Volume 13, Issue 2 (Spring 2016 -- 2016)                   ASJ 2016, 13(2): 99-104 | Back to browse issues page

XML Print


Download citation:
BibTeX | RIS | EndNote | Medlars | ProCite | Reference Manager | RefWorks
Send citation to:

Taghavi M M, Vazirinejad R, Komlakh K, Shabanizadeh A, Taghipour Z, Jafari-Naveh H R, et al . Comparing the Effect of Teaching Aids, Review Session, and Practical Session on Learning Anatomy. ASJ. 2016; 13 (2) :99-104
URL: http://anatomyjournal.ir/article-1-173-en.html
1- Department of Anatomy and Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
2- Department of Social Medicine and Social Determinants of Health Research Center, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
3- Department of Neurosurgery, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
4- Department of Anatomy, School of Medicine, Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences, Rafsanjan, Iran.
Abstract:   (2707 Views)

Introduction: We compared the effect of the teaching aids and review sessions on learning anatomy subjects by the medical students of Rafsanjan University of Medical Sciences.
Methods: In this study, during each semester, practical anatomy courses were presented by using different teaching aids such as, cadaver, bones, and training videos to the students. For all studied groups, at the end of each semester and a few days before the final exam, the regular review sessions were held by course lecturers. Then, student’s viewpoints about the effect of both teaching aids and review sessions on their learning process were investigated, using the study checklist. Finally, the mean final scores of students who participated in the review session were compared with those who did not.
Results: The mean scores of anatomy practice exam (range 1-20) of students who did not participate in review sessions were significantly lower than the student who did participate in these sessions. Among the medical and dental students, a significant difference was reported with regard to the effectiveness of teaching aids and review sessions on learning process. Viewpoint of senior students in comparison to junior students were more positive about practical courses and review sessions. Overall, students’ viewpoints about the effect of both teaching aids and review sessions on their learning process were positive and there was no significant difference between them with regard to their gender or field of study. However, medical and dental students believed that using teaching aids such as bones and models was very effective in their learning process of head and neck course. These opinions were significantly different between students of these two courses compare to students in the other courses (for models: P=0.022, for bones: P=0.007).
Conclusion: Practical anatomy and review sessions play an important role in the learning process of different subjects. Therefore, we suggest that practical courses and review sessions be held with greater emphasis and for a longer time.

Keywords: Anatomy, Learning, Teaching
Full-Text [PDF 494 kb]   (1344 Downloads)    
Type of Study: Review |
Received: 2015/11/25 | Accepted: 2016/04/1 | Published: 2016/05/1

References
1. Michel MC, Bischoff A, Heringdorf DZ, Neumann D, Jakobs K. Problem-vs. Lecture-based pharmacology teaching in a German medical school. Naunyn-Schmiedeberg's. Archives of Pharmacology. 2002; 366(1):64-68. doi: 10.1007/s00210-002-0570-x [DOI:10.1007/s00210-002-0570-x]
2. Mehdizadeh M, Haghir H, Joghtai MT, Shayan SH. [Educational needs and practical skills of master anatomy students considering the needs of the community (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2004; 4(2):85-93.
3. Shariati M, Jafarinaveh H, Bakhshi H. [The role of anatomy course in achieving clinical objectives: The viewpoints of Rafsanjan Medical University students in clinical settings (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2005; 5(2): 176-80.
4. Adibi I, Hasani N, Sadre Arhami S, Ashourioun V, Monajemi AR. [Teaching integrated course of physical examination and trunk anatomy to second year medical students (Persian)]. Iranian Journal of Medical Education. 2006; 6(1):7-13.
5. Forrester-Paton C, Forrester-Paton J, Gordon AL, Mitchell HK, Bracewell N, Mjojo J, et al. Undergraduate teaching in geriatric medicine: mapping the British Geriatrics Society undergraduate curriculum to Tomorrow's Doctors 2009. Age & Ageing. 2014; 43(3):436-439. doi: 10.1093/ageing/afu024 [DOI:10.1093/ageing/afu024]
6. Mirzaei M, Azizian F. [Assessment of interactive and Task-Based Learning (TBL) methods compared to the conventional method of undergraduate teaching (Persian)]. Journal of Medical Education & Development. 2012; 7(1):10-17.
7. Reidenberg JS, Laitman JT. The new face of gross anatomy. Anatomical Record. 2002; 269(2):81-88. doi: 10.1002/ar.10076 [DOI:10.1002/ar.10076]
8. Azer SA, Eizenberg N. Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first-and second-year students. Surgical & Radiologic Anatomy. 2007; 29(2):173-80. doi: 10.1007/s00276-007-0180-x [DOI:10.1007/s00276-007-0180-x]
9. Lempp HK. Perceptions of dissection by students in one medical school: beyond learning about anatomy. A qualitative study. Medical Education. 2005; 39(3):318-25. doi: 10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02095.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1365-2929.2005.02095.x]
10. Miller SA, Perrotti W, Silverthorn DU, Dalley AF, Rarey KE. From college to clinic: reasoning over memorization is key for understanding anatomy. Anatomical Record. 2002; 269(2):69-80. doi: 10.1002/ar.10071 [DOI:10.1002/ar.10071]
11. Lachman N, Pawlina W. Integrating professionalism in early medical education: the theory and application of reflective practice in the anatomy curriculum. Clinical Anatomy. 2006; 19(5):456-60. doi: 10.1002/ca.20344 [DOI:10.1002/ca.20344]
12. Cho MJ, Hwang YI. Students' perception of anatomy education at a Korean medical college with respect to time and contents. Anatomy & Cell Biology. 2013; 46(2):157-62. doi: 10.5115/acb.2013.46.2.157 [DOI:10.5115/acb.2013.46.2.157]
13. Mitchell R, Batty L. Undergraduate perspectives on the teaching and learning of anatomy. ANZ Journal of Surgery. 2009; 79(3):118-21. doi: 10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04826.x [DOI:10.1111/j.1445-2197.2008.04826.x]
14. Lam TP, Irwin M, Chow LW, Chan P. Early introduction of clinical skills teaching in a medical curriculum-factors affecting students' learning. Medical Education. 2002; 36(3):233-40. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01142.x [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01142.x]
15. Tavares MA, Silva MC. Evaluation of the Clinical Anatomy Program in the Medical School of Porto by two cohorts of students. Clinical Anatomy. 2002; 15(1):56-61. doi: 10.1002/ca.1093 [DOI:10.1002/ca.1093]
16. Allen SS, Roberts K. An integrated structure-function module for first year medical students: correlating anatomy, clinical medicine and radiology. Medical Education. 2002; 36(11):1106-107. doi: 10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.134127.x [DOI:10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.134127.x]

Add your comments about this article : Your username or Email:
CAPTCHA code

Send email to the article author


Designed & Developed by : Yektaweb