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.

Neuromuscular dysfunction of the pelvic floor and perineum can negatively impact several populations including the elderly, parous women, and athletes. Pelvic health physiotherapists assess and treat neuromuscular dysfunction of the perineal and pelvic diaphragmatic regions using targeted physical therapy techniques. Consequently, they must rely on their understanding of the complex anatomy of the pelvic floor to guide them during the assessment and treatment of their patients. In Canada, physiotherapists who choose to specialize in pelvic health enroll in continuing education courses to learn clinical concepts and techniques associated with the specialty. However, an initial pilot study revealed that the majority of physiotherapists attending these entry‐level pelvic health courses had limited prior knowledge of the anatomy relevant to the specialty. Since pelvic anatomy is foundational to the pelvic health specialty, entering the course with insufficient anatomical knowledge may limit the physiotherapists' abilities to learn and execute more advanced clinical procedures.To improve baseline pelvic anatomy knowledge, a cadaver‐based online teaching resource, the Pelvic Health Anatomy Module (PHAM), was created and evaluated in the present study. The study was conducted to assess: (1) the efficacy of the PHAM to enhance physiotherapists' anatomical knowledge before entering a pelvic health course, and (2) if having stronger anatomical knowledge prior to the onset of the course impacted their understanding of the course concepts. Physiotherapists (n = 23) were given one of two anatomy education resources to review before the beginning of an entry‐level pelvic health certification course – the experimental group received the novel PHAM resource, while the control groups reviewed a traditionally‐used online video resource.Participants who received the PHAM perceived it as “very useful”, while the control group perceived the traditional videos as “useful”. The average for the group who reviewed the PHAM was higher for the anatomy scores at the beginning, end, and one week after completion of the course than the group who reviewed the control resource. Furthermore, the average for the group who reviewed the PHAM was higher on evaluations of course concepts compared to the groups who reviewed the control resource. The initial results of this study support the development and use of comprehensive and purposeful anatomy resources for continuing education courses in healthcare, particularly physiotherapy, to enhance foundational knowledge and facilitate better application of course concepts.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

Human anatomy is an information‐dense field that often has institutional‐ and curricular‐imposed restraints. The resulting time and resource limitations cultivate a need to develop and implement tools that promote efficiency through self‐directed student learning opportunities. Furthermore, such tools require testing to ensure that they positively contribute to meaningful student learning.We recently created an educational tool to promote student efficiency in the cadaver‐based laboratory at the University of Guelph. The Human Anatomy Laboratory Companion (HALC) is a paper‐based, take‐home workbook for undergraduate students enrolled in our dissection‐ based, third‐year human anatomy course. The overall goal of the HALC was to provide students with a curriculum‐targeted, cadaver‐based resource for pre‐laboratory preparation and post‐laboratory review.This pilot study examined students' reported use of the HALC, and determined if usage influenced their course experience, contextual learning approaches, or course performance outcomes. Course experience was measured using the Course Experience Questionnaire (CEQ), while the students' preferred and contextual approaches to learning were measured using the Revised Two Factor Study Process Questionnaire (RSPQ‐2F). Student grades on written and laboratory tests were examined as performance outcomes.Students who used the HALC ‘Very Frequently’ (370.83 ± 21.476) reported statistically significantly higher scores on the Learning Resources subscale of the CEQ than students who only used it ‘Occasionally’ (260.53 ± 23.865, p = 0.03). Furthermore, students who ‘Very Frequently’ (47.92 ± 32.061) used the HALC reported statistically significantly higher scores on the Appropriate Workload subscale of the CEQ than students who ‘Never” used it (−126.92 ± 34.722, p = 0.003). Multiple linear regression (MLR) analyses found no significant correlation between HALC usage frequency and contextual learning approaches when student demographic data, preferred learning approaches, GPA, and CEQ subscale scores were included as covariates (p > 0.05). Further MLR analysis revealed that HALC usage frequency was a statistically significant predictor of laboratory test performance when controlling for GPA, and contextual learning approaches (β = 1.585 ± 0.678, p = 0.021).Together these data suggest that students who reported more frequent use of the HALC had: higher satisfaction with the courses learning resources, a stronger ability to cope with the amount of work that was expected of them throughout the course and, better preparation for laboratory‐based examinations. While the HALC was not found to influence the students' approach to learning in human anatomy, this study demonstrates the potential for curriculum‐targeted, dissection‐based resources that use real cadaveric images to improve laboratory‐based performance outcomes and student satisfaction in dissection‐based undergraduate human anatomy courses.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.

