From: Improving gross anatomy learning using reciprocal peer teaching
Opinion | Response (%) |
---|---|
Alternating schedule prevented me from dissecting all the parts I want to | |
 Strong disagree | 9 |
 Disagree | 43 |
 Neither agree nor disagree | 4 |
 Agree | 32 |
 Strong agree | 12 |
Pre-lab demonstration improved my knowledge as a primary dissector | Â |
 Strong disagree | 3 |
 Disagree | 3 |
 Neither agree nor disagree | 3 |
 Agree | 45 |
 Strong agree | 46 |
Effect of Reciprocal Peer Teaching on my gross anatomy education | |
 Strongly positive | 51 |
 Mildly positive | 37 |
 Neutral | 11 |
 Mildly negative | 1 |
 Strongly negative | 0 |
The greatest benefit of RPT | |
 Enhanced learning of anatomy | 59 |
 More efficient use of time | 10 |
 Experiencing of teaching peers | 26 |
 There are no benefits of RPT | 1 |
 Other, please specify (builds confidence) | 4 |
The greatest drawback of RPT | |
 Not enough time in the lab | 25 |
 Few opportunities to actively dissect | 48 |
 Didn’t receive adequate teaching from peers | 7 |
 There are no drawbacks of RPT | 8 |
 Too many people in one group | 12 |
Other comments related specifically to RPT in the anatomy lab | |
 1. Every student should have opportunity to play both roles | |
 2. RPT should be maintained at CUHAS | |
 3. Dissection groups should be smaller for easy teaching and understanding | |
Prior experience with Reciprocal Peer Teaching method | |
 Yes | 0 |
 No | 100 |