Human Anatomy Software Use in Traditional and Online Anatomy Laboratory Classes:

Student-Perceived Learning Benefits

Author(s): Brian L. Kuyatt and Jason D. Baker
Source: Journal of College Science Teaching , May/June 2014, Vol. 43, No. 5 (May/June
2014), pp. 14-19
Published by: National Science Teachers Association

Stable URL: https://www.jstor.org/stable/43633223

JSTOR is a not-for-profit service that helps scholars, researchers, and students discover, use, and build upon a wide
range of content in a trusted digital archive. We use information technology and tools to increase productivity and
facilitate new forms of scholarship. For more information about JSTOR, please contact support@jstor.org.

Your use of the JSTOR archive indicates your acceptance of the Terms & Conditions of Use, available at
https://about.jstor.org/terms

is collaborating with JSTOR to digitize, preserve and extend access to Journal of College
Science Teaching

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
TWO-YEAR COMMUNITY

Human Anatomy Software Use in

Traditional and Online Anatomy
Laboratory Classes: Student-Perceiv
Learning Benefits
By Brian L. Kuyatt and Jason D. Baker

This study evaluates the Purpose

effectiveness of human anatomy courses have typically en- The primary purpose of this study
software in face-to-face and gaged students in hands- is to evaluate the effectiveness of
online anatomy laboratory Human courses on gaged actionviactitiesvianatomy students
ties that may
student human anatomical learn- in- have that typically laboratory in may hands- en- in-
clude human cadaver dissection in
classes. Cognitive, affective, and ing following use of an integrat-
psychomotor perceived learning medical schools or mammalian dis- ed publisher's software package
was measured for students using section in undergraduate programs. (i.e., Pearson Education's Practice
Pearson Education 's Practice Dissections are typically supported Anatomy Laboratory 2.0 software
Anatomy Laboratory 2.0 software. by two-dimensional (2D) images [PAL 2.0]) in community college
This study determined that student- from textbooks, detailed plastic anatomy/physiology (A&P) labo-
perceived learning was significantlymodels, or real human anatomical ratory classes. Learning effective-
greater in the online class structures (e.g., bones) and com- ness was measured using a valid
environment and was specifically monly include sophisticated visual and reliable quantitative instrument
related to psychomotor learning. software. For students to compre- called the CAP Perceived Learn-
The findings of this study have hend spatial anatomical relationshipsing Scale (Rovai, Wighting, Baker,
implications for future educational in three dimensions, these programs & Grooms, 2009), which measured
practice in the use of advanced require a higher level of user interac- student-perceived cognitive, af-
digital software for learning in both tivity and an increased level of three- fective, and psychomotor learning
traditional and online education dimensional (3D) spatial-relational(CAP), and an associated attitudinal
courses as instructors seek to comprehension. survey. Community college students
find better methods to assist their Although the sophistication of hu- in an introductory anatomy labora-
students in developing skills in man anatomy imaging software hastory class were given the perceived
learning human anatomy. increased dramatically, the methods learning instrument at the end of a
for measuring human anatomicalterm following use of the PAL 2.0
learning from these programs has software. The evaluation of students
lagged. Previous studies for measur-was conducted in both traditional
ing anatomical learning associated face-to-face (FTF) and online A&P
with technology have often limitedlaboratory courses.
their assessment of student learning The research questions were:
to grades, which vary significantly by
course and instructor. Few research 1 . Is there a difference in overall
studies have considered the role of perceived learning scores be-
3D human anatomy software across tween students using PAL 2.0
multiple learning environments using software in FTF and online learn-
an independent assessment measure. ing environments?

