The demand for upper‐level undergraduate dissection‐based anatomy courses is growing, as professional programs require more advanced anatomy training prior to matriculation. To address this need, Indiana University School of Medicine (IUSM) partnered with Indiana University‐Purdue University Indianapolis—a large, urban, life science‐focused campus nearby to IUSM—to offer an undergraduate, dissection‐based course in regional gross anatomy. Because this is a new course, a deeper post‐course evaluation of student perceptions was conducted using Q methodology. In this study, Q methodology was used to evaluate student views of the overall course structure, pre‐laboratory materials and activities, assessments, and quality of instruction. Of the 15 students in the spring semester 2018 cohort, 80% (n = 12) participated in the evaluation, and 10 of those students followed up with written explanations for their rationale in selecting the four statements with which they most strongly agreed and disagreed. The Q methodology sorted the students into one of three statistically significant groups: Motivated Dissectors (n = 6), Traditional Students (n = 3), and Inspired Learners (n = 3). Motivated Dissectors and Inspired Learners felt strongly that the course did not encourage self‐directed learning and that the pre‐laboratory materials were not adequate to prepare them for quizzes. Traditional Students, however, disagreed, having a favorable opinion of the pre‐laboratory materials, even though this group felt most strongly that the amount of material covered in the course was overwhelming. This study demonstrates the utility of Q methodology to evaluate courses to elucidate student perspectives and inform future course modifications.

中文翻译：

---

使用Q方法研究学生对基于解剖的本科大体解剖学课程的认知。

由于专业课程要求在入学前进行更高级的解剖学培训，因此对基于大学本科解剖学的高级课程的需求正在增长。为了满足这一需求，印第安纳大学医学院（IUSM）与印第安纳大学普渡大学印第安纳波利斯分校（位于IUSM附近的一个大型，以城市，生命科学为重点的校园）合作，提供了基于本科的解剖学课程。由于这是一门新课程，因此使用Q方法对学生的感知进行了更深入的评估。在这项研究中，使用了Q方法论来评估学生对整个课程结构，实验室前的材料和活动，评估以及教学质量的看法。在2018年春季学期的15名学生中，有80％（n = 12）参加了评估，这些学生中有10位在选择最强烈同意和不同意的四项陈述后，就其理由进行了书面解释。Q方法将学生分为三个具有统计学意义的组之一：积极的解剖者（n = 6），传统学生（n = 3）和有启发性的学习者（n = 3）。积极进取的学习者和受启发的学习者强烈认为，该课程并不鼓励自我学习，实验前的材料不足以使他们准备测验。然而，传统学生对此并不满意，他们对实验前的材料持赞成态度，尽管该小组最强烈地认为课程中涉及的材料数量是巨大的。