The relationships between learning outcomes and methods of teaching anatomy as perceived by professional anatomists

Changes in the teaching of gross anatomy have often involved decreasing student contact time alongside the use of new methods for teaching. However, there remains controversy over teaching methods and about whether cadaveric dissection by students should remain the preferred method. Furthermore, decisions concerning changes to curricula are more likely to be taken by choosing a method of teaching rather than by proper evaluation of what are the desired learning outcomes for a course in anatomy. The purpose of this study was to ascertain the attitudes of anatomists in Europe towards the methods of teaching best fitting a series of learning outcomes for anatomy and secondarily to test the hypothesis that, from evaluation of learning outcomes, anatomy is best taught by cadaveric dissection by the students. About 113 completed questionnaires were received from anatomists who are employed at higher education institutions that use various teaching methods. Most anatomists (69%) favored the use of cadaveric dissection above other teaching methods when considering the whole series of learning comes, this method seeming to achieve a range of different course aims/objectives, P < 0.001; Kruskal–Wallis). Consequently, these findings are consistent with our initial hypothesis. However, when individual learning outcomes were considered, the relationship was not so clear cut and, for example, little difference was discernible between teaching methods when considering learning outcomes related to the acquisition of anatomical knowledge. The use of human cadaveric dissection gained more approval when the skills‐base was considered rather than just the content(knowledge)‐base of an anatomical course. Clin. Anat. 21:182–189, 2008. © 2008 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.

[1]  G. Cerri,et al.  The value of teaching sectional anatomy to improve CT scan interpretation , 2001, Clinical anatomy.

[2]  H. Erden,et al.  Computed tomography and morphometry of the carpal canal in the dog. , 2003, Annals of anatomy = Anatomischer Anzeiger : official organ of the Anatomische Gesellschaft.

[3]  B. Hillen,et al.  Giving color to a new curriculum: Bodypaint as a tool in medical education , 2002, Clinical anatomy.

[4]  R. Madeley,et al.  Tomorrow's doctors. , 1994, Journal of public health medicine.

[5]  W. Cottam,et al.  Adequacy of medical school gross anatomy education as perceived by certain postgraduate residency programs and anatomy course directors , 1999, Clinical anatomy.

[6]  B. Moxham,et al.  Attitudes of professional anatomists to curricular change , 2005, Clinical anatomy.

[7]  R. Newell.  Follow the royal road: the case for dissection. , 1995, Clinical anatomy.

[8]  H. Goodwin.  Litigation and surgical practice in the UK , 2000, The British journal of surgery.

[9]  C. E. Dinsmore,et al.  Teaching and learning gross anatomy: Dissection, prosection, or “both of the above?” , 1999, Clinical anatomy.

[10]  Jeffrey T Laitman,et al.  The new face of gross anatomy , 2002, The Anatomical record.

[11]  K. Brasel,et al.  Teaching anatomy with surgeons' tools: Use of the laparoscope in clinical anatomy , 2001, Clinical anatomy.

[12]  Peter Dangerfield,et al.  Learning gross anatomy in a clinical skills course , 2000, Clinical anatomy.

[13]  W. Monkhouse,et al.  Dissection: A positive experience , 2001, Clinical anatomy.

[14]  Frank Nagy,et al.  Analysis of medical students' use of Web‐based resources for a gross anatomy and embryology course , 2002, Clinical anatomy.

[15]  D. Prideaux,et al.  Research in medical education: asking the right questions , 2002, Medical education.

[16]  D. Heylings,et al.  Anatomy 1999–2000: the curriculum, who teaches it and how? , 2002, Medical education.

[17]  M Utting,et al.  What future for dissection in courses of human topographical anatomy in universities in the UK? , 1995, Clinical anatomy.

[18]  J. Fasel,et al.  A survival strategy for anatomy , 2005, The Lancet.

[20]  C. Hulsebosch,et al.  Status of gross anatomy in the U.S. and Canada: Dilemma for the 21st century , 1994 .

[21]  J. Fagan,et al.  Just another sebaceous cyst? , 2007, Annals of the Royal College of Surgeons of England.

[22]  James H. Johnson,et al.  Importance of dissection in learning anatomy: Personal dissection versus peer teaching , 2002, Clinical anatomy.

[23]  Paul Halasz,et al.  An AcrobatTM‐based program for gross anatomy revision , 2004, Medical education.

[24]  S. Bertman,et al.  Human anatomy: A foundation for education about death and dying in medicine , 1997, Clinical anatomy.

[25]  C P M van der Vleuten,et al.  Growth of medical knowledge , 2002, Medical education.

[26]  J R Skidmore,et al.  The case for prosection: Comment on R. L. M. newell's paper , 1995, Clinical anatomy.

[27]  J. Shaw-dunn.  Follow the radical road: Comment on R. L. M. newell's paper , 1995, Clinical anatomy.

[28]  James Duncan,et al.  Integrated approach to teaching and testing in histology with real and virtual imaging , 2002, The Anatomical record.

[29]  Significance of the role of self‐study and group discussion , 1999, Clinical anatomy.

[30]  O. Plaisant,et al.  Perception of medical students towards the clinical relevance of anatomy , 2007, Clinical anatomy.

[31]  J. Fasel,et al.  Anatomy teaching for medical undergraduates: General practice as a guideline? The brain , 1999, Clinical anatomy.