What Does a Modern Anatomist Look like? Current Trends in the Training of Anatomy Educators

Anatomical sciences are foundational to the health professions, yet little is known about the qualifications of anatomy educators at the graduate and professional level in the United States. Moreover, there is concern that the number of qualified anatomy educators being trained may be insufficient to meet the growing demand posed by new and expanded programs in medicine and allied health specialties. The authors surveyed anatomists from across the country to (i) characterize the educational credentials of current anatomy educators and (ii) assess the perceived need for education‐focused postdoctoral positions or formal mentorships to prepare anatomists for teaching‐intensive faculty positions. To probe the survey responses more deeply, one‐on‐one interviews were conducted with eight individuals selected to represent a diverse sample of respondents in terms of institution, gender, and academic rank. Results indicate that 30–40% of educators at the graduate level and approximately 60% of those at the undergraduate level lack graduate coursework in histology, embryology, and neuroanatomy. Forty‐five percent of respondents had completed a postdoctoral fellowship. Eighty‐six percent replied “yes/maybe” to the question of whether an anatomy education postdoctoral fellowship would benefit doctoral graduates. The top 3 reasons for this recommendation were to (i) establish independent educational research, (ii) improve a publication record, and (iii) gain additional teaching experience. Notable weaknesses of education‐focused postdoctoral training were related to finances, fear of exploitation, and undervaluing of teaching. Moving forward, postdoctoral fellowships and other forms of postgraduate training may represent a key strategy for training anatomists in the current educational climate

The Intermingled History of Occupational Therapy and Anatomical Education – A Retrospective Exploration

Patient treatment through human morality and a strong belief in the connection of body and mind birthed the premise of therapy through occupations. Understanding this connection was instrumental to the evolution of therapeutic rehabilitation. During the 18th Century a revolutionary mental hygiene movement transformed traditional methods of treatment for persons with mental illness and configured the true beginning of occupational therapy. Concurrently anatomical training was becoming more formalized within the US medical curricula. Later, the medical reform movement of the 20th Century gave structure and importance to occupations as a therapy. First mentioned in World War I, “reconstruction aides” relied on a combination of behavioral and anatomical knowledge to rehabilitate soldiers with injuries that were incompatible with activities of daily living. Eventually, these ventures contributed to the development of the American Occupational Therapy Association and a standardized occupational therapy curriculum. Since October, 1923, minimum standards of practice for occupational therapists have included a strong foundation in biological sciences that specifically address human structure, function and motion. The goal of occupational therapy has always been to provide functional skills for daily living; for this reason, anatomical education has remained a benchmark of the field. New standards and competencies have been identified through the progression, refinement and expansion of the field; yet the importance of anatomical training has not changed