Assessment of a Technology-Enhanced Review Workshop before Final Exams in an Undergraduate Human Anatomy and Physiology Course
DOI:
https://doi.org/10.55420/2693.9193.v5.n2.217Keywords:
Hispanic-Serving Community College, Gateway Course, Anatomy and Physiology I, Final Exams, Review Sessions, Biomedical Animations, Jeopardy Style PowerPoint Quiz GameAbstract
Gateway science courses are challenging for community college students, particularly for underrepresented Hispanic students who struggle with the course content as well as time management in their daily lives. In order to improve their academic success and understanding of Human Anatomy & Physiology, a series of two-weekend Anatomy and Physiology review workshops were offered prior to the cumulative final exams. Among others, teaching strategy included presentation of 3D animation video clips illuminating step-by-step biomedical processes, followed by fun Jeopardy-style Quiz competition. The competitions aimed at stimulating student interest and triggering their instant feedback that would reflect the level of their comprehension on topics of challenge. Our findings showed that the rate of passing, particularly grades of C+ and higher (required in all nursing courses), was consistently higher for workshop participants than for non-participants. We believe that the technology-enhanced workshops created an exciting, game- like learning environment that resulted in greater engagement and better academic performance among our students.
Metrics
References
Bender, D. & Randall, KE. (2005). Description and Evaluation of an Interactive Jeopardy Game Designed to Foster Self-assessment. Internal Journal of Allied Health and Practice, 3(4): 1-7.
Bloom, BS. (1984). The Search for Methods of Group Instruction as Effective as One-to- One Tutoring. Educational Leadership, 41(8): 4-17.
Drane, D., Smith, H.D., Light, G., Pinto, L. & Swarat, S. (2005). The Gateway Science Workshop Program: Enhancing Student Performance and Retention in the Sciences through Peer-Facilitated Discussion. Journal of Science Education and Technology, Vol. 9, No. 1.
Feder, ME. (2005). Aims of Undergraduate Physiology Education: a View from the University of Chicago. AJP Advances in Physiology Education, 29(1): 3-10.
Harris, DE., Hannum, L., & Gupta, S. (2004). Contributing Factors to Student Success in Anatomy and Physiology: Lower Outside Workload and Better Preparation. American Biology Teacher, 66 (3):168-175.
Hoppes, S. & Chesbro, S. (2003). Elements of Instruction in Allied Health: Do Faculty and Students Value the Same Things? Journal of Allied Health, 32(3): 167-172.
Houlson, V. (2007). Getting Results from One-Shot Instruction: A Workshop for First- Year Students. College & Undergraduate Libraries, Vol. 14 Issue 1, p89-108.
Husmann, PR., Barger, JB., Schutte AF. (2015). Study Skills in Anatomy and Physiology: Is There a Difference? Anat Sci Educ. Mar 11, doi: 10.1002/ase.1522.
Lavine, R. (2011). Biomedical Animations and Video Clips as Educational Tools. Med Sci Educ, 21(2): 177-180.
Mattheis A, Jensen M. (2014). Fostering Improved Anatomy and Physiology Instructor Pedagogy. Adv Physiol Educ, Dec; 38(4):321-9.
McKee, G. (2002). Why is Biological Science Difficult for the First-year Nursing Students? Nurse Ed. Today. 22, 251-257.
Michael, J., Modell, H., McFarland. J, Cliff, W. (2009). The “Core Principles” of Physiology: What Should Students Understand? Adv in Physiology Education. Vol. 33(1):10-16.
Michael, J. (2007). What Makes Physiology Hard for Students to Learn? Results of a Faculty Survey. Adv Physiol Educ, Mar; 31(1):34-40.
Morton, JP. Doran, DA., MacLaren, DP. (2008). Common Student Misconception in Exercise Physiology and Biochemistry. Adv Physiol Educ, 32(2)275: 142-6.
Rotter, K. (2004). Modifying “Jeopardy!” Games to Benefit All Students. Teaching Exceptional Children, 36 (3): 58 – 62.
Sefton, AJ. (2005). Charting a Global Future for Education in Physiology. Adv Physiol Educ, 29(4): 189-93.
Silverthorn, DU. (2002). Uncovering Misconceptions about the Resting Membrane Potential. Adv Physiol Educ, 26(1-4): 69-71.
Vander, A. (1998). Some Difficult Topics to Teach and not to Teach in Renal Physiology. Adv Physiol Educ, 275:S148-56.
Downloads
Published
How to Cite
Issue
Section
License
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-ShareAlike 4.0 International License.
Open Access Policy Statement
HETS Online Journal has adopted an open access policy and provides immediate access to its content free of charge to the reader. The journal does not pass on the cost of publication or submission of manuscripts, known as an Article Processing Charge (APC), to authors.
HOJ is licensed under CC-BY-NC-SA.
