In March 2020, the coronavirus disease 2019 global pandemic forced many post-secondary institutions to move their teaching online, which had a substantial impact on students enrolled in laboratory-based courses in fields like human anatomy. This descriptive study collected students' perspectives on the transition to remote education, with specific attention to the teaching activities, resources, and assessments used in an undergraduate Clinical Human Visceral Anatomy course at McGill University. Through inductive semantic thematic analysis, student-held values for effective remote education were identified and grouped into the following themes:(1) preferences for communication, (2) values for remote learning activities and resources, (3) values for remote assessment, and (4) perceived positive and negative impacts of remote education on learning. Students generally valued having clear communication, opportunities for both synchronous and asynchronous learning activities, and flexible assessment formats that maintained alignment with the course outcomes and activities. Many felt that remote education had a net-negative impact on their learning, course satisfaction, and sense of community. However, there were no significant differences in grades on laboratory quizzes administered before and after the shutdown (P = 0.443), and grades on the remote final examination were significantly higher than those on the in-person midterm examination (P < 0.001). These findings are discussed in the context of modern educational theories and practices related to remote teaching. Strategies for facilitating a student-centered environment online are also proposed. Future longitudinal research into skill development, learning outcome attainment, and the evolving perspectives of students and instructors operating in remote education contexts is warranted.

Many institutions rely upon prosection‐based laboratories as more resource‐efficient and time‐effective alternatives to traditional cadaver dissection for human anatomy education. To facilitate growing enrollment numbers despite resource limitations, the University of Guelph (a non‐medical institution) introduced a modified “stepwise” prosection‐based laboratory cohort to supplement a dissection‐based course. In this design, all students attended the same lectures, but those in the dissection‐based cohort learned by performing regional dissections and students in the prosection‐based cohort studied from those dissections. Prosection students thereby witnessed a “slow reveal” of structures throughout the course. This study compared the perceived course experiences, student approaches to learning, and academic performance between the two groups. Multiple linear regression analyses were used to isolate the effect of the laboratory environment on student approaches to learning and academic performance from demographic and situational covariates. Both groups reported positive course experience ratings and high average final grades that were not statistically dissimilar (P > 0.05), increased reliance on deep approaches to learning (P = 0.002), and decreased reliance on surface approaches to learning (P = 0.023). When controlling for covariates, participation in dissection had small but statistically significant positive associations with deep approaches to learning (P = 0.043), performance on laboratory oral assessments (P < 0.001), and average final grades (P = 0.039). Ultimately, both designs promoted meaningful learning and desirable performance outcomes, indicating that both dissection and stepwise prosection have the potential to facilitate high quality human anatomy instruction.

Background During the COVID-19 pandemic, in-person cadaveric dissection laboratories for teaching anatomy were omitted by many schools around the world. While knowledge domains can be easily evaluated via remote exams, non-traditional discipline-independent skills such as those encouraged through reflection on the topic of death are often overlooked. This study investigated how different anatomy course formats played a role in initiating students’ reflections on death during the COVID-19 pandemic. Method In fall 2020, 217 medical, dental, premedical, and health sciences students from 13 international universities discussed differences in their anatomy courses online. Formats of anatomy courses ranged from dissection-based, prosection-based, hybrid (combination of dissection and prosection) to no laboratory exposure at all. Students’ responses to the question, “Did/does your anatomy course initiate your thinking about life's passing?” were collected, and they self-reported themes that were present in their reflections on death using a multiple-choice prompt. Statistical analyses to detect differences between students with and without exposure to cadavers were performed using the chi-squared test. Results When comparing students who had exposure to human anatomical specimens to those who had no exposure, the majority of students with exposure thought that the course did initiate thoughts about life’s passing, compared to students without exposure ( P < 0.05). Reflection themes were consistent across groups. Discussion These findings indicate that anatomy dissection courses are important for the initiation of students’ feelings about the topic of death. Omission of cadaveric dissection- or prosection-based laboratories will decrease the likelihood that students initiate reflection on this topic and gain important transferable skills.

Historically, Anatomy education is an in‐person discipline involving exposure to human body donors that facilitates personal and professional growth through, in part, the initiation of reflection on the topic of death. However, during the COVID‐19 pandemic the decreased exposure to cadaveric anatomy for many health professions students may have influenced the depth of their individual reflections on this topic. Accordingly, this study aimed to investigate the effect of an alternate approach—focus group discussions between peers with varying degrees of exposure to cadaveric material—that may offer one strategy to stimulate deep reflection on the topic of death. A programmatic intervention was introduced, wherein students (n = 221) from 13 international universities discussed differences in their anatomy courses during small focus group sessions as part of an online exchange program. An inductive semantic thematic analysis was conducted on responses to an open‐ended text–response question on how the activity influenced students' reflections about death. Resulting themes were organized into categories that described the content and topics of the students' discussions as they grappled with this sensitive topic. The students reportedly engaged in deep reflection and expressed an increased sense of connectedness with their peers, despite their disparate exposure levels to cadaveric anatomy and being physically distanced. This demonstrates that focus groups with students experiencing different laboratory contexts can be used to help all students reflect on the topic of death and that interchanges between dissecting and non‐dissecting students can initiate thoughts about death and body donation among non‐dissecting students.