Graduate and Undergraduate Faculty Collaboration Utilizing Peer Observation to Enhance Educational Opportunities for Students and Faculty: A Case Example
Main Article Content
Abstract
While evidence supports the use of cadavers to facilitate the teaching and learning of human anatomy, cadaver-based teaching may not be present at the undergraduate level at many institutions due to limited laboratory access, financial constraints, and the lack of qualified faculty trained to teach in this type of setting. The following case example outlines a unique program designed to provide cadaver-based instruction to undergraduate students, while simultaneously training undergraduate faculty to teach in this setting through peer observational methods. More specifically, the following teaching collaboration was designed with the intent to achieve the following: 1) expose undergraduate anatomy students to cadaver-based learning; 2) provide education and training to undergraduate faculty so they are better qualified to teach human anatomy in the context of a cadaver laboratory; 3) provide graduate physical therapy students additional opportunities to dissect and reinforce their anatomy knowledge; and 4) demonstrate the value of interdisciplinary collaboration. Eighty-one undergraduate students were exposed to the cadaver laboratory for four educational sessions throughout the semester. Course evaluations revealed that 93% of the undergraduate students reported that their experiences in the cadaver laboratory served to enhance their learning, and 97% reported that the use of human cadavers should be continued in future courses. This interdisciplinary model allowed anatomy instruction to be expanded to previously unserved student groups as well as provided a mechanism for professional development of undergraduate anatomy faculty. This model may serve as a template to promote new program development to enhance faculty and student learning, while simultaneously encouraging interdisciplinary collaboration across the university.
Keywords: interdisciplinary, peer observation, pedagogy, anatomy, cadaver
Downloads
Article Details
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
References
AAMC-HHMI. (2009). Report of the Scientific Foundations for Future Physicians (SFFP) Committee. Washington, DC. Retrieved from http://www.hhmi.org/grants/pdf/08– 209_AAMC- HHMI_report.pdfle
Turney, B.W. (2007). Anatomy In a Modern Medical Curricullum. Ann R Coll Surg Engl, 89, 104–107. doi 10.1308/003588407X168244.
Azer, S. A., & Eizenberg, N. (2007). Do we need dissection in an integrated problem-based learning medical course? Perceptions of first- and second-year students. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy, 29(2), 173–180. https://doi.org/10.1007/s00276-007-0180-x
Aziz, M. A., Mckenzie, J. C., Wilson, J. S., Cowie, R. J., Ayeni, S. A., & Dunn, B. K. (2002). The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anatomical Record, 269(1), 20–32. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.10046
Bell, A., & Mladenovic, R. (2008). The benefits of peer observation of teaching for tutor development. Higher Education, 55(6), 735–752. https://doi.org/10.1007/s10734-007-90931
Bell, M. (2001). Supported reflective practice: a programme of peer observation and feedback for academic teaching development. International Journal for Academic Development, 6(1), 29–39. https://doi.org/10.1080/13601440110033643
Bennett, S., & Barp, D. (2008). Peer observation – a case for doing it online. Teaching in Higher Education, 13(5), 559–570. https://doi.org/10.1080/13562510802334871
Bergman, E. M., Prince, K. J. A. H., Drukker, J., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Scherpbier, A. J. J. A. (2008). How much anatomy is enough? Anatomical Sciences Education, 1(4), 184–188. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.35
Bergman, E. M., van der Vleuten, C. P. M., & Scherpbier, A. J. J. A. (2011). Why don’t they know enough about anatomy? A narrative review. Medical Teacher, 33(5), 403–409. https://doi.org/10.3109/0142159X.2010.536276
Böckers, A., Jerg-Bretzke, L., Lamp, C., Brinkmann, A., Traue, H. C., & Bö Ckers, T. M. (2010). The gross anatomy course: An analysis of its importance. Anatomical Sciences Education, 3(1), 3–11. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.124
Brenton, H., Hernandez, J., Bello, F., Strutton, P., Purkayastha, S., Firth, T., & Darzi, A. (2007). Using multimedia and Web3D to enhance anatomy teaching. Computers and Education, 49(1), 32–53. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compedu.2005.06.005
Bryk, Anthony S., and Driscoll, M. E. (1988). “The High School as Community: Contextual Influences and Consequences for Students and Teachers.” Madison, Wisconsin: National Center on Effective Secondary Schools, Madison, WI.
