Design, Implementation, and Evaluation of an Online Systemic Human Anatomy Course with Laboratory
Notice bibliographique
Résumé
Systemic Human Anatomy is a full credit, upper year undergraduate course with a prosection laboratory demonstration at Western University Canada. To meet enrolment demands beyond the physical space of the laboratory facility, a fully online section was developed to run concurrently with the traditional face-to-face (F2F) course in 2012-13. Lectures for F2F students were broadcast in live and archived format to online students using Blackboard Collaborate virtual classroom. Online laboratories were delivered in the virtual classroom by teaching assistants (TAs) with three dimensional (3D) anatomical models (Netter’s 3D Interactive Anatomy).\nStudent performance outcomes and student and instructor perceptions of the experience were studied over a two year period to determine the strengths and weaknesses of the new format. Data comparing the online and F2F student grades suggest that previous academic achievement, and not delivery format, predicts performance in anatomy. Students valued pace control, schedule and location flexibility of learning from archived materials. In the online laboratory, they had difficulty using the 3D models and preferred the unique and hands-on experiences of cadaveric specimens. The F2F environment was conducive to learning in both lecture and lab because students felt more engaged by instructors in person and were less distracted by their surroundings.\nThe course was modified in its second year with the addition of virtual breakout laboratory rooms, which allowed students to learn in smaller groups and interact with 3 TAs per lesson. The new laboratory format encouraged the majority of online students to use the 3D models. Virtual breakout rooms engaged online students in learning and the students were satisfied with their interactions with TAs and peers, though online laboratories did not adequately replace the F2F learning environment for all students. The biggest concern of the instructors was their inability to see coverbal student behaviour and use it to assess class engagement and their teaching effectiveness.\nThe design and evaluation of the course will guide anatomy educators in accommodating large student populations when faced with limited laboratory facilities and/or cadaveric specimens. The instructional methods will also be of interest to science, engineering, and mathematics educators who teach 3D concepts.
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 | 0,001 | 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 | 0,001 |
| Science ouverte | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Intégrité de la recherche | 0,000 | 0,000 |
| Charge utile insuffisante (le modèle a refusé de juger) | 0,000 | 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 ».