The World Wide Web, online course material, electronic databases, and e-books present a unique challenge to traditionally approached curriculum delivery. With the Millennial student in mind teaching focus is no longer on how knowledge should be transferred, but how knowledge should be managed.
The challenge for traditional anatomy courses now lies in how to incorporate desired global outcomes and maximize the skill of teaching for a group of individuals who have free access to multiple sources of information but lack direction on how to interpret and develop clinical reasoning. In this chapter, we provide a method for conveying core concepts that are driven by enquiry, critical thinking, reflective learning, and student centeredness. Presentation of anatomical material is built around concepts that have an underlying clinical principle, formulation of multiple choice questions around the concept, identification of key anatomical structures easily located through dissection, and the application of the principle to practical understanding and clinical interpretation. While the design of the briefing session is embedded within a team-based learning framework, its principles may be as effectively applied to larger classroom settings. The implication of adopting a purely pedagogy driven lecture is that not only is there greater student involvement but also greater demand on teacher creativity and planning and a change in the nature of the teaching mission—teaching by “questioning instead of teaching by telling.” (Mazur, Science 323:50–1, 2009)
Critical Thinking Clinical Reasoning Traditional Lecture Teaching Anatomy Audience Response System
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.
Drake RL, et al. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: the winds of change continue to blow. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(6):253–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3(2):83–93.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Gregory JK, et al. Restructuring a basic science course for core competencies: an example from anatomy teaching. Med Teach. 2009;31(9):855–61.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Borges NJ, et al. Comparing millennial and generation X medical students at one medical school. Acad Med. 2006;81(6):571–6.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Lachman N, Christensen KN, Pawlina W. Anatomy teaching assistants: facilitating teaching skills for medical students through apprenticeship and mentoring. Med Teach. 2013;35(1):e919–25.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Kotze SH, Driescher ND, Mole CG. The translucent cadaver: a follow-up study to gauge the efficacy of implementing changes suggested by students. Anat Sci Educ. 2013;6(6):433–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Camp CL, et al. Comparative efficacy of group and individual feedback in gross anatomy for promoting medical student professionalism. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3(2):64–72.PubMedGoogle Scholar
Jonas-Dwyer D, Pospisil R. The millennial effect: implications for academic development. Proceedings of the 2004 Annual International Conference of the Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australasia (HERDSA). 2004. pp. 356–66.Google Scholar
Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Compton S. Team-based learning in anatomy: an efficient, effective, and economical strategy. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4(6):333–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Nanjundaiah K, Chowdapurkar S. Body-painting: a tool which can be used to teach surface anatomy. J Clin Diagn Res. 2012;6(8):1405–8.PubMedCentralPubMedGoogle Scholar
Regan de Bere S, Mattick K. From anatomical ‘competence’ to complex capability. The views and experiences of UK tutors on how we should teach anatomy to medical students. Adv Health Sci Educ. 2010;15(4):573–85.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
Trelease RB, Nieder GL. Transforming clinical imaging and 3D data for virtual reality learning objects: HTML5 and mobile devices implementation. Anat Sci Educ. 2013;6(4):263–70.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Holland BK. Modified use of team-based learning for effective delivery of medical gross anatomy and embryology. Anat Sci Educ. 2008;1(1):3–9.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Vasan NS, DeFouw DO, Compton S. A survey of student perceptions of team-based learning in anatomy curriculum: favorable views unrelated to grades. Anat Sci Educ. 2009;2(4):150–5.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Youdas JW, et al. Use of individual feedback during human gross anatomy course for enhancing professional behaviors in doctor of physical therapy students. Anat Sci Educ. 2013;6(5):324–31.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
DiLullo C, McGee P, Kriebel RM. Demystifying the Millennial student: a reassessment in measures of character and engagement in professional education. Anat Sci Educ. 2011;4(4):214–26.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar
Twenge JM. Generational changes and their impact in the classroom: teaching Generation Me. Med Educ. 2009;43(5):398–405.PubMedCrossRefGoogle Scholar