Reciprocal peer teaching: Students teaching students in the gross anatomy laboratory

Abstract

Three common instructional strategies used to teach gross anatomy are lecture, discovery or inquiry-based learning, and cooperative learning. One form of cooperative learning, called reciprocal peer teaching (RPT), illustrates circumstances where students alternate roles as teacher and student. By assuming the responsibility of teaching their peers, students not only improve their understanding of course content, but also develop communication skills, teamwork, leadership, confidence and respect for peers that are vital to developing professionalism early in their medical careers. Traditionally in our Anatomy department, students dissect the entire body using a standard dissection manual. More non-traditionally, however, we have increased cooperative learning in the dissection laboratory by involving students in a series of supplementary RPT activities. During these exercises, 10% of the class practiced their demonstration with course instructors until the students felt prepared to demonstrate the exercise to their classmates. We designed one peer demonstration emphasizing three to six teaching objectives for most of the 40 dissection units. This resulted in a compendium of peer demonstrations for implementation throughout the course. The multitude of diverse exercises permitted each student many opportunities to teach their peers. A debriefing questionnaire was administered at the end of the course demonstrating that 100% of students agreed the RPT experience increased their understanding of the topics they taught and 97% agreed it increased their retention of information they taught to their peers. In addition, 92% agreed that RPT improved their communication skills, which can be applied beyond anatomy to their careers as future physicians.

The anatomy of anatomy: A review for its modernization

“…The chairperson is responsible to lead the discussion and cover all learning objectives as well as encouraging dialog between fellow team members while developing necessary transferable skills for professionalism and leadership. In a survey by Krych et al (2005), 100% of participants in RPT dissection schemes agreed that their teaching experiences helped with understanding topics that they taught and 97% believed that there was increased retention of anatomy facts through teaching others. Students in gross anatomy RPT acquired more knowledge in this way than from staff teaching (Hendelman and Boss, 1986).…”

“…Students in gross anatomy RPT acquired more knowledge in this way than from staff teaching (Hendelman and Boss, 1986). Besides also becoming more independent learners, which is crucial to self-directed learning in the medical profession, the students attained improved attitudes to anatomy and an overwhelming majority agreed that RPT further developed essential communication skills (Hendelman and Boss, 1986;Krych et al, 2005). Other advantages of RPT include requiring less number of cadavers, a more economical teaching budget and a smaller student-teacher ratio.…”

The South-east Scotland Foundation Doctor Teaching Programme — Is “near-peer” teaching feasible, efficacious and sustainable on a regional scale?

“…Email: j.n.rodrigues@doctors.org.uk from a qualified professional (Lake 1999;Perkins et al 2002;Hudson et al 2008). Advantages for peer tutors have also been demonstrated: Krych et al (2005) showed that student tutors in an anatomy teaching programme felt their knowledge, understanding and communication skills had developed as a result of their involvement in the scheme. Similarly, peer tutors in patientcentred interviewing felt that their own consultation skills had improved (Nestel et al 2005).…”

The gross anatomy course: An analysis of its importance

“…Multiple reports compare problem-based learning (Azer and Eizenberg, 2007), peer teaching (Krych et al, 2005;Evans and Cuffe, 2009), team-based learning (Nieder et al, 2005), computer or web-based teaching materials (Bryner et al, 2008;Petersson et al, 2009), and clinical skills (Dusseau et al, 2008) with traditional dissection methodology. Winkelmann (2007) reviewed several novel teaching methods and found that they were mostly judged to be ''not disadvantageous'' while at the same time not achieving significantly better results than traditional teaching methods on comparable examinations.…”