THE USAGE OF ANATOMAGE AND PLASTINATION IN ANATOMY LEARNING: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES

N. Bustamam, Diana Agustini Purwaningastuti
{"title":"THE USAGE OF ANATOMAGE AND PLASTINATION IN ANATOMY LEARNING: STUDENT PERCEPTIONS AND LEARNING OUTCOMES","authors":"N. Bustamam, Diana Agustini Purwaningastuti","doi":"10.22146/jpki.48798","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"Background: In the Academic Year 2017/2018 the Faculty of Medicine Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta (FMUPNVJ) began using anatomage and plastination as learning tools. This study aims to describe the learning process, compare learning outcomes of students after using anatomage and plastination with the learning outcomes of students in the previous academic year, and describe students’ perceptions regarding the learning tools used.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on the population of second-semester FMUPNVJ students who had taken dermatomusculoskeletal (DMS) block in the academic year 2017/2018. Data were taken from the total population (n = 163). A questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions were used to obtain student perceptions related to the learning process and the learning tools used. Semester grade point average (GPA) before taking the DMS block and results of anatomy practical exam of the subjects (n = 163) and students of the previous academic year (n = 157) were analyzed.Results: The students appreciate learning using anatomage and plastination. The Mann-Whitney test result showed that there was no difference in semester GPA before taking DMS block between the two groups (p = 0.090). However, the learning outcomes after using anatomage and plastination were lower than those using only cadaver and mannequin (p = 0.002). Each learning tool has some advantages and disadvantages. Conclusion: The usage of anatomage and plastination at Anatomy Laboratory FMUPNVJ has not been able to improve learning outcomes. Anatomage features need to be used optimally to enhance the learning outcomes.","PeriodicalId":17805,"journal":{"name":"Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia: The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education","volume":"46 1","pages":""},"PeriodicalIF":0.0000,"publicationDate":"2021-06-21","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"1","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Jurnal Pendidikan Kedokteran Indonesia: The Indonesian Journal of Medical Education","FirstCategoryId":"1085","ListUrlMain":"https://doi.org/10.22146/jpki.48798","RegionNum":0,"RegionCategory":null,"ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"","JCRName":"","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 1

Abstract

Background: In the Academic Year 2017/2018 the Faculty of Medicine Universitas Pembangunan Nasional Veteran Jakarta (FMUPNVJ) began using anatomage and plastination as learning tools. This study aims to describe the learning process, compare learning outcomes of students after using anatomage and plastination with the learning outcomes of students in the previous academic year, and describe students’ perceptions regarding the learning tools used.Methods: A cross-sectional study was conducted on the population of second-semester FMUPNVJ students who had taken dermatomusculoskeletal (DMS) block in the academic year 2017/2018. Data were taken from the total population (n = 163). A questionnaire with a 5-point Likert scale and open-ended questions were used to obtain student perceptions related to the learning process and the learning tools used. Semester grade point average (GPA) before taking the DMS block and results of anatomy practical exam of the subjects (n = 163) and students of the previous academic year (n = 157) were analyzed.Results: The students appreciate learning using anatomage and plastination. The Mann-Whitney test result showed that there was no difference in semester GPA before taking DMS block between the two groups (p = 0.090). However, the learning outcomes after using anatomage and plastination were lower than those using only cadaver and mannequin (p = 0.002). Each learning tool has some advantages and disadvantages. Conclusion: The usage of anatomage and plastination at Anatomy Laboratory FMUPNVJ has not been able to improve learning outcomes. Anatomage features need to be used optimally to enhance the learning outcomes.
查看原文
分享 分享
微信好友 朋友圈 QQ好友 复制链接
本刊更多论文
解剖与塑化在解剖学学习中的运用:学生的认知与学习成果
背景:在2017/2018学年,雅加达Pembangunan国立退伍军人大学医学院(FMUPNVJ)开始使用解剖和塑化作为学习工具。本研究旨在描述学习过程,比较解剖塑化后学生的学习成果与上一学年学生的学习成果,并描述学生对所使用的学习工具的看法。方法:对2017/2018学年接受皮肤肌肉骨骼(DMS)阻滞治疗的第二学期FMUPNVJ学生进行横断面研究。数据取自全体人群(n = 163)。采用李克特5分量表和开放式问题问卷来获得学生对学习过程和使用的学习工具的看法。分析163名学生(n = 163)和157名上一学年学生(n = 157)参加DMS模块前的学期平均绩点(GPA)和解剖学实践考试成绩。结果:学生对解剖学和塑化学有较强的学习兴趣。Mann-Whitney检验结果显示,两组学生服用DMS block前的学期GPA差异无统计学意义(p = 0.090)。解剖塑化后的学习效果明显低于单纯使用尸体和人体模型的学习效果(p = 0.002)。每种学习工具都有一些优点和缺点。结论:在FMUPNVJ解剖实验室使用解剖塑化并不能改善学习效果。解剖特征需要最佳地使用,以提高学习效果。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 去求助
来源期刊
自引率
0.00%
发文量
0
期刊最新文献
Inquiry Learning Methods to Increase Student Motivation and Learning Outcomes The Noteworthiness of Constructive Feedback and Student-Reflection to Approach Competence-Based Curriculum: An Explanatory Study of Medical Schools in Indonesia The Relationship Between Anatomy Identification Test Scores and The Suitability in V/A/R/K Modality Usage Between Study Habit and Learning Style COMPARISON OF HISTOLOGY PRACTICUM EXAM RESULTS BASED ON THE LEARNING STYLE OF MEDICAL STUDENTS Description of The Professional Identity of First-Level Clinical Medical Students and The Various Factors That Facilitate Its Formation
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
现在去查看 取消
×
提示
确定
0
微信
客服QQ
Book学术公众号 扫码关注我们
反馈
×
意见反馈
请填写您的意见或建议
请填写您的手机或邮箱
已复制链接
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
×
扫码分享
扫码分享
Book学术官方微信
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:481959085
Book学术
文献互助 智能选刊 最新文献 互助须知 联系我们:info@booksci.cn
Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。
Copyright © 2023 Book学术 All rights reserved.
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号 京ICP备2023020795号-1