1 4 Journal of College Science Teaching

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
2. Are there differences in cogni- learning in
forefront of providing education methods, digital image
tive, affective, and psychomotor high-demand fields such as nursingfor anatomical instruc-
software use
subscale scores between students and allied health professions,
tion, andand
instructional theory related
using PAL 2.0 software in FTF therefore they also continue to to
3D spatial
rap- anatomical learning.
and online learning environ- idly develop online coursesThe guidelines
such as for design, devel-
ments? anatomy for these vocations opment,
(Mul-evaluation, and delivery
lins, 2007). To more effectively of instructional
in- training solutions,
Literature review struct students in these online anat- using digital computer technology,
Education in human anatomy and omy lab courses, there has also been are the same methods that can be di-
human dissection within the United an increase in the use of alternative rected to asynchronous learning (or
States is changing. Because of the software technologies online to help self-study), to synchronous learn-
initiation and expansion of nursing students understand 3D anatomical ing, to the online virtual classroom,
and allied health sciences as profes- information. as well as to traditional FTF instruc-
sions, the demand for anatomical tion (Clark & Mayer, 2008). One of
education in undergraduate schools Commercial anatomy software the fundamental and most effective
has increased. Despite this increased As the sophistication of computer methods of e-learning is an engaged
demand, certain negative factors technology has increased, software learning environment.
have also contributed to increased simulations have progressed from Engagement in learning is accom-
development of alternative meth- the use of videodiscs, CDs, and plished by appropriately designing
ods for human anatomy instruction.DVDs of 2D images to more com- and integrating instructional text
These include high costs associated plex, high-memory commercial soft- and visuals in order to build new
with, and negative public perceptionware using 3D image displays con- knowledge and skills for long-term
of, human dissection; a growing lacktaining more advanced assessments. memory. This psychological process
of cadaverous materials; and a de-PAL is a low-cost software pack- must be optimized, whether in the
crease in qualified anatomy instruc-age associated with the publisher's traditional or online environment,
tors. Alternative anatomy instruction lab text and is also accessible
A&P in order for learning to occur. For
methods have also been driven by online through the Pearson Educa-students to become proficient in
technological improvements such as tion website (www.myaandp.com).any area of study, such as human
high-quality digital image capture It includes interactive 2D and 3D anatomy, simple practice must be
and the development of commercial anatomical animations for bone rota-integrated with interactive practice
software for 2D and 3D image dis- tions, muscle origins, and insertions;
leading to a growth of expertise, oth-
play on personal computers. digital images of human skulls and erwise known as deliberate practice
muscles; human cadaver photos; and (Ericcson, 2006).
Human anatomy instruction digital models of other human anato-Clark and Mayer (2008) extrapo-
With the increased demand for A&P my integrated with microscopic slide lated Ericcson's (2006) deliber-
lecture and lab classes in nursing images, practice reviews, sample ate practice concept into practice
and the allied health programs and quizzes, and lab practical tests to methods
in- that focus on "specific
decreasing classroom space, many crease student retention of anatomi- skill gaps," "explanatory corrective"
schools are attempting to accom- cal information. Exams and images user feedback (not merely simple
modate students through online included with PAL can be used in feedback), nondistracting practice
classes in anatomy. Online educa- class or incorporated into typical on-environments, and transferable skills
tion provides the flexibility required line learning management systems
from the learning to the work envi-
by students who work full time or such as Blackboard. ronment (p. 235). Clark and Mayer,
whose schedules and family de- along with Ericcson, described that
mands may not allow them to attend Pedagogical issues learning is accomplished through re-
FTF classes (American Association When discussing pedagogical meth- petitive, highly interactive anatomy
of Colleges of Nursing, 2010; Mul- ods of anatomical learning, it is im-laboratory study methods such as the
lins, 2007). Community colleges portant to consider instructor and use of dissections, textbook images,
in flio T Tnifprl Qtotpc remain at tVi p ctiirl#*nt n<=*rcrif»rti'/ť*c nf a n a trun i nal anrl Hirrital onftwarp fnr r>r»mnrp_
Ili IXIW UllllVVI L; VUlVü L vllliilll Ul liiv ÜVWUV11Í ļ^viūļ/vvn ▼ vu v/i. wimvviiiivvii UllU ^ JL-X UlglVUl UVI t ▼ ▼ U1 V lvi v Vlllļ/l V

