Search

According to self‐determination theory, the need for competence, autonomy, and relatedness has been associated with intrinsic motivation. Fulfilling basic psychological needs can lead to better learning, academic performance, and well‐being. In this study, an anatomy program integrated gamification and drawing methods to explore their influence on basic psychological needs satisfaction and potential learning implications. Basic psychological needs outcomes of sport sciences students were compared to test the effects of the Observe–Reflect–Draw–Edit–Repeat (ORDER) method and gamification (experimental condition) versus a non‐ORDER and non‐gamified program (control condition). These two different 30‐h (7‐week) anatomy education programs were implemented at two Spanish public universities with 116 first‐year sport sciences students. Pre and post‐treatment measurements were collected using the Basic Psychological Needs Satisfaction Scale. Statistical analyses included independent samples t‐tests, ANCOVAs, and factorial repeated measures ANOVAs 2 × 2 (time × treatment). The gamified ORDER program achieved higher satisfaction scores in basic psychological needs compared to the control group (t = 2.98, p = 0.004, d = 0.54). Additionally, an interaction effect between time and treatment was observed (p = 0.042, ηp2 = 0.038). Treatment and interaction effects were observed for 'autonomy' (p = 0.003, ηp2 = 0.074) and 'competence' satisfaction (p = 0.048, ηp2 = 0.035). A time effect was found for 'relatedness' in the control group, but no significant treatment or interaction effects were identified. The causes of these effects are debated in the study, as well as the limitations. These findings support the notion that students' basic psychological needs are better satisfied in anatomy education with the implementation of this multimethod educational intervention based on ORDER and gamification. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

The way medical students learn anatomy is constantly evolving. Nowadays, technologies such as tablets support established learning methods like drawing. In this study, the effect of drawing on a tablet on medical students' anatomy learning was investigated compared to drawing or summarizing on paper. The quality of drawings or summaries was assessed as a measure of the quality of strategy implementation. Learning outcome was measured with an anatomy test, both immediately afterward and after 4–6 weeks to assess its sustainability. There were no significant group differences in learning outcome at both measurement points. For all groups, there was a significant medium strength correlation between the quality of the drawings or summaries and the learning outcome (p < 0.05). Further analysis revealed that the quality of strategy implementation moderated outcomes in the delayed test: When poorly implemented, drawing on a tablet (M = 48.81) was associated with lower learning outcome than drawing on paper (M = 58.95); The latter (M = 58.89) was related to higher learning outcome than writing summaries (M = 45.59). In case of high‐quality strategy implementation, drawing on a tablet (M = 60.98) outperformed drawing on paper (M = 52.67), which in turn was outperformed by writing summaries (M = 62.62). To conclude, drawing on a tablet serves as a viable alternative to paper‐based methods for learning anatomy if students can make adequate use of this strategy. Future research needs to identify how to support student drawing, for instance, by offering scaffolds with adaptive feedback to enhance learning. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]

Spatial ability (SA) is the cognitive capacity to understand and mentally manipulate concepts of objects, remembering relationships among their parts and those of their surroundings. Spatial ability provides a learning advantage in science and may be useful in anatomy and technical skills in health care. This study aimed to assess the relationship between SA and anatomy scores in first‐ and second‐year medical students. The training sessions focused on the analysis of the spatial component of objects' structure and their interaction as applied to medicine; SA was tested using the Visualization of Rotation (ROT) test. The intervention group (n = 29) received training and their pre‐ and post‐training scores for the SA tests were compared to a control group (n = 75). Both groups improved their mean scores in the follow‐up SA test (P < 0.010). There was no significant difference in SA scores between the groups for either SA test (P = 0.31, P = 0.90). The SA scores for female students were significantly lower than for male students, both at baseline and follow‐up (P < 0.010). Anatomy training and assessment were administered by the anatomy department of the medical school, and examination scores were not significantly different between the two groups post‐intervention (P = 0.33). However, participants with scores in the bottom quartile for SA performed worse in the anatomy questions (P < 0.001). Spatial awareness training did not improve SA or anatomy scores; however, SA may identify students who may benefit from additional academic support. [ABSTRACT FROM AUTHOR]