No known study has compared similar types of student-made models in an effort to isolate the factors that make one tool more effective for learning and retention or more preferred by students. The current study compared the effectiveness of two types of functional, student-made laryngeal models, which differed in how accurate they were to the size and shape of a human larynx and how complex they were to assemble. Twenty-five anatomy and physiology students were divided into two groups who completed a pre-test and received identical instruction in laryngeal anatomy. Each group assembled, labeled, and turned in a different model larynx (folded or 3D printed). Participants then completed a post-test. Four months later, a retention-test was given. Participants were also given a survey to analyze their perceptions of the model’s effectiveness on learning. No significant differences between the groups were noted in learning or retention in anatomy or physiology, or in the students’ perceptions of the usefulness of assembly. Significant differences were noted in the amount of time students spent assembling the models. Qualitative analysis showed frustration with assembly impacted students’ perceptions of learning. While academic benefits may be similar despite type of model, students completing the 3D printed model had less frustration which increased their perception of learning. Decreased assembly time may have contributed to increased study time, as students had more time to study after assembly.
|Commitee:||Huston, Mary E, Gamas, Warren|
|School:||Minot State University|
|School Location:||United States -- North Dakota|
|Source:||MAI 81/11(E), Masters Abstracts International|
|Subjects:||Speech therapy, Higher education, Physiology|
|Keywords:||Anatomy, Communication disorders, Higher education, Laryngeal anatomy, Learning, Retention|
Copyright in each Dissertation and Thesis is retained by the author. All Rights Reserved
The supplemental file or files you are about to download were provided to ProQuest by the author as part of a
dissertation or thesis. The supplemental files are provided "AS IS" without warranty. ProQuest is not responsible for the
content, format or impact on the supplemental file(s) on our system. in some cases, the file type may be unknown or
may be a .exe file. We recommend caution as you open such files.
Copyright of the original materials contained in the supplemental file is retained by the author and your access to the
supplemental files is subject to the ProQuest Terms and Conditions of use.
Depending on the size of the file(s) you are downloading, the system may take some time to download them. Please be