A Retrospective Study on the Effects of Face-to-Face and Online Teaching Methods on Student Performance in Veterinary Anatomy Education

Öz

The Coronavirus Disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic triggered a rapid shift from face-to-face to online learning, significantly impacting anatomy education, which relies heavily on practical training. This retrospective study evaluated the effects of face-to-face, online, and hybrid teaching on student performance in Anatomy-I and Anatomy-II courses in Turkish and English veterinary programs at Ankara University from 2017 to 2021. A total of 1.496 students (Turkish: 1.253; English: 243) were included, with academic years categorized as pre-pandemic, acute pandemic, and prolonged pandemic. Performance was analyzed using Chi-square, t-tests, Kappa agreement, and odds ratios. Results showed higher success rates in online Anatomy-II courses, especially in 2020–2021. Anatomy-I outcomes varied, and female students consistently outperformed male students. The hybrid model produced mixed results. Online education, when well-structured, was as effective as traditional methods. Future anatomy education should adopt hybrid models that combine digital flexibility with essential in-person practice.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• COVID-19 pandemic
• Hybrid teaching
• Student performance
• Veterinary anatomy education

Veteriner Anatomi Eğitiminde Yüz Yüze ve Çevrimiçi Öğretim Yöntemlerinin Öğrenci Performansına Etkilerinin Retrospektif Bir Çalışması

Öz

Koronavirüs hastalığı (COVID-19) salgını, yüz yüze eğitimden çevrimiçi eğitime hızlı bir geçişe neden olmuş ve uygulama eğitimine büyük ölçüde dayanan anatomi eğitimini önemli ölçüde etkilemiştir. Bu retrospektif çalışma, 2017-2021 yılları arasında Ankara Üniversitesi'ndeki Türkçe ve İngilizce veteriner hekimliği programlarında Anatomi-I ve Anatomi-II derslerinde yüz yüze, çevrimiçi ve karma öğretimin öğrenci performansına etkilerini değerlendirmiştir. Toplam 1.496 öğrenci (Türkçe: 1.253; İngilizce: 243) çalışmaya dahil edildi ve akademik yıllar pandemi öncesi, akut pandemi ve uzayan pandemi dönemi olarak kategorize edildi. Performans, Ki-kare, t-testleri, Kappa uyumu ve olasılık oranları kullanılarak analiz edildi. Sonuçlar, özellikle 2020-2021'de çevrimiçi Anatomi-II derslerinde daha yüksek başarı oranları gösterdi. Anatomi-I sonuçları değişiklik gösterdi ve kız öğrenciler erkek öğrencilerden sürekli olarak daha iyi performans gösterdi. Hibrit model karışık sonuçlar verdi. İyi yapılandırılmış çevrimiçi eğitim, geleneksel yöntemler kadar etkiliydi. Gelecekteki anatomi eğitimi, dijital esnekliği temel yüz yüze uygulamalarla birleştiren hibrit modelleri benimsemelidir.

Anahtar Kelimeler

• COVID-19 salgını
• Hibrit öğretim
• Öğrenci performansı
• Veteriner anatomi eğitimi

Kaynakça

1. Adedoyin OB, Soykan E (2023). COVID-19 pandemic and online learning: the challenges and opportunities. Interact Learn Environ, 31(2), 863-875.
2. Al-Angari NS, Aldaham AS, Masuadi E, Nadeem M, Alkadi L (2022). The effectiveness of students’ performance in preclinical fixed prosthodontics course in predicting subsequent clinical performance. J Prosthodont, 31(1), 45-49.
3. Bauler LD, Lesciotto KM, Lackey-Cornelison W (2022). Factors impacting the rapid transition of anatomy curricula to an online environment in response to Covid-19. Anat Sci Educ, 15(2), 221-232.
4. Bhagat OL, Bhandari B, Mehta B, Sircar S (2014). Objective structured practical examination and conventional practical examination: a comparison of scores. Med Sci Educ, 24, 395-399.
5. Bonacini L, Murat M (2023). Beyond the covid-19 pandemic: remote learning and education inequalities. Empirica, 50(1), 207-236.
6. Boulos AN (2022). Evaluation of the effectiveness of online education in anatomy for medical students during the COVID-19 pandemic. Ann Anat, 244, 151973.
7. Chaker R, Gallot M, Madi A, Collet C, Hoyek N (2025). Teaching human anatomy before during and after covıd‐19 pandemic: a longitudinal study on kinesiology students' performance, cognitive load, and congruent embodied learning. Anat Sci Educ, 18(1), 48-58.
8. Coldwell J, Goold A, Craig A, Mustard J (2007). Gender and equity in e-learning. Australas. J Inf Syst, 15(1), 9–24.

