to use

herbs does little to no good. Always view the whole, even from the

beginning, even if it doesn't seem to make clear sense and things

will start to come into focus more quickly and easily. Of course,

every school has its own way of introducing herbal study. This is

just what I experienced.

 

Thanks, Shanna

 

 

,

wrote:

> Below is the standard scenario in medical training adapted to

herbs.

> Note in each case, students use books to learn. But if this

method was

> adopted in the early stage of TCM education, I predict that far

more

> students would have some herbal fluency by internship. As it is

now,

> only the exceptional students who typically learn through self

> motivation regardless of environment achieve that goal. How many

> people on this list would say they learned herbology despite their

> training? How many others (perhaps not on this list) would say

they

> never learned herbology due to an insistence on teaching styles

that

> does not work for most people. I used to think that my life would

be

> easier if everyone at PCOM was more like me. Then I decided to do

my

> job.

>

>

> Rote learning:

>

> In Herbs 1, you are presented with lists of data (taste, temp,

etc.)

> and explanations of the associated theory plus tips on memorizing

the

> data (pnemonics, whatever)

>

> You access your books and other study aids (like zoo cards or make

your

> own databases,etc.) to aid in memorization for testtaking

>

> The students take the test and average a 85-90 or better. 3

months

> later, only 10% can still pass the exam

>

>

>

> PBL:

>

> You are given a problem, often a case. The problem has a solution

that

> requires research.

>

> For example, students might compare and contrast an entire

category of

> herbs to find the best solution for a case (as in real life).

This

> will involve study of the information in your books about taste,

temp,

> etc. Exams in herbs 1 have long been case based. Why not the

> teaching, as well?

>

> Carefully selected cases will be used to induce study of all

categories

> and even across categories as the course goes on. Everything will

be

> discussed to insure deep understanding. Representative rx will be

> introduced in this context, as well.

>

> The students takes the same test as the rote learners above and

the

> average grade is somewhat lower (80-85), but after 3 months, 90%

of

> students still pass the retake.

>

>

>

> Chinese Herbs

>

>

> FAX:

>

>