Vol. 43. No. 5. 2014 15

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
TWO-YEAR COMMUNITY

hending human anatomy structuralskey (1987) diverged from previ- scores for FTF classes differs sig-
relationships. Deliberate practice
ous research and developed student nificantly from the mean value of
does make perfect, so to say, inself-reporting
un- measures of learning the total CAP scores from the online
rather than using grades. It was their
derstanding human anatomy whether classes when using the PAL 2.0 soft-
in traditional or online learningassertion
en- that grading varies con- ware in the lab classes.
vironments. So methodologies siderably
and between instructors and To analyze Research Question 2,
even
pedagogies used in 3D learning are between classes with the same the researchers conducted a one-way
also important contributors to theinstructor.
de- Pace (1990) also demon-multivariate analysis of variance
strated that perceived learning was(MANOVA). The second research
gree of effective learning regardless
of the learning environment. a valid measure of student learningquestion addresses the individual
based on the consistency of per-relationship in the student-perceived
ceived results over time and across
learning CAP subscale scores be-
Methodology different populations of students.tween cognitive, affective, and psy-
Porticiponts and setting Corrallo (1994) contended that an chomotor learning related to total
extensive amount of research in per-learning occurring within the FTF or
The target population for the project
en- learning demonstrates thatonline classes.
was community college studentsceived
rolled in first-level A&P laboratory
self-reports of cognitive learning in
courses in both the traditional FTF students are comparable with results Results
classroom and online environments derived from more direct methods of
at two campuses of a major commu-assessment.
Demographics
nity college in Florida. The enroll- The nine-item, self-reported CAP In the 13 FTF laboratory classes
ment for the 13 laboratory coursePerceived Learning Scale instrument given during a class, with 258 total
sections of A&P surveyed was ap- is a valid and reliable measurement students, 211 surveys were returned
proximately 220-260 students for composed of three CAP subscales (81.8% total response rate) of which
traditional classes and 40-50 stu- (each with three items) that evaluate only 152 were completely filled out
dents for the two A&P Level 1 online perceived cognitive, affective, andand were used in this study (58.9%
classes, for a total of about 260-300 psychomotor learning; the scores successful response rate). In online
students. The classes in which the range from a low of 0 to a high of hybrid laboratory classes (online hy-
survey was to be administered are 18. The total CAP scores combine brid classes consisted of six online

taught by six different biology in- and six FTF classes), surveys were
cognitive, affective, and psychomotor
emailed to all 46 students, with 33
structors. It was anticipated that thesubscale learning scores having a total
majority of the students in the tra- minimum and maximum perceived students returning completed sur-
ditional and online classes selected learning scale of 0-54. Higher totalveys (71.7% response rate).
would take the survey. The labora- CAP scores are interpreted as indica- Of the total 185 students in both
FTF and online classes, 51 (27.6%)
tions of higher perceptions of total
tory course is a 1 -credit laboratory
required to be taken along with thelearning (Rovai et al., 2009). were age 20 or younger, 84 (45.4%)
A&P lecture course and is a require- were ages 21 to 30, 36 (19.5%) were
Research design and analysis ages 31-40, 13 (7.0%) were ages
ment of all prenursing and most
41-50, and 1 (0.5%) was over 50 years
To analyze Research Question 1 , the
other allied health programs prior to
acceptance in these programs in the researchers used an independent- old. These percentages for age groups
state of Florida. samples t test to determine whether about the same for both FTF and
are
there were differences between the online students, individually, com-
Instrumentation means in the Likert scores of each pared with the overall percentage age
Self-reported measures of learn- of the total CAP scores on a self- groups (see Table 1). There were 142
female students and 43 male students;
ing, also called perceived learning, reported perceived learning instru-
have been shown to be valid mea- ment administered to students. The therefore, females constituted 76.8%
independent-samples t test evalu- of the total students. Forty-seven per-
surements of learning effectiveness.
In studies of cognitive learning, whether the mean value of the
ates cent of the participants indicated they
Richmond, Gorham, and McCro- total CAP Perceived Learning Scale were part-time students at the college,

