A "Do-It-Yourself" interactive bone structure module: Development and evaluation of an online teaching resource

Anatomical Sciences Education

Volumn 6, Issue 2, 2013, Pages 107-113

  Rich, Peter ^a   Guy, Richard ^a  

^a RMIT UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

Anatomy education; E learning; Gross anatomy education; Histology, microscopic anatomy; Self directed learning, computers in anatomical education; Teaching methodology

Indexed keywords

ANATOMY; ANATOMY AND HISTOLOGY; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; BONE; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER PROGRAM; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; EVALUATION STUDY; HUMAN; INTERNET; LEARNING; PERCEPTION; PROCEDURES; PROGRAM EVALUATION; PSYCHOLOGY; QUESTIONNAIRE; STUDENT; TEACHING; ARTICLE; HISTOLOGY; METHODOLOGY; PSYCHOLOGICAL ASPECT;

ANATOMY; ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; BONE AND BONES; COMPREHENSION; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; CURRICULUM; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; EDUCATIONAL STATUS; HUMANS; INTERNET; LEARNING; PERCEPTION; PROGRAM EVALUATION; QUESTIONNAIRES; SOFTWARE; STUDENTS; TEACHING;

EID: 84875054561     PISSN: 19359772     EISSN: 19359780     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1002/ase.1312     Document Type: Article

References (31)

1. Adamczyk C, Holzer M, Putz R, Fischer MR. 2009. Student learning preferences and the impact of a multimedia learning tool in the dissection course at the University of Munich. Ann Anat 191: 339-348.
2. Allen EB, Walls RT, Reilly FD. 2008. Effects of interactive instructional techniques in a web-based peripheral nervous system component for human anatomy. Med Teach 30: 40-47.
3. Bryner BS, Saddawi-Konefka D, Gest TR. 2008. The impact of interactive, computerized educational modules on preclinical medical education. Anat Sci Educ 1: 247-251.
4. Clark RE. 1992. Dangers in the evaluation of instructional media. Acad Med 67: 819-820.
5. Cook DA. 2009. The failure of e-learning research to inform educational practice, and what we can do about it. Med Teach 31: 158-162.
6. Cook DA, McDonald FS. 2008. E-learning-Is there anything special about the "E"? Perspect Biol Med 51: 5-21.
7. Deubel P. 2003. An investigation of behaviorist and cognitive approaches toinstructional multimedia design. J Educ Multimedia Hypermedia 12: 63-90.
8. Doubleday EG, O'Loughlin VD, Doubleday AF. 2011. The virtual anatomy laboratory: Usability testing to improve an online learning resource for anatomy education. Anat Sci Educ 4: 318-326.
9. Finn GM, McLachlan JC. 2010. A qualitative study of student responses to body painting. Anat Sci Educ 3: 33-38.
10. Gehrmann S, Höhne KH, Linhart W, Pflesser B, Pommert A, Riemer M, Tiede U, Windolf J, Schumacher U, Rueger JM. 2006. A novel interactive anatomic atlas of the hand. Clin Anat 19: 258-266.
11. Gould DJ, Terrell MA, Fleming J. 2008. A usability study of users' perceptions toward a multimedia computer-assisted learning tool for neuroanatomy. Anat Sci Educ 1: 175-183.
12. Guy R. 2011. Increasing student engagement in physiology-The use of simple spinal reflex animations. Proc Aust Physiol Soc 42: 41-46.
13. Jastrow H, Hollinderbäumer A. 2004. On the use and value of new media and how medical students assess their effectiveness in learning anatomy. Anat Rec 280B: 20-29.
14. Jastrow H, Vollrath L. 2002. Anatomy online: presentation of a detailed WWW atlas of human gross anatomy-Reference for medical education. Clin Anat 15: 402-408.
15. Khalil MK, Paas F, Johnson TE, Su YK, Payer AF. 2008. Effects of instructional strategies using cross sections on the recognition of anatomical structures in correlated CT and MR images. Anat Sci Educ 1: 75-83.
16. Lamberski RJ, Dwyer FM. 1983. The instructional effect of coding (color and black and white) on information acquisition and retrieval. Educ Commun Tech 31: 9-21.
17. Lei LW, Winn W, Scott C, Farr A. 2005. Evaluation of computer-assisted instruction in histology: Effect of interaction on learning outcome. Anat Rec 284B: 28-34.
18. Levinson AJ, Weaver B, Garside S, McGinn H, Norman GR. 2007. Virtual reality and brain anatomy: A randomised trial of e-learning instructional designs. Med Educ 41: 495-501.
19. McCoubrie P. 2004. Improving the fairness of multiple-choice questions: A literature review. Med Teach 26: 709-712.
20. McNulty JA, Sonntag B, Sinacore JM. 2009. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: A six-year study. Anat Sci Educ 2: 2-8.
21. O'Byrne PJ, Patry A, Carnegie JA. 2008. The development of interactive online learning tools for the study of anatomy. Med Teach 30: e260-e271.
22. Patel SG, Rosenbaum BP, Chark DW, Lambert HW. 2006. Design and implementation of a web-based, database-driven histology atlas: Technology at work. Anat Rec 289B: 176-183.
23. 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.
24. Premadasa IG. 1993. A reappraisal of the use of multiple choice questions. Med Teach 15: 237-242.
25. Reilly FD. 2011. Outcomes from building system courseware for teaching and testing in a discipline-based human structure curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 4: 190-194.
26. Salajan FD, Perschbacher S, Cash M, Talwar R, El-Badrawy W, Mount GJ. 2009. Learning with web-based interactive objects: An investigation into student perceptions of effectiveness. Comput Educ 53: 632-643.
27. Sinav A, Ambron R. 2004. Interactive web-based programs to teach functional anatomy: The pterygopalatine fossa. Anat Rec 279B: 4-8.
28. Skakun EN, Nanson EM, Kling S, Taylor WC. 1979. A preliminary investigation of three types of multiple choice questions. Med Educ 13: 91-96.
29. Smythe G, Hughes D. 2008. Self-directed learning in gross human anatomy: Assessment outcomes and student perceptions. Anat Sci Educ 1: 145-153.
30. van Merriënboer JJ, Sweller J. 2010. Cognitive load theory in health professional education: Design principles and strategies. Med Educ 44: 85-93.
31. Wong G, Greenhalgh T, Pawson R. 2010. Internet-based medical education: A realist review of what works, for whom and in what circumstances. BMC Med Educ 10: 12.