160 - Differing Categories of Anatomical Structures (CoAS) on a Bellringer Examination: Effects on Academic Performance and Self-assessed Confidence in Knowledge

Poster Board Number: 160
There are separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – first hour
Even poster #s – second hour

Co-authors:

Kristina Marrelli - University of Guelph; Lorraine Jadeski - University of Guelph

Abstract Body : Gross human anatomy courses are often perceived as content-heavy and overwhelming by students, with past research indicating that certain anatomical topics present more challenges than others. However, limited attention has been given to understanding how academic performance and confidence in anatomical knowledge differ across specific categories of anatomical structures (CoAS). Further, there is a notable gap in understanding how these factors relate to students enrolled in cadaveric dissection courses.

This study sought to investigate the impact of three distinct CoAS (i.e., musculature, neurovasculature, and osteology) on: 1) academic performance, and 2) self-assessed confidence in knowledge (SACK) during a bellringer examination. Undergraduate students in a third-year Human Anatomy: Dissection course at the University of Guelph voluntarily participated in this study (n = 210). Performance was assessed through a 48-item bellringer examination. SACK was self-assessed using a 3-point Likert scale for each question (1 = low confidence, 2 = medium, 3 = high).

Statistical analysis was conducted using the Statistical Package for the Social Sciences (SPSS) statistical software program, version 28.0. Findings revealed variations in both academic performance and SACK across different CoAS. Mean scores indicated that the musculature category had the highest academic performance (88.5%) and the highest SACK score (2.54), while osteology had the lowest academic performance (76.1%) and SACK score (2.27). A Friedman test was conducted for both outcomes, followed by Kendall’s Coefficient of Concordance (W) and Wilcoxon Signed-Ranks tests (r) with Bonferroni corrections to assess effect sizes for each multiple pairwise comparison (musculature–neurovasculature; musculature–osteology; neurovasculature–osteology). SACK scores were statistically significantly different across all CoAS, χ²(2) = 122.017, p < .0005, W = 0.291. Statistically significant differences in academic performance across all CoAS were observed, χ²(2) = 141.038, p < .0005, W = 0.336. Post-hoc analysis revealed that academic performance scores were not significant between neurovasculature and osteology categories (p = 1.000).

These findings provide valuable insights for anatomy educators, guiding the development of effective pedagogical tools that address the impact of different CoAS on students’ learning outcomes. This information can guide them in allocating supplementary resources and emphasizing specific topics in lectures and dissection laboratories. To further improve learning outcomes, future directions include hosting focus groups to understand variances in SACK scores, and replicating this study at other time points when different anatomical regions are taught.