The COVID-19 pandemic is forcing many institutions to consider remote, virtual instruction for the safety of employees and students. Based upon the authors’ experiences in transforming preclerkship medical science courses to virtual platforms, this paper shares tips for faculty rapidly establishing remote medical science instruction. With planning and support, faculty can create engaging, high-quality educational experiences for learners.

Few discussions regarding instructional methods incite as much passion as the debate over dissection versus prosection. Despite numerous analyses, few studies have isolated the impact of dissection versus prosection from the numerous variables that are involved in anatomy education. This study used a retrospective design to assess the effect of peer teaching with dissection or prosection on anatomical knowledge retention of the peer teachers. Exam scores were analyzed from three cohorts of students ( N = 184) who were enrolled in a Musculoskeletal System course in an allopathic medical school between academic years 2014–2017. Students in the first 2 yr learned anatomy of an assigned region through traditional dissection, whereas students in the third year learned anatomy of the same regions on prosected specimens. The effect of these instructional methods on anatomical knowledge retention was measured by student performance on a teaching-readiness quiz, written exam, and practical examination. One advantage of this study is the stability of variables between cohorts. Student groups peer taught the same objectives; course sequencing and content remained consistent between years; students spent the same amount of time learning their material, regardless of learning modality (dissection or prosection); and students were tested in the same manner. Comparisons of student performance data suggest that anatomy knowledge was equivalent, regardless of the instructional method (dissection or prosected cadavers) but is strongly associated with prior anatomy experience. Findings from this study support previous studies that conclude that there are no disparities in the effectiveness of learning anatomy via dissection or prosection.

Due to the Covid‐19 pandemic, many academic institutions had to rapidly transition education to a remote online environment. While a hurdle for most educators, this transition posed an even greater challenge for anatomy educators, many of whom were forced to depart from the traditional cadaver‐based laboratory to a virtual format. Recent publications have discussed the rapid transition to online formats necessitated by Covid‐19 and the accompanying difficulties, but none have identified specific factors that influenced the difficulty of this transition. Anatomy educators were surveyed to examine how this transition was accomplished and perceived. Of the 165 educators who responded, the majority utilized cadaver‐based laboratory instruction. Educators felt that transitioning the laboratory portion of their courses was significantly more difficult and required more time than converting lecture materials. Factors that impacted the difficulty of the transition included a number of pedagogical aspects of the pre‐Covid‐19 curricula, including the delivery format of prior content, availability of pre‐existing electronic materials, and the laboratory technique previously used. Additionally, the length of time an educator had been teaching prior to Covid‐19 impacted their perception of difficulty, with newer and more senior educators finding this much more challenging than mid‐tenure educators. Ease of transition may be related to previous exposure to curricular reform, experience with multiple anatomy pedagogies, and educator adaptability. While not surprising that converting a cadaver‐based laboratory to an online format was challenging, knowledge of the alignment of this difficulty with prior educator pedagogy can help guide future innovations to anatomy education.