I think that the benefits of regional anatomy are the simplicity at organizing the information in your mind.  I think that I will recall more readily the bones, muscles, arteries, and nerves that are in specific regions than memorizing them separately.  It is better to look at one diagram with all the information on it than looking at one item, for example: nerves, on several different diagrams of different parts of the body. The downside of regional anatomy is the book.  If I need to look something up in the book, I end up wasting a whole lot of study time trying to find what I am looking for.  It would be much easier if we had a book that went along with our class.  I study mostly from the lecture notes and pictures from the website and CD, but sometimes I need to look something up and it is difficult.

In my opinion there are both good and bad things about both systematic and regional methods. The regional method is better because you learn the entire area at one time. Whereas, when learning systematically you first learn the bones for the entire body and then go back to learn the muscles which would be more difficult. Also the regional method is easier to remember the names because you only do one area at a time. For example muscles that extend the digits are something digitorum. On the other hand, systematic could be easier to do because you do each thing by itself. You would remember the bones first and then the other parts of the body. Whereas in regional method you learn bones, muscles, nerves, arteries, and sometimes organs, which can be a lot to remember at one time. Also, I think for testing purposes it would be easier to remember if things were systematic method.

The regional approach to anatomy is better as far as learning the muscles and bones all at once while going over the specific body parts. It is easier to visualize how the system works with going over the region in the same time frame. The system approach would be easier to learn the reproductive, respiratory, circulatory, nervous, and digestive systems as a whole instead of breaking them down into regions because it is easier to follow the whole system this way instead of breaking it down into regions. I feel that a mixture of both approaches would work well in teaching an anatomy class.

I like the regional approach better because you can learn how parts of the body function with others that are located in the same region. For example, how the tibial nerve runs along with the posterior tibial artery through the muscles in the leg. It is also nice to learn the muscles that are innervated by the nerves in the same section so it "clicks" or "makes sense." On the other hand, a systematic approach would be easier because it isn't so detailed with having to know how and where muscles attach to bones or how the muscle is innervated, and being able to concentrate completely on characteristics of the system being studied.

I believe there are definite advantages and disadvantages to both teaching methods of anatomy (i.e. regional vs. systems). As you know, the systems approach focuses on body systems individually. This method is less complex and easier for the "beginner" student of anatomy to grasp. It also allows the individual systems to be covered in a bit more detail than the regional method. However, its downside is that it disassociates important functional relationships between body structures. (Thus key relationships between structures are often overlooked.) The regional approach (which we follow in class) emphasizes the functional and 3-D relationships between the various systems and structures. In my opinion, this is its biggest benefit. However, it can be confusing or overwhelming to a "beginner" anatomy student as it assumes that the student already has a certain level of knowledge about the various systems and body organization. Also -- when following this method within a tight timeframe, it forces the instructor to provide less detail about certain subject matter.

Here is my opinion on the different ways to teach anatomy. When teaching anatomy it may be better to teach systematically, meaning one system at a time because that way the student can learn everything there is to know about that one system. Over the course of time when being taught that way, when you have been taught all the systems it will make sense at the end of the course. It can be like putting a puzzle together, first you do the borders then you might do the sky and then another part but when all is said and done you get to see the entire picture.  When you learn anatomy one system at a time by the time you are done with all the systems of the body you understand the entire picture. Another way to learn anatomy is by regions. This to me makes the most sense. With this system you learn all there is to know about each region. It is nice to be able to learn the muscles of say the lower extremities and not only know what they are but what they do and what gives them blood and feeling. It helps to be able to put each of the little puzzles together and then once you have gone through each region then you can see the BIG picture. This way to me makes the most sense even though it can be very overwhelming at times. I suppose each method gives the same information so I suppose it is a personal preference on which way you would prefer to learn it.

