Quantitative and qualitative examination of 2D versus 3D technologies in teaching anatomy (211.7)

Abstract

Listen

Translate article

The primary purpose of the study was to identify whether three‐dimensional technologies significantly improved the knowledge and comprehension levels of students within a gross anatomy curriculum compared to the traditional two‐dimensional figures. We hypothesized that the use of 3D technologies would dramatically enhance the comprehension and retention of students.We tested our hypotheses in a graduate and undergraduate level gross anatomy curriculum. Students were presented 2D images and 3D study materials (atlases, videos, and animations). All material was presented to the students over blackboard; and individual student usage of all material was tracked throughout the semester (# views, time of viewing, and dates of usage).Subjective measures of student opinion were taken using student surveys. To provide a quantitative measure of student interest, the number of views for each type of study material was calculated. This calculation was then compared with the subjective student evaluations.To provide a quantitative measure for learning comprehension, half of the test questions were presented from the 2D and the other half from the 3D study materials. Test scores for questions covering 2D versus 3D material were then compared within each student and between students to determine whether the student’s opinion about their learning improvements was substantiated with their test results.Subjective results indicate that students were much more interested and engaged with the 3D study materials. Although they prefer 3D materials verbally, students tended to rely more heavily on 2D materials when studying prior to tests and 3D materials when not cramming. Preliminary test results indicate that the student scores on 3D material were better than that of 2D material. As expected, student usage of all study materials increased an individual’s overall scores. Given this bias, the percentage of time utilizing 2D versus 3D study materials, was also positively correlated with improved score.Grant Funding Source: Supported by Iowa State University Miller Fellowship