Intentional grouping and team building within the gross anatomy laboratory

IF 4.7 2区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Tracey Zeiner, Teressa Brown, Alexis Gillett, LaVona Traywick, Daniel Cipriani
{"title":"Intentional grouping and team building within the gross anatomy laboratory","authors":"Tracey Zeiner,&nbsp;Teressa Brown,&nbsp;Alexis Gillett,&nbsp;LaVona Traywick,&nbsp;Daniel Cipriani","doi":"10.1002/ase.70094","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<p>Several benefits have been cited in literature discussing cadaver dissection, with the development of team building skills and group dynamics frequently toward the top of this list. This study aims to focus on the development of teamwork skills with intentional lab group formation based on individualized strength assessments in the gross anatomy lab. The participants were physical therapy students enrolled in a Clinical Gross Anatomy course at a private medical school. The students were purposely assigned their lab groups of four based on their results from the CliftonStrengths assessment. “Strengths,” were divided into four main categories: executing, influencing, relationship building, and strategic thinking. Each group had a student who scored highly in each of the four areas. For the pre-experimental one-group pretest–posttest design, the data measures were TCI (Team Climate Inventory) with additional open-ended questions on the posttest. Significant changes were noted in the pre/posttest TCI scores in two of the four TCI categories. Using thematic analysis, two primary dimensions of teambuilding were identified. First, personality trait differences were identified within groups and led to further understanding of competition within the group and individual self-confidence issues. Second, group dynamics were identified as they related to a positive, negative, or neutral experience. This pilot study demonstrated significant changes in team dynamics; however, intentional grouping based on individualized personality strengths did not significantly impact these results. Positive experiences were noted in some groups, considerable negative experiences were noted in others, with some neutral still.</p>","PeriodicalId":124,"journal":{"name":"Anatomical Sciences Education","volume":"18 9","pages":"905-911"},"PeriodicalIF":4.7000,"publicationDate":"2025-07-24","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"Anatomical Sciences Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://anatomypubs.onlinelibrary.wiley.com/doi/10.1002/ase.70094","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0

Abstract

Several benefits have been cited in literature discussing cadaver dissection, with the development of team building skills and group dynamics frequently toward the top of this list. This study aims to focus on the development of teamwork skills with intentional lab group formation based on individualized strength assessments in the gross anatomy lab. The participants were physical therapy students enrolled in a Clinical Gross Anatomy course at a private medical school. The students were purposely assigned their lab groups of four based on their results from the CliftonStrengths assessment. “Strengths,” were divided into four main categories: executing, influencing, relationship building, and strategic thinking. Each group had a student who scored highly in each of the four areas. For the pre-experimental one-group pretest–posttest design, the data measures were TCI (Team Climate Inventory) with additional open-ended questions on the posttest. Significant changes were noted in the pre/posttest TCI scores in two of the four TCI categories. Using thematic analysis, two primary dimensions of teambuilding were identified. First, personality trait differences were identified within groups and led to further understanding of competition within the group and individual self-confidence issues. Second, group dynamics were identified as they related to a positive, negative, or neutral experience. This pilot study demonstrated significant changes in team dynamics; however, intentional grouping based on individualized personality strengths did not significantly impact these results. Positive experiences were noted in some groups, considerable negative experiences were noted in others, with some neutral still.

Abstract Image

Abstract Image

在大体解剖实验室中有意识的分组和团队建设。
在讨论尸体解剖的文献中,有几个好处被引用,其中团队建设技能和团队动力的发展经常排在第一位。本研究旨在探讨大体解剖实验室中,以个人力量评估为基础,透过有意向的实验室小组,培养学生的团队合作能力。参与者是一所私立医学院临床大体解剖课程的物理治疗专业学生。根据克利夫顿优势评估的结果,学生们被故意分配到四人一组的实验小组。“优势”被分为四个主要类别:执行力、影响力、关系建立和战略思维。每一组都有一名学生在这四个方面得分很高。对于实验前一组前测后测设计,数据测量为TCI(团队气候量表),并在后测中附加开放式问题。在四个TCI类别中,有两个类别的TCI测试前/测试后得分发生了显著变化。通过主题分析,确定了团队建设的两个主要维度。首先,群体内的人格特质差异被识别出来,并导致对群体内竞争和个人自信问题的进一步理解。其次,群体动态被确定为与积极、消极或中性体验相关。这项初步研究表明,团队动力发生了重大变化;然而,基于个性化人格优势的故意分组对这些结果没有显著影响。一些小组注意到了积极的经历,另一些小组注意到了相当多的消极经历,还有一些小组仍然是中性的。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
求助全文
约1分钟内获得全文 求助全文
来源期刊
Anatomical Sciences Education
Anatomical Sciences Education Anatomy/education-
CiteScore
10.30
自引率
39.70%
发文量
91
期刊介绍: Anatomical Sciences Education, affiliated with the American Association for Anatomy, serves as an international platform for sharing ideas, innovations, and research related to education in anatomical sciences. Covering gross anatomy, embryology, histology, and neurosciences, the journal addresses education at various levels, including undergraduate, graduate, post-graduate, allied health, medical (both allopathic and osteopathic), and dental. It fosters collaboration and discussion in the field of anatomical sciences education.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信