Perceptions among occupational and physical therapy students of a nontraditional methodology for teaching laboratory gross anatomy

Anatomical Sciences Education

Volumn 4, Issue 2, 2011, Pages 71-77

  Thomas, K Jackson ^a   Denham, Bryan E ^b   Dinolfo, John D ^b  

^a MEDICAL UNIVERSITY OF SOUTH CAROLINA   (United States)

^b CLEMSON UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

Computer assisted learning; E learning; Gross anatomy; Occupational therapy; Physical therapy; Prosections; Student perceptions; Teaching methodologies

Indexed keywords

ANATOMY; ARTICLE; EDUCATION; HUMAN; MEDICAL PERSONNEL; METHODOLOGY; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PHYSIOTHERAPY; PILOT STUDY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT; TEACHING; VOCATIONAL EDUCATION;

ANATOMY; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; EDUCATION, PROFESSIONAL; HUMANS; OCCUPATIONAL THERAPY; PHYSICAL THERAPY (SPECIALTY); PILOT PROJECTS; STUDENTS, HEALTH OCCUPATIONS;

EID: 79952848468     PISSN: 19359772     EISSN: 19359780     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ase.208     Document Type: Article

References (37)

1. Bentley BS, Hill RV. 2009. Objective and subjective assessment of reciprocal peer teaching in medical gross anatomy laboratory. Anat Sci Educ 2: 143-149.
2. Berube D, Murray C, Schultze K. 1999. Cadaver and computer use in the teaching of gross anatomy in physical therapy education. J Phys Ther Educ 13: 41-46.
3. Bukowski EL. 2002. Assessment outcomes: Computerized instruction in a human gross anatomy course. J Allied Health 31: 153-158.
4. Chan LK, Ganguly PK. 2007. Evaluation of small-group teaching in human gross anatomy in a Caribbean medical school. Anat Sci Educ 1: 19-22.
5. Daruwalla ZJ, Courtis P, Fitzpatrick C, Fitzpatrick D, Mullett H. 2010. Anatomic variation of the clavicle: A novel three dimensional study. Clin Anat 23: 199-209.
6. Drake RL, McBride JM, Lachman N, Pawlina W. 2009. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: The winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ 2: 253-259.
7. Evans DJ. 2008. Designing patient-focused information: An opportunity for communicating anatomically related information. Anat Sci Educ 1: 41-45.
8. Evans DJ, Cuffe T. 2009. Near-peer teaching in anatomy: An approach for deeper learning. Anat Sci Educ 2: 227-233.
9. Fleming ND, Mills C. 1992. Not another inventory: Rather a catalyst for reflection. To Improve Academy 11: 137-149.
10. Foreman KB, Morton DA, Musolino GM, Albertine KH. 2005. Design and utility of a web-based computer-assisted instructional tool for neuroanatomy self-study and review for physical and occupational therapy graduate students. Anat Rec 285B: 26-31.
11. Gregory JK, Lachman N, Camp CL, Chen LP, Pawlina W. 2009. Restructuring a basic science course for core competencies: An example from anatomy teaching. Med Teach 31: 855-861.
12. Hamilton SS, Yuan BJ, Lachman N, Hellyer NJ, Krause DA, Hollman JH, Youdas JW, Pawlina W. 2008. Interprofessional education in gross anatomy: Experience with first-year medical and physical therapy students at Mayo Clinic. Anat Sci Educ 1: 258-263.
13. Hildebrandt S. 2010. Lessons to be learned from the history of anatomical teaching in the United States: The example of the University of Michigan. Anat Sci Educ 3: 202-212.
14. Hisley KC, Anderson LD, Smith SE, Kavic SM, Tracy JK. 2008. Coupled physical and digital cadaver dissection followed by a visual test protocol provides insights into the nature of anatomical knowledge and its evaluation. Anat Sci Educ 1: 27-40.
