Fostering Students Collaborative Learning through Innovative Integrated Assessments in a Laboratory Setting
Authors: Taranikanti Varna , Srinivasan Dinesh Kumar , Inuwa Ibrahim 
Published: May 2022

Educational experiences that are active, contextual, integrated, engaging, and student‐owned leads to deeper learning. In integrated medical curricula across the globe the impetus is on integration, collaboration and peer learning that involves students working in small groups to discuss concepts or find solutions to problems. Collaborative learning commonly occurs in the labs (anatomy, histology & pathology) where students learn /dissect/taught in teams. In spite of these learning experiences, the implicit objectives of a course are evident to students from the nature of its examinations. As assessment drives learning, can this type of learning be assessed in the labs?

Presently, practical examinations are conducted in the lab are mainly discipline‐centered or even when integrated, knowledge is tested using pins and/or tags to indicate specific structures on dissections, prosection, radiological and bony landmarks. However, paucity of time & venues, reports of in‐consistency in marking free text responses, testing solely knowledge recall delayed or lack of feedback are some of the many drawbacks of the spotter examination.1 Hence addressing these issues through educational interventions is important for proper implementation of the integrated curriculum.

In line with the best evidence based medical education (BEME),2 integrated team assessments in labs use the principles of constructive, collaborative and contextual approach that enable students in knowledge acquisition through assessments. It is a feasible and a novel method of testing the application of interdisciplinary knowledge using the available institutional resources (cadavers, radiological, pathological and histological images) within the lab setting using a modified TBL approach.3 It addresses (a) integration, (b) format of assessment (team & individual) (c) knowledge, application and analytical aspect of student learning and (d) feedback (immediate, self and peer feedback) (Fig 1). In addition, confronted with authentic cases around a cadaver exposes the students to a professionally relevant context and gives a simulated bed‐side environment as in wards.

As we climb up the integration ladder, it is important as medical educators to make translational contribution by showing how educational evidence of constructivist learning theory can be brought into educational practice through assessments. It augments authenticity, motivation and lays foundation for collaborative learning for pre‐clinical medical students.

Inuwa IM, Rawahy AM, Taranikanti V, Habbal O. (2011). Anatomy ‘steeplechase’ online‐ necessity sometimes is the catalyst for innovation. Anat Sci Educ, 4(2):115‐8.

Harden RM, Grant J, Buckley G et al. (2000). Best evidence medical education. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract, 5:71–90.

Barremkala M, Taylor TAH, Taranikanti V. (2020). Team Assessment in Laboratory Setting: A Novel Approach Using Cadavers to Assess Collaborative Learning in the Gross Anatomy Lab. Med Science Educator 30:21‐22.