Remember Me
Or use your Academic/Social account:


Or use your Academic/Social account:


You have just completed your registration at OpenAire.

Before you can login to the site, you will need to activate your account. An e-mail will be sent to you with the proper instructions.


Please note that this site is currently undergoing Beta testing.
Any new content you create is not guaranteed to be present to the final version of the site upon release.

Thank you for your patience,
OpenAire Dev Team.

Close This Message


Verify Password:
Verify E-mail:
*All Fields Are Required.
Please Verify You Are Human:
fbtwitterlinkedinvimeoflicker grey 14rssslideshare1
Publisher: ThinkMind/IARIA
Languages: English
Types: Part of book or chapter of book
Subjects: RT, L1

Classified by OpenAIRE into

mesheuropmc: education
This paper presents evaluation data following the revision of the delivery method for an anatomy and physiology module for pre-registration healthcare practitioners, into a blended (hybrid) model. This subject is recognized as problematic when delivered by traditional methods, therefore change was instigated to introduce stimulating, interactive material; this was presented though use of e-learning tools to supplement the face-to-face sessions. The evaluation data consists of student outcomes from the hybrid mode of delivery compared with previous cohorts using the traditional methods, plus student satisfaction surveys from the students undertaking the module by blended learning. Results of the evaluation have identified that student outcomes for the new delivery method are demonstrating a trend for improvement for a multiplechoice exam, with no significant difference noted for a seen exam. The survey determined that the majority of students indicated satisfaction with the overall quality of the module, with the teaching methods, with the content and with the support provided to them. Therefore, this study suggests that a well designed blended learning system, with good academic content and interactive exercises are motivating for learning and yields as good, if not better, outcomes as a lecture. The module delivery will continue to be enhanced through the addition of synchronous chat facilities and online social network tools.
  • The results below are discovered through our pilot algorithms. Let us know how we are doing!

