Browsing by Author "Dunham, Stacey M."

Now showing 1 - 2 of 2
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    Correlating Spatial Ability With Anatomy Assessment Performance: A Meta-Analysis
    (Wiley, 2021) Roach, Victoria A.; Mi, Misa; Mussell, Jason; Van Nuland, Sonya E.; Lufler, Rebecca S.; DeVeau, Kathryn M.; Dunham, Stacey M.; Husmann, Polly; Herriott, Hannah L.; Edwards, Danielle N.; Doubleday, Alison F.; Wilson, Brittany M.; Wilson, Adam B.; Anatomy, Cell Biology and Physiology, School of Medicine
    Interest in spatial ability has grown over the past few decades following the emergence of correlational evidence associating spatial aptitude with educational performance in the fields of science, technology, engineering, and mathematics. The research field at large and the anatomy education literature on this topic are mixed. In an attempt to generate consensus, a meta-analysis was performed to objectively summarize the effects of spatial ability on anatomy assessment performance across multiple studies and populations. Relevant studies published within the past 50 years (1969-2019) were retrieved from eight databases. Study eligibility screening was followed by a full-text review and data extraction. Use of the Mental Rotations Test (MRT) was required for study inclusion. Out of 2,450 screened records, 15 studies were meta-analyzed. Seventy-three percent of studies (11 of 15) were from the United States and Canada, and the majority (9 of 15) studied professional students. Across 15 studies and 1,245 participants, spatial ability was weakly associated with anatomy performance (rpooled = 0.240; CI at 95% = 0.09, 0.38; P = 0.002). Performance on spatial and relationship-based assessments (i.e., practical assessments and drawing tasks) was correlated with spatial ability, while performance on assessments utilizing non-spatial multiple-choice items was not correlated with spatial ability. A significant sex difference was also observed, wherein males outperformed females on spatial ability tasks. Given the role of spatial reasoning in learning anatomy, educators are encouraged to consider curriculum delivery modifications and a comprehensive assessment strategy so as not to disadvantage individuals with low spatial ability.
  • Thumbnail Image
    Item
    How are our Undergraduate Students Doing? Exploring the Emotional Impact of Human Donors in Undergraduate Anatomy Education
    (2024-04-26) Shafer, Anna; Dunham, Stacey M.
    INTRODUCTION: The use of human cadavers (donors) in anatomy laboratories is a common experience for many future healthcare professionals. For undergraduates taking anatomy, this may be their first introduction to human cadavers, and for many students their first experience viewing a deceased person. Students exhibit a variety of reactions to this experience. Previous research has focused on student experiences in undergraduate medical education. This study explores student reactions to donors in undergraduate education. STUDY OBJECTIVE: The purpose of this study was to ascertain students’ emotions and reactions to the donors in the laboratory classroom setting and to identify coping mechanisms that students used within this learning environment. Understanding these student experiences will provide insight to educators as they work to accommodate student needs and understand the emotional impact of human donor use in undergraduate education. METHODS: The participants of this study included students who completed a 5-credit hour, 200-level human anatomy course between Fall 2021 through Fall 2023. The laboratory uses two prosected donors that the students observe throughout the semester. Students are required to identify structures on the donors for the muscular, nervous, circulatory, respiratory, digestive, urinary, and reproductive systems. Students do not have the opportunity to touch the donors; instead, instructors in the course demonstrate structures to small groups of students, and students can practice identifying structures during open study periods. Three of the four laboratory exams include identification questions on the donors which are approximately 25% of each exam. Students who were currently enrolled in the course, as well as those who were previously enrolled, were invited to participate in the study via the university’s learning management system. Students completed an anonymous survey that asked questions related to their individual experiences in the anatomy laboratory. The survey was hosted on Qualtrics and completed by participants electronically. The study was approved by Indiana University IRB #21296. RESULTS: A total of 326 surveys were completed. For 88% of students, this was their first exposure to human cadavers. Students described feeling excited, nervous, frightened, awed, shocked, and hesitant upon first seeing the donors. Only 22% of students somewhat or strongly agreed with the statement, “I believe using humor is an appropriate coping method for working with the donors.” When asked if they “would have benefitted from knowing more information about the lives of the donors,” 30% of students responded they either somewhat or strongly agreed. Students frequently described reminding themselves the donor was previously a living being as a coping mechanism. Many students also discussed the importance of eating before lab. CONCLUSIONS: While the initial exposure to human donors in the anatomy laboratory can be an unsettling experience for students, anatomy educators can accommodate their students' emotional needs by using appropriate instruction methods. This can provide a positive learning environment and potentially result in an improvement in students’ performances within the course as well as future anatomy education.