Abstract: Learning Through Creation: A Lesson in Anatomy Through Sculpture
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
PURPOSE: Facial anatomy is a complex topic that is often difficult to teach. Multiple interconnected layers of tissue make up the underlying facial components and three-dimensional visualization is essential to understanding the relationships between critical structures. Sculpture allows the student to appreciate these relationships and the typical proportions of various facial features with regards to one another. This technique is grounded in constructionism, a learning theory that states a strong connection exists between design and learning.1,2 We sought to determine if medical students’ knowledge of facial anatomy would be improved through the creation of a portrait sculpture. METHODS: 16 students attended a 4-hour sculpture workshop administered by an instructional team affiliated with Dalhousie University’s Division of Plastic and Reconstructive Surgery and the Humanities Department. Attendees were provided with 10lbs of clay and sculpting tools. Students were guided by an experienced facilitator and plastic surgery resident who anchored the sculpting process on anatomical principles. Pre- and post- questionnaires were administered assessing students’ confidence in specific facial anatomy principles. RESULTS: Students reported their knowledge of facial surface landmarks, facial proportions, soft tissue layers, muscles, bones, arteries, skin tension lines, the golden ratio, and observational skills were significantly enhanced by the workshop (P<0.05). 81% of participants said they were very satisfied with the sculpture workshop, and 100% would recommend it to other students. Moreover, 100% of students reported that they would like more sculpture workshops offered and 94% believed that there should be other methods of anatomy training than what is currently offered in medical school. CONCLUSION: This study demonstrates that anatomical concepts can be effectively learned through guided sculpture technique facilitated by anatomy instruction. We recommend this form of teaching as an addition to the current methods of practice. In the future we hope to develop further workshops focusing on other anatomical regions. REFERENCES: 1. Parmaxi A, Zaphiris P. Developing a framework for social technologies in learning via design-based research. EMI Educ Media Int. 2015;52(1):33–46. doi:10.1080/09523987.2015.1005424. 2. Papert S, Harel I, Papert BS. Situating Constructionism. Constructionism. 1991;36:1–11. doi:10.1111/1467–9752.00269.
Récupéré en direct depuis OpenAlex et désinversé. Les résumés ne sont pas conservés dans cette base de données : les index inversés représentent 8,6 Go des 9,3 Go de texte de la base, et le serveur dispose de 13 Go libres.
Comment cette classification a été obtenuedéplier
Prédiction distillée sur la base complète
Imitation des enseignantsNi prévalence calibrée, ni vérité terrain. Validation humaine à venir. Apprise à partir de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Codex et de 10 348 étiquettes directes de Gemma. Le mode candidate est l'union des têtes enseignantes seuillées; le consensus est leur intersection. Ces sorties portent le statut machine_predicted_unvalidated et ne sont ni des étiquettes humaines ni des étiquettes directes de modèles de pointe.
Scores Codex et Gemma par catégorie
| Catégorie | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Métarecherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,001 | 0,000 |
Scores machine (provisoires)
Les deux têtes enseignantes du modèle étudiant, lues sur ce travail. Un score ordonne la base pour la relecture; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie, et le statut de validation accompagne chaque rangée tel quel.
Scores de référence d'un modèle non mature (critères de maturité non atteints, 7 itérations). Un score ordonne; il n'affirme jamais une catégorie.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · tel quel depuis la passe de notation : score_only signifie que le nombre peut ordonner les travaux, et qu'aucune étiquette de catégorie n'en découleClassification
machine, non validéePrédiction automatique; un appel candidat d’une seule tête enseignante, pas un consensus.
Le détail, modèle par modèle et score par score, se trouve en fin de page sous « Comment cette classification a été obtenue ».