    • [1] Sturges, D., Maurer, T.W., and Cole, O., (2009). Understanding protein synthesis: a role-play approach in large undergraduate human anatomy and physiology classes. Advances in Physiology Education, 33, pp. 103-110
    • [2] Johnston, A.N.B., (2010). Anatomy for nurses: providing students with the best learning experience. Nurse Education in Practice, 10, pp. 222-226
    • [3] McLachlan, J.M., Bligh, J., Bradley, P., & Searle, J. (2004). The use of cadavers in anatomy teaching. Medical Education, 38(4), pp. 418- 424.
    • [4] Clancy, J., McVicar, A., Bird, D., (2000). Getting it right? An exploration of issues relating to the biological sciences in nurse education and nursing practice. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 32(6), pp. 1522-1532.
    • [5] McVicar, A., Clancy, J., (2001). Education. The Biosciences and Fitness for Practice. A time for review? British Journal of Nursing 10(21), pp. 1415-1420.
    • [6] Johnston, A.N.B., McAllister, M., (2008). Back to the future with hands-on science. Journal of Nursing Education, 7(9), pp. 417-421.
    • [7] Mitchell, B.S., McCrorie, P., Sedgwick, P., (2004). Student attitudes towards anatomy teaching and learning in a multiprofessional context. Medical Education, 38(7), pp.737-748
    • [8] Wilkes, L.M., Batts, J.E., (1998). Nurses' understanding of physical science in nursing practice. Nurse Education Today, 18(2), pp. 125- 132.
    • [9] Department for Education and Employment (DfEE) (2003) The Future of Higher Education. HMSO, London.
    • [10] Higher Education Funding Council for England (Hefce) (2009) Enhancing Learning and Teaching Through the Use of Technology. A Revised Approach to Hefce's Strategy for E-learning. Hefce, London. Retrieved from: on 18 September 2012.
    • [11] Department for Education and Skills (DfES) (2003) Towards a Unified E-learning Strategy. HMSO, London.
    • [12] Department of Health, (2001). Working Together Learning Together: A Framework for Lifelong Learning for the NHS. HMSO, London.
    • [13] Bybee, R.W., Taylor, J., Gardner, A., Scotter, P., Powell, J., Westbrook, A., and Landes, N., (2006). The BSCS 5E Instructional Model: Origins, Effectiveness, and Application. Colorado Springs, CO:National Institutes of Health, Office of Science Education.
    • [14] Philip, C.T., Unuh, K.P., Lachman, N., and Pawlina, W., (2008). An explorative learning approach to teaching clinical anatomy using student generated content. Anatomical Sciences Education, 1, pp. 106- 110
    • [15] Gogalniceanu P., Fitzgerald O'Connor E., and Raftery, A.T., (2009). Undergraduate anatomy teaching in the UK. Ann. R. Coll. Surg. Engl. (Suppl) 91, pp. 102-106
    • [16] Gresty, K., Cotton, D., (2003). Supporting biosciences in the nursing curriculum: development and evaluation of an online resource. Journal of Advanced Nursing 44(4), pp. 339-349.
    • [17] Prowse, M.A., (2003). Learning using bioscience in nursing. Part one: a review of the literature. Journal of Advanced Perioperative Care, 1, pp. 85-93.
    • [18] Jordan, S., Davies, S., and Green, B., (1999). The biosciences in the pre-registration nursing curriculum: staff and students' perceptions of difficulties and relevance. Nurse Education Today, 19, pp. 215-226.
    • [19] McKee, G., (2002). Why is biological science difficult for first year nursing students? Nurse Education Today, 22, pp. 251-257.
    • [20] Thornton, T., (1997). Attitudes towards the relevance of biological, behavioural and social sciences in nursing education. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 26 (1), pp. 180-186.
    • [21] Aktekin, M., and Aktekin, C.A., (2011). Discovering the “anatomy” in students' minds through metaphors. Surg Radiol Anat, 33, pp. 539- 542
    • [22] Tanner, C.A., (2003). Science and nursing education. Journal of Nursing Education 42(1), pp. 3-4.
    • [23] Regan de Bere, S., and Mattick, K., (2010). From anatomical 'competence' to complex capability. The views and experiences of UK tutors on how we should teach anatomy to medical students. Advances in Health Sciences Education, 15(4), pp. 573-585
    • [24] Knight, J.K., & Wood, W.B., (2005). Teaching more by lecturing less. Cell Biology Education, 4, pp. 298-310.
    • [25] Ramsden, P., (2003). Learning to Teach in Higher Education. Routledge Falmer, London and New York.
    • [26] Cannon, R., (1992). Lecturing. Higher Education Research and Development Society of Australiasia, Campbelltown.
