Computer Assisted Learning: Assessment of the Veterinary Virtual Anatomy Education Software IVALA™
Abstract
:1. Introduction
2. Materials and Methods
2.1. IVALA™ Program
2.2. RUSVM Gross Anatomy 1 Course
2.3. Participants
2.4. Survey Tools
- (1)
- What is the participant’s general attitude toward CAL and the IVALA™ program?
- (2)
- What is the perceived educational value of CAL and the IVALA™ program in relation to other learning resources?
- (3)
- What effect did IVALA™ have on the laboratory dissection experience?
- (4)
- Was the accuracy, fidelity, and content of IVALA™ suitable for this anatomy course?
- (5)
- Was the IVALA™ program user friendly?
- (6)
- Was the IVALA™ program beneficial to anatomic education?
2.5. Examinations
2.6. Statistical Analysis
3. Results
3.1. Examination Outcomes
3.2. Pre Interaction Survey
3.3. Post Interaction Survey
4. Discussion
5. Conclusions
Supplementary Materials
Author Contributions
Acknowledgments
Conflicts of Interest
References
- McLachlan, J.C.; Patten, D. Anatomy teaching: Ghosts of the past, present and future. Med. Educ. 2006, 40, 243–253. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Sugand, K.; Abrahams, P.; Khurana, A. The anatomy of anatomy: A review for its modernization. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2010, 3, 83–93. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Aziz, M.A.; Mckenzie, J.C.; Wilson, J.S.; Cowie, R.J.; Ayeni, S.A.; Dunn, B.K. The human cadaver in the age of biomedical informatics. Anat. Rec. 2002, 269, 20–32. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Böckers, A.; Jerg-Bretzke, L.; Lamp, C.; Brinkmann, A.; Traue, H.C.; Böckers, T.M. The gross anatomy course: An analysis of its importance. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2010, 3, 3–11. [Google Scholar] [PubMed]
- Preece, D.; Williams, S.B.; Lam, R.; Weller, R. “Let’s get physical”: Advantages of a physical model over 3D computer models and textbooks in learning imaging anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2013, 6, 216–224. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Levine, M.G.; Stempak, J.; Conyers, G.; Walters, J.A. Implementing and integrating computer-based activities into a problem-based gross anatomy curriculum. Clin. Anat. 1999, 12, 191–198. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Leveritt, S.; McKnight, G.; Edwards, K.; Pratten, M.; Merrick, D. What anatomy is clinically useful and when should we be teaching it? Anat. Sci. Educ. 2016, 9, 468–475. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jones, D.G. Reassessing the importance of dissection: A critique and elaboration. Clin. Anat. 1997, 10, 123–127. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Gummery, E.; Cobb, K.A.; Mossop, L.H.; Cobb, M.A. Student Perceptions of Veterinary Anatomy Practical Classes: A Longitudinal Study. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2017, 1–14. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Terrell, M. Anatomy of learning: Instructional design principles for the anatomical sciences. Anat. Rec. B New Anat. 2006, 289, 252–260. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Fitzgerald, J.E.; White, M.J.; Tang, S.W.; Maxwell-Armstrong, C.A.; James, D.K. Are we teaching sufficient anatomy at medical school? The opinions of newly qualified doctors. Clin. Anat. 2008, 21, 718–724. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Hart, L.A.; Wood, M.W.; Weng, H.-Y. Mainstreaming alternatives in veterinary medical education: Resource development and curricular reform. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2005, 32, 473–480. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Ozkadif, S.; Eken, E. Modernization process in veterinary anatomy education. Energy Educ. Sci. Technol. B 2012, 4, 957–962. [Google Scholar]
- Bok, D. Needed: A new way to train doctors. In New Directions for Medical Education; Schmidt, H.G., Lipkin, M., Jr., de Vries, M.W., Greep, J.M., Eds.; Springer: New York, NY, USA, 1989; pp. 17–38. ISBN 978-1-4612-8114-6. [Google Scholar]
