Transforming A Large Anatomy Class Into A Student Centered Learning Experience
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Anatomy education is challenged to develop contemporary pedagogies that move beyond memorization and factual recall to integration of information eliciting from students meaningful and deeper understandings. Inquiry‐based learning is one such strategy that involves students' active and increasingly independent investigation of questions and problems that are of interest to them. This learning strategy aims to encourage learners to draw upon the broader contexts for learning and emphasizes the development of skills that extend beyond the confines of the classroom. This study explores undergraduate students' perspectives and experiences of an inquiry project and its learning utility over a five year period. At the conclusion of each iteration qualitative analysis of assessment surveys were indicative that the inquiry‐based learning activity was useful for developing teamwork skills, communication skills and achieving personal goals, while the responses from facilitators of the project reflected on deep and active learning as being the primary benefits to the students. Although the perceived benefits of the activity differed between the two groups, the overall reaction was positive from all participants. Furthermore, from the data collected each year modifications were made to the inquiry‐based activity and these changes were tracked to inform trends over time. Positive perspectives consistently highlighted the value of student‐selected topics of interest, being creative with research and presentations, and working collaboratively with peers. Negatives were present every year but less consistent and reflective of the modifications of the activity. While a common theme has been the desire for more guidance with this activity, changes in negative feedback demonstrate how modifications are working to address students' learning needs. In addition, students and facilitators were observed during group work sessions and presentations, activity documents and students' work were analyzed, and interviews were conducted. Data analysis indicated that outcomes of the learning experiences reflect that of authentic learning. These observations offer a favourable view of an inquiry‐based learning activity in a large‐scale undergraduate anatomy course designed to engage students through self‐directed education, peer interaction, and collaboration. Although inquiry‐based learning continues to remain a positive experience for students, further quantitative studies are required to determine the benefit of this active learning strategy in terms of learning anatomy and applying anatomy‐specific knowledge.
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 | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Communication savante | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Science ouverte | 0,001 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,001 |
| 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 ».