{'fraction_non_alphanumeric': 0.021937842778793418, 'fraction_numerical': 0.006946983546617916, 'mean_word_length': 5.392523364485982, 'pattern_counts': {'":': 0, '<': 1, '<?xml version=': 0, '>': 0, 'https://': 0, 'lorem ipsum': 0, 'www.': 0, 'xml': 0}, 'pii_count': 0, 'substrings_counts': 0, 'word_list_counts': {'cursed_substrings.json': 0, 'profanity_word_list.json': 0, 'sexual_word_list.json': 0, 'zh_pornsignals.json': 0}}
Effects of Supplementing the Deconstructive Process of Dissection with the Constructive Process of Building Muscles in Clay

Typically, gross anatomy courses utilize cadaver dissection to facilitate learning specific structures as well as spatial relationships of one structure to another. The deconstructive nature of dissection, however, directs students to first examine the big picture and then discover underlying details. While this approach may be useful for many, some students are more successful when they are able to build‐up knowledge from the smallest details to the larger picture. Further, if students are able to successfully work through the deconstructive process of dissection, then mirror the process in a constructive way, they are more likely to have a comprehensive understanding of the location of structures and the spatial relationships between them. To evaluate how supplementing learning by dissection with a constructive analogy affects students' knowledge acquisition and application, 165 undergraduate gross anatomy students were asked to build pelvic limb muscles in clay following a dissection of the same muscles. Prior to the clay building activity students had completed the following class assignments: 1) watched lecture videos presenting information regarding pelvic limb muscles, 2) participated in class activities in which they were asked to apply information from the videos, and 3) completed a dissection of the pelvic limb on canine cadavers. At this point, students were asked to take a pre‐quiz designed to evaluate knowledge gained in four specific concepts as related to the muscles of the pelvic limb: 1) origins and insertions, 2) actions based on location, 3) identification, and 4) spatial relationships. During one lab period following the pre‐quiz, students participated in a guided activity involving building muscles on a skeletal model of the dog or human (Anatomy in Clay® CANIKEN® & MANIKEN®) in order from the deepest muscles to the most superficial. At the end of the activity, students were asked to complete a five‐point Likert‐scale survey which measured their perceived benefit from the activity. One week following the activity, they were given a post quiz which evaluated the same four concepts. Overall quiz scores improved significantly after completing the muscle construction activity. The pre‐quiz average was 59% while the post quiz average was 77% (p < 0.0001). Based on the survey, the majority of students agreed or strongly agreed that the physical and interactive nature of the activity was beneficial and that it helped improve their spatial abilities, their ability to visualize locations of muscles relative to one another and identify specific muscles.