Byrne, J., Brown, H., & Challen, D. (2010). Peer development as an alternative to peer observation: a tool to enhance professional development. International Journal for Academic Development, 15(3), 215–228. https://doi.org/10.1080/1360144X.2010.497685
Chan, L. K., & Cheng, M. M. W. (2011). An analysis of the educational value of lowfidelity anatomy models as external representations. Anatomical Sciences Education, 4(5), 256–263. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.239
Chapman, S. J., Hakeem, A. R., Marangoni, G., & Prasad, K. R. (2013). Anatomy in medical education: Perceptions of undergraduate medical students. Annals of Anatomy, 195(5), 409–414. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2013.03.005
Craig, S., Tait, N., Boers, D., & McAndrew, D. (2010). Review of anatomy education in Australian and New Zealand medical schools. ANZ Journal of Surgery, 80(4), 212–216. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1445-2197.2010.05241.x
Dangerfield, P., Bradley, P., & Gibbs, T. (2000). Learning gross anatomy in a clinical skills course. Clinical Anatomy, 13(6), 444–447. https://doi.org/10.1002/10982353(2000)13:6<444::AID-CA9>3.0.CO;2-W
Drake, R. L., McBride, J. M., Lachman, N., & Pawlina, W. (2009). Medical education in the anatomical sciences: The winds of change continue to blow. Anatomical Sciences Education, 2(6), 253–259. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.117
Dusseau, J., Knutson, D., & Way, D. (2008). Anatomy correlations: Introducing clinical skills to improve performance in anatomy. Family Medicine, 40(9), 633–637.
Forester, J. P., McWhorter, D. L., & Cole, M. S. (2002). The relationship between premedical coursework in gross anatomy and histology and medical school performance in gross anatomy and histology. Clinical Anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 15(2), 160–164. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.1114
Glowacki-Dudka, Michelle; Brown, M. P. (2007). Professional Development Through Faculty Learning Communities. New Horizons in Adult Education and Human Resource Development, 21(1/2).
Gogalniceanu, P., O’Connor, E. F., & Raftery, A. T. (2009). Undergraduate anatomy teaching in the UK. Bull R Coll Surg Engl. 2009;91(3):102-106. https://doi.org/10.1308/147363509X407506
Hendry, G. D., & Oliver, G. R. (2012). Seeing is Believing: The Benefits of Peer Observation. Journal of University Teaching & Learning Practice, 9(91). http://ro.uow.edu.au/jutlp/vol9/iss1/7
Johnson, E. O., Charchanti, A. V., & Troupis, T. G. (2012). Modernization of an anatomy class: From conceptualization to implementation. A case for integrated multimodalmultidisciplinary teaching. Anatomical Sciences Education, 5(6), 354–366. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1296
Johnston, A. N. B. (2010). Anatomy for nurses: Providing students with the best learning experience. Nurse Education in Practice, 10(4), 222–226. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2009.11.009
Jones, C. (2009). Interdisciplinary Approach - Advantages, Disadvantages, and the Future Benefits of Interdisciplinary Studies. Essai, 7(2009), 75–81.
Keig, L., and Waggoner, M. D. (1994). Collaborative peer review: The role of faculty in improving college teaching. ERIC Publications.
