At most institutions, education in the anatomical sciences has undergone several changes over the last decade. To identify the changes that have occurred in gross anatomy, microscopic anatomy, neuroscience/neuroanatomy, and embryology courses, directors of these courses were asked to respond to a survey with questions pertaining to total course hours, hours of lecture, and hours of laboratory, whether the course was part of an integrated program or existed as a stand-alone course, and what type of laboratory experience occurred in the course. These data were compared to data obtained from a similar survey in 2002. Comparison between the data sets suggests several key points some of which include: decreased total hours in gross anatomy and neuroscience/neuroanatomy courses, increased use of virtual microscopy in microscopic anatomy courses, and decreased laboratory hours in embryology courses.

No abstract

Curricular changes continue at United States medical schools and directors of gross anatomy, microscopic anatomy, neuroscience/neuroanatomy, and embryology courses continue to adjust and modify their offerings. Developing and supplying data related to current trends in anatomical sciences education is important if informed decisions are going to be made in a time of curricular and course revision. Thus, a survey was sent to course directors during the 2012-2013 academic years to gather information on total course hours, lecture and laboratory hours, the type of laboratory experiences, testing and competency evaluation, and the type of curricular approach used at their institution. The data gathered were compared to information obtained from previous surveys and conclusions reached were that only small or no change was observed in total course, lecture and laboratory hours in all four courses; more gross anatomy courses were part of an integrated curriculum since the previous survey; virtual microscopy with and without microscopes was the primary laboratory activity in microscopic anatomy courses; and neuroscience/neuroanatomy and embryology courses were unchanged.

Renewed emphases on teaching professionalism require physicians to develop the ability to critically reflect upon their own decisions. Innovative programs that address teaching professionalism within medical curricula have been implemented in almost all medical schools. The foundation for many of these programs is "reflection," which is regarded as a core skill in professional competence. In order to achieve the desired outcomes and meet the demands of a required curriculum, an understanding of educational concepts in the designing of medical curricula is essential. Educators recognize that, for most medical students, professional growth is initiated during the first year of the medical curriculum and, therefore, traditionally pure content delivery courses such as first year anatomy course are being utilized now in order to explore issues related to critical thinking and professionalism. As a result, learning strategies such as "reflective practice" are beginning to play an important role in curriculum design. This article provides an overview of the theory of reflective practice, and demonstrates how reflective practice may be integrated into the anatomy curriculum. In order to incorporate reflective exercises into a curriculum, the basic elements of a reflective process are defined, strategies to implement reflective exercises within the course are described, and the benefits of reflective practice are highlighted. Therefore, in creating an environment that fosters reflective learning, the gap between theory and practice may be consolidated, which in the context of anatomy promotes the issue of teaching for relevance and clinical application.

No abstract

Three common instructional strategies used to teach gross anatomy are lecture, discovery or inquiry-based learning, and cooperative learning. One form of cooperative learning, called reciprocal peer teaching (RPT), illustrates circumstances where students alternate roles as teacher and student. By assuming the responsibility of teaching their peers, students not only improve their understanding of course content, but also develop communication skills, teamwork, leadership, confidence and respect for peers that are vital to developing professionalism early in their medical careers. Traditionally in our Anatomy department, students dissect the entire body using a standard dissection manual. More non-traditionally, however, we have increased cooperative learning in the dissection laboratory by involving students in a series of supplementary RPT activities. During these exercises, 10% of the class practiced their demonstration with course instructors until the students felt prepared to demonstrate the exercise to their classmates. We designed one peer demonstration emphasizing three to six teaching objectives for most of the 40 dissection units. This resulted in a compendium of peer demonstrations for implementation throughout the course. The multitude of diverse exercises permitted each student many opportunities to teach their peers. A debriefing questionnaire was administered at the end of the course demonstrating that 100% of students agreed the RPT experience increased their understanding of the topics they taught and 97% agreed it increased their retention of information they taught to their peers. In addition, 92% agreed that RPT improved their communication skills, which can be applied beyond anatomy to their careers as future physicians.

There is increasingly a call for clinical relevance in the teaching of the biomedical sciences within all health care programs. This presupposes that there is an understanding of what is "core" material within the curriculum. To date, the anatomical sciences have been poorly served by the development of core syllabuses, although there have been commendable attempts to define a core syllabus for gross anatomy in medicine and for some medical specialties. The International Federation of Associations of Anatomists and the European Federation for Experimental Morphology aim to formulate, on an international basis, core syllabuses for all branches of the anatomical sciences. This is being undertaken at the initial stage using Delphi Panels consisting of a team of anatomists, scientists, and clinicians who evaluate syllabus content and accord each element/topic "essential," "important," "acceptable," or "not required" status. Their initial conjectures, published on the International Federation of Associations of Anatomists' website, provide merely a framework to enable anatomical (and other cognate learned) societies and individual anatomists, clinicians, and students to comment upon the syllabuses. This article presents the concepts and methodological approaches underlying the hybrid Delphi process employed. Preliminary findings relating to the development of a neuroanatomy core syllabus are provided to illustrate the methods initially employed by a Delphi Panel. The approach is novel in that it is international in scope, is conceptually democratic, and is developmentally fluid in terms of availability for amendment. The aim is to set internationally recognized standards and thus to provide guidelines concerning anatomical knowledge when engaged in course development.

The goals of our study were to determine the predictive value and usability of an audience response system (ARS) as a knowledge assessment tool in an undergraduate medical curriculum. Over a three year period (2006)(2007)(2008), data were collected from first year didactic blocks in Genetics/Histology and Anatomy/Radiology (n=42-50 per class). During each block, students answered clinically oriented multiple choice questions using the ARS. Students' performances were recorded and cumulative ARS scores were compared with final examination performances. Correlation coefficients between these variables were calculated to assess the existence and direction of an association between ARS and final examination score. If associations existed, univariate models were then constructed using ARS as a predictor of final examination score. Student and faculty perception of ARS difficulty, usefulness, effect on performance, and preferred use were evaluated using a questionnaire. There was a statistically significant positive correlation between ARS and final examination scores in all didactic blocks and predictive univariate models were constructed for each relationship (all P < 0.0001). Students and faculty agreed that ARS was easy to use and are liable tool for providing real-time feedback that improved their performance and participation. In conclusion, we found ARS to be an effective assessment tool benefiting the faculty and the students in a curriculum focused on interaction and self-directed learning.