Knowledge Gains and Changing Attitudes from the Anatomy Education Research Institute (AERI 2017): A Mixed Methods Analysis

Abstract

The inaugural Anatomy Education Research Institute (AERI 2017) was held in Bloomington, Indiana in July of 2017. This workshop style conference paired experienced educational researchers (invited speakers) with individuals interested in learning more about the field (accepted applicants). In 2017, AERI was held over a five‐day period and entailed plenary style presentations, break‐out sessions, and specific times for small group mentorship. All participants (applicants and invited speakers) completed a pre‐conference survey at the beginning of the institute and a post‐conference survey at the end of the institute. Both surveys included categorical and Likert scale questions as well as open‐ended questions for participant feedback. Quantitative and qualitative analyses indicate that both applicants and speakers increased their knowledge of anatomy education research, but that additional obstacles remain. Funding, time, and a lack of respect for the field remain problematic for faculty that wish to complete educational research. Mentorship and a community of practice also emerged as major themes necessary for educational research to be successful.

Do the benefits continue? Long term impacts of the Anatomy Education Research Institute (AERI) 2017

“…These levels include 1) Reaction (i.e., participants' thoughts or reactions to the institute), 2) Learning (evidence of increasing participant knowledge from the institute), 3) Behavior (changes to participants' behavior following the institute), and 4) Results (ultimate outcomes associated with participants' increased knowledge and changed behavior following the institute). Our previous publications have focused on the first level of evaluation (reaction) during AERI 2017 [3] and the second level of evaluation (learning) immediately following AERI 2017 [4]. This report continues that evaluation by examining the maintenance of those attitudes and learning gains (Kirkpatrick levels 1 & 2) and assessing whether participants' behavior was impacted by this experience (Kirkpatrick level 3).…”

“…As such, the AERI 2017 organizers developed and administered multiple survey instruments as well as focus groups and individual interviews. This manuscript will focus on the six-month and thirty-month follow-up surveys and the nine-month follow-up focus groups and interviews with comparisons to the surveys that were administered at the beginning of the institute and at the end of the institute (these surveys and results have been previously described in O'Loughlin et al [3] and Husmann et al [4]). All AERI surveys and interviews were completed in accordance with Indiana University Institutional Review Board (IRB) protocol #1704969308.…”

“…Husmann et al [4] expanded on this research to discuss the learning gains (Kirkpatrick level 2) that resulted immediately following AERI 2017 as seen on the pre-AERI and post-AERI surveys. Increased knowledge of anatomy education-related resources and topics was seen for both invited speakers and accepted applicants, further supporting Steinert et al 's conclusions that mentors can also benefit from mentoring others [8,13,14].…”

“…E-mails inviting all participants to complete the survey were sent out through the Qualtrics program, followed by four reminder e-mails to any unfinished respondents over the course of two and a half weeks. For further information on the development of this survey and its predecessors, please see O'Loughlin et al [3] and Husmann et al [4].…”

“…Overarching codes were also condensed into larger themes for interpretation. Codes were also counted for comparisons between invited speakers and accepted applicants and for comparisons with the data from pre-AERI and/or post-AERI surveys [4]. Some responses were dual-coded if multiple ideas applied.…”