Assessment of Weekly Study Guide Use and Utility in a Condensed Medical Gross Anatomy and Embryology Course
Authors: Harrell Kelly M. , Charles Stephen C. 
Published: June 2021

Implementation of a condensed preclinical curriculum is becoming a trend among US medical schools. Condensing basic science courses to fit into an 18‐month curricular model involves careful and intentional planning in order to decrease contact hours without sacrificing foundational content. While a decrease in contact hours may allow for an increase in self‐guided study time, it diminishes important faculty‐student face‐to‐face interaction that many students need for higher‐order learning. In an attempt to augment learning in the face of decreased contact time, twelve weekly study guides were developed for first‐year medical (n=85) and graduate (n=4) students in a condensed medical gross anatomy and embryology course. Each study guide contained multiple open‐answer gross and clinical anatomy questions pertaining to selective content covered over the course of the week in lecture and laboratory sessions. Study guides were made available to all students through Blackboard. Study guide answers were not posted, though students were free to seek faculty assistance when needed. The purpose of this study is to assess student use and perception of the study guides as a focused learning resource. A post‐course, voluntary survey was sent to all students to assess frequency of study guide use, strengths, weaknesses, and perception of study guide utility in terms of learning and quiz/exam preparation. Eighty‐eight (98.8% response rate) students completed the survey. Survey results revealed that use of the 12 study guides varied among students. Thirty students (34.1%) used 1–4, 17 students (19.3%) used 5–10, 7 students (8%) used 8–11,13 students (14.8%) used all 12, and 21 students (23.8%) did not use the study guides. Using a 5‐point Likert scale (1=strongly disagree; 5=strongly agree), students rated study guide content applicability, organization, and utility for learning and quiz/exam preparation. Only responses from students who used the study guides in some capacity (n=67) were included in these analyses. Fifty‐eight (86.6%) and 47 (70.1%) students agreed/strongly agreed that study guide content was applicable to and helped in preparation for answering quiz/exam questions, respectively. Moderately strong, positive correlations were found between student study guide use frequency and perceived exam preparation (r=0.55) and perceived effect on quiz/exam performance (r=0.60). Additionally, moderate positive correlations were found between student study guide use frequency and reported understanding of gross (r=.55) and clinical (r=.46) anatomy content, respectively. Quartile rank of final course grade was not strongly correlated with survey responses, suggesting that study guide use was not limited to a specific student quartile. Overall, weekly study guides were well‐used in varying degrees among students in a condensed gross anatomy and embryology course. Students who used the study guides consistently reported positive perceived effects on learning and assessment performance. Correlative results suggest that students who completed more study guides felt better prepared for assessments and perceived the study guides as useful learning tools for gross and clinical anatomy topics. Future directions include analysis of student performance on quiz/exam questions mapped to study guide content.Support or Funding Informationn/aThis abstract is from the Experimental Biology 2018 Meeting. There is no full text article associated with this abstract published in The FASEB Journal.