Objectives: Anatomy remains a fundamental component of medical education, and in many ways has withstood the ultimate pedagogical test; time. Anatomy demonstrators represent a keystone of this educational landscape, but little is known about their role in education, and learner’s development. This study sought to identify learners’ perceived value of medical demonstrators in undergraduate anatomy education.
Methods: A qualitative questionnaire was adapted from a student evaluation of teaching/units (SETU) template at Monash University. Students were invited to provide feedback on demonstrator preparation, teaching style and engagement, using a 5-point Likert Scale, followed by an open-ended feedback question. Results were analysed with content analysis using an abductive process, combining inductive coding with themes aligning with Pedagogical Content Knowledge (PCK) theory.
Results: In total, 141 questionnaires were completed (44% response rate). Three key themes relating to perceived demonstrator value were recognised: demonstrator teaching delivery methods, anatomy content and general comments. Effective teaching delivery centred on several key demonstrator characteristics including enthusiasm and approachability. Effective PCK, primarily understanding of subject matter and its clinical context, seemed to promote successful teaching delivery, as did a transition to less self-directed, more facilitated teaching.
Conclusions: Medical demonstrators appear to be valued highly by medical students, primarily by offering both a welcoming teaching environment, and a rich educational experience based on PCK. To further evolve this role, training opportunities for demonstrators should focus on developing teaching styles that nurture the identified valued characteristics, and application of PCK should remain at the forefront of all undergraduate anatomy teaching.
Keywords: anatomy; education; medical demonstrators; role; undergraduate
Ethical statement: We confirm that this study has received full ethical approval (Monash Ethics ID: 39275).
Funding statement: No funding was sought for the study and there are no conflicts of interest to declare.