Premium
Two years' experience of assessment of anatomy teachers and courses by preclinical and clinical students
Author(s) -
Monkhouse W. S.,
Lee T. C.,
Clarke E. D.
Publication year - 1993
Publication title -
clinical anatomy
Language(s) - English
Resource type - Journals
SCImago Journal Rank - 0.667
H-Index - 71
eISSN - 1098-2353
pISSN - 0897-3806
DOI - 10.1002/ca.980060309
Subject(s) - gross anatomy , constructive criticism , surface anatomy , anatomy , medicine , medical education , neuroanatomy , relevance (law) , dissection (medical) , human anatomy , psychology , criticism , mathematics education , art , literature , political science , law
Students at the Royal College of Surgeons in Ireland completed a questionnaire at the end of the anatomy course assessing teachers and teaching in the department of anatomy. Individual teachers were rated on a five‐point scale for their performance as lecturers, demonstrators, and examiners. Anatomy teaching was considered in its various subdivisions: regional anatomy, the dissection room course (gross laboratory), radiological anatomy, embryology, neuroanatomy, and histology, and each was scored on a similar five‐point scale for relevance and interest. Constructive criticism of both staff (faculty) and course was invited. The results of this survey have been used to counsel staff to good effect, and to improve course structure and content. Resultant changes were made in the teaching of histology, neuroanatomy, and embryology, and the restructuring of surface anatomy tutorials. Numerical scores for teachers provide indices of teaching abilities for comparative purposes and for professional advancement. A similar questionnaire given to clinical students 1 year after completion of the anatomy course is shown to have been of little value. © 1993 Wiley‐Liss, Inc.