Using anatomical language answers part b

PROJECT: ANATOMICAL DIALOGUE

Submission Date: Tuesday 13th May (Week 11) for Tasks 1 and 2

General Objective : Demonstrate higher processing skills in the areas of synthesis and evaluation through an analysis of how anatomy is used and represented in our personal lives and future profession.

Specific Objectives : Synthesise a personal account of an injury or medical condition that was experienced by yourself, a family member or a friend using language suitable for (a) a layperson; and (b) a medical professional. Reflect on the ramifications of audience-specific terminology in the workplace. Critique anatomical dialogue of one peer.

Length : Three complementary project tasks across the semester

Individual submission guidelines are below; if working in a pair, submission is twice the length of these guidelines.

Project Task 1: approximately 700-1000 words

Project Task 2: approximately 1000-1500 words (including reflection)

Guidelines: Maximum of 5 single-sided A4 pages for TASK 1 and 2

plus one completed criteria sheet

12 point font; single line spacing; minimum page margins set at 2cm Top and Left, 1.5cm Bottom and Right

Weighting : 25% [Tasks 1 and 2: 20%]

Overview

The study of anatomy is more than just memorisation of facts. Anatomy is embedded in our personal lives, on the television, in the newspaper and tempts society to test its ethical and moral boundaries. As we study anatomy we therefore need to learn how to use anatomical terminology in different contexts and demonstrate a deep understanding of the current perceptions of anatomy in society.

The following pages describe in detail the requirements for each of the three tasks required to complete your project.

You must include the following completed tasks in your project:

1. Project Task 1: Creating an Anatomical Dialogue [Layperson version]

2. Project Task 2: Creating an Anatomical Dialogue [Anatomical/medical professional version]

3. Project Task 3: Critique of peer work

Most of you coming into LQB183 will be what is commonly known as a layperson, that is, an inexperienced anatomist in this case. However during the course of this unit you will start to learn, use and be tested on specific anatomical terminology, such that you should no longer be an anatomical layperson by the end of the semester! In order to track your personal development this task offers you an opportunity to write about a personal medical experience at the start of the semester when many of you will be writing as a layperson (and if not will be encouraged to do so). Later in the semester you will then be asked to revisit your ‘story’ and modify it based on your learning experiences in LQB183 such that it is suitable for an experienced anatomist to read or hear. This will enable you to reflect on your growth in mastering the use of anatomical terminology and prepare you for the workforce where you will need to communicate with persons of multiple backgrounds!

In this activity you will need to synthesise a personal account of an injury or medical condition that was experienced by yourself, a family member or a friend. There will be two parts to this process: [Part A] written from the perspective of a layperson and [Part B] written from the perspective of an experienced anatomist or medical professional. Each part will describe the same ‘story’ but each will use a different ‘language’ to contrast communication between laypersons versus communication between medical professionals.

The third part of the task requires you to read, evaluate and provide a judgement of the work of one of your peers within the LQB183 class. This will provide support to your peers so that they can read your comments and use them to improve their task 1 and 2 submission, and will also provide insights into your own work by having to evaluate the work of others.

Recommended Commencement Date: [Task 1] Week 1; [Task 2] Week 4.

Why are we doing this task?

It is not only medical professionals that talk about anatomy. In fact almost all people at some stage or another will communicate about a medical situation and use some anatomical terminology (haven’t you?!). However the way they communicate and the terminology they use depends on who they are and what audience they are communicating with. For example if we compare an individual with no anatomical training to one with medical training or experience, the language they each use to describe a similar experience or event, for example how they broke their leg, will significantly differ.

For Example:

Dialogue between two Laypersons with no anatomical or medical training: “Yesterday my brother broke his tail-bone after falling off a rope swing and landing on his bum. Now he has to sleep on his tummy or side to reduce the pain from the massive bruising!”

Dialogue between two Medical professionals or anatomists: “Yesterday my brother fractured his coccyx after falling off a rope swing and landing on his gluteal region. The anteroposterior radiograph presented a hairline fracture on the left cornua of the 1st coccygeal vertebra. Now he will have to sleep in a prone or lateral decubitus position to avoid applying pressure to the contused area.”

Note in the reconstruction that terminology is modified to reflect the change in audience from a layperson to a medical professional/anatomist; anatomical language is used to enhance the understanding of the injury. When conversing with a medical professional more detail is needed to explain the medical condition accurately and specifically.

In fact it is far more complex for an experienced anatomist to discuss a medically-related situation to an inexperienced friend or family member than it would be to discuss it with a colleague, for the experienced anatomist needs to decide what terminology is appropriate and familiar or known to the intended audience. As a biomedical scientist you will need to communicate effectively with clinicians and biomedical researchers as well as patients, the latter often being inexperienced in anatomical language. It is therefore important to be able to recognise and apply different forms of anatomical communication. This will enable you to communicate medical knowledge appropriately to various audiences.

Step 1: [Task 1] Creating an anatomical dialogue as a layperson

write a personal account of an injury or medical condition that was experienced by yourself, a family member or a friend from a laypersons perspective. Describe the injury or medical condition using terminology that would be understood by a layperson. It is essential that you focus on how the human body was affected during and after this experience and do not write too much on how the event came about for example. Make sure your story is medically oriented. Your account must be approximately 700-1000 words in length (this should be approximately 1.5 A4 pages of typing). If your story is not long enough, you may need to write about two different medical incidents.

Your story will be communicated to your peers and teaching team and therefore should not be confidential or include details that may cause personal embarrassment or discomfort to yourself or others.

Step 2: [Task 1] Editing your first draft for a layperson audience

Task 1 should be written using only layperson and general terminology. This may make your story sound very simple and vague – but this is what we are looking for.