1 6 Journal of College Science Teaching

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
and 53% indicated they were full-time
students.
Although percentages of student Participant ages (/V = 1 85).
age groups in FTF and online classes
were about the same as for the com- <21 21-30 31-40 41-50 50+

bined group percentages, online learn- FTF 43 (28.3%) 69 (45.4%) 29(1 9.1 %) 1 0 (6.6%) 1 (0.7%)
ers were more likely to be part-time
students (63.6%) than enrolled in Online 8(24.2%) 15(45.5%) 7(21.2%) 3(9.1%) 0

FTF classes (43.4%). Female stu-

Note: FTF = face-to-face.
dents constituted a higher percentage
(87.9%) of online students versus
females in FTF classes (74.3%); male
students represented 25.7% (39 men)
Participant's year in program {N = 1 85).
of FTF students, and only 12.1% (4
men) among online students. When Year 1 Year 2 Year 3
comparing student descriptions of
participant's year in college in FTF FTF 95 (62.5%) 47(30.9%) 10(6.6%)
and online programs, our results
Online* 1 1 (33.3%) 1 9 (57.6%) 1 (3.0%)
showed that for FTF classes, 62.5%
were first-year students, 30.95% were
Note: FTF = face-to-face.
second-year students, and 6.6% were
third-year students, whereas in online *Two students in the online class group did not indicate a program year even
though they were still considered as online students for the analysis.
classes, only 33.3% were first-year
students, 57.6% were second-year
students, and 3.0% were third-year
students (see Table 2).
Descriptive statistics - student total CAP scores in FTF/online classes.
Research Question 1
Variable M SD
Using an independent samples t test,
we found the means of the total CAP FTF class (N = 152) 36.95 7.12
Perceived Learning Scale scores
Online class (N = 33) 40.67 7.62
for the online class (M = 40.67, SD
= 7.62) were significantly greater Note: FTF = face-to-face.
than the FTF classes (M= 36.95, SD
= 7.12), /(183) = 2.69, p < .01, d =
0.20. The Cohen's d of 0.20 showed
a small effect size (20%) as seen in
Table 3. Descriptive statistics for three CAP subscale scores on students by
There is sufficient evidence to course type (FTF, N = 1 52; Online, N = 33) in the 95% CI.

support a statistically significant dif- FTF Online

ference in total CAP scores in online
M SD M SD
classes compared with scores in FTF
classes, with online class total CAP
Cognitive 12.91 2.64 13.06 2.83
scores being significantly greater than
FTF class scores. Affective 13.48 3.31 13.52 3.47

Research Question 2 Psychomotor 10.64 3.66 14.09 3.13

A one-way, between-groups M ANO- Note : FTF = face-to-face; Cl = confidence interval.

