Practical anatomy classes: An alternative to improve the learning of middle school students
Bibliographic record
Abstract
Anatomy is the branch discipline focused on studying organisms' physical structures and parts. Although technological advances are broadening the anatomy study, the practices of prosection and dissection of human cadavers and animals remain a primary teaching method. Despite the large body of research supporting its benefits, in some countries, cadaveric prosection and dissection of vertebrate animals in secondary education have been banned. In the current study, to prevent a lack of access to anatomical sciences education, the use of plastinated biological specimens was proposed for teaching practical biology in middle and high schools. The study was conducted in the 2014 academic year. Eighty-seven middle school students participated in the experiment. Groups consisted of: (i) theoretical classes only; (ii) theoretical class plus prosection with fresh specimens class; (iii) theoretical class plus expository with plastinated specimens classes. A post-test grade method was used to assess the impact of such tasks on the learning experience of each group. An ANOVA test and multiple regression model were used to analyze the effects of the variables of interest. Our study highlighted that students who underwent the plastination practical class had higher overall performance and a higher mean post-test grade than those in the pure theoretical group. A favorable effect of a positive self-knowledge assessment on the students' performance was found, supporting the self-efficacy model of human behavior. Thus, the current study provides further evidence to support the use of plastinated specimens as an effective teaching method in countries where dissection is not feasible.
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 machine prediction
Teacher imitationNot calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.
Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)
| Category | Codex | Gemma |
|---|---|---|
| Metaresearch | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Meta-epidemiology (narrow) | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Meta-epidemiology (broad) | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Bibliometrics | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Science and technology studies | 0.001 | 0.000 |
| Scholarly communication | 0.002 | 0.001 |
| Open science | 0.001 | 0.002 |
| Research integrity | 0.001 | 0.001 |
| Insufficient payload (model declined to judge) | 0.019 | 0.004 |
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 source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), 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".