15. John NW, Lim IS. 2007. Cybermedicine tools for communication and learning. J Vis Commun Med 30: 4-9.
16. Lake DA. 2001. Student performance and perceptions of a lecture-based course compared with the same course utilizing group discussion. Phys Ther 81: 896-902.
17. Latman NS, Lanier R. 2001. Gross anatomy course content and teaching methodology in allied health: clinicians' experiences and recommendations. Clin Anat 14: 152-157.
18. Lujan HL, DiCarlo SE. 2006. First-year medical students prefer multiple learning styles. Adv Physiol Educ 30: 13-16.
19. Mattingly GE, Barnes CE. 1994. Teaching human anatomy in physical therapy education in the United States: A survey. Phys Ther 74: 720-727.
20. McKenzie AL, Gutierrez B. 2007. The varied-integrative-progressive (VIP) model for anatomy instruction in physical therapist education. J Phys Ther Educ 21: 17-29.
21. McLachlan JC, Patten D. 2006. Anatomy teaching: Ghosts of the past, present and future. Med Educ 40: 243-253.
22. Moxham BJ, Plaisant O. 2007. Perception of medical students towards the clinical relevance of anatomy. Clin Anat 20: 560-564.
23. Mukhtar Y, Mukhtar S, Chadwick SJ. 2009. Lost at sea: Anatomy teaching at undergraduate and postgraduate levels. Med Educ 43: 1078-1080.
24. Pawlina W. 2006. Professionalism and anatomy: How do these two terms define our role? Clin Anat 19: 391-392.
25. Pearson WGJr, Hoagland TM. 2010. Measuring change in professionalism attitude during the gross anatomy course. Anat Sci Educ 3: 12-16.
26. Petersson H, Sinkvist D, Wang C, Smedby O. 2009. Web-based interactive 3D visualization as a tool for improved anatomy learning. Anat Sci Educ 2: 61-68.
27. Philip CT, Unruh KP, Lachman N, Pawlina W. 2008. An explorative learning approach to teaching clinical anatomy using student generated content. Anat Sci Educ 1: 106-110.
28. Plack MM. 2000. Computer-assisted instruction versus traditional instruction in teaching human gross anatomy. J Physic Ther Educ 14: 38-43.
29. Rarey KE, Romrell LJ, Pawlina W, Rathe R, Rosenberg JJ. 1997. Human Anatomy. CD-ROM. Intranet version 2.2. Tampa, FL: Gold Standard Multimedia, Inc.
30. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. 2010. The anatomy of anatomy. A review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ 3: 83-93.
31. SurveyMonkey. 2010. SurveyMonkey.com-online based survey software. Portland, OR. URL: [accessed 20 November 2010].
32. Thakore H, McMahon T. 2008. Designing an interactive multimedia rich tutorial for medical students: beyond a 'book on a screen.' J Vis Commun Med 31: 4-10.
33. Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Compton S. 2009. A survey of student perceptions of team-based learning in anatomy curriculum: Favorable views unrelated to grades. Anat Sci Educ 2: 150-155.
34. Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Holland BK. 2008. Modified use of team-based learning for effective delivery of medical gross anatomy and embryology. Anat Sci Educ 1: 3-9.
35. Wait KR, Cloud BA, Forster LA, Jones TM, Nokleby JJ, Wolfe CR, Youdas JW. 2009. Use of an audience response system during peer teaching among physical therapy students in human gross anatomy: Perceptions of peer teachers and students. Anat Sci Educ 2: 286-293.
36. Yip GW, Rajendran K. 2008. SnapAnatomy, a computer-based interactive tool for independent learning of human anatomy. J Vis Commun Med 31: 46-50.
37. Youdas JW, Hoffarth BL, Kohlwey SR, Kramer CM, Petro JL. 2008. Peer teaching among physical therapy students during human gross anatomy: Perceptions of peer teachers and students. Anat Sci Educ 1: 199-206.