Developing lasting knowledge of human anatomy is foundational for students in the health sciences. Anatomy teaching methods are constantly adapting to achieve this goal, despite time and resource limitations. Interventions that target the laboratory environment, such as moving from dissection‐ to prosection‐based teaching or adding computer‐assisted learning resources, are widespread. However, the long‐term effect of such interventions on knowledge retention is not well understood. Accordingly, this study evaluated 1) the influence of the laboratory learning environment (dissection‐ versus prosection‐based) and 2) the impact of a curriculum‐targeted computer‐assisted learning resource on long‐term knowledge recall among non‐medical undergraduate human anatomy students at the University of Guelph. Participants reported their demographic information, approaches to learning in the course, and use of the computer‐assisted learning resource through a combination of online and written surveys. Knowledge recall was assessed through a written test of short‐answer questions administered three months after the course ended. The test included two low‐order questions and two high‐order questions (based on the Blooming Anatomy Tool), which were evaluated using the Structure of the Observed Learning Outcome Taxonomy to yield performance scores. The performance scores were compared between dissection‐ and prosection‐based groups, as well as between low‐ and high‐frequency users of the computer‐assisted learning resource with the Mann‐Whitney U test. Furthermore, multiple linear regression analyses were used to investigate the relationships between 1) the laboratory learning environment and performance and 2) use of the computer‐assisted learning resource and performance, while controlling for students’ approach to learning scores, final grades, and how recently they studied the material. The laboratory environment was not found to influence knowledge recall (p > 0.05). However, high‐frequency users of the computer‐assisted learning resource demonstrated stronger knowledge recall than low‐frequency users (p = 0.003) and use of the resource was strongly positively correlated with performance on high‐order questions (p = 0.014) when controlling for the aforementioned variables. Deep approaches to learning were positively associated with overall knowledge recall ability in both comparisons (p < 0.05). These findings suggest that the dissection‐ and prosection‐based laboratory teaching approaches at the University of Guelph offered equal opportunities for long‐term knowledge retention; however, using the resource more frequently and pursuing a deeper approach to learning in the course may help students develop stronger long‐term knowledge recall abilities. Therefore, supplemental computer‐assisted learning resources can be used as a low‐risk intervention to support cadaver‐based human anatomy education and promote long‐term knowledge retention.

Human anatomy is an essential subject for the medical and health sciences. Teaching and learning human anatomy each require large investments of time and resources; however, many institutions are challenged by limitations to both. As a result, the approaches used to teach human anatomy are constantly evolving to overcome these limitations and deliver meaningful learning opportunities. One common method for enhancing anatomy education is through computer‐assisted learning (CAL). The rapid growth and advancement of technology over recent decades has made the creation of CAL resources cheaper, easier, and more accessible, facilitating their rise as popular supplements to traditional approaches such as dissection (DI) and prosection (PRO). Accordingly, this study evaluated a novel CAL resource that was created for and introduced into an undergraduate DI and PRO human anatomy course at the University of Guelph between the Fall 2015 and 2016 semesters. The objective was to determine the influence of the resource on the students' academic experiences through evaluations of their course satisfaction (CS), contextual approaches to learning (SAL, characterized by deep [DA] and surface [SA] approach scores), and overall course performance.Participants reported their demographic information, CS, SAL, and use of the CAL resource through a combination of online and written surveys. Written feedback regarding their perceptions of the CAL resource was also collected and thematic analysis was performed to extract common themes. CS was compared between the Fall 2015 and Fall 2016 academic cohorts using the Mann‐Whitney U test. Comparisons of contextual SAL and performance were made using analyses of covariance with preferred SAL scores and cumulative grade averages as covariates, respectively. CAL resource use by students in both DI and PRO was then characterized and multiple linear regression analyses were used to determine correlations between their use of the resource and DA scores, SA scores, and course performance.Although the students' mean (± SEM) CS improved between the 2015 and 2016 cohorts in both DI (2015 = 74.15 ± 3.29, 2016 = 86.54 ± 1.94, p = 0.002) and PRO (2015 = 78.41 ± 5.95, 2016 = 93.55 ± 3.06, p = 0.051), the mean differences (± SEM) in DA (DI = −2.11 ± 0.53, p < 0.0005; PRO = −2.72 ± 1.03, p = 0.010) and SA (DI = 1.95 ± 0.55, p < 0.0005; PRO = 4.16 ± 1.10, p < 0.0005) scores suggested that the course presented a more surface‐oriented environment in 2016 than in 2015. Contextual SAL and course performance were not directly influenced by CAL resource use (p > 0.05); however, students in both DI (p = 0.001) and PRO (p = 0.025) who reported higher positive perceptions of the resource had higher DA scores.These findings indicated that using the CAL resource did not significantly enhance the students' learning experience. However, those who saw value in the resource and reported more positive perceptions toward it used deeper approaches to learning, which are representative of meaningful learning. Alongside the analyses of written student feedback, this suggests that the context in which CAL resources are to be disseminated may merit strong consideration before incorporating such resources into a course.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2019 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.