MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4404726334 · doi:10.1177/23821205241296984

Student Critical Self-Reflection and Perceptions of Video-Based Pro-Section Computer-Assisted Instruction

2024· article· en· W4404726334 on OpenAlexafffund
Emily S. Ho, Erica Dove, Lorna Aitkens, Andrea Duncan, Anne Agur

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular Development · 2024
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAnatomy and Medical Technology
Canadian institutionsHospital for Sick ChildrenUniversity of Toronto
FundersTemerty Faculty of Medicine, University of TorontoUniversity of Toronto
KeywordsPsychologyObservational studyMedical educationPerceptionCritical reflectionGross anatomyReflection (computer programming)Critical thinkingMathematics educationMedicinePedagogyComputer scienceAnatomyPathology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Introduction The cost, high resource demands, and psychological significance of in-person cadaveric labs are barriers to their use. Computer-assisted instruction (CAI) of gross anatomy is widely available as an alternative option. However, student engagement, reflections, and expectations of learning anatomy with CAI instead of in-person labs may influence their learning experience and outcomes. Purpose To evaluate students’ critical self-reflection and perceptions of learning using online self-guided anatomy modules with video-based pro-section CAI. Methods A prospective observational cross-sectional study was conducted with first-year occupational therapy students who received anatomy education using CAI involving online self-guided anatomy modules with video-based pro-section instruction. Critical self-reflection was measured using Kember's Critical Self-Reflection Questionnaire scores and open-ended comments. Paired analysis of self-reported Kember nonreflective and reflective actions was conducted followed by quantitative (correlation, Student t-tests) and qualitative (directed content analysis) exploration of factors associated with critical self-reflection. Results Of the 126 students enrolled in the study, 97 consented and completed the study. The students’ Kember Understanding (U) subscale mean score was significantly higher than the Habitual Action (HA), Reflection, and Critical Self-Reflection subscales. The largest effect size was found between the U and HA subscales ( d s = 1.3, 95% CI [1.0, 1.5]). Academic outcomes (anatomy quiz sum score, term grade) did not correlate with the Kember scores. Overall, students felt that video-based anatomy pro-section CAI was best used in a supplementary manner and opportunities for hands-on learning of anatomy were needed. Conclusion Video-based anatomy pro-section CAI helped students understand anatomy but did not readily engage students in critical self-reflection. Strategic course and curriculum design with integrated and hands-on learning opportunities are needed to optimize student anatomy learning experience and academic outcomes while using this type of CAI.

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 imitation

Not 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.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Other design · Consensus signal: none
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.990
Threshold uncertainty score0.258

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

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.

Opus teacher head0.007
GPT teacher head0.311
Teacher spread0.303 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designOther design
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

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".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2024
Admission routes2
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Medical Education and Curricular DevelopmentSame topicAnatomy and Medical TechnologyFrench-language works237,207