MEDEV

School of Medical Sciences Education Development

Background

The Cambridge Graduate Course took its first student intake in 2001, which is due to qualify this summer. During the initial curriculum design it was agreed to develop a strand in the humanities, which has provided the opportunity to consider the potential for various ways of learning. These have included a number of small-scale projects, including the introduction of Life Drawing during clinical attachments at The West Suffolk Hospital.

There is nothing new about drawing from life (or the cadaver) as a means of learning: the development of established knowledge of anatomy was based on this practice. Leornado da Vinci wrote: “Observe the body from birth to decrepitude. Describe the changes which the members, and particularly the joints, undergo. Notice which grow fat and which grow lean”. The GMC currently emphasises the scientific basis of medical practice, yet definitions of art and science are blurred. “Art” may involve observation, measurement and experiment, whilst “Science” involves interpretation and leaps of imagination. Visual imagery of the body also has the potential to address far more than observational skills, and the potential for this needed to be considered.

We were uncertain how acceptable life drawing would be to a diverse group of students with a first degree in any discipline, and whether this should be an optional or core activity. Neither were we sure whether we should be advertising any specific aims for the activity, as this might constrain learning. Most undergraduate activity is underpinned by assessment, but it was unclear how life drawing might fit into this context. These formed the research questions for a Mini-project funded by the Subject Centre in 2003.

What we did

With the help of an artist, Sarah Brownie, 3 Life Drawing workshops were held for different groups of students, each lasting 2-3 hours. These were advertised as optional activity for the first two and core activity for the third. The workshops were held within the educational facilities of the hospital using a male model twice and a female once. The students started with some short 10- 15 minute poses. They then had a break, where they were shown examples of work by well-known artists depicting the body. These were chosen to address particular themes related to physicality and to generate discussion. The students then carried out a final piece. Some of the final work was later presented as a computer installation.

Methodology

The project was seen as an example of Action Research, as the two teachers were also the researchers. Data collection was mainly qualitative through participant observation, a diary of e-mails and a questionnaire, with some quantitative date from attendance records. Three research questions were considered:

• Should life drawing be core or optional?
• Could or should aims be identified?
• What is the role of assessment?

Results

Core or optional?

A total of 33/63 students attended the workshops. Numbers did not vary whether the sessions were advertised as optional or core. The students felt it should be optional, although one commented: “It is tempting to say it should be compulsory since I think everyone would end up getting something out of it”. Only 3 who did not attend the sessions returned a questionnaire, but reasons for not attendingincluded a dislike of drawing and “being too busy revising for exams”. All students who attended enjoyed the sessions and wanted life drawing included in the curriculum for the future, but as an optional activity.

Identifying aims

All students agreed that the exercise improved their observational skills. Other possibilities, tended to vary from session to session depending on how discussion developed. These included differences and similarities between art and science and analogies between the relationships between artist/model and doctor/ patient. Trying to force discussion around these issues in did not work easily and it was felt unnecessary to include these as aims for the future.

Role of assessment

It was agreed by the students that assessment was not appropriate for this type of learning. Several students did not want others to see their work, and self-assessment was enough. Others agreed to exhibit their work for peer-assessment and gave consent for any left-over work to be used in a computer installation. There was some evidence, however, that assessment in other subjects limited learning from life drawing: “would it be OK if I used Wednesday afternoon for revision time?”

Some conclusions and ideas for the future

• Overall the students who attended were positive about life drawing: “I came to do something different”, “a refreshing alternative”, “such activities should be strongly encouraged”. The use of artists’ images was also appreciated. It is planned to continue to offer this as an optional activity during clinical attachments. The concept of the humanities as a core strand within a curriculum could be addressed through a menu of options.
• If an aim is required then “To develop observational skills of the body” is a reasonable one. The use of visual images by artists also provoked discussion on many issues related to physicality, the doctor-patient relationship and the meaning of science or art in medicine.
• We have since tried other workshops looking at pathological processes using art processes.
• Inter-disciplinary involvement with an artist was valuable, and there is potential for involving interdisciplinary groups of students.
• There remains concern that the pressure students feel to prepare for formal examinations may constrain learning from activity of this kind.