Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

Students Satisfaction with the Use of PlayDoh® as a Tool to Actively Learn 3D Veterinary Anatomy More Accurately

  • Original Research
  • Published:
Medical Science Educator Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Understanding veterinary anatomy is an essential skill for the study of veterinary medicine as well as for diagnostic imaging and therapy. Dissection facilities are increasingly limited in some schools and its alternatives have often focussed on using two-dimensional images. However, the study of veterinary anatomy is mainly concerned with identifying structures and spatial relationships between them within a 3D space, and the use of 2D teaching approaches does not provide accurate information. We tested whether PlayDoh® student-built models could be an inexpensive potential tool beneficial to veterinary students learning anatomy in three distinct scenarios: (1) during a lecture, introducing a new concept; (2) during a flipped classroom approach where a video-podcast lecture was to be watched by the students prior to the lecture and (3) as a revision session where students brought their own questions and created, under supervision, their own models to respond to them. PlayDoh® sessions benefitted 172 first-year Veterinary Medicine and Animal Science students. The most accurate visualisation of anatomical structures in 3D was the principal benefit mentioned by the learners (35%). In addition, the learners noted that the technique would help with ‘retention’ (18%). According to the students’ preferences, it was possible to create four groups: A, B, C and D. Group A encompassed the methodologies most liked by students and consisted of lectures, dissection and demonstrations. Group B included demonstrations and 3D modelling using PlayDoh®. Group C consisted of 3D modelling using PlayDoh®, books and online and, finally, group D included the methodologies least preferred by students, i.e. online and PBL. Our findings suggest that using 3D PlayDoh® modelling has potential as a method to enhance the learning of veterinary anatomy and may be most valuable to those students learning more complex subject areas that require a 3D teaching approach in practice.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2

Similar content being viewed by others

Data Availability

The data that support the findings of this study are available from the corresponding author [MPM], upon request.

References

  1. Fasel JHD. Teaching of gross anatomy to medical undergraduates: general practice as a guideline? A synopsis J Anat. 1998;192(2):305–6.

    Google Scholar 

  2. Sugand K, Abrahams P, Khurana A. The anatomy of anatomy: a review for its modernization. Anat Sci Ed. 2010;3:83–93.

    Google Scholar 

  3. Winkelmann A. Anatomical dissection as a teaching method in medical school: a review of the evidence. Med Educ. 2007;41(1):15–22.

    Google Scholar 

  4. McBride JM, Drake RL. National survey on anatomical sciences in medical education. Anat Sci Educ. 2018;11(1):7–14.

    Google Scholar 

  5. Nuanmeesri S, Preedawon K, Poomhiran L. Augmented reality to teach human heart anatomy and blood flow. Turk Online J Educ T. 2019;18(1):15–24.

    Google Scholar 

  6. Yammine K, Violato C. A meta-analysis of the educational effectiveness of three-dimensional visualization technologies in teaching anatomy. Anat Sci Educ. 2015;8(6):525–38.

    Google Scholar 

  7. Nguyen N, Nelson AJ, Wilson TD. Computer visualizations: factors that influence spatial anatomy comprehension. Anat Sci Ed. 2012;5(2):98–108.

    Google Scholar 

  8. Eftekhar B, Ghodsi M, Ketabchi E, Ghazvini AR. Play dough as an educational tool for visualization of complicated cerebral aneurysm anatomy. BMC Med Educ. 2005;5(1):15.

    Google Scholar 

  9. Chen JCT, Amar AP, Levy ML, Apuzzo MLJ. The development of anatomic art and sciences: the ceroplastica anatomic models of La Specola. Neurosurgery. 1999;45(4):883–92.

    Google Scholar 

  10. Haviland TN, Parish LC. A brief account of the use of wax models in the study of medicine. J Hist Med Allied Sci. 1970;25(1):52–75.

    Google Scholar 

  11. Xinnong C. Chinese acupuncture and moxibustion. Beijing: Foreign Languages Press; 1990.

    Google Scholar 

  12. Neave R. Pictures in the round: moulage and models in medicine. J Audiov Media Med. 1989;12(2):80–4.

    Google Scholar 

  13. Vernon T, Peckham D. The benefits of 3D modelling and animation in medical teaching. J Audiov Media Med. 2002;25(4):142–8.

