Movement guided learning© as a novel means of musculoskeletal anatomy instruction
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Our bodies can be physically stretched, palpated, and manipulated. These movement opportunities can be used in anatomical instruction, essentially turning a student's body into their own educational tool. This research details the initial development and use of a novel teaching approach, Movement Guided Learning© (MGL). Following prior instruction on both the skeletal system and the muscular system, students participated in a tutorial‐styled learning activity that relied on the MGL teaching approach. The learning activity was exploratory, guiding students through physical movements/stretches, directing students through surface palpation/visualization, and challenging students to collectively brainstorm on the application concepts. Musculoskeletal anatomy knowledge was assessed before and after the MGL activity, with improvements on open‐ended concept questions (t(9) = −3.65, p=.005). The MGL activity was well received by students, with all students indicating they believe it should be used in future classes. MGL as a means of musculoskeletal anatomy instruction provides an opportunity for students to independently construct deeper, more integrated, concept understanding. Grant Funding Source : none
Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.
How this classification was reachedexpand
Full frame distilled prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.
Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Open science | 0.000 | 0.000 |
| Research integrity | 0.000 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
Machine scores (provisional)
The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.
Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.
score_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from itClassification
machine, unvalidatedMachine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.
How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".