Using a clinical computer system to assess student anatomical knowledge and understanding: A pilot
Introduction: Although anatomy is baseline knowledge for radiation therapists, students often do not see its clinical relevance. Radiation therapists need to interpret the anatomy visualised on computed tomography (CT) images for planning and treatment verification purposes. The Bachelor of Radiation Therapy at the University of Otago combines anatomy with imaging concepts in a first-year academic paper. Teaching includes using a treatment planning system (TPS), which permits students to make the connection between textbook anatomy and CT images. This project explored the use of a TPS as an assessment tool for anatomy.
Method: The anatomical knowledge of two small cohorts of first- and second-year radiation therapy students was assessed using a treatment planning system. Semi-structured focus groups were conducted with each cohort to capture the students’ experience of the assessment.
Results: Students performed no worse in this assessment compared with a similar traditional assessment. In addition, the assessment promoted student engagement with the material. Students could demonstrate their knowledge and understanding in a manner reflective of clinical practice. Concerns regarding lack of familiarity in using the planning system and fear of technological failure on the assessment day were identified, as well as a general discomfort with the absence of a “correct answer” for certain scenarios.
Conclusions: This study shows that a TPS can be used to teach and assess anatomical knowledge. Students found the TPS assessment to be more clinically relevant and were able to make connections between topics and clinical experience. Future assessments utilising a TPS should ensure students are familiar with the system prior to those assessments.
Balasooriya, C., Toohey, S., & Hughes, C. (2005). What do deep and surface approaches to learning mean for medical students and medical education? Focus on Health Professional Education: A Multi‑Disciplinary Journal, 6(3), 29–42.
Biggs, J., & Tang, C. (2009). Teaching for quality learning at university (3rd ed.). Maidenhead, UK: Open University Press.
Boon, J. M., Meiring, J. H., & Richards, P. A. (2002). Clinical anatomy as the basis for clinical examination: Development and evaluation of an introduction to clinical examination in a problem-oriented medical curriculum. Clinical Anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 15(1), 45–50. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1002/ca.1091
Boud, D. (1990). Assessment and the promotion of academic values. Studies in Higher Education, 15(1), 101–111. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1080/03075079012331377621
Boud, D., & Falchikov, N. (2006). Aligning assessment with long term learning. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 31(4), 399–413. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1080/02602930600679050
Chakravarty, M., Latif, N. A, Abu-Hijleh, M. F., Osman, M., Dharap, A. S., & Ganguly, P. K. (2005). Assessment of anatomy in a problem-based medical curriculum. Clinical Anatomy (New York, N.Y.), 18(2), 131–136. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1002/ca.20038
Drake, R. L. (2007). A unique, innovative, and clinically oriented approach to anatomy education. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 82(5), 475–478. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1097/ACM.0b013e31803eab41
Gibbs, G., & Simpson, C. (2004). Conditions under which assessment supports students’ learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education, 1, 3–31.
Gunderman, R. B., & Wilson, P. K. (2005). Viewpoint. Exploring the human interior: The roles of cadaver dissection and radiologic imaging in teaching anatomy. Academic Medicine, 80(8), 745–749. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200508000-00008
Johnston, A. N. B. (2010). Anatomy for nurses: Providing students with the best learning experience. Nurse Education in Practice, 10(4), 222–226. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1016/j.nepr.2009.11.009
Liamputtong, P. (2009). Qualitative research methods (3rd ed.). Melbourne, Australia: Oxford University Press Australia and New Zealand.
McCann, A. L. (2010). Factors affecting the adoption of an e-assessment system. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education, 35(7), 799–818. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1080/02602930902981139
McCuskey, R. S., Carmichael, S. W., & Kirch, D. G. (2005). The importance of anatomy in health professions education and the shortage of qualified educators. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American Medical Colleges, 80(4), 349–351. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1097/00001888-200504000-00008
Monkhouse, W. S. (1993). Teaching and examining clinical skills in anatomy. Clinical Anatomy, 6, 185–187.
Morgan, D. L. (1996). Focus groups. Annual Review in Sociology, 22, 129–152.
Philip, C. T., Unruh, K. P., Lachman, N., & Pawlina, W. (2008). An explorative learning approach to teaching clinical anatomy using student generated content. Anatomical Sciences Education, 1(3), 106–110. Retrieved from http://doi.org/10.1002/ase.26
Ramsden, P. (2003). Learning to teach in higher education (2nd ed.). New York, NY/London, England: RoutledgeFalmer.
Rosenberg, W., & Donald, A. (2015). Evidence based medicine: An approach to clinical problem-solving. British Medical Journal, 310(6987), 1122–1126.
- There are currently no refbacks.