IJCRR - Vol 05 Issue 04, February, 2013
TEACHING METHODOLOGY OF ANATOMY: A MODERN OUTLOOK
Author: Udaya Kumar P., Seema Madan
Traditionally sole pedagogy of gross anatomy has been through cadaver dissections and didactic lectures. However increased access to recent technologies, have prompted many universities and colleges to redefine the teaching methods thus effectively impart the knowledge of gross anatomy.
Aim: To compare the traditional teaching method versus modern teaching method and evaluate their effectiveness in learning gross anatomy. To assess the degree of student’s satisfaction of learning with the above said methods.
Material and Methods: A prospective study was carried out among the freshman undergraduate medical students of Gandhi medical college, Andhra Pradesh, India. The students of the Experimental group were taught using power point lectures and computer based dissection visuals, along with the traditional method of teaching. The Control group students were allotted the same number of dissection and lecture hours as the experimental group and followed the same pattern of dissection. The students of this group were taught by using traditional Chalk and Board lectures only. They had no access to power point lectures and computer based dissection visuals. Student’s performance was evaluated using multiple choice questions and a feedback questionnaire,
Results: Experimental group Students performed better than the traditional group. i.e. in 2009, four out of six examinations and in 2010, five out of six examinations, experimental group’s average scores were significantly higher ( p < 0.05 ) than the traditional group. The difference in the averages, between the two groups, was significant, i.e. Z > 1.96.
Keywords: Cadaver dissections; Chalk & Board; power point lectures.
Udaya Kumar P., Seema Madan. TEACHING METHODOLOGY OF ANATOMY: A MODERN OUTLOOK International Journal of Current Research and Review. Vol 05 Issue 04, February, 130-135
1. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ. 2010 Mar-Apr; 3(2):83-93.
2. Cannon R. Lecturing, Kensington, NSW; Higher Education Research and Development. Society of Australia; 1988.
3. Biasutto S, Caussa LI, Criado del Rio LE. Teaching anatomy: cadavers vs. computers? Ann Anat. 2006 Mar, 188(2): 187-90.
4. Boucher, Brenda, Hunter, Diana, Henry, Jason. Effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching biomechanics of the temporomandibular joint. The Journal of Physical Therapy Education. Vol. 13, No. 2
5. Elizondo-Omana, R. E., Morales-Gomez, J. A., Guzaman, S. L., Ibarra, R. P. and Vilchez, F. C., (2004), Traditional teaching supported by computer-assisted learning for macroscopic anatomy. The Anatomical Record Part B: The New Anatomist, 278B: 18-22.
6. Granger NA, Calleson DC, Henson OW, Juiliano E, Wineski L, McDaniel MD, Burgoon JM. Use of Web-based materials to enhance anatomy instruction in the health sciences. Anat Rec B New Anat. 2006 Jul; 289(4): 121-7.
7. Jose A Pereira, Eulogio Pleguezuelos, Alex Meri, Antoni Molina-Ros, M Carmen MolinaTomas, Carlos Masdeu. Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. J.Med Educ., 41(2): 189-195. Feb 2007.
8. Dana J. Jamero, PhrmD, Amne Borghol, PharmD and Linda Mihm, PharmD. Comparision of Computer-Mediated Learning and Lecture-Mediated Learning for Teaching Pain Management to Pharmacy Students. Am J Pharm Educ. 2009 February 19; 73(1): 05.
9. Forester JP, Thomas PP, McWhorter DL. Effects of four supplemental instruction programs on students' learning of gross anatomy. Clin Anat. 2004 May;17(4):322-7
10. M Thomas, B Appala Raju. Are PowerPoint presentations fulfilling its purpose? South East Asian Journal of Medical Education, Inaugural issue.
11. Nobert A Jones, Ph.D., Raymond P. Olfason, Ph.D. and Jerome Sutin, Ph.D; Evaluation of a Gross Anatomy Program Without Dissection. J.Med.Educ., 53:198-204, 1978.
12. Walsh, R. J. and Bohn, R.C. (1990). Computer-assisted instructions: a role in teaching human gross anatomy. Medical Education, 24: 499-506.
13. Bukowski EL. Assessment outcomes: Computerized instruction in a human gross anatomy course. J Allied Health. 2002 Fall: 31(3): 153-8.
14. Dobbins.C, Kanhere.A, Maddern.GJANZ. Anatomy in the virtual world. J. Surg. 2007; 77 Suppl 1: A77.
15. McNulty JA, Hoyt A, Gruener G, Chandrasekhar A, Espiritu B, Price R Jr, Naheedy R; An analysis of lecture video utilization in undergraduate medical education: association with performance in the courses. BMC Med Educ-01-JAN-2009; 9: 6
16. Azer SA, Eizenberg N. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first- and second-year students. Surg Radiol Anat. 2007 Mar; 29(2): 173-80.Eupub 2007 Feb 21.
17. Patel KM, Moxham BJ, The relationship between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by professional anatomists. Clin Anat-01-MAR-2008; 21(2): 182-9.
18. Vikas Seth, Prerna Upadhyaya, Mushtaq Ahmad, Vijay Moghe; Power point or chalk and talk: Perceptions of medical students versus dental students in a medical college in India. Advances in medical education and practice 2010:1 11-16.