    • [27] Chen Kinshuk, W., (2005). Cyber Schooling Framework: Improving Mobility and Situated Learning. 5th International Conference on Advanced Learning Technologies. Taiwan.
    • [28] Lujan, H.L., and DiCarlo, S.E., (2005). Too much teaching, not enough learning: what is the solution? Adv Physiol Educ., 30, pp. 17- 22.
    • [29] Li, Y., Chen, P., and Tasi, S. (2008). A comparison of the learning styles among different nursing programs in Taiwan: Implications for nursing education. Nursing Education Today, 28(1), pp. 70−76.
    • [30] Duffy, J.L., and McDonald, J.B., (2008). Teaching and learning with technology (3rd ed.). Boston: Pearson.
    • [31] Okojie, M.C., Olinzock, A.A., and Boulder, T.C.O., (2006). The pedagogy of technology integration. The Journal of Technology Studies, 32(2), pp. 66-71.
    • [32] Moule, P., (2007). Challenging the five-stage model for e-learning: a new approach. ALT-J 15(1), pp. 39-52.
    • [33] Moule, P., Ward, R., and Lockyer, L., (2010). Nursing and healthcare students' experiences and use of e-learning in higher education. Journal of Advanced Nursing. 66(12), pp. 2785-2795
    • [34] O'Reilly, T., (2005). What is Web 2.0? Retrieved from: on 18 September 2011.
    • [35] Stephenson, J., Brown, C., and Griffin, D., (2008). Electronic delivery of lectures in the university environment: An empirical comparison of three delivery styles. Computational and Educational, 50(3), pp. 640−651.
    • [36] Cuthrell, K., (2007). Instructional strategies: what do online students prefer? MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 3(4), pp. 357-362.
    • [37] Gopal, T., Herron, S.S., Mohn, R.S., Hartsell, T., Jawor, J.M., and Blickenstaff, J.C., (2010). Effect of an interactive web-based instruction in the performance of undergraduate anatomy and physiology lab students. Computers & Education, 55, pp. 500-512
    • [38] Greenhalgh, T., (2001). Computer-assisted learning in undergraduate medical education. British Medical Journal, 322, pp. 40-44.
    • [39] Park, J.Y., (2008). ILED: interactive learning experience design. MERLOT Journal of Online Learning and Teaching, 4(3), pp. 357- 370.
    • [40] Moule, P., (2006). E-learning for healthcare students: developing the communities of practice framework. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 53(3), pp. 370-380.
    • [41] White, S., and Ousey, K., (2011). Evaluating the Effectiveness of a Multiprofessional Online Mentor Update Tool. In: The Third International Conference on Mobile, Hybrid, and On-line Learning eL&mL 2011, Guadeloupe, France.
    • [42] Reime, M., Harris, A., Aksnes, J., and Mikkelsen, J., (2008). The most successful method in teaching nursing students infection control- elearning or lecture? Nurse Education Today 28(7), pp. 798-806.
    • [43] Huang, C., and Huang, H.K., (2003). Interactive instruction of cellular physiology for remote learning. Cellular and Molecular Biology, 49(8), 1377-1384.
    • [44] Wharrad, H.J., Cook, E., and Poussa, C., (2005). Putting postregistration nursing students on-line: important lessons learned. Nurse Education Today, 25(4), pp. 263-271.
    • [45] Howard, M.G., Collins, H.L., and DiCarlo, S.E., (2002). “Survivor” torches “Who Wants to be a Physician?” in the educational games rating war. Adv Physiol Educ., 26, pp. 30-36.
    • [46] Hudson, M., (2003). Acting out muscle contraction. Am Biol Teach, 65, pp. 128-132.
    • [47] Yu, S., Yang, K.F., (2006). Attitude towards web-based distance learning among public health nurses in Taiwan: a questionnaire survey. Int. J. Nurs. Stud. 43(6), pp. 767-774.
    • [48] Yu, S., Chen, I., Yang, K., Wang, T., and Yen, L., (2007). A feasibility study on the adoption of elearning for public health nurse continuing education in Taiwan. Nurse Educ. Today, 27(7), pp. 755- 761.
    • [49] Paladino, Y., Peres, H.H.C., (2007). E-learning: a comparative study for knowledge apprehension among nurses. Rev Latino-am Enfermagem, 15(3), pp. 397-403.
    • [50] Žvanut, B., Pucer, P., Lukin, M., Trobec, I., and Plazar, N., (2008). The Acceptance of Blended Elearning in the Pedagogical Process of Nursing. In: Soliman, K.S. (Ed.), Information management in modern organizations: trends & challenges: proceedings of the 9th International Business Information Management Conference. International Business Information Management Association, Marrakech.