9. Csorba LM, Dabija DC (2024). The impact of the covıd-19 pandemic on students’ future online education behaviour. Heliyon, 10(20), e39560.
10. Daniel SJ (2020). Education and the covıd-19 pandemic. Prospects, 49(1), 91-96.
11. Darici D, Reissner C, Brockhaus J, Missler M (2021). Implementation of a fully digital histology course in the anatomical teaching curriculum during covıd-19 pandemic. Ann Anat, 236, 151718.
12. Davarpanah SH, Barat Dastjerdi N, Shirzad Z (2023). Student teachers’ experiences of online education during the covıd-19 pandemic: challenges and opportunities. J High Educ Policy Leadersh Stud, 4(2), 129-135.
13. Devi R, Chand SP (2024). In-service teachers' perceptions and challenges in online assessments amid covıd-19. Int J Assess Eval, 31(2), 45–56.
14. Devine E, Hunt JA, Anderson SL, Mavromatis MV (2022). Online case-based course in veterinary radiographic interpretation generates better short-and long-term learning outcomes than a virtual lecture-based course. JVME, 50(6), 666-676.
15. Díez-Pascual AM, García-Díaz P, Peña-Capilla R, Jurado-Sanchez B (2025). Face-to-face vs. online learning in science and engineering courses during covıd-19 epoch. Res Sci Technol Educ, 43(1), 347-376.
16. Dissabandara LO, Nawaratna S, Nirthanan S (2023). Fine‐tuning the standard setting of objective structured practical examinations in clinical anatomy. Anat Sci Educ, 16(3), 486-496.
17. Dooley LM, Frankland S, Boller E, Tudor E (2018). Implementing the flipped classroom in a veterinary pre-clinical science course: Student engagement, performance, and satisfaction. JVME, 45(2), 195-203.
18. Franchi T (2020). The impact of the covıd-19 pandemic on current anatomy education and future careers: A student's perspective. Anat Sci Educ, 13(3), 312–315.
19. Gao M, Cui Y, Chen H et al. (2022). The efficacy and acceptance of online learning vs. offline learning in medical student education: A systematic review and meta-analysis. JXYM, 7 (1).
20. Goncalves E, Capucha L. (2020). Student-centered and ıct-enabled learning models in veterinarian programs: what changed with covıd-19?. Educ Sci, 10(11), 343.
21. Gupta A, Shrestha RM, Shrestha S, Acharya A, Pandey N (2021). Impact of e-learning during covıd-19 pandemic among medical students in a medical college of nepal: A cross-sectional study. JNMA, 59(233), 301-305.
22. Gwazdauskas, FC, McGilliard ML, Corl BA (2014). Characteristics of student success in an undergraduate physiology and anatomy course. J Dairy Sci, 97(10), 6378-6381.
23. Haines JM, Wardrop KJ, Lindberg CJ et al. (2020). Development and assessment of a formal learning module to educate veterinary students in an intensive care unit about transfusion reactions. JVECC, 30(4), 405-410.
24. Jones K, Miller DJ, Noble P (2025). Did the rapid transition to online learning in response to covıd-19 ımpact students' cognitive load and performance in veterinary anatomy?. J Vet Med Educ, 52(1), 70-80.
25. Kelly RF, Mihm-Carmichael M, Hammond JA (2021). Students’ engagement in and perceptions of blended learning in a clinical module in a veterinary degree program. J Vet Med Educ, 48(2), 181-195.
26. Kessels U, Van Houtte, M. (2022). Side effects of academic engagement? How boys’ and girls’ well-being is related to their engagement and motivational regulation. Gend. Educ, 34(6), 627-642.