- Cottam, W.W. Adequacy of medical school gross anatomy education as perceived by certain postgraduate residency programs and anatomy course directors. Clin. Anat. 1999, 12, 55–65. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Craig, S.; Tait, N.; Boers, D.; McAndrew, D. Review of anatomy education in Australian and New Zealand medical schools. ANZ J. Surg. 2010, 80, 212–216. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- McLachlan, J.C.; Bligh, J.; Bradley, P.; Searle, J. Teaching anatomy without cadavers. Med. Educ. 2004, 38, 418–424. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Korf, H.W.; Wicht, H.; Snipes, R.L.; Timmermans, J.P.; Paulsen, F.; Rune, G.; Baumgart-Vogt, E. The dissection course–necessary and indispensable for teaching anatomy to medical students. Ann. Anat. 2008, 190, 16–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Reidenberg, J.S.; Laitman, J.T. The new face of gross anatomy. Anat. Rec. 2002, 269, 81–88. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Pereira, J.A.; Pleguezuelos, E.; Meri, A.; Molina-Ros, A.; Molina-Tomás, M.C.; Masdeu, C. Effectiveness of using blended learning strategies for teaching and learning human anatomy. Med. Educ. 2007, 41, 189–195. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Francis, N.R.; Lewis, W. What price dissection? Dissection literally dissected. Med. Humanit. 2001, 27, 2–9. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Nicholson, D.T.; Chalk, C.; Funnell, W.R.J.; Daniel, S.J. Can virtual reality improve anatomy education? A randomised controlled study of a computer-generated three-dimensional anatomical ear model. Med. Educ. 2006, 40, 1081–1087. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tan, S.; Hu, A.; Wilson, T.; Ladak, H.; Haase, P.; Fung, K. Role of a computer-generated three-dimensional laryngeal model in anatomy teaching for advanced learners. J. Laryngol. Otol. 2012, 126, 395–401. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khalil, M.; Lamar, C.; Johnson, T. Using computer-based interactive imagery strategies for designing instructional anatomy programs. Clin. Anat. 2005, 18, 68–76. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Codd, A.M.; Choudhury, B. Virtual reality anatomy: Is it comparable with traditional methods in the teaching of human forearm musculoskeletal anatomy? Anat. Sci. Educ. 2011, 4, 119–125. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Spitzer, V.M.; Scherzinger, A.L. Virtual anatomy: An anatomist’s playground. Clin. Anat. 2006, 19, 192–203. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Yammine, K.; Violato, C. A meta-analysis of the educational effectiveness of three-dimensional visualization technologies in teaching anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2015, 8, 525–538. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nieder, G.L.; Scott, J.N.; Anderson, M.D. Using QuickTime virtual reality objects in computer-assisted instruction of gross anatomy: Yorick—the VR Skull. Clin. Anat. 2000, 13, 287–293. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef]
- Drake, R.L.; McBride, J.M.; Lachman, N.; Pawlina, W. Medical education in the anatomical sciences: The winds of change continue to blow. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2009, 2, 253–259. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Tam, M.D.; Hart, A.R.; Williams, S.; Heylings, D.; Leinster, S. Is learning anatomy facilitated by computer-aided learning? A review of the literature. Med. Teach. 2009, 31, e393–e396. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Berg, D.; Raugi, G.; Gladstone, H.; Berkley, J.; Weghorst, S.; Ganter, M.; Turkiyyah, G. Virtual reality simulators for dermatologic surgery: Measuring their validity as a teaching tool. Dermatol. Surg. 2001, 27, 370–374. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Kim, S.; Brinkley, J.F.; Rosse, C. Profile of on-line anatomy information resources: Design and instructional implications. Clin. Anat. 2003, 16, 55–71. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Mathiowetz, V.; Yu, C.H.; Quake-Rapp, C. Comparison of a gross anatomy laboratory to online anatomy software for teaching anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2016, 9, 52–59. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- IVALA. Available online: www.ivalalearn.com (accessed on 15 February 2018).
- VIN. Paul Pion Veterinary Information Network. Available online: www.vin.com (accessed on 15 February 2018).
- Evans, H.; De Lahunta, A. Guide to the Dissection of the Dog, 8th ed.; Elsevier Health Sciences: New York, NY, USA, 2016; ISBN 9780323392983. [Google Scholar]
- Dyce, K.M.; Sack, W.O.; Wensing, C.J.G. Textbook of Veterinary Anatomy, 4th ed.; Elsevier Health Sciences: New York, NY, USA, 2010; ISBN 9781416066071. [Google Scholar]
- Medhub E*Value. Available online: http://www.medhub.com/evalue/evalue-product/ (accessed on 7 March 2018).
- Linton, A.; Schoenfeld-Tacher, R.; Whalen, L.R. Developing and implementing an assessment method to evaluate a virtual canine anatomy program. J. Vet. Med. Educ. 2005, 32, 249–254. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Team, R.C. R: A language and environment for statistical computing. R Foundation for Statistical Computing, Vienna, Austria. 2013. Available online: http://www.R-project.org/ (accessed on 21 September 2017).