    • [51] Woodrow, J.E.J., Smith, J.A.M., and Pedretti, E.G., (2000). Assessing technology enhanced instruction: a case study in secondary science. Journal of Educational Computing Research, 23(1), pp. 15-39.
    • [52] Rouse, D., (2000). The effectiveness of computer-assisted instruction in teaching nursing students about congenital heart disease. Computer in Nursing, 18, pp. 282-287.
    • [53] Chinnici, J.P., Yue, J.W., and Torres, K.M., (2004). Students as “human chromosomes” in role-playing mitosis and meiosis. Am Biol Teach, 66, pp. 35-39.
    • [54] Ross, P.M., Tronson, D.A., and Ritchie, R.J., (2008). Increasing conceptual understanding of glycolysis and the Krebs cycle using role-play. Am Biol Teach, 70, pp. 163-169.
    • [55] Gerdprasert, G., Pruksacheva, T., Panijpan, P., and Ruenwongsa, P., (2010). Development of a web-based learning medium on mechanism of labour for nursing Students. Nurse Education Today, 30(5), pp. 464-469.
    • [56] Kumrow, D.E., (2007). Evidence-based strategies of graduate students to achieve success in a hybrid web-based course. Journal of Nursing Education, 46(3), pp. 140-145.
    • [57] Limpach, A.L., Bazrafshan, P., Turner, P.D., and Monaghan, M.S., (2008). Effectiveness of human anatomy education for pharmacy students via the internet. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(6) Article 145 pp. 1-5
    • [58] Guerri-Guttenberg, R.A., (2008). Web-based method for motivating 18-year old anatomy students. Medical Education, 42, p. 1119.
    • [59] Lewis, M.J., Davies, R., Jenkins, D., and Tait, M.I., (2001). A review of evaluative studies of computer-based learning in nursing education. Nurse Education Today, 21(1), pp. 26-37.
    • [60] Peng, H., Tsai, C.C., and Wu, Y.T., (2006). University students' selfefficacy and their attitudes toward the Internet: the role of students' perceptions of the Internet. Educational Studies, 32(1), pp. 73-86.
    • [61] Atack, L., (2003). Becoming a web-based learner: registered nurses' experiences. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44(3), pp. 289-297.
    • [62] Hew, K.F., and Hara, N., (2008). An online listserv for nurse practitioners: a viable venue for continuous nursing professional development? Nurse Education Today, 28, pp. 450-457.
    • [63] Chen, S-W., Stocker, J., Wang, R-H., Chung, Y-C., and Chen, M-F., (2009). Evaluation of self-regulatory online learning in a blended course for post-registration nursing students in Taiwan. Nurse Education Today, 29(7), pp. 704-709.
    • [64] Atack, L., and Rankin, J., (2002). A descriptive study of registered nurses' experiences with web-based learning. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 40(4), pp. 457-465.
    • [65] Art, B., and Lisa, E. (2008). Designing and delivering effective online nursing courses with evolve electronic classroom. Journal of Computer Information Nursing, 26(5), pp. 54−60.
    • [66] Wiksten, D.L., Antonio, K., and Buxton, B.P. (1998). The effectiveness of an interactive computer program versus traditional lecture in athletic training education. Journal of Athletic Training, 33(3), pp. 238−243.
    • [67] Boyle, D., and Wambach, K., (2001) Interaction in graduate nursing web-based instruction. Journal of Professional Nursing, 17(3), pp. 128-134.
    • [68] Selim, H.M., (2007). Critical success factors for e-learning acceptance: confirmatory factor models. Comput. Educ. 49, pp. 396- 413
    • [69] Gresty, K.A., and Cotton, D.R.E., (2003). Supporting biosciences in the nursing curriculum: development and evaluation of an online resource. Journal of Advanced Nursing, 44, pp. 339-49.
    • [70] Bond, C.S., (2009). Nurses, computers and pre-registration education. Nurse Education Today 29(7), pp. 731-734.
    • [71] Bond, C., (2004). Surfing or drowning? Student nurses' Internet skills. Nurse Education Today, 24(3), pp. 169-173.
    • [72] Gibbon, C., (2006). Enhancing clinical practice through the use of electronic resources. Nursing Standard, 20(22), pp. 41-46.
    • [73] Lee, M.G., (2001). Profiling student's adaptation styles in Web-based learning. Computers and Education, 36(1), pp. 121-132.
    • [74] Creedy, D.K., Mitchell, M., Seaton-Sykes, P., Cooke, M., Patterson, E., Purcell, C., and Weeks, P., (2007). Evaluating a web-enhanced bachelor of nursing curriculum: perspectives of third-year students. Journal of nursing education, 46(10), pp. 460-467.
