Skip to main content

Advertisement

SpringerLink
Log in

Student-Centered Learning in the Anatomy Laboratory: Medical Students’ Perspective

  • Original research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

The teaching of anatomy has for long been delivered through lectures and supplemented with laboratory sessions that are predominantly delivered by faculty members. In this study, we aimed to assess the benefits of medical students’ student-centered learning (SCL) approach in the anatomy laboratory. First-year medical students were invited to participate in this study. Information about the study was provided to the students and informed consent was obtained. In one laboratory session, students were divided into groups and were provided with a list of structures that they need to identify on prosections using the available resources. This was followed by a faculty-led learning session (FLL) to identify the same list of structures. Students were then asked to complete a questionnaire at the end of the laboratory session evaluating the benefits of incorporating SCL into their learning. Anonymized data was collected and analyzed using Statistical Package for Social Scientist (SPSS). From the 86 registered students, 65 took part in this study. Medical students preferred FLL session when it comes to consolidating anatomical knowledge, remembering new anatomical knowledge, and developing in-depth understanding of anatomy and their ability to ask questions regarding challenging topics. Meanwhile, students’ preferred SCL session when it comes to helping them stay focused, providing a more relaxed learning environment, enhancing communication with peers, and developing independent learning skills. In this study, we highlight the benefits of incorporating SCL in the anatomy laboratory complemented by FLL. With the clear benefits of SCL, further research is required to investigate the best way to integrate similar sessions in an anatomy laboratory and its impact on student performance.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Di Ieva A, Tschabitscher M, Prada F, Gaetani P, Aimar E, Pisano P, et al. The neuroanatomical plates of Guido da Vigevano. Neurosurg Focus. 2007;23(1):1–4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. Balta JY, Cronin M, Cryan JF, O’Mahony SM. Human preservation techniques in anatomy: a 21st century medical education perspective. Clin Anat. 2015;28(6):725–34.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. Papa V, Vaccarezza M. Teaching anatomy in the XXI century: new aspects and pitfalls. Sci World J. 2013:2013.

  4. McLachlan JC, Patten D. Anatomy teaching: ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ. 2006;40(3):243–53.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3(2):83–93.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Kerby J, Shukur Z, Shalhoud J. The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by medical students. Clin Anat. 2011;24(4):489–97.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  7. Collins JP. Modern approaches to teaching and learning anatomy. BMJ. 2008;337:a1310.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Saxena V, Natarajan P, O’Sullivan PS, Jain S. Effect of the use of instructional anatomy videos on student performance. Anat Sci Educ. 2008;1(4):159–65.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Drake RL, McBride JM, Lachman N, Pawlina W. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: the winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(6):253–9.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Nnodim JO, Ohanaka EC, Osuji CU. A follow-up comparative study of two modes of learning human anatomy: by dissection and from prosections. Clin Anat. 1996;9(4):258–62.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. McWatt SC, Newton GS, Umphrey GJ, Jadeski LC. Dissection versus prosection: a comparative assessment of the course experiences, approaches to learning, and academic performance of non-medical undergraduate students in human anatomy [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 15]. Anat Sci Educ. 2020;10.

  12. Evans DJR, Cuffe T. Near-peer teaching in anatomy: an approach for deeper learning. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(5):227–33.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  13. Bruno PA, Love Green JK, Illerbrun SL, Holness DA, Illerbrun SJ, Haus KA, et al. Students helping students: evaluating a pilot program of peer teaching for an undergraduate course in human anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9(2):132–42.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  14. Naqi SA. Peer assisted learning as a formal instructional tool. J Coll Physicians Surg Pakistan. 2014;24(3):169–72.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Krych AJ, March CN, Bryan RE, Peake BJ, Pawlina W, Carmichael SW. Reciprocal peer teaching: students teaching students in the gross anatomy laboratory. Clin Anat. 2005;18(4):296–301.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. Tariq VN. Introduction and evaluation of peer-assisted learning in first-year undergraduate bioscience. Biosci Educ. 2005;6:1–19.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Shankar N, Roopa R. Evaluation of a modified team based learning method for teaching general embryology to 1st year medical graduate students. Indian J Med Sci. 2009;63(1):4–12.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Chakravarthi S, Vijayan P. Analysis of the psychological impact of problem based learning (PBL) towards self directed learning among students in undergraduate medical education. Int J Psychol Stud. 2010;2(1):38.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  19. Weyrich P, Celebi N, Schrauth M, Möltner A, Lammerding-Köppel M, Nikendei C. Peer-assisted versus faculty staff-led skills laboratory training: a randomised controlled trial. Med Educ. 2009;43(2):113–20.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  20. Brueckner JK, MacPherson BR. Benefits from peer teaching in the dental gross anatomy laboratory. Eur J Dent Educ. 2004;8(2):72–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  21. Balta JY, Supple B, O’Keeffe GW. The universal design for learning framework in anatomical sciences education [published online ahead of print, 2020 Jun 15]. Anat Sci Educ. 2020. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1992.

  22. Deveugele M, Derese A, Maesschalck S, Willems S, Driel MV, Maeseneer J. Teaching communication skills to medical students, a challenge in the curriculum? Patient Educ Couns. 2005;58:265–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  23. Correa R, Brugal Y, Valentin L, Perez JP-GJ. Peer-teaching: an effective learning experience? Puerto Rico Heal Sci J. 2009;28(1).

  24. Schwabe L, Wolf OT. Learning under stress impairs memory formation. Neurobiol Learn Mem. 2010;93(2):183–8.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  25. Chen LP, Gregory JK, Camp CL, Juskewitch JE, Pawlina W, Lachman N. Learning to lead: self- and peer evaluation of team leaders in the human structure didactic block. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(5):210–7.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  26. O’Shea E. Self-directed learning in nurse education: a review of the literature. J Adv Nurs. 2003;43(1):62–70.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  27. Balta JY, O’Keeffe GW, Supple B. Utilizing the scholarship of teaching and learning to design an anatomy pedagogy course. Eur J Anat. 2019;23(3):233–40.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Acknowledgments

We would like to acknowledge Dr. James J. Cray’s assistance in statistical analysis.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Anatomy and Neuroscience, University College Cork, Cork, Ireland

    Elias Abdullah, Mutahira Lone & Joy Y. Balta

  2. Department of Clinical Skills, School of Medicine, St. George University, St. George’s, Grenada

    Elias Abdullah

  3. Division of Anatomy, Department of Biomedical Education and Anatomy, College of Medicine, The Ohio State University, Columbus, OH, USA

    Joy Y. Balta

Authors
  1. Elias Abdullah
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Mutahira Lone
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Joy Y. Balta
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Joy Y. Balta.

Ethics declarations

Conflict of Interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

Ethical Approval

All procedures performed in studies involving human participants were in accordance with the ethical standards of the institution and/or national research committee and with the 1964 Helsinki declaration and its later amendments or comparable ethical standards.

Informed Consent

Informed consent was obtained from all individual participants included in the study.

Additional information

Publisher’s Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Abdullah, E., Lone, M. & Balta, J.Y. Student-Centered Learning in the Anatomy Laboratory: Medical Students’ Perspective. Med.Sci.Educ. 30, 1459–1464 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01094-w

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-020-01094-w

Keywords

Search

Navigation