Introduction: Medical institutions around the world are exploring various newer modes of teaching and assessment
methods to incorporate into the teaching curriculum. In this changing situation, e-learning methods are being widely used. For determining the effectiveness of a new learning method, assessment should be done since learning and assessment are intricately associated. One such newer method of testing practical anatomy knowledge is online spotter examination. The present study was conducted to correlate the students’ performance between traditional and online spotter exam and analyse the students’ perception about both exam patterns.
Methods: A cross-sectional descriptive study was conducted among 120 first year medical students after obtaining ethical approval from the Institute Research and Ethics committee. Students were selected using simple random sampling method. Two modes of practical examination, traditional and online spotter, were conducted. After the examination, mean scores of OSE and TSE were compared using independent sample t-test. A questionnaire was given to collect data on their perception about the exam pattern, and the responses were scored using Likert scale.
Results: The performance mean score in online spotter exam was higher compared to traditional spotter exam. Analysis of the students’ perception about the exam pattern revealed that they preferred the online examination. This could be attributed to advantages of online teaching and learning using audio-visual aids with good quality images (84=70%), easy to answer in multiple choice question (78=65%), quick results (108=90%), absence of bias in evaluation (108=90%), easy for future online postgraduate entrance exams (114=95%), and overall time limit and its advantages (84=70%);the only drawback was anxiety about internet connectivity (96=80%).
Conclusion: Online spotter exam can be conducted for routine formative assessment under controlled conditions to improve the students’ knowledge and enhance their confidence and adaptability for future online exams. |
- Van der Vleuten CP. The assessment of professional competence: developments, research and practical implications. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract. 1996;1(1):41-7.
- Schuwirth LW, van der Vleuten CP. Programmatic assessment: from assessment of learning to assessment for learning. Med Teach. 2011;33(6):478-85.
- McKeown PP, Heylings DJ, Stevenson M, McKelvey KJ, Nixon JR, McCluskey DR. The impact of curricular change on medical students’ knowledge of anatomy. Med Educ. 2003;37:954–61.
- Shaffer K. Teaching anatomy in the digital world. N Engl J Med. 2004;351:1279–82.
- Heylings DJA. Anatomy 1999–2000: the curriculum who teaches it and how. Med Educ. 2002;36:702–10.
- Older J. Anatomy: a must for teaching the next generation. Surgeon. 2004;2:79–90.
- Rohen JW, Yokochi C, Lutjen-Drecoll E. Color Atlas of Anatomy: A Photographic Study of the Human Body. 6th Ed. Stuttgart, Germany: Schattauer GmbH. 2006. 532 p.
- Pei L, Wu H. Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta‑analysis. Med Educ Online. 2019;24:1666538.
- Romanov K, Nevgi A. Do medical students watch video clips in eLearning and do these facilitate learning? Med Teach. 2007;29:484–8.
- Erolin C, Reid L, McDougall S. Using virtual reality to complement and enhance anatomy education. J Vis Commun Med. 2019;42:93–101.
- Estai M, Bunt S. Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical review. Ann Anat. 2016;208:151–7.
- Yammine K. The current status of anatomy knowledge: Where are we now? Where do we need to go and how do we get there? Teach Learn Med. 2014;26:184–8.
- Daly FJ. Use of electronic anatomy practical examinations for remediating “at risk” students. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;3:46–9.
- Friedman Ben-David M. Principles of assessment. In: Dent, Harden, editors. A Practical Guide for Medical Teachers. 3rd ed. London: Churchill Livingstone; 2009.
- Thompson AR, O’Loughlin VD. The blooming anatomy tool (BAT): A discipline-specific rubric for utilizing Bloom’s taxonomy in the design and evaluation of assessments in the anatomical sciences. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8(6):493-501.
- Artino AR Jr, La Rochelle JS, Dezee KJ, Gehlbach H. Developing questionnaires for educational research: AMEE guide no. 87. Med Teach. 2014;36:463–74.
- Gibbs G, Simpson C. Conditions under which assessment supports student learning. Learning and Teaching in Higher Education. 2005;1:3–31.
- Tirpude AP, Gaikwad M, Tirpude PA, Jain M, Bora S. Retrospective analysis of prevalent anatomy spotter’s examination: an educational audit. Korean J Med Educ.2019;31(2):115–24.
- Sadeesh T, Prabavathy G, Ganapathy A. Evaluation of undergraduate medical students’ preference to human anatomy practical assessment methodology: a comparison between online and traditional methods. Surgical and Radiologic Anatomy. 2021;43:531–5.
- Meyer AJ, Innes SI, Stomski NJ, Armson AJ. Student performance on practical gross anatomy examinations is not affected by assessment modality. Anat Sci Educ. 2016;9:111–20.
- Inuwa IM, Airawahy M, Taranikanti V, Habbal O. Anatomy "steeplechase" online: Necessity sometimes is the catalyst for innovation. Anat Sci Educ. 2010;4:115–8.
- Inuwa IM, Taranikanti V, Al-rawahy M, Habbal O. Anatomy practical examinations: how does student performance on computerized evaluation compare with the traditional format? Anat Sci Educ. 2012;5:27–32.
- Inuwa IM, Taranikanti V, Al-Rawahy M, Habbal O. Perceptions and attitudes of medical students towards two methods of assessing practical anatomy knowledge. Sultan Qaboos Univ Med J. 2011;11:383–90.
- Wilkinson T, Boohan M, Stevenson M. Does learning style influence academic performance in different forms of assessment? J Anat. 2014;224:304–8.
- Busan AM. Learning styles of medical students - implications in education. Curr Health Sci J. 2014;40:104–10.
- Shaibah HS, Van der Vleuten CP. The validity of multiple choice practical examinations as an alternative to traditional free response examination formats in gross anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2013;6:149–56.
- Neuderth S, Jabs B, Schmidtke A. Strategies for reducing test anxiety and optimizing exam preparation in German university students: A prevention-oriented pilot project of the University of Wurzburg. J Neural Transm. 2009;116:785–90.
- Walsh K. Online assessment in medical education–current trends and future directions. Malawi Medical Journal. 2015;27(2):71-2.
|