    • [75] Horiuchi, S., Yaju, Y., Koyo, M., Sakyo, Y., and Nakayama, K., (2009). Evaluation of a web-based graduate continuing nursing education program in Japan: a randomized controlled trial. Nurse Education Today, 29(2), pp. 140-149.
    • [76] Abdelaziz, M., Kamel, S.S., Karam, O., and Abdelrahman, A., (2011). Evaluation of E-learning program versus traditional lecture instruction for undergraduate nursing students in a faculty of nursing. Teaching and Learning in Nursing, 6(2), pp. 50-58
    • [77] Guernsey, L., (1998). Distance education for the not-so-distant. Chronicle of Higher Education, 45(3), pp. 29−30.
    • [78] Vandeveer, M., and Norton, B., (2005). From teaching to learning: theoretical foundation. In: Billings, D.M., and Halstead, J.A. (Eds.), Teaching in Nursing. Elsevier-Saunders, St. Louis, pp. 240-241.
    • [79] NASA (2011) 5Es Overview: “The 5E instructional model”. Retrieved from: on 18 September 2011.
    • [80] Green, S.M., Weaver. M., Voegeli, D., Fitzsimmons, D., Knowles, J., Harrison, M. and Shephard, K., (2006) The development and evaluation of the use of a virtual learning environment (Blackboard 5) to support the learning of pre-qualifying nursing students undertaking a human anatomy and physiology module. Nurse Education Today, 26(5), pp. 388-395.
    • [81] Marsh, D., Pountney, R. and Prigg, R., (2008). C-SAP Scoping Survey on the Use of E-learning in the Social Sciences. Higher Education Academy Sociology, Anthropology and Politics, London.
    • [82] Jonas, D., and Burns, B., (2010). The transition to blended e-learning. Changing the focus of educational delivery in children's pain management. Nurse Education in Practice, 10(1), pp. 1-7.
    • [83] Poirier, T.I., and O'Neil, C.K., (2000). Use of web technology and active learning strategies in a quality assessment methods course. Am J Pharm Educ. 64, pp. 289-98.
    • [84] Smith, A.C., Stewart, R., Shields, P., Hayes-Klosteridis, J., Robinson, P., and Yuan, R., (2005). Introductory biology courses: a framework to support active learning in large enrollment introductory science courses. Cell Biol Educ. 4, pp. 169-79.
    • [85] Phillips, J.M., (2005). Strategies for active learning in online continuing education. J Continuing Educ Nurs. 36, pp. 77-83.
    • [86] Song, L., Singleton, E.S., Hill, J.R., and Koh, M.H., (2004). Improving online learning: Student perceptions of useful and challenging characteristics. Internet and Higher Education, 7, pp. 59- 70
    • [87] Hill, J.R., (2002). Overcoming obstacles and creating connections: Community building in Web-based learning environments. Journal of Computing in Higher Education, 14(1), pp. 67-86.
    • [88] Allen, S.S., and Roberts, K., (2002). An integrated structure-function module for first year medical students: Correlating anatomy, clinical medicine and radiology. Med Educ. 36, pp. 1106-1107.
    • [89] Salmon, G., (2002). E-moderating-the Key to Teaching and Learning On-Line. Kogan Page, London.
    • [90] Percac, S., and Goodenough, D.A., (1998). Problem based teaching and learning as a bridge from basic anatomy to clinical clerkships. Surg Radiol Anat. 20(3), pp. 203-207
    • [91] Metz, A.M., (2008). The effect of access time on online quiz performance in large biology lecture courses. Biochemistry and Molecular Biology Education, 26(3) pp. 196-202.
    • [92] DeSouza, E., and Fleming, M., (2003). A comparison of in-class and online quizzes on student exam performance, J. Comput. Higher Educ. 14, pp. 121-134.
    • [93] S. Freeman, S., O'Connor, E., Parks, J.W., Cunningham, M., Hurley, D., Haak, D., Dirks, C., and Wenderoth, M.P., (2007). Prescribed active learning increases performance in introductory biology. CBELife Sci. Educ. 6, pp. 132-139.
    • [94] Riffell, S.K., and Sibley, D.F., (2005). Using web-based instruction to improve large undergraduate biology courses: An evaluation of a hybrid course format. Comput. Educ. 44, pp. 217-235.
    • [95] Mayer, R., (2004). Should there be a three-strikes rule against pure discovery learning? The case for guided methods of instruction. Am. Psychologist, 59, pp. 14-19.
    • [96] Likert, R., (1932). A technique for the measurement of attitudes. Archives of Psychology, 140, pp. 1-55
    • [97] Jeffries, P.R., (2001). Computer versus lecture: a comparison of two methods of teaching oral medication administration in a nursing skills laboratory. Journal of Nursing Education 40(7), pp. 323-329.