- Burnard, P. Constructing grounded theory: A practical guide through qualitative analysis. Nurse Res. 2006, 13, 84–85. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McNulty, M.A.; Stevens-Sparks, C.; Taboada, J.; Daniel, A.; Lazarus, M.D. An anatomy precourse enhances student learning in veterinary anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2016, 9, 344–356. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Saldaña, J. The Coding Manual for Qualitative Researchers; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 2015; ISBN 978-1446247372. [Google Scholar]
- Strauss, A.; Corbin, J. Basics of Qualitative Research; Sage: Thousand Oaks, CA, USA, 1990; pp. 85–186. ISBN 978-1-4129-9746-1. [Google Scholar]
- Glaser, B.; Strauss, A. The Discovery of Grounded Theory: Strategies for Qualitative Research; Aldine Publishing Co: Chicago, IL, USA, 1967; pp. 1–271. ISBN 978-0202302607. [Google Scholar]
- McNulty, J.A.; Halama, J.; Espiritu, B. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in the medical gross anatomy curriculum. Clin. Anat. 2004, 17, 73–78. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Motola, I.; Devine, L.A.; Chung, H.S.; Sullivan, J.E.; Issenberg, S.B. Simulation in healthcare education: A best evidence practical guide. AMEE Guide No. 82. Med. Teach. 2013, 35, e1511–e1530. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Jastrow, H.; Vollrath, L. Teaching and learning gross anatomy using modern electronic media based on the visible human project. Clin. Anat. 2003, 16, 44–54. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Nieder, G.L.; Nagy, F. Analysis of medical students’ use of web-based resources for a gross anatomy and embryology course. Clin. Anat. 2002, 15, 409–418. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- McNulty, J.A.; Sonntag, B.; Sinacore, J.M. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: A six-year study. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2009, 2, 2–8. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed] [Green Version]
- Qayumi, A.; Kurihara, Y.; Imai, M.; Pachev, G.; Seo, H.; Hoshino, Y.; Cheifetz, R.; Matsuura, K.; Momoi, M.; Saleem, M.; et al. Comparison of computer-assisted instruction (CAI) versus traditional textbook methods for training in abdominal examination (Japanese experience). Med. Educ. 2004, 38, 1080–1088. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Trelease, R.B. Anatomical informatics: Millennial perspectives on a newer frontier. Anat. Rec. 2002, 269, 224–235. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Elizondo-Omaña, R.E.; Morales-Gómez, J.A.; Guzmán, S.L.; Hernández, I.L.; Ibarra, R.P.; Vilchez, F.C. Traditional teaching supported by computer-assisted learning for macroscopic anatomy. Anat. Rec. B New Anat. 2004, 278, 18–22. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Khot, Z.; Quinlan, K.; Norman, G.R.; Wainman, B. The relative effectiveness of computer-based and traditional resources for education in anatomy. Anat. Sci. Educ. 2013, 6, 211–215. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
- Garg, A.; Norman, G.R.; Spero, L.; Maheshwari, P. Do virtual computer models hinder anatomy learning? Acad. Med. 1999, 74, S87–S89. [Google Scholar] [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Student Group | Exam 1 | Exam 2 | Both Exam Scores Combined | ||||||
---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
IVALA™ associated questions | Non IVALA™ associated questions | All (total) | IVALA™ associated questions | Non IVALA™ associated questions | All (total) | IVALA™ associated questions | Non IVALA™ associated questions | All (total) | |
IVALA™ users (n = 56) | 77.8 | 86.0 | 82.5 | 75.8 | 89.2 | 84.4 | 77.1 | 87.4 | 83.3 |
Non IVALA™ users (n = 123) | 71.6 | 83.5 | 78.5 | 70.4 | 86.7 | 80.9 | 71.2 | 84.9 | 79.5 |
p-value comparisons | 0.007 | 0.3 | 0.02 | 0.01 | 0.2 | 0.01 | 0.003 | 0.09 | 0.006 |
© 2018 by the authors. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution (CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).
Share and Cite
Little, W.B.; Artemiou, E.; Conan, A.; Sparks, C. Computer Assisted Learning: Assessment of the Veterinary Virtual Anatomy Education Software IVALA™. Vet. Sci. 2018, 5, 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci5020058
Little WB, Artemiou E, Conan A, Sparks C. Computer Assisted Learning: Assessment of the Veterinary Virtual Anatomy Education Software IVALA™. Veterinary Sciences. 2018; 5(2):58. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci5020058
Chicago/Turabian StyleLittle, William Brady, Elpida Artemiou, Anne Conan, and Cathryn Sparks. 2018. "Computer Assisted Learning: Assessment of the Veterinary Virtual Anatomy Education Software IVALA™" Veterinary Sciences 5, no. 2: 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci5020058
APA StyleLittle, W. B., Artemiou, E., Conan, A., & Sparks, C. (2018). Computer Assisted Learning: Assessment of the Veterinary Virtual Anatomy Education Software IVALA™. Veterinary Sciences, 5(2), 58. https://doi.org/10.3390/vetsci5020058