    Google Scholar 

  14. Whitacre H. Persistent thyrolingual duct: complete branchial fistula: with note on the teaching of embryology by means of clay models. Ann Surg. 1903;37:56–64.

    Google Scholar 

  15. Ackermann EK. Constructing knowledge and transforming the world. In: A learning zone of one’s own: sharing Representations and flow in collaborative learning environments. M. Tokoro and L.Steels (Eds.); 2004. Part 1: pp. 15–37.

  16. Kember D. A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics’ conceptions of teaching. Learn Instr. 1997;7(3):255–75.

    Google Scholar 

  17. Rogers CR, Freiberg HJ. Freedom to learn. 3rd ed. New York: Prentice Hall; 1994.

    Google Scholar 

  18. Wilke RR. The effect of active learning on student characteristics in a human physiology course for nonmajors. Adv Physiol Educ. 2003;27(4):207–23.

    Google Scholar 

  19. Bloom BS, Engelhart MD, Furst E, Hill WH, Krathwohl D. Taxonomy of educational objectives: the classification of educational goals. Handbook 1: cognitive domain. New York: David McKay Co, New York; 1956.

  20. Carlson NR. Physiology of behavior. 6th ed. Boston: Allyn and Bacon; 1998.

    Google Scholar 

  21. Manners RM, Jazayeri FR, de Bono AM, Webber SM, Macleod ER. PlayDoh® models are a very effective kinaesthetic tool for teaching anatomy of the eye. Med Sci Educ. 2017;27(4):585–8.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Peabody MA, Noyes S. Reflective boot camp: adapting LEGO® SERIOUS PLAY® in higher education. Reflective Pract. 2017;18(2):232–43.

    Google Scholar 

  23. Swann D. NHS at home: using Lego Serious Play to capture service narratives and envision future healthcare products. INCLUDE 2011 Proceedings; 2011.

  24. Stead R. Exploration: building the abstract—metaphorical Play-Doh® modelling in health sciences. In: James A, Nerantzi C, editors. The power of play in higher education. Palgrave Macmillan: Cham; 2019. p. 227–38.

    Google Scholar 

  25. Moraes SG, Reis MVA, Mello MFS, Pereira LAV. The usefulness of autopsies as a tool for teaching human embrilogy. J Morphol Sci. 2004;21(3):117–23.

    Google Scholar 

  26. Abeysekera L, Dawson P. Motivation and cognitive load in the flipped classroom: definition, rationale and a call for research. High Educ Res Dev. 2015;34(1):1–14.

    Google Scholar 

  27. Seale C. Ensuring rigour in qualitative research. Eur J Public Health. 1997;7(4):379–84.

    Google Scholar 

  28. Gale NK, Heath G, Cameron E, Rashid S, Redwood S. Using the framework method for the analysis of qualitative data in multi-disciplinary health research. BMC Med Res Methodol. 2013;13(1):117.

    Google Scholar 

  29. Barbour RS. Checklists for improving rigour in qualitative research: a case of the tail wagging the dog? BMJ. 2001;322(7294):1115–7.

    Google Scholar 

  30. Sheskin DJ. Handbook of parametric and nonparametric statistical procedures. CRC Press; 2003.

  31. Wheble R. Channon, SB What use in anatomy in first opinion small animal veterinary practice? A qualitative study anatomical sciences education. 2021;14:440–51.

    Google Scholar 

  32. Markovic L, Nguyen S, Clouser S. Utility of three-dimensional virtual and printed models for veterinary student education in cogenital heart disease. 2023;6(1):15–21.

    Google Scholar 

  33. Schoenfeld-Tacher RM, Horn TJ, Scheviak TA, Royal KD, Hudson LC. Evaluation of 3D additively manufactured canine brain models for teaching veterinary neuroanatomy. J Vet Med Educ. 2017;44(4):612–9.

    Google Scholar 

  34. Nielsen TD, Dean RS, Massey A, Brennan ML. Survey of the UK veterinary profession 2: sources of information used by veterinarians. Vet Rec. 2015;177(7):172.

