Skip to main page content
U.S. flag

An official website of the United States government

Dot gov

The .gov means it’s official.
Federal government websites often end in .gov or .mil. Before sharing sensitive information, make sure you’re on a federal government site.

Https

The site is secure.
The https:// ensures that you are connecting to the official website and that any information you provide is encrypted and transmitted securely.

Access keys NCBI Homepage MyNCBI Homepage Main Content Main Navigation
. 2017 May 26:6:87.
doi: 10.15694/mep.2017.000087. eCollection 2017.

Ten considerations for implementing effective and sustainable near-peer teaching in clinical anatomy education

Scott Border  1 , William Parton  1 , Matthew Myers  1 , Ahmed Elmansouri  1 , Charlotte Harrison  1 , Jonny Stephens  1 , Eleanor Seaby  1 , Samuel Hall  1
Affiliations

Ten considerations for implementing effective and sustainable near-peer teaching in clinical anatomy education

Scott Border et al. MedEdPublish (2016). .

Abstract

This article was migrated. The article was marked as recommended. Near-peer teaching (NPT) is becoming increasing popular in medical education. The rationale and benefits of introducing such programs have been well documented and are usually described in terms of their advantages to the teacher, students and faculty. As a team that have successfully introduced two NPT anatomy programs in the last six years at the University of Southampton, we have taken a largely evidenced based approach in offering 10 considerations to ensure the implementation of a sustainable and effective NPT program in anatomical sciences. We have highlighted important aspects of NPT that will help maximise the benefit of such programs and emphasised particular areas where careful thought is necessary. We conclude that to safeguard sustainability and consistency of any given NPT program, faculty and student partnership is required, as is the maintenance of quality control and evaluative techniques.

Keywords: Anatomy; Anatomy Education; Medical Education; Near-Peer Teaching; Peer Teaching.

PubMed Disclaimer

References

    1. Bentley B. S. and Hill R. V.(2009). Objective and subjective assessment of reciprocal peer teaching in medical gross anatomy laboratory. Anatomical Sciences Education. 2(4),143–149. 10.1002/ase.96 - DOI - PubMed
    1. Biggs J. B.(1989). Approaches to the enhancement of tertiary teaching. Higher education research and development. 8(1),7–25. 10.1080/0729436890080102 - DOI
    1. Biggs J. B.(2011). Teaching for quality learning at university: What the student does. McGraw-Hill Education (UK).
    1. Border S. Stephens J. Smith C. and Hall S(2017) The how, why and when of implementing near-peer teaching in anatomy education. Anatomical Society Summer Meeting at Brighton and Sussex Medical School. J. Anat. 230:354–372. 10.1111/joa.12558 - DOI
    1. Bovill C. Felten P. and Cook-Sather A.(2014, June). Engaging students as partners in learning and teaching (2): practical guidance for academic staff and academic developers.In International consortium on educational development conference. Stockholm, Sweden: (pp.16–18).