Document Type : Original Article


1 Department of Internal Medicine, School of Medicine, International Branch

2 Department of Medical Education, Educational Development and Research Centre, Shiraz University of Medical Sciences, Shiraz, Iran


Objective: Learning by lecture is a passive experience. Many innovative techniques have been
presented to stimulate students to assume a more active attitude toward learning. In this study,
simultaneous sketch drawing, as an interactive learning technique was applied to teach anatomy
to the medical students. Materials and Methods: We reconstructed a fun interactive model of
teaching anatomy as simultaneous anatomic sketching. To test the model’s instruction effectiveness,
we conducted a quasi‑ experimental study and then the students were asked to write their learning
experiences in their portfolio, also their view was evaluated by a questionnaire. Results: The results
of portfolio evaluation revealed that students believed that this method leads to deep learning and
understanding anatomical subjects better. Evaluation of the students’ views on this teaching approach
was showed that, more than 80% of the students were agreed or completely agreed with this statement
that leaning anatomy concepts are easier and the class is less boring with this method. More than
60% of the students were agreed or completely agreed to sketch anatomical figures with professor
simultaneously. They also found the sketching make anatomy more attractive and it reduced the time
for learning anatomy. These number of students were agree or completely agree that the method help
them learning anatomical concept in anatomy laboratory. More than 80% of the students found the
simultaneous sketching is a good method for learning anatomy overall. Conclusion: Sketch drawing,
as an interactive learning technique, is an attractive for students to learn anatomy.


1. Halasz NA. We create and can remove the roadblocks to good basic
science education. Acad Med. 1999;74:67.
2. Grammaticos, PC, Diamantis A. “Useful known and unknown views
of the father of modern medicine, Hippocrates and his teacher
Democritus”. Hellenic journal of nuclear medicine. 2008;11:2-4.
3. Handfield-Jones R, Nasmith L, Steinert Y, Lawn N. Creativity in
medical education: The use of innovative techniques in clinical
teaching. Med Teach 1993;15:3-10.
4. Geuna S, Giacobini-Robecchi MG. The use of brainstorming for
teaching human anatomy. Anat Rec 2002;269:214-16.
5. Ganske I, Su T, Loukas M, Shaffer K. Teaching methods in anatomy
courses in North American medical schools: The role of radiology.
Acad Radiol 2006;13:1038-46.
6. Drake RL. A unique, innovative, and clinically oriented approach to
anatomy education. Acad Med 2007;82:475-78.
7. Mc Menamin PG. Body painting as a tool in clinical anatomy
teaching. Anat Sci Educ 2008;1:139-44.
8. Cowan M, Arain NN, Assale TS, Assi AH, Albar RA, Ganguly PK.
Student-centered integrated anatomy resource sessions at Alfaisal
University. Anat Sci Educ 2010;3:272-5.
9. Ganguly PK, Chan KL. Living anatomy in the 21st century: How
far can we go? South East Asian Journal of Medical Education.
10. Yip GW, Rajendran K. Snap anatomy, a computer-based interactive
tool for independent learning of human anatomy. J Vis Commun
Med 2008;31:46-50.
11. Pandey P, Zimitat C. Medical students’ learning of anatomy:
Memorisation, understanding and visualisation. Med Educ 2007;
12. Smith CF, Mathias HS. Medical students’ approaches to learning
anatomy: Students’ experiences and relations to the learning
environment. Clin Anat 2010;23:106-14.
13. Quitadamo IJ, Kurtz MJ. Learning to improve: Using writing to
increase critical thinking performance in general education biology.
CBE Life Sci Educ 2007;6:140-54.
14. Samy A. Azer. Learning surface anatomy: Which learning approach
is effective in an integrated PBL curriculum? Medical teacher
15. Lufler RS, Zumwalt AC, Romney CA, Hoagland TM. Incorporating
radiology into medical gross anatomy: Does the use of cadaver CT
scans improve students’ academic performance in anatomy? Anat
Sci Educ 2010;3:56-63.
16. Kieser J, Livingstone V, Meldrum A. Professional storytelling in
clinical dental anatomy teaching. Anat Sci Educ 2008;1:84-9.
17. Corton MM, McIntire DD, Wai CY, Ling FW, Wendel GD Jr. A
comparison of an interactive computer-based method with a
conventional reading approach for learning pelvic anatomy. Am J
Obstet Gynecol 2006;195:1438-43.
18. Durosaro O, Lachman N, Pawlina W. Use of knowledge-sharing
web-based portal in gross and microscopic anatomy. Ann Acad
Med Singapore 2008;37:998-1001.
19. Mottershead S. The teaching of anatomy and its influence on the
art and practice of surgery. Br Med J 1980;280:1306-09.
20. Smith CF. In response to Dr. Patel and Professor Moxham
“Attitudes of professional anatomists to curricular hange”. Clin Anat
2006;19:780-1. author reply 2-3.
21. Scott TM. How we teach anatomy efficiently and effectively. Med
Teach 1993;15:67-75.
22. Hubbell DS, Dwornik JJ, Alway SE, Eliason R, Norenberg RE.
Teaching gross anatomy using living tissue. Clin Anat 2002;15:157-9.
23. Koutselini, M. Participatory teacher development at schools:
Processes and issues. Action Research 2008;6:29-48.
24. Azer SA. Learning the surface anatomy: Which learning approach is
effective in an integrated PBL curriculum? Med Teach 2011;33:78-80.
25. Langlois J, Wells GA, Lecourtois M, Bergeron G, Yetisir E, Martin M.
Spatial abilities in an elective course of applied anatomy after a
problem-based learning curriculum. Anat Sci Educ 2009;2:107-12.
26. Mallon WT, Biebuyck JF, Jones RF. The reorganization of basic
science departments in U.S. medical schools, 1980-1999. Acad
Med 2003;78:302-6.
27. McLachlan JC , Debra Patten D. Anatomy teaching: ghosts of the
past, present and future. Med Educ 2006;40:243-53.