Are quiz‐games an effective revision tool in Anatomical Sciences for Higher Education and what do students think of them?

Abstract

Recently, there has been an increased volume of pedagogical research and practice of mobile learning (m-learning) and gameplay in education. This paper presents the findings of a study that examined the effect on achievement and explored student perception towards quiz-game play prior to an anatomy assessment in first year Higher Education students. Achievement data was collected over two academic years at all module assessment (A1-A4) points. A1 was used as a baseline, showing no difference between groups or years, A2 and A3 were comparable online assessments done on the lower and upper limbs that followed the same format; A4 was a viva-voce to assess the whole module learning. The optional 15-minute quiz-gameplay intervention (G) using a mobile application was initiated prior to A3, those students who chose not to participate performed their traditional study routine; no other changes to assessments were made resulting in a Gameplay and non-gameplay (G, NG) group for each year. Students were invited to participate in an online focus group (N = 84) and a sample undertook indepth interviews (N = 9) to gain qualitative data on their perceptions of the intervention. Students who participated in the gameplay (G) group (N = 87) demonstrated a significant improvement in A3 compared to A2, and the non-game play (NG) group (N = 164) a significant decrease. A thematic analysis was undertaken on the focus group and interview data revealing key aspects of quiz-gameplay as a learning tool. This paper offers insight into the potential benefit of encouraging m-learning gameplay as part of revision or learning for anatomy students. This information could help educators and study support facilitate efficient revision methods as well as initiate further research into the use of anatomy gameplay to enhance the student learning experience.

Anatomi eğitiminde mobil öğrenmenin öğrencilerin öğrenme becerileri ve motivasyonuna etkisi: sistematik derleme

“…In 10 (3%) of the studies included in the research, they compared the traditional learning method and mobile application methods to investigate the effect of mobile learning. In 8 (26%) of the studies, it was observed that the final exam results of the students who learned anatomy with the mobile application were higher than the students who learned with the traditional method (Chakraborty & Cooperstein, 2018;Fernández-Alemán, López-González, et al, 2016;Fernández-Alemán, Lopez-Gonzalez, et al, 2016;Lazarus et al, 2017;Moro et al, 2017;Traser et al, 2015;Wilkinson & Barter, 2016;Wilkinson et al, 2020). In the other 2 (6%) studies, it was observed that the anatomy final exam results of the experimental groups were higher, but there was a decrease in their cognitive levels (Bork et al, 2021;Küçük et al, 2016).…”

“…Within the scope of the systematic review, it was stated in 20 (66%) studies that mobile learning facilitates three-dimensional learning, is motivating and fun. They stated that they can access anatomy notes and images at any time of the day (Bolatli & Kizil, 2022;Bork et al, 2021;Fernández-Alemán, López-González, et al, 2016;Gnanasegaram, Leung, & Beyea, 2020;Golenhofen et al, 2020;Havens, Saulovich, & Saric, 2020;Jamali, Shiratuddin, Wong, Oskam, & Sciences, 2015;Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018;Küçük, Kapakin, & Göktaş, 2016;Lazarus, Sookrajh, & Satyapal, 2017;Mendez-Lopez et al, 2022;Mogali et al, 2019;Moro, Štromberga, Raikos, & Stirling, 2017;Morris, Lambe, Ciccone, & Swinnerton, 2016;Pickering, 2015;Stewart & Choudhury, 2015;Stirling & Birt, 2014;Traser, Hoffman, Seifert, & Wilson, 2015;Wilkinson & Barter, 2016;Wilkinson et al, 2020). In 19 (63%) studies, the learning effectiveness of medical school students in anatomy education with mobile applications was investigated, and positive feedback was received from the students.…”

“…In 19 (63%) studies, the learning effectiveness of medical school students in anatomy education with mobile applications was investigated, and positive feedback was received from the students. In addition, students said that learning is more permanent and takes place in a shorter time (Bork et al, 2021;Chandrasekaran et al, 2021;Fernández-Alemán, Lopez-Gonzalez, et al, 2016;Gnanasegaram et al, 2020;Golenhofen et al, 2020;Harmon, Burgoon, & Kalmar, 2022;Jamali et al, 2015;Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018;Küçük et al, 2016;Lazarus et al, 2017;Mayfield, Ohara, & O'Sullivan, 2013;Mogali et al, 2019;Morris et al, 2016;Pickering, 2015;Raney, 2016;Stewart & Choudhury, 2015;Stirling & Birt, 2014;Traser et al, 2015;Wilkinson et al, 2020). However, in 6 (20%) studies, students stated that cadaveric education was easier, internet access outside the school was problematic, they had difficulty in downloading programs to their personal devices and they could not use the programs because they were paid.…”

“…In these studies, there was no comparison made, and the measures used by the researchers, qualitative data such as observations and interviews, student scores, questionnaires, mobile usage, and participant satisfaction are included (Golenhofen et al, 2020;Harmon et al, 2022;Havens et al, 2020;Jamali et al, 2015;Kurniawan & Witjaksono, 2018;Pickering, 2015;Stewart & Choudhury, 2015). Wilkinson et al (2020) have seen that with gameplay in mobile learning, the learning of anatomy is reinforced, the information is repeated, the success rate is increased, and it makes learning fun by taking the lesson away from boring. In 3 studies included in the systematic article, it was found that the exam results of the students who received anatomy education with mobile applications compared to traditional learning methods were statistically significantly higher (p˂0.001) (Fernández-Alemán, López-González, et al, 2016;Stirling & Birt, 2014;Wilkinson & Barter, 2016).…”

The Reliability and Medical Students’ Appreciation of Certainty-Based Marking

“…In contrast, computer based learning methods show no overt effect when compared to traditional study methods [23]. Moreover, the factor of luck in MCQ is a known design problem and when not enough care is taken to actively discourage the random guessing, exams become unreliable [24][25][26][27][28][29]. CBM was designed to tackle the issues presented above-identifying students' conceptual misunderstandings, identifying students' areas for improvement and actively discouraging random guessing [30][31][32].…”