One Does Not Simply Integrate: Assessing Integrated vs. “Silo‐ed” Anatomical Sciences Presentation in Online Learning Module
Authors: Buenting Cory Ann , Corral Janet , Buenting Todd , Lee Lisa M.J 
Published: June 2021

Anatomical sciences are fundamental to medical competency; however, classroom contact hours have reduced to minimum due to nation‐wide, integration‐driven curricular reform, which in turn correlates with a substantial increase in adjunct online learning resources. Such resources vary greatly in content, format, and accuracy, for there are few evidence‐based guidelines for developing an effective resource that yields measurable learning. Thus, an IRB‐exempt study was designed with the objective of assessing the educational value of two types of online module presentations: silo‐ed vs. integrated presentation of the peritoneum.

The two versions of online learning modules were produced with identical embryology, histology, and gross anatomy content and interactive features. The control module presented peritoneal anatomy, embryology and histology sequentially, and the experimental module integrated all three subjects for each peritoneal organ. First‐year students from graduate and professional health programs without prior content exposure were recruited and randomly assigned to access either control or experimental modules. Participants completed two different quizzes on peritoneum before and after module interaction then completed a survey.

A total of 133 participants completed the study. Quantitative analysis of pre vs. post quiz scores revealed a significant increase in post quiz performance in both control (n=64) and experimental (n=69) groups (both p<0.05 ). However, the amount of post quiz increase between control and experimental groups was not statistically significant (p=0.862), suggesting that integrated presentation in a digital resource may have minimal effect on learning outcomes. Survey analyses, however, revealed more experimental group participants reported enhanced understanding of gross anatomy (70%) and embryology (62%) of the peritoneum after module use, compared to the control group (63% gross, 52% embryo). There was little difference between control (59%) and experimental (57%) participants reporting that the module helped them understand histology. This may suggest students' slight preference for the integrated presentation of some anatomy subjects, although it may have little impact on learning outcomes. Thematic analyses of survey comments revealed that all participants highly value in‐module interactive features. Comments regarding interactive feature improvements were notable from the experimental group and comments regarding the contents were more notable from the control group.

This study highlights the educational value of online learning resources for anatomical sciences which regardless of integration can yield measurable learning outcomes. Students' perceptions and preference for varied subject integration, however, may have implications for varied resource usage, learning motivation as well as evaluation of the resource and the instructor.

This abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.