Anatomy education should be made as effective as possible, as nobody will deny that medical students cannot do without anatomical knowledge. Because of promising findings in the areas of teaching in context, vertical integration and assessment strategies, it is recommended that future research into anatomy education should focus on these factors.
Innovations in undergraduate medical education, such as integration of disciplines and problem based learning, have given rise to concerns about students' knowledge of anatomy. This article originated from several studies investigating the knowledge of anatomy of students at the eight Dutch medical schools. The studies showed that undergraduate students uniformly perceived deficiencies in their anatomical knowledge when they started clinical training regardless of their school's didactic approach. A study assessing students' actual knowledge of clinical anatomy revealed no relationship between students' knowledge and the school's didactic approach. Test failure rates based on absolute standards set by different groups of experts were indicative of unsatisfactory levels of anatomical knowledge, although standards differed markedly between the groups of experts. Good test performance by students seems to be related to total teaching time for anatomy, teaching in clinical context, and revisiting anatomy topics in the course of the curriculum. These factors appeared to outweigh the effects of disciplinary integration or whether the curriculum was problem-based or traditional.
BackgroundTo get insight in how theoretical knowledge is transformed into clinical skills, important information may arise from mapping the development of anatomical knowledge during the undergraduate medical curriculum. If we want to gain a better understanding of teaching and learning in anatomy, it may be pertinent to move beyond the question of how and consider also the what, why and when of anatomy education.MethodsA purposive sample of 78 medical students from the 2nd, 3rd, 4th and 6th year of a PBL curriculum participated in 4 focus groups. Each group came together twice, and all meetings were recorded and transcribed verbatim. Data were analysed with template analysis using a phenomenographical approach.ResultsFive major topics emerged and are described covering the students’ perceptions on their anatomy education and anatomical knowledge: 1) motivation to study anatomy, 2) the relevance of anatomical knowledge, 3) assessment of anatomical knowledge, 4) students’ (in)security about their anatomical knowledge and 5) the use of anatomical knowledge in clinical practice.ConclusionsResults indicated that a PBL approach in itself was not enough to ensure adequate learning of anatomy, and support the hypothesis that educational principles like time-on-task and repetition, have a stronger impact on students’ perceived and actual anatomical knowledge than the educational approach underpinning a curriculum. For example, students state that repetitive studying of the subject increases retention of knowledge to a greater extent than stricter assessment, and teaching in context enhances motivation and transfer. Innovations in teaching and assessment, like spiral curriculum, teaching in context, teaching for transfer and assessment for learning (rewarding understanding and higher order cognitive skills), are required to improve anatomy education.
Anatomy education often consists of a combination of lectures and laboratory sessions, the latter frequently including surface anatomy. Studying surface anatomy enables students to elaborate on their knowledge of the cadaver's static anatomy by enabling the visualization of structures, especially those of the musculoskeletal system, move and function in a living human being. A recent development in teaching methods for surface anatomy is body painting, which several studies suggest increases both student motivation and knowledge acquisition. This article focuses on a teaching approach and is a translational contribution to existing literature. In line with best evidence medical education, the aim of this article is twofold: to briefly inform teachers about constructivist learning theory and elaborate on the principles of constructive, collaborative, contextual, and self-directed learning; and to provide teachers with an example of how to implement these learning principles to change the approach to teaching surface anatomy. Student evaluations of this new approach demonstrate that the application of these learning principles leads to higher student satisfaction. However, research suggests that even better results could be achieved by further adjustments in the application of contextual and self-directed learning principles. Successful implementation and guidance of peer physical examination is crucial for the described approach, but research shows that other options, like using life models, seem to work equally well. Future research on surface anatomy should focus on increasing the students' ability to apply anatomical knowledge and defining the setting in which certain teaching methods and approaches have a positive effect.
Eight factors are claimed to have a negative influence on anatomical knowledge of medical students: (1) teaching by nonmedically qualified teachers, (2) the absence of a core anatomy curriculum, (3) decreased use of dissection as a teaching tool, (4) lack of teaching anatomy in context, (5) integrated curricula (problem-based learning or systems-based curricula), (6) inadequate assessment of anatomical knowledge, (7) decreased anatomy teaching time, and (8) neglect of vertical integration of anatomy teaching. A recent review revealed a lack of evidence underpinning any of the claims owing to the poor quality of papers, and recommendations were made for education and research on teaching in context and the implementation of vertical integration and of assessment strategies. In this article, we will describe the alleged factors fully, revealing additional recommendations for improving anatomy education by promoting recognition for teaching in institutions, by enhancing the professional recognition of anatomists through the implementation of a national postgraduate training program, and by encouraging anatomists to participate in educational research.
Low back pain patients' perspectives on long-term adherence to home-based exercise programmes in physiotherapy.
Clay modeling is increasingly used as a teaching method other than dissection. The haptic experience during clay modeling is supposed to correspond to the learning effect of manipulations during exercises in the dissection room involving tissues and organs. We questioned this assumption in two pretest-post-test experiments. In these experiments, the learning effects of clay modeling were compared to either live observations (Experiment I) or video observations (Experiment II) of the clay-modeling exercise. The effects of learning were measured with multiple choice questions, extended matching questions, and recognition of structures on illustrations of cross-sections. Analysis of covariance with pretest scores as the covariate was used to elaborate the results. Experiment I showed a significantly higher post-test score for the observers, whereas Experiment II showed a significantly higher post-test score for the clay modelers. This study shows that (1) students who perform clay-modeling exercises show less gain in anatomical knowledge than students who attentively observe the same exercise being carried out and (2) performing a clay-modeling exercise is better in anatomical knowledge gain compared to the study of a video of the recorded exercise. The most important learning effect seems to be the engagement in the exercise, focusing attention and stimulating time on task.
scite is a Brooklyn-based organization that helps researchers better discover and understand research articles through Smart Citations–citations that display the context of the citation and describe whether the article provides supporting or contrasting evidence. scite is used by students and researchers from around the world and is funded in part by the National Science Foundation and the National Institute on Drug Abuse of the National Institutes of Health.
hi@scite.ai
10624 S. Eastern Ave., Ste. A-614
Henderson, NV 89052, USA
Copyright © 2024 scite LLC. All rights reserved.
Made with 💙 for researchers
Part of the Research Solutions Family.