    • [98] Smolle, J., Staber, R., Neges, H., Relbnegger, G., and Kerl, H., (2005). Computer-based training in dermatooncology-A preliminary report comparing electronic learning programs with face-to-face teaching. Journal der Deutschen Dermatologischen Gesellschaft, 3(11), pp. 883−888.
    • [99] Desai, N., Philpott-Howard, J., Wade, J., and Casewell, M., (2000). Infection control training: Evaluation of a computer assisted learning package. The Journal of Hospital Infection, 44(3), pp. 193−199.
    • [100]Reime, M.H., Harris, A., Aksnes, J., and Mikkelsen, J., (2008). The most successful method in teaching nursing students infection control-Elearning or lecture? Nursing Education Today, 28(7), pp. 798−806.
    • [101]Seabra, D., Srougi, M., Baptista, R., Nesrallah, L.J., Ortiz, V., and Sigulem, D., (2004). Computer aided learning versus standard lecture for undergraduate education in urology. The Journal of Urology, 171(3), pp. 1220−1222.
    • [102]Stanton, M., Crow, C., Morrison, R., Skiba, D.J., Monroe, T., Nix, G., and Gooner, V., (2005). Web-based graduate education in rural nursing case management. Online Journal of Rural Nursing Health Care, 5(2), pp. 1−15.
    • [103]Ricer, R.E., Filak, A.T., and Short, J., (2005). Does a high tech (computerized, animated, PowerPoint) presentation increase retention of material compared to a low tech (black on clear overheads) presentation? Journal of Teaching and Learning in Medicine, 17(2), pp. 107−111.
    • [104]Jenkins, S., Goal, R., and Morrele, D., (2008). Computer-assisted instruction versus traditional lecture for medical student teaching of dermatology morphology: A randomized control trial. Journal of the American Academy of Dermatology, 59(2), pp. 255−259.
    • [105]Shen, Q., Chung, J.K.H., Challis, D., and Cheung, R.C.T., (2007). A comparative study of student performance in traditional mode and online mode of learning. Journal of Computational Applied Engineering Education, 15(1), pp. 30−40.
    • [106]Sit, J.W.H., Chung, J.W.Y., Chow, M.C.M., and Wong, T.K.S., (2005). Experience of online learning: students' perspective. Nurse Education Today, 25(2), pp. 140-147.
    • [107]Tait, M., Tait, D., Thornton, F., and Edwards, M., (2008). Development and evaluation of a critical care e-learning scenario. Nurse Education Today, 28, pp. 970-980.
    • [108]Richards, C.N., and Ridley, D.R. (1998). Factors affecting college students' persistence in on-line computer-managed instruction. College Studies of Journal, 31(4), pp. 490−495.
    • [109]Valenta, A., Therriault, D., Dieter, M. and Mrtek, R., (2001). Identifying student attitudes and learning styles in distance education. Journal of Asynchronous Learning Networks, 5(2), pp. 1−15.
    • [110]El-Deghaidy, H., and Nouby, A., (2008). Effectiveness of a blended elearning cooperative approach in an Egyptian teacher education programme. Journal of Computational Educational, 51(3), pp. 988−1006
    • [111]Mastrian, K. G., and McGonigle, D., (1997). Older student perceptions of technology based learning assignments. Online Journal of Nursing Informatics, 1(2), retrieved from: on 19 September 2011.
    • [112]Petrides, L.A., (2002). Web-based technologies for distributed (or distance) learning: Creating learning-centered educational experiences in the higher education classroom. International Journal of Instructional Media, 29(1), pp. 69-77.
    • [113]Vonderwell, S., (2003). An examination of asynchronous communication experiences and perspectives of students in an online course: A case study. Internet and Higher Education, 6, pp. 77-90.
    • [114]Hara, N., and Kling, R., (1999). Students' frustrations with a webbased distance education course. First Monday, 4(12), retrieved from: on 19 September 2011.
    • [115]Rovai, A.P., (2002). Sense of community, perceived cognitive learning, and persistence in asynchronous learning networks. Internet and Higher Education, 5, pp. 319-332.
    • [116]Beasley, N., and Smyth, K., (2004). Expected and actual student use of an online learning environment: a critical analysis. Electronic Journal on e-Learning, 2, pp. 43-50.
    • [117]Kashyap, V., (2006). Learning strategies and performance in a technology integrated classroom. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 38(3), pp. 293-307.
  • No related research data.
  • No similar publications.

Share - Bookmark

Cite this article