VA was performed to test the null

Vol. 43, No. 5, 2014 17

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
TWO-YEAR COMMUNITY

ate anatomy laboratory classes. Al-or participation-type student learning

hypothesis that there are no differ-
ences between the means in the total though perceived learning scores are (engagement), such as with software
student-perceived learning scores in not summative assessments, Ewell,tools. Millard (2012) indicated that
cognitive, affective, and psychomo- Lovell, and Jones (1994) noted thatthe highest success rates in online
tor subscale scores (dependent vari- "there is a considerable literature courses were in courses that used vid-
ables or DVs) between students us- eos, music, and digital content, and
concerned with establishing the va-
ing PAL 2.0 software by class typelidity of student self-reports about
in which students were more engaged
(independent variable or IV; FTF, cognitive outcomes" (p. 23). with course content. Reading only
online) learning environments as Significantly higher total CAP
text was boring, so the addition of this
indicated in Table 4. scores for online students versus FTF creative content reduced student iso-
Significant differences were found students implies that online hybrid lation, engaging students more in the
at the .05 significance level between students can learn as much or more online environment. PAL software
student CAP subscale scores. Be- about human anatomy than FTF stu- has highly interactive digital content
cause of the unequal N values dents.for Although lecture-based instruc- that engaged students more in learn-
FTF (N = 33) and online (N = 152) tion predominates online, there has ing cognitive information through
ro- an increase in technology and 3D interactive images and unique
values, the Pillai 's trace is more been
bust when compared with Wilks' A
digital tools for anatomical instruc- lab quizzes. This engagement or par-
(Tabachnick & Fidell, 2007), there- tion. Despite the resistance from some ticipation in learning is a substantial
fore, Pillai 's trace tests, F(3,181) =
science educators, this study tends reason for success in FTF as well as
to support the concept that human online hybrid lab courses and sup-
.14,/? < .001, rj2= .14, were signifi-
cant to p < .001, indicating that anatomy
we laboratories can move to ports concepts that significant learn-
can reject the hypothesis that the the fully online format with appro- ing can be accomplished in the fully
population means are the same priatefor instructional development and online lab environment (Jeschofnig
the three CAP (cognitive, affective,pedagogy (Jeschofnig & Jeschofnig, & Jeschofnig, 2011). This study also
and psychomotor) subscale scores. 2011). demonstrated that learning in online
This indicates there is a statisticallyOnline hybrid laboratory students hybrid labs is not just equivalent to
significant difference between FTF had significantly higher total CAP but also greater than learning in FTF
and online courses in terms of the Perceived Learning Scale scores than classes. This should encourage chief
three DV subscale scores with an FTF students and, specifically, signif- academic officers to offer more on-
effect size of 14% (medium to large).
icantly higher psychomotor subscale line hybrid or fully online lab classes
Post hoc univariate ANOVAs for scores when compared to cogni- to increase enrollment.
the psychomotor subscale score weretive or affective subscale domains. Significantly greater student PAL
the only significant DV, F(l, 183) = Anatomy learning, per se, is typicallypsychomotor subscale scores sup-
25.39,/? < .001. Cognitive and affec- associated with the cognitive domainported the concept that students can
tive subscale scores were both not and student grades (Dumont, 1996; learn effectively in online laboratory
significant, respectively, atF(l, 183)Hiltz & Wellman, 1997). However, groups showing "sense of commu-
= .09,/? = .77 and F( 1, 183) = .003,anatomy students tend to be more nity and student learning are highly
p = .96. motivated than typical undergraduate related constructs in ALN [asyn-
students because anatomy classes are chronous learning network] environ-
Discussion the gateway courses into the health ments" (Rovai & Ponton, 2005, p.
sciences, particularly nursing. As
The results show that online hy- 85). These results emphasize that the
with graduate student test grades,
brid laboratory students had signifi- online learning environment should
correlation studies with anatomy
cantly higher total CAP scores than continue to be supported in education
FTF students using the total CAP students would probably tend to have(Rovai & Ponton, 2005). Besides stu-
Perceived Learning Scale. This is limited use because of this uniform dent learning, substantial evidence
the first time this student-perceivedsuperior nature. exists that active participation is a
learning survey has been intro-Not only is psychomotor learning positive influence for student satis-
duced into science education classes measurement possible, but this can faction (Alavi & Dufner, 2005) and
and, specifically, into undergradu-be correlated with more hands-on retention rates (Rovai, 2002). These

