ArticleMedical science educator2023
Faculty Perception of Student Engagement in Online Anatomy Laboratory Courses During the COVID-19 Pandemic.
Article in Medical science educator, 2023. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 2 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
2 citing papers in PubMed, 12 citations in OpenAlex.
- A comparative study on the effectiveness of online and in-class team-based learning on student performance and perceptions in virtual simulation experiments.BMC medical education · 2024Article
- Integrating Virtual Teaching in a New Era of Medical Education: Lessons from a Neurology Course.Advances in medical education and practice · 2023Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
1 author at 1 institution in 1 country.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
When the social distancing guidelines, as a result of the COVID-19 pandemic, caused universities to close campuses, there was a rapid shift in the course delivery methods of human gross anatomy laboratory sessions. Courses were delivered online, and this change created new challenges for anatomy faculty to engage students effectively. This profoundly impacted student-instructor interactions, the quality of the learning environment, and successful student outcomes. Because of the importance of student interaction and engagement for hands-on laboratory courses like anatomy, which rely on cadaver dissections and in-person learning communities, as well as the novel opportunity, this qualitative study sought to explore the faculty perspectives of transitioning their in-person laboratory sessions online and unearth their experience with student engagement in this new teaching format. The Delphi technique was used to explore this experience in two rounds of qualitative inquiry using questionnaires and semi-structured interviews, and thematic analysis was used to analyze the data, identifying codes and building themes. The study utilized indicators of student engagement in online courses to formulate four themes: instructor presence, social presence, cognitive presence, and reliable technology design and access. These were constructed based on the factors faculty used to maintain engagement, new challenges they faced, and strategies deployed to overcome these challenges and engage students in the new learning format. These are supported by strategies such as using video and multimedia, ice-breaker activities, chat and discussion features, immediate and personalized feedback, and virtual meeting via synchronous sessions. These themes highlight important lessons that faculty designing online anatomy laboratory courses can use to guide their course design, and institutions and instructional design faculty can use to inform best practices and faculty development efforts. Additionally, the study calls for further research to design a standardized and global assessment tool that measures student engagement in the online learning environment.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.