    Google Scholar 

  35. Liew SC, Sidhu J, Barua A. The relationship between learning preferences (styles and approaches) and learning outcomes among pre-clinical undergraduate medical students. BMC Med Educ. 2015;15(1):44.

    Google Scholar 

  36. James A. Lego Serious Play: a three-dimensional approach to learning development. Journal of Learning Development in Higher Education. 2013;6:1–18.

    Google Scholar 

  37. Roberts D. Higher education lectures: from passive to active learning via imagery? Act Learn High Educ. 2017;20(1):63–77.

    Google Scholar 

  38. Stumm S, Furnham AF. Learning approaches: associations with Typical Intellectual Engagement, intelligence and the Big Five. Pers Indiv Differ. 2012;53(5):720–3.

    Google Scholar 

  39. Neel JA, Grindem CB. Learning-style profiles of 150 veterinary medical students. J Vet Med Educ. 2010;37(4):347–52.

    Google Scholar 

  40. Langebæk R, Nielsen SS, Koch BC, Berendt M. Student preparation and the power of visual input in veterinary surgical education: an empirical study. J Vet Med Educ. 2016;43(2):214–21.

    Google Scholar 

  41. Ward PJ, Walker JJ. The influence of study methods and knowledge processing on academic success and long-term recall of anatomy learning by first-year veterinary students. Anat Sci Educ. 2008;1(2):68–74.

    Google Scholar 

  42. Barrett-Meija RA, Cano-Marin NE, Torres-Gomez RH, Quiceno-Zapata S, Tamayo-Arango LJ. Perceptions of students and teacher about traditional and active didactic strategies in a veterinary anatomy course. Eur J Anat. 2022;26(5):589–97.

    Google Scholar 

  43. Dooley LM, Frankland S, Boller E, Tudor E. Implementing the flipped classroom in a veterinary pre-clinical science course: student engagement, performance, and satisfaction. J Vet Med Educ. 2018;45(2):195–203.

    Google Scholar 

  44. Thai NTT, De Wever B, Valcke M. The impact of a flipped classroom design on learning performance in higher education: looking for the best ‘blend’ of lectures and guiding questions with feedback. Comput Educ. 2017;107:113–26.

    Google Scholar 

  45. Smith CF, Freeman SK, Heylings D, Finn GM, Davies DC. Anatomy education for medical students in the UK and Republic of Ireland in 2019: a 20-year follow-up. Anat Sci Educ. 2022;15:993–1006.

    Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. Department of Basic and Environmental Sciences, Engineering School of Lorena, University of Sao Paulo, Lorena, Brazil

    Mariana Pereira De Melo

  2. Library and Learning Support, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK

    Rachel Stead

  3. Department of Higher Education, University of Surrey, Guildford, Surrey, GU2 7XH, UK

    Simon Lygo-Baker

  4. School of Anatomy, University of Bristol, Bristol, UK

    A. Augusto Coppi

Authors
  1. Mariana Pereira De Melo
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Rachel Stead
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. Simon Lygo-Baker
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  4. A. Augusto Coppi
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Mariana Pereira De Melo.

Ethics declarations

Ethics Approval and Consent to Participate

A local ethics committee ruled that no formal ethics approval was required in this particular case.

Competing Interests

The authors declare no competing interests.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Supplementary Information

Below is the link to the electronic supplementary material.

Supplementary file1 (MP4 11808 KB)

Rights and permissions

Springer Nature or its licensor (e.g. a society or other partner) holds exclusive rights to this article under a publishing agreement with the author(s) or other rightsholder(s); author self-archiving of the accepted manuscript version of this article is solely governed by the terms of such publishing agreement and applicable law.

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

De Melo, M.P., Stead, R., Lygo-Baker, S. et al. Students Satisfaction with the Use of PlayDoh® as a Tool to Actively Learn 3D Veterinary Anatomy More Accurately. Med.Sci.Educ. 33, 1371–1378 (2023). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-023-01892-y

Download citation

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s40670-023-01892-y

Keywords

Search

Navigation