82 - How to Train the Future Generation of Anatomy Teachers: A Pilot Study

Poster Board Number: 82
There are separate poster presentation times for odd and even posters.
Odd poster #s – first hour
Even poster #s – second hour

Abstract Body : INTRODUCTION AND OBJECTIVE: Anatomy instruction has changed over the past three decades and it’s unclear whether future anatomy teachers will be prepared to deal with evolving demands. The current cohort of anatomy teachers are best equipped to provide insight into the necessary preparations of future anatomy teachers. Therefore, the purpose of this pilot study was to canvass current anatomy teachers in the state of Ohio to identify how to best train the future generation of anatomy teachers. MATERIALS AND METHODS: A survey was developed to solicit the opinions of Ohio anatomy teachers regarding how to best train future anatomy teachers. The survey consisted of 20 questions regarding anatomy teacher preparation. Eighty-three anatomy teachers in Ohio were invited to participate after review of their membership profiles from the American Association for Anatomy, the American Association of Clinical Anatomists, and the Human Anatomy and Physiology Society. Participants were asked to indicate their level of agreement to statements regarding required anatomical and ancillary training of future anatomy teachers. Responses were scored from 1.00 (strongly disagree) to 5.00 (strongly agree). Reliability evidence was provided via Cronbach’s alpha and content validity evidence was provided via expert review from eight anatomy faculty members at separate institutions. RESULTS: Forty-two (51%) participants responded to the survey, with 32 (39%) responses being more than 90% complete. Twenty (63%) participants held a rank of assistant professor or higher and 23 (72%) participants reported teaching in multiple anatomical subdisciplines. Cronbach’s alpha estimates for anatomical training and ancillary training subscales were .93 and .75, respectively. Mean (SD) level of agreement values ranged from 3.19 (1.33) to 4.72 (0.77), with median values ranging from 3.00 to 5.00. All statements regarding the importance of required coursework in the traditional anatomical subdisciplines had mean values above 4.50 and median values of 5.00, with 18 (56%) participants choosing “strongly agree” for each statement. Statements regarding the importance of working with human body donors, obtaining a doctoral degree to teach graduate and professional students, and required coursework in pedagogy also had median values of 5.00, though “working with human body donors” was the only statement to have a mean of 4.50 or higher. CONCLUSION: Pedagogical training, in addition to training in the traditional anatomical subdisciplines, should be required training for future anatomy teachers. SIGNIFICANCE/IMPLICATION: Anatomical subdiscipline education has been inconsistent for those training to teach anatomy, though results indicate that the training remains relevant. In addition to ensuring traditional subdiscipline education, programs training future anatomy teachers would do well to include pedagogical training in their curricula.