A Quantitative Analysis of Four Undergraduate Human Anatomy Laboratory Curricula: Approaches, Identified Structures, Concepts, and Thematic Emphases

Using artificial intelligence to grade practical laboratory examinations: Sacrificing students' learning experiences for saving time?

The use of artificial intelligence (AI) by students has recently been made a key topic among educators because of the potential to transform students' learning experiences. However, the use of AI-based software by instructors has not received the same level of consideration despite its recent accessibility and prevalence. This contribution discusses the benefits, challenges, and limitations of commercial AI-based software (Gradescope®) for grading summative, short answer practical examinations in an undergraduate gross anatomy course. While the integration of Gradescope® in grading practical examinations reduces time and perceived instructor biases, it might erode personal relationships between students and instructors, especially with regard to individual feedback. Future research should assess best practices for incorporating AI technology into course grading considering the challenges and trade-offs to students and instructors.

Design for assessment of dissection in anatomy laboratory based on group identification of structures and peer evaluation

Dissection is a unique multisensory educational experience and is essential to learning the anatomical construction of the human and animal bodies. This study aims to introduce a specialized design for the assessment of dissection and to discuss the assessment's attributes. The design was a product of the "assessment drives learning" concept and was developed to motivate students to dissect. Students were awarded "dissection points" based on prior group dissection and identification of structures. Students' perception of the design was examined, and content analysis was performed. The assessment consisted of two parts: the first assigning each student group structures to "pin" on their previously dissected cadavers; the second was a group peer evaluation. The most critical factor for the assessment's success was careful selection of structures assigned to students to pin. The assessment was fit for the purpose, valid, reliable, and had a significant educational impact. Eighty-three percent of students (n = 116) recommended maintaining the assessment design, as they felt it promoted a deep approach to learning as well as teamwork while reducing stress to a minimum. A strong correlation (Spearman's rho = 0.46, P < 0.0001) was present between the high rating of the design and the number of structures learned, as well as, high rating and lower stress level (Spearman's rho = 0.40, P < 0.0001). There was no apparent influence of grades on student perception of the effectiveness of the assessment. This specific design of evaluation could be used as part of anatomy education in veterinary and medical schools.

Skeletal muscle coverage in undergraduate courses: a comparison of stand-alone human anatomy and anatomy and physiology (A&P) courses

Anecdotal data suggest great variation in breadth and depth of skeletal muscle coverage between undergraduate human anatomy (HA) and anatomy and physiology (A&P) courses. This manuscript is the second in a series (Reynolds A, Goodwin M, O'Loughlin VD. Adv Physiol Educ 46: 309-318, 2022. doi:https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00084.2021) that methodically assesses skeletal muscle content coverage across undergraduate HA and A&P courses. The authors developed an online skeletal muscle coverage survey and collected 342 responses worldwide, 156 from instructors of HA courses and 186 from A&P course instructors. Demographic results showed that HA courses are primarily taught at 4-year baccalaureate institutions, have relatively larger class sizes, and are more likely to use human (vs. animal) prosections or dissections. In contrast, A&P courses are primarily taught at community colleges, have relatively smaller class sizes, and are more likely to use animal (vs. human) dissections. HA courses tend to require their students to learn all skeletal muscle aspects (i.e., identification, action, attachments, innervation), whereas A&P courses tend to focus on muscle identification or action only. The proportions of courses that require identification of large, superficial skeletal muscles are similar between the two course types. However, HA courses are more likely to require their students to identify deeper and smaller muscles, including more distal appendicular muscles and pelvic muscles. These differences likely are due, in part, to the more anatomical focus of HA courses and the slightly different student populations between these courses. These findings provide much-needed information about muscular system coverage between HA and A&P courses and may guide instructor discussions about curricula.

Twelve tips for optimising medical student retention of anatomy

Concern that many graduate medical students do not know sufficient anatomy to safely and effectively assess and treat patients is a frequent complaint by clinicians. Although downgrading of anatomy relative to newer basic sciences is often blamed, there is evidence students rapidly forget anatomy. However, there are a number of ways instructors can foster long-term retention of anatomy, the most powerful involving intertwining clinical and anatomical information and assessing in-depth processing. Assisting this process is 'triaging' the curriculum so it contains only clinically engaged anatomy. Students are far more likely to remember information which they consider to be relevant to their future vocation. Therefore, teaching only anatomy which is likely to be useful in a clinical context tends to improve long-term retention of anatomy by medical students. Other helpful techniques include incorporating surface and radiological anatomy in a vertically integrated curriculum, reciprocal peer teaching and employing clinically qualified instructors.

Perceptions, satisfactions, and performance of undergraduate students during Covid-19 emergency remote teaching

Due to the Covid-19 pandemic, the education system worldwide faced sudden and unforeseen challenges. Many academic institutions closed their doors, forcing both educators and students to transition to Emergency Remote Teaching (ERT) for the remainder of the semester. This transition eliminated hands-on experiences, increased workload, and altered curricula. However, these aspects, as well as students' perceptions, study habits, and performance in response to ERT remain poorly documented. This contribution describes changes in the curriculum of an undergraduate cadaver-based laboratory, and explores students' performance, self-perceived learning, and overall satisfaction during this educational crisis. Online content delivery for this course included both asynchronous instruction and synchronous discussion sessions. While formative assessments remained the same, online spotter examinations included short answer, multiple choice, multiple answer, ordering, and true and false questions. Despite examination grades improving 20% during ERT, students reported lower levels of learning, confidence, and engagement with the course materials when compared to the face-to-face portion of the class. The most prevalent challenges identified by students were those related to the loss of access to cadaver-based learning, including difficulty identifying and visualizing structures in three dimensions, and the loss of context and sensorial cues. Flexibility in taking examinations and learning the material at their own pace were recognized as positive outcomes of the ERT transition. While the resulting student perceptions and performances are unsurprising, they offer insight into the challenges of fostering a productive learning environment in a future threatened by epidemic outbreak and economic uncertainty.

Differences Between Attached and Detached Cadaveric Prosections on Students' Identification Ability During Practical Examinations

Cadaveric prosections are effective learning tools in anatomy education. They range from a fully dissected, sometimes plastinated, complete cadaver (in situ prosections), to a single, carefully dissected structure detached from a cadaver (ex situ prosections). While most research has focused on the advantages and disadvantages of dissection versus prosection, limited information is available on the instructional efficacy of different prosection types. This contribution explored potential differences between in situ and ex situ prosections regarding the ability of undergraduate students to identify anatomical structures. To determine if students were able to recognize the same anatomical structure on both in situ and ex situ prosections, or on either one individually, six structures were tagged on both prosection types as part of three course summative examinations. The majority of students (61%-68%) fell into one of the two categories: those that recognized or failed to recognize the same structure on both in situ and ex situ prosections. The percentage of students who recognized a selected structure on only one type of prosection was small (1.6%-31.6%), but skewed in favor of ex situ prosections (P ≤ 0.01). These results suggest that overall students' identification ability was due to knowledge differences, not the spatial or contextual challenges posed by each type of prosection. They also suggest that the relative difficulty of either prosection type depends on the nature of the anatomical structure. Thus, one type of prosection might be more appropriate for teaching some structures, and therefore the use of both types is recommended.