27. Khaled A, Hazaymeh WA, Montierre ME (2022). Challenges of online education for teachers and parents in the emirati school system. Eur J Educ Res, 11(4), 2345-2355.
28. Lancaster T, Cotarlan C. (2021) Contract cheating by stem students through a file sharing website: a covıd-19 pandemic perspective. IJEI, 17 (1), 1-16.
29. Longhurst GJ, Stone DM, Dulohery K et al. (2020). Strength, weakness, opportunity, threat (swot) analysis of the adaptations to anatomical education in the United Kingdom and republic of ıreland in response to the covid‐19 pandemic. Anat Sci Educ, 13(3), 301-311.
30. Lu D, Wu Z (2011). Internet based chinese language distance education system. Adv Mater Res, 143, 457-461.
31. Mishrif A (2024). covıd-19 effects on the global economy: an overview. economic effects of the pandemic: ımplications for the economy, Finance and Tourism, 3-23.
32. Mok HN (2014). Teaching tip: The flipped classroom. JISE, 25 (1), 7 –11.
33. Muca E, Cavallini D, Odore R et al. (2022). Are veterinary students using technologies and online learning resources for didactic training? A mini-meta analysis. Educ Sci, 12(8), 573.
34. Oliveira D, Soares GSL, Silva Júnior LMD et al. (2025). Preliminary study on online and in-person teaching methods for animal anatomy. Cienc Rural, 55, e20240214.
35. Pei L, Wu H (2019). Does online learning work better than offline learning in undergraduate medical education? A systematic review and meta-analysis. Med Educ Online, 24(1), 1666538.
36. Price L (2006). Gender differences and similarities in online courses: challenging stereotypical views of womenJ. Comput. Assist. Learn, 22(5), 349-359.
37. Sakaue M, Oishi M, Ozawa A et al. (2024). Availability and issues of 3D-printed skull models for veterinary anatomy laboratories from students' perspective before and during the covıd-19 pandemic. J Vet Med Sci, 86(10), 1081-1088.
38. Shi CR, Rana J, Burgin S (2018). Teaching & learning tips 6: the flipped classroom. Int J Dermatol, 57(4), 463-466.
39. Sil A, Das S, Das P, Jayswal D, Das NK (2024). Designing, introducing, and implementing objective structured practical examinations as a formative assessment tool in undergraduate medical pharmacology. Med Educ Dev, 17(55), 1-9.
40. Stevens GJ, Bienz T, Wali N, Condie J, Schismenos S (2021). Online university education is the new normal: but is face-to-face better?. ITSE, 18(3), 278-297.
41. Torda A, Shulruf B (2021). It’s what you do, not the way you do it–online versus face-to-face small group teaching in first year medical school. BMC medical education, 21, 541.
42. Veeramani R, Madhugiri VS, Chand P (2015). Perception of MBBS students to "flipped classroom" approach in neuroanatomy module. Anat Cell Biol, 48(2), 138-143.
43. Yalcin Y, Dennen VP (2024). An investigation of the factors that influence online learners’ satisfaction with the learning experience. EAIT, 29(4), 3807-3836.
44. Yaman R, Hagen KM, Ghaith S, Luong H, Almader‐Douglas D, Langley NR. (2023). Gender bias in medical education: A scoping review. Clin. Teach, 20(4), e13592.
45. Yoo H, Kim D, Lee YM, Rhyu IJ (2021). Adaptations in anatomy education during covıd-19. JKMS, 36(1).