Early Identification of Factors Contributing to Allied Health Students' Academic Difficulties in Gross Anatomy

Abstract

IntroductionEarly identification of students struggling with gross anatomy due to inadequate study strategies is critical to prevent poor course outcomes and repetition of the course. Students often enter health professional schools with inadequate and inefficient study strategies. Faculty and teaching assistants give students advice at the beginning of the course about effective study strategies, but it is unclear if and when students implement those strategies. Few studies have addressed how to quickly identify at‐risk students and how to remediate their difficulties prior to the end of a course.Purpose and HypothesisThe purpose of this project was to assess the effectiveness of formative practice written and lab exams to identify students at academic risk early in the learning process and prompt students to examine their study strategies. We hypothesized that performance on these formative assessments would predict future academic performance on subsequent exams. We also hypothesized that students would recognize early difficulties and adjust study habits and strategies accordingly.MethodsAllied Health (Occupational Therapy, Physical Therapy, and Physician Assistant) students enrolled in a 9‐week Gross Anatomy course during the summer of 2017 were included in the study (n=129). Following the first week of class, practice written and lab practical exams were administered to students for formative feedback. Students were prompted to complete a short study habits questionnaire prior to the start of class, following each exam, and at the end of the course. Academic performance was calculated from scores on three written and lab exams. Linear regression analyses were used to compare formative practice exam performance with future academic performance. Paired T‐tests and multiple regression analysis were used to compare survey responses throughout the course. Survey responses were themed and quantified for analysis.ResultsThe presence of formative practice exams did not improve overall class performance on the first set of written and lab practical exams when compared to exam performance in years where formative practice exams were not given (p=0.84). However, significant correlations were found between practice lab exam scores and first lab exam grades (R2=0.342, p<0.01) as well as final grades (R2=0.372, p<0.01). Significant correlations were also found between practice written exam scores and first written exam grades (R2=0.308, p<0.01) as well as final grades (R2=0.341, p<0.01). Survey results show that more students felt they studied adequately in preparation for the first set of exams than for the practice exams (Lab Practical: 4.36 vs. 3.53; Written Exam: 4.32 vs. 3.21; p<0.01).ConclusionComparison of class grades based on the presence or absence of a set of practice exams illustrated that there was not an improvement in academic performance by taking a practice exam before a graded exam. However, early formative practice assessments can be used to predict future academic performance within a class. These practice assessments could be used to identify students likely to struggle throughout the gross anatomy course as early as one week into the learning process. Targeted interventions to help students adjust their study strategies could then be applied early in the course to improve academic performance.This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.