1 8 Journal of College Science Teaching

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms
are key elements for administrators Clark, R. C., & Mayer, R. E. (2008). E- sity-business-feb-20 1 2
who might otherwise not support the Learning and the science of instruc- Mullins, C. (2007). Community colleg-
online science class environment. tion (2nd ed.). San Francisco, CA: es. In M. G. Moore (Ed.), Handbook
Pfeiffer. of distance education (pp. 491-500).
Conclusion Corrallo, S. (1994). A preliminary Mahwah, NJ: Erlbaum.
The results of the study indicate stu- study of the feasibility and utility Pace, C. R. (1990). The undergradu-
dents can effectively learn humanfor national policy of instructional ates : A report of their activities and
anatomical relationships with digi- " good practice " indicators in under- progress in college in the 1980s.
tal software tools, specifically usinggraduate education (NCES 94437). Los Angeles, CA: University of
the PAL 2.0 software. This learningWashington, DC: U.S. Department California, Center for the Study of
can be just as or more effective on- of Education, Institute of Education Evaluation.
line than in the FTF environment. Sciences, National Center for Educa- Richmond, V. P., Gorham, J. S., & Mc-
As simulation software improved in- tion Statistics. Croskey, J. C. (1987). The relation-
teraction with anatomical structures Dumont, R. (1996). Teaching and learn- ship between selected immediacy
more extensively than in FTF labs, ing in cyberspace. IEEE Transac- behaviors and cognitive learning. In
higher student self-reports in the tions on Professional Communica- M. A. McLaughlin (Ed.), Commu-
psychomotor domain demonstrated tions, 39, 192-204. nication yearbook 10 (pp. 574-590).
greater student learning within a vir- Ericcson, K. A. (2006). The influence of Newbury Park, CA: Sage.
tual environment. Critics of online experience and deliberate practice on Rovai, A. P. (2002). Building a sense of
science learning tend to postulate the development of superior expert community at a distance. Interna-
significantly lower scores for on- performance. In K. A. Ericcson, N. tional Review of Research in Open
line hybrid lab experiences than in Charness, P. J. Feltovich, & R. R. and Distance Learning, 3, 1-16.
the corresponding FTF courses, but Hoffman (Eds.), The Cambridge Rovai, A. P., & Ponton, M. K. (2005).
results were just the opposite. On- handbook of expertise and expert An examination of sense of class-

line hybrid students reported overall performance (pp. 223-242). New room community and learning
higher perceived learning scores, York, NY: Cambridge University among African American and Cau-
specifically within the psychomotor Press. casian graduate students. Journal of
domain, but no significant differ-Ewell, P. T., Lovell, C. D., & Jones, D. Asynchronous Learning Networks,
ences within the cognitive and af- P. (1994). A preliminary study of the 9(3), 77-92.
fective domains between FTF and feasibility and utility for national Rovai, A. P, Wighting, M. J., Baker, J.
online classes. Accordingly, simula- policy of instructional " good prac- D., & Grooms, L. D. (2009). Devel-
tion software and online laboratories tice " indicators in undergraduate opment of an instrument to measure
should be considered as options for education. Washington, DC: U.S. perceived cognitive, affective, and
anatomy classes. ■ Department of Education, Institute of psychomotor learning in tradi-
Education Sciences, National Center tional and virtual higher education
References for Education Statistics. classrooms. The Internet and Higher
Alavi, M., & Dufner, D. (2005). Hiltz, S. R., & Wellman, B. (1997). Education, 12, 7-13.
Technology-mediated collaborative Asynchronous learning networks as Tabachnick, B., & Fidell, L. (2007).
learning: A research perspective. In a virtual classroom. Communications Using multivariate statistics. Boston,
S. R. Hiltz & R. Goldman (Eds.), of ACM, 40(9), 44-49. MA: Pearson Education.

Learning together online: Research Jeschofnig, L., & Jeschofnig, P. (2011).

on asynchronous learning networks
(pp. 191-213). Mahweh, NJ: Erl-
baum.
American Association of Colleges of
Nursing. (2010). Nursing shortage
fact sheet. Retrieved from http://
www.aacn.nche.edu/media/pdf/
NrsgShortageFS.pdf
Teaching lab science courses online :
Resources, best practices, tools,
and technology. San Francisco, CA:
Wiley.
Millard, E. (2012, February). Online
and engaged. University Business ,
23-25. Retrieved from http://www.
universitybusiness.com/issue/univer-
Brian L Kuyatt (briankuyatt@clearwater.
edu) is an assistant professor of Instruc-
tional Technology and Blackboard admin-
istrator at Clearwater Christian College in
Clearwater ņ, Florida . Jason D. Baker is a
professor in the School of Education at Re-
qent University in Virginia Beach, Virginia.

Vol. 43, No. 5,2014 19

This content downloaded from

13.127.124.178 on Sat, 05 Mar 2022 20:20:14 UTC
All use subject to https://about.jstor.org/terms