Importance of learning the connection between form and function together - redesigning anatomy and physiology for improved student learning outcomes
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
First-year undergraduate level human anatomy and physiology courses are required for numerous degrees and programs, including nursing, kinesiology, and biomedical sciences. These courses create an important foundation for students to build their continued learning. However, identifying the best way to offer these courses is still not fully clear. Some post-secondary institutions and/or programs offer integrated anatomy and physiology courses, while others, separate anatomy from physiology. As well, with the increased requirement and desire for online formats, additional consideration into course delivery is needed. Previously, we evaluated and reported student human physiology content retention 3-months following course completion at our institution that offers separate anatomy and physiology courses. We found that overall content retention was poor and exacerbated in the online format of course delivery. Given this, we identified that there may be a disconnect in the way these courses are delivered that is problematic to learning. Currently, the physiology course follows in the semester after the anatomy course. In both courses, a new body system is discussed each week in rapid succession. Out of necessity, the anatomy course includes some basic physiology to improve understanding and a review of anatomy occurs in the physiology course to fully understand function. Thus, there is significant overlap that takes away from time that can be spent reinforcing complex physiological topics. We hypothesize that redesign of these courses using a systems-based approach to combine the anatomy and physiology within one course will improve student retention of core physiological concepts, since students would learn both the form (anatomy) and function (physiology) together. We will discuss the considerations that we have evaluated with respect to the redesign of these courses and welcome discussion with respect to the strengths and weaknesses of separate versus combined anatomy and physiology curriculum delivery. Teaching Fellows Program, Trent University This is the full abstract presented at the American Physiology Summit 2023 meeting and is only available in HTML format. There are no additional versions or additional content available for this abstract. Physiology was not involved in the peer review process.
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 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens strict) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Méta-épidémiologie (sens large) | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Bibliométrie | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Études des sciences et des technologies | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».