The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition: Lessons Learned from Partnering with Students to Innovate Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Education

Self Cite

Anatomists are well placed to tackle the transition from face-to-face to blended learning approaches as a result of the rapidly forced changes brought about by Covid-19. The subject is extremely visual and has therefore previously been a target for the development of technology enhanced learning initiatives over the last ten years. Today's students have come to expect the integration of technology in the classroom and remotely. They adjust quickly to the innovative use of new applications and software and have begun to integrate it within their own workflow for note taking and study aids. Given the intense drive towards blended deliveries of anatomy as a result of the Covid-19 pandemic, it is easy to picture how the benefits of working in partnership with students (in order to achieve many of these aims) would be possible, particularly in difficult subjects like neuroanatomy. In doing so, it provides anatomists with new opportunities to engage students in a way that aligns well with best practice frameworks for engaging students through partnership. The current United Kingdom guidelines set out by Advance HE (a professional membership scheme for promoting excellence in higher education) strongly encourages the higher education community to seek out appropriate academic contexts where a balance of power can be struck between staff and student to create a community of practice. If such an approach can be fully embraced by anatomists, a strong argument can be made for seizing the opportunity to optimize the benefits of student partnership work in this discipline.

Section: Studymentioning

confidence: 99%

Working in Creative Partnership with Students to Co‐Produce Neuroanatomy e‐Learning Resources in a New Era of Blended Learning

Border

Woodward

Kurn

et al. 2021

Self Cite

“…Despite this, there are clearly a number of enthusiasts among the medical student population. The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC) is an annual competition held at the University of Southampton run in partnership between medical students, qualified doctors, and academic staff with support from The Anatomical Society (Geoghegan et al, 2019). The aim was to provide an educational and intellectually stimulating event, in which students can enhance their neuroanatomy knowledge, strengthen their portfolios, and help to vertically integrate the subject at all stages of the curriculum.…”

Section: The Potential Role Of Extracurricular Anatomy Assessmentsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…(Rowland et al, 2011; Papa and Vaccarezza, 2013). Practical anatomy has been typically assessed via a spotter assessment, also known as the steeplechase examination in some countries (Smith and McManus, 2015; Brenner et al, 2015; Geoghegan et al, 2019; Tirpude et al, 2019). Spotter examinations typically take place in the Dissecting Room and consist of 30–40 stations.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Multiple‐Choice versus Open‐Ended Questions in Advanced Clinical Neuroanatomy: Using a National Neuroanatomy Assessment to Investigate Variability in Performance Using Different Question Types

Merzougui

Myers

Hall

et al. 2021

Self Cite

Methods of assessment in anatomy vary across medical schools in the United Kingdom (UK) and beyond; common methods include written, spotter, and oral assessment. However, there is limited research evaluating these methods in regards to student performance and perception. The National Undergraduate Neuroanatomy Competition (NUNC) is held annually for medical students throughout the UK. Prior to 2017, the competition asked open‐ended questions (OEQ) in the anatomy spotter examination, and in subsequent years also asked single best answer (SBA) questions. The aim of this study is to assess medical students’ performance on, and perception of, SBA and OEQ methods of assessment in a spotter style anatomy examination. Student examination performance was compared between OEQ (2013–2016) and SBA (2017–2020) for overall score and each neuroanatomical subtopic. Additionally, a questionnaire explored students’ perceptions of SBAs. A total of 631 students attended the NUNC in the studied period. The average mark was significantly higher in SBAs compared to OEQs (60.6% vs. 43.1%, P < 0.0001)—this was true for all neuroanatomical subtopics except the cerebellum. Students felt that they performed better on SBA than OEQs, and diencephalon was felt to be the most difficult neuroanatomical subtopic (n = 38, 34.8%). Students perceived SBA questions to be easier than OEQs and performed significantly better on them in a neuroanatomical spotter examination. Further work is needed to ascertain whether this result is replicable throughout anatomy education.

“…Meanwhile, the implementation of new technologies, such as audience response systems, has provided an opportunity to improve neuroscience learning and teaching by enhancing the participation of students (Ruisoto and Juanes, 2019). Neuroanatomy academic competition has been useful to encourage undergraduates to develop an interest in the neurosciences (Geoghegan et al, 2019). Near‐peer teaching could also improve students' attitudes about neuroscience and ease their neurophobia (Stephens et al, 2016; Geoghegan et al, 2019).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Neuroanatomy academic competition has been useful to encourage undergraduates to develop an interest in the neurosciences (Geoghegan et al, 2019). Near‐peer teaching could also improve students' attitudes about neuroscience and ease their neurophobia (Stephens et al, 2016; Geoghegan et al, 2019). Jozefowicz argues that the most effective “treatment” for neurophobia is a strong integration of basic medical sciences with clinical neurology (Jozefowicz, 1994).…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

A Hands‐On Organ‐Slicing Activity to Teach the Cross‐Sectional Anatomy

Zuo

2020

The presentation of pre‐sliced specimens is a frequently used method in the laboratory teaching of cross‐sectional anatomy. In the present study, a new teaching method based on a hands‐on slicing activity was introduced into the teaching of brain, heart, and liver cross‐sectional anatomy. A randomized, controlled trial was performed. A total of 182 third‐year medical students were randomized into a control group taught with the prosection mode (pre‐sliced organ viewing) and an experimental group taught with the dissection mode (hands‐on organ slicing). These teaching methods were assessed by testing the students' knowledge of cross‐sectional specimens and cross‐sectional radiological images, and analyzing students' feedback. Using a specimen test on three organs (brain, heart, and liver), significant differences were observed in the mean scores of the control and experimental groups: for brain 59.6% (±14.2) vs. 70.1% (±15.5), (P < 0.001, Cohen's d = 0.17); for heart: 57.6% (±12.5) vs. 75.6% (±15.3), (P < 0.001, d = 0.30); and for liver: 60.4% (±14.5) vs. 81.7% (±14.2), (P < 0.001, d = 0.46). In a cross‐sectional radiological image test, better performance was also found in the experimental group (P < 0.001). The mean scores of the control vs. experimental groups were as follows: for brain imaging 63.9% (±15.1) vs. 71.1% (±16.1); for heart imaging 64.7% (±14.5) vs. 75.2% (±15.5); and for liver imaging 61.1% (±15.5) vs. 81.2% (±14.6), respectively. The effect sizes (Cohen's d) were 0.05, 0.23, and 0.52, respectively. Students in the lower tertile benefited the most from the slicing experiences. Students' feedback was generally positive. Hands‐on slicing activity can increase the effectiveness of anatomy teaching and increase students' ability to interpret radiological images.