Anatomy Education‐Paradigm Shift from Passive to Active Learning‐Effects on Student Engagement, Comprehension and Retention A Review of Literature from 2012 to 2022

Abstract

IntroductionThere has been a dramatic paradigm shift from passive to active teaching and learning methods. Passive teaching is faculty‐centric, while active teaching is student‐centric which many academic scholars believe will lead to better student engagement, comprehension, and knowledge retention. Instead of just pouring information into their brains, students must be responsible for their learning, and teachers only act as facilitators rather than the sage on the stage. There is a need to formulate curriculum map designs and lesson plans that leads to higher‐order learning using Bloom's taxonomy in teaching.ObjectiveThe objective is to review literature that compares the passive and active teaching strategies on their advantages and disadvantages regarding student engagement, comprehension, and knowledge retention.MethodologyA review of the literature was conducted on passive and active learning methods in anatomy education from 2012 to 2022.ResultsThe faculty‐centric passive teaching with lectures and videos make students disengaged. On the other hand, in active learning, students are more engaged, have better comprehension, retention and are more responsible for their learning. Active teaching utilizes discussion fora, collaborative and peer teaching, flipped classrooms, blended classes, games, concept maps, chunking, polling, and augmented reality.The pyramid of retention from the National Training Laboratories in Bethel, Maine, showed that passive teaching led to 30 % retention while active teaching had superior retention from 50 to 90 %.ConclusionActive learning methods have more advantages regarding student engagement, comprehension and, retention than passive teaching. In addition, the faculty may combine both strategies to maximize learning among the students.