I believe that the regional approach is a good way to view the body I believe that the regional approach is a good way to view the body. By looking at the body by a regional view, it allows the chance to look at not only the bones of the arm for example, but the muscles that go with the arm. It seems to make more sense to say here is the humerus and all of its muscles that make this arm function. The same thing with the legs and the body organs. The systematic approach isn't a bad idea, because you can learn all of the bones of the body then the muscles on different time periods. But it kind of doesn't seem to make sense to do it that way, because by the time you have learned all of the bones, then have to go and learn the muscles, it seems like you would have forgotten some of the bones, which apply to the muscles you just learned. It sounds easier to just learn all the bones, then the muscles, then the organs, but by the time you have to put it all together, it seems to me that it would almost be impossible. You would have to remember so much in order for it all to fit together and make sense. I personally prefer the regional approach, but the systematic approach would be fine. I guess it is all about how each method is taught.

The regional method is favored by medical schools because injuries and diseases involve specific body regions. Therefore, if you are a surgeon you would need to know the structure of each body region in depth. Learning each structure in a body region may be easier because you are learning everything about that one section at a time. But it may be harder for some, because there is so much to remember. If you are just learning muscles then you can focus only on the muscles and not have to worry about the bones and the arteries and nerves until you come to them. This is my first time taking anatomy so I do not know which approach is better but I think the regional approach is difficult. It says in the book that the "systemic approach is the approach taken in most college anatomy classes and in this book". It also says that the systemic approach is best for relating structure to function. In systemic, all the organs with related functions are studied together. We were told in the beginning that "form follows function". In my opinion I think it would be less difficult to learn one system at a time and maybe go more in depth with that one system such as the nervous system. Learn everything there is to learn about the nervous system and each of the plexus's before you come to the muscle groups. I think it would make more sense and be easier to remember but that's just my opinion. I had never heard of a plexus before this class. We cover so much information in class it is hard to sort it all out so I think it would be easier to cover one system at a time. I am obviously not a medical student so maybe the systemic approach would be better for me. Then again as you mentioned in the beginning you thought it worked better to cover a region at a time because doing it the other way, some students have forgotten what goes with what.

Regional versus systemic: For me, regional seems more logical Regional versus systemic: For me, regional seems more logical. It is easier to associate how each component correlates to that region rather than, as in systemic (i.e. learning all the bones, then all the muscles, where they attach and their associated action, then the vessels and where they insert) having to go back and forth. Systemic versus regional: Although systemic requires going back and forth, the components would be repeated and it would be necessary to remember each part as additional components are added. Regional has its disadvantages in repetition as once an area is covered in entirety, it is easy to forget the "other" and focus on the "new" region.

Regional Anatomy offers a more comprehensive look at the body by combining bones, muscles, vessels, nerves and a little physiology, section by section. It integrates the structure and functions of the particular body region and helps to relate the regions, one to another. The only drawback I can see is the quantity of material presented at once. If you miss anything, it can mess up everything! Systematic Anatomy offers the opportunity to study one system in its entirety, at a time. (Bones, Muscles, Neuro-vascular, organs, etc.) The benefit of this approach would appear to be an intense concentration applied to the system, and then "layering" the systems together to complete the picture. The disadvantage (to me) would be having to memorize all the bones, muscles, etc. and then trying to remember them later to put all the systems together.

The regional approach may be better than the systems approach because it takes a certain region/compartment of the body and breaks down all the bones, muscles, nerves, and arteries. When you learn the regional approach, then you will know everything that goes in the upper extremity or the lower extremity or the abdomen. This will help you to know the functions of the bones, muscles, nerves, and arteries that are included in a region/compartment of the body. I think the regional approach is very good, even though it seems like a lot of information to learn. The systems approach may be better than the regional approach because you learn all the bones, then all the muscles, etc. This approach might helps students to learn more if they know all the bones, and all the muscles, etc. Then they could go back and put the muscles with bones and nerves and arteries. It just depends on how you learn as to which approach you like best.

Anatomy is a difficult subject, it contains a lot of information Anatomy is a difficult subject, it contains a lot of information. However, I think that a regional approach to anatomy is a better way of learning. This way everything seems to come together and makes sense much quicker. Regional may also be better because with a systems method it may difficult to remember every specific part, in