Deynes MA, Sánchez GSR, Álvarez FEC, Ditoh F, Márquez FM

Language: Spanish
References: 12
Page: 1746-1752
PDF size: 360.07 Kb.

ABSTRACT

A technological development study was conducted at the University for Development Studies, especially School of Medicine and Health Sciences of Tamale (Northern Region, Ghana) from January to March 2010, by means of an educational software named NEUROEVAL, including the content imparted on the central nervous system in Anatomy practical classes and it would serve for the self-evaluation of students before the final examination of each section. The effectiveness of the software was validated through users (n =15) and experts (n=7) surveys, who agreed to evaluate it as useful (93.7% and 100.0%, respectively). On terms of design, users found it functional and comprehensible, while experts reported that it was simple. The content was valued as important for both groups. Finally, the contribution of this computer tool to the educational process was satisfactory.

REFERENCES

1. . Heylings DJ. Anatomy 1999–2000: the curriculum, who teaches it and how? Med Educ. 2002; 36(8): 702–10.

2. Drake RL. A unique, innovative, and clinically oriented approach to anatomy education. Acad Med. 2007; 82(5): 475–8.

3. Lever Duffy J, McDonald JB. Teaching and learning with technology. 3 ed. Boston, MA: Allyn & Bacon; 2007.

4. Okojie M, Olinzock AA, Okojie-Boulder TC. The pedagogy of technology integration. The Journal of Technology Studies. 2006; 32(2): 66–71.

5. Lowerison G, Sclater J, Schmid RF, Abrami PC. Are we using technology for learning? Journal of Educational Technology Systems. 2006; 34(4): 401–25.

6. Woodrow JE, Mayer Smith JA, Pedretti EG. Assessing technology enhanced instruction: a case study in secondary science. Journal of Educational Computing Research. 2000; 23(1): 15–39.

7. Schacter J. The impact of education technology on student achievement [citado 17 Mar 2010]. Disponible en: http://www.mff.org/pubs/ME161.pdf

8. Gogalniceanu P, Madani H, Paraskeva PA, Darzi A. A minimally invasive approach to undergraduate anatomy teaching. Anat Sci Educ. 2008; 1(1): 46-7.

9. McNulty JA, Sonntag B, Sinacore JM. Evaluation of computer-aided instruction in a gross anatomy course: a 6-year study. Anat Sci Educ. 2009; 2(1): 2-8.

10. Holubar SD. Coming soon to an operative theater near you: Medicine meets virtual reality. En: Resident and Associate Society-American Collage of Surgery News. 2009 [citado 10 Abr 2010]. Disponible en: http://www.magnetmail.net/actions/email_web_version.cfm?recipient_id=129924379 &message_id=665103&user_id=ACSurgeons#i9

11. Scott DJ, Cendan JC, Pugh CM, Minter RM, Dunnington GL, Kozar RA. The changing face of surgical education: simulation as the new paradigm. J Surg Res. 2008; 147(2): 189-93.

12. Issenberg SB, McGaghie WC, Hart IR, Mayer JW, Felner JM, Petrusa ER. Simulation technology for health care professional skills training and assessment. JAMA. 1999; 282(9): 861-6.