If in doubt about the appropriateness of a term, consider: is there another way of communicating the same message that a greater number of people in the general population will understand? Always use the simplest terms when communicating with laypeople (even if they seem a bit silly or colloquial!).

Consider the following questions when editing your draft:

· Was a term/word used that you do not fully understand or don’t know the definition of? What would be an alternate term/word that a layperson would/does understand?

· Were the simplest terms used throughout? Can any terms be simplified further?

· Did the story describe the effect on the human body in enough detail, that is, did it contain sufficient anatomical information for this task?

· Is the story within the word-limit for this task, ie. 700-1000 words?

Remember to try to avoid all medical terminology and any complex terms that could be restated in simpler terms. This is what you will be marked on!!

Step 3: [Task 2] Reconstruction of your anatomical dialogue for discussion with a medical professional or anatomist

Describe the injury or medical condition now using terminology that would be understood by a medical professional and anatomist (and unlikely to be understood by the layperson) by reconstructing your story from Task 1 of this task.

Note that the genre used for Task 1 may not be appropriate for the new audience of experienced anatomists/health professionals! Therefore use a communication style that is appropriate for a medical audience – remember to still be creative and it can be submitted in a written or digital medium! Submissions using digital media will need to be accompanied by a written transcript of any included audio.

It is essential to read over the criteria sheet whilst preparing your final draft to ensure you have completed all set elements for the task.

Step 4: [Task 2] Write a reflection on the importance of using audience-specific terminology appropriately

A reflective piece of approximately 500 words should follow your story summarising your personal growth in anatomical terminology usage and understanding of the importance of audience-specific terminology in health professions. Consider the following questions/suggestions:

· Did you find it difficult to communicate as a layperson in Task 1? Why or why not?

· Provide an example or examples of terminology that was/were changed during the editing process of Task 1 ie. terminology that may not have been appropriate for a layperson and needed simplification;

· Did you find it difficult to communicate as an experienced anatomist in Task 2? Were you still using language that would be more appropriate for a layperson?

· Are you automatically using correct anatomical terminology now or do you still have to think through it carefully?

· Would you now consider yourself to be an anatomist or do you believe you are still a layperson? Why?

· Provide at least two examples of terminology that were changed from [Task 1] to [Task 2] of your story and comment on the implications of these different ways of describing the same medical event in the community (**Note: this should be the focus of your reflection)

· Describe the personal relevance of using audience-specific terminology in your desired career.

CRITERIA Project (Applied): Creating an Anatomical Dialogue

5

4

3

2

1

CRITERIA C

Analysis: Discrimination of Appropriate Language

- ability to recognise inappropriate terminology

- depth of reflection

- demonstrates understanding of purpose of task

All terminology is appropriate for context in both Part A and Part B.

Correct terminology for context is used appropriately on nearly every occasion in both Part A and Part B.

Correct terminology for context is used appropriately most of the time.

Correct terminology for context is inconsistent with multiple errors in Part A or Part B.

Your use of appropriate terminology for context is poor with multiple errors in both Part A and Part B.

You have provided sufficient, relevant and meaningful examples to illustrate language discrimination between the layperson and the experienced anatomist; and have provided a number of insightful and analytical personal statements upon reflection of this task. You have demonstrated a clear understanding of the purpose of this task.

Relevant personal statements are provided upon reflection of this task and sufficient examples of language discrimination are included but reflection lacks depth. An understanding of the purpose of this task is demonstrated.

At least one personal statement is provided upon reflection of this task, but sufficient or relevant examples are lacking. You have a basic understanding of the purpose of this task.

Personal statements upon reflection of this task are limited and unclear; and sufficient and relevant examples are lacking. You have not demonstrated an understanding of the purpose of this task.

Personal statements upon reflection of this task are inappropriate or absent; and no examples have been included.

CRITERIA C

Synthesis: Adaptation of Anatomical Dialogue

- ability to select and use appropriate terminology for new anatomical context

- depth of response

All modifications to Part B are highly appropriate and used in the correct context demonstrating excellent adaptation skills.

All modifications to Part B are appropriate and used in the correct context demonstrating good adaptation skills (some terminology though is not the most appropriate for context).

Most modifications to Part B are sufficient and used in the correct context but did not use the most appropriate terminology for context consistently.

Several modifications demonstrated a lack of understanding of task and/or a lack of appropriate use of language in different contexts.

Modifications to your story are limited demonstrating minimal or a lack of adaptation skills.

Sufficient and relevant detail is provided in Part B related to the experienced anatomist reader.

Detail was lacking in one or two phrases in Part B.

Detail provided in Part B is minimal.

Detail provided in Part B is minimal.

Detail provided in Part B is lacking.

CRITERIA D

Expression and Style used in Construction of Dialogue:

- use of creative writing style

- clarity of expression

- demonstrates competency in writing skills

- within word-limit

Your work provides a vivid and highly engaging response to the topic by using appropriate storytelling writing style for each task.

Through the use of appropriate storytelling you have constructed an interesting anatomical dialogue.

Only one of the tasks uses an appropriate writing style for audience.

Your story lacks creativity.

You have not adhered to the instructions for this task.

Your work is clearly and succinctly expressed and you have adhered to correct conventions of grammar, punctuation and spelling throughout this essay.

You express yourself clearly and in a scholarly way, using correct conventions of grammar, punctuation and spelling on nearly every occasion.

You have expressed yourself well through the use of grammar, spelling and punctuation conventions that are used correctly most of the time.

Your clarity of expression is not consistent and you need to adhere more closely to the conventions of grammar, spelling and punctuation.

Many errors in the construction of your story make it very difficult to understand. You need to adhere much more closely to the conventions of grammar, spelling and punctuation.