Kerby, J., Shukur, Z. N., & Shalhoub, J. (2011). The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by medical students. Clinical Anatomy, 24(4), 489–497. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.21059
Korf, H. W., Wicht, H., Snipes, R. L., Timmermans, J. P., Paulsen, F., Rune, G., & Baumgart-Vogt, E. (2008). The dissection course - necessary and indispensable for teaching anatomy to medical students. Annals of Anatomy, 190(1), 16–22. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2007.10.001
Krontiris-Litowitz, J. (2008). Using truncated lectures, conceptual exercises, and manipulatives to improve learning in the neuroanatomy classroom. Advances in Physiology Education, 32(2), 152–6. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00103.2007
Lujan, H. L., & DiCarlo, S. E. (2006). First-year medical students prefer multiple learning styles. Advances in Physiology Education, 30(1), 13–16. https://doi.org/10.1152/advan.00045.2005
McLachlan, J. C., & Patten, D. (2006). Anatomy teaching: Ghosts of the past, present and future. Medical Education, 40(3), 243–253. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.13652929.2006.02401.x
McNulty, J. A., Sonntag, B., & Sinacore, J. M. (2009). Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: A six-year study. Anatomical Sciences Education, 2(1), 2–8. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.66
Miller, S. A., Perrotti, W., Silverthorn, D. U., Dalley, A. F., & Rarey, K. E. (2002). From college to clinic: reasoning over memorization is key for understanding anatomy. The Anatomical Record, 269(2), 69–80. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.10071
Papa, V., & Vaccarezza, M. (2013). Teaching anatomy in the XXI century: New aspects and pitfalls. The Scientific World Journal. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/310348
Patel, K. M., & Moxham, B. J. (2006). Attitudes of professional anatomists to curricular change. Clinical Anatomy. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20249
Pereira, J. A., Pleguezuelos, E., Meri, A., Molina-Ros, A., Molina-Tomas, M. C., & Masdeu, C. (2007). Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Medical Education, 41(2), 189–195. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1365-2929.2006.02672.x
Peterson, C. A., & Tucker, R. P. (2005). Undergraduate coursework in anatomy as a predictor of performance: Comparison between students taking a medical gross anatomy course of average length and a course shortened by curriculum reform. Clinical Anatomy, 18(7), 540–547. https://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20154
Peterson, D. C., & Mlynarczyk, G. S. A. (2016). Analysis of traditional versus threedimensional augmented curriculum on anatomical learning outcome measures. Anatomical Sciences Education, 9(6), 529–536. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1612
Rolfe, I. E., & Sanson-Fisher, R. W. (2002). Translating learning principles into practice: A new strategy for learning clinical skills. Medical Education, 36(4), 345–352. https://doi.org/10.1046/j.1365-2923.2002.01170.x
Saltarelli, A. J., Roseth, C. J., & Saltarelli, W. A. (2014). Cadavers, Multimedia Simulation, and Anatomy Human Cadavers vs. Multimedia Simulation: A Study of Student Learning in Anatomy. Anatomical Sciences Education, 7, 331–339. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.1429
Shaffer, K. (2004). Teaching anatomy in the digital world. N Engl J Med, 351(13), 1279– 81. https://doi.org/10.1056/NEJMp048100
Sicat, B. L., Kreutzer, K. O. K., Gary, J., Ivey, C. K., Marlowe, E. P., Pellegrini, J. M., … Simons, D. F. (2014). A collaboration among health sciences schools to enhance faculty development in teaching. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 78(5). https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe785102
Simpson, J. S. (2014). An Economical Approach to Teaching Cadaver Anatomy: A 10-Year Retrospective. The American Biology Teacher, 76(1), 42–46. https://doi.org/10.1525/abt.2014.76.1.9
Sugand, K., Abrahams, P., & Khurana, A. (2010). The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anatomical Sciences Education, 3(2), 83–93. https://doi.org/10.1002/ase.139
Terrell, M. (2006). Anatomy of learning: Instructional design principles for the anatomical sciences. Anatomical Record - Part B New Anatomist. https://doi.org/10.1002/ar.b.20116