Incorporating Virtual Slides into Web-based Learning Modules and Laboratory

Exercises

Haviva M. Goldman, Ph.D.Department of Neurobiology & Anatomy

Drexel University College of Medicine

Introduction• Use of histological slides and microscopy in

undergraduate medical education– Microanatomy - 1st year– Pathology -2nd year

• Interdisciplinary Laboratories– Students work in groups

– Shared microscopes, monitors, videodisk players

Two curricula

• Traditional (IFM)– Integrated, modular, symptoms-based curriculum– Microanatomy course taught over an 8 month

period, integrated with several other courses

• Problem based (PIL)– Microanatomy taught as part of an anatomy block– 3 month intensive period, integrated with case

vignettes– Fewer hours of scheduled laboratory sessions

Towards Virtual Microscopy• Requirements

– Web-based; Wireless Access– Flexible and Customizable

• Ability to tailor slides and annotations towards either curriculum

• Began digitizing current slide collection (200+ slides) in 2004– MBF Bioscience Virtual Slice Module for Stereoinvestigator– MBF Bioscience Neuroinformatica server

• Open Source• .jsp/.asp

– Server also houses University of Iowa’s (Dr. Fred Dee) collection

•Integrate into current laboratory manual and website–Dreamweaver

–Html and active server pages (ASP)

• Challenge: Integrate virtual slides into the microanatomy course without losing independent learning component

Towards Virtual Microscopy

Introducing virtual microscopy: IFM

• 2005: Two trial labs; work our way backwards• Currently 2/3 of the course available as virtual

laboratories; Complete next academic year.• Microscopes and glass slides still available;

Usage encouraged. – scavenger hunts– Exams

• Organization of laboratory remains the same:– Students work in groups of 5 with instructor

available for guidance.

The Virtual Microscope

The Virtual Microscope Web Interface

Slide Orientation

Gross-anatomy correlates

Introduce new imaging modalities

Focus Questions

Embedded Annotated Review Questions

Mystery Slides

Results - IFM

• Overwhelmingly positive student feedback

• Individual students chose to use the resource in different ways– preview vs. review

• Performance on exams unchanged

Strong AgreeAgree

NeutralDisagree

Strong Disagree

S1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

ResponsePercentage

The use of virtual slides enhanced my understanding of the subject more than glass slides

Strong AgreeAgree

NeutralDisagree

Strong Disagree

S1

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

ResponsePercentage

The annotations improved my understanding of the laboratory material

Strong AgreeAgree

NeutralDisagree

Strong Disagree

S1

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

ResponsePercentage

The annotations discouraged independent learning of the laboratory material

“The virtual microscope was amazing. It actually encouraged our group to regularly attend MA labs because we were reassured that we’d have time to get together and pool the resources of the tangible slides, videodisks, virtual microscope, and a professor…It didn’t replace our use of the actual slides, but supplemented and reinforced what we were learning.”

“The virtual slides are very nice to learn from, but I feel like there is something sacrificed in the process. I’m not quite sure if it’s what you gain from searching the slide yourself, which has more of a problem solving aspect to it.”

Virtual Microscopy in PBL

• Virtual slides (some annotated/some not) available from the beginning of the course

• Self-study modules

Case-based Microanatomy web page

Example: Bone Formation Laboratory

Results

• Students overwhelmingly prefer virtual slides

• But, with virtual slides introduced at the beginning of the course:– Lab attendance dropped– Laboratory groups splintered– “group learning” diminished

• Need more flexibility– Allow student to choose annotation level (no annotation,

hyperlinks, full annotation); rollovers; quiz-mode– Students make their own annotations– Randomize slides for studying

• Facilitated review sessions rather than facilitated laboratories– Student’s present structures– New, mystery slides– Review quizzes

• Need more virtual slides– File format issues

Future

• Different solutions for different curricula– For PBL students, integrate microanatomy into their cases– For IFM students, integrate microanatomy with other

courses (e.g. physiology, gross anatomy) and preview for 2nd year pathology

• Encourage use of glass slides?– Scavenger hunts– Examinations include glass slides– FUTURE: checklist/passport on glass slides

Future

Acknowledgements

• Collaborators– Dr. Janet Smith, Neurobiology & Anatomy, DUCOM– Dr. Judy Churchill, Neurobiology & Anatomy, DUCOM– Dr. Arnold Smolen, Technology in Medical Education, DUCOM

• Support– Department of Orthopaedic Surgery, Drexel– Drexel Professional Enrichment and Growth Award, 2007-2008

• Additional assistance – Drexel Co-op students: Derek Rosensweig, Matt Snyder, Saad

Masood– The folks at MBF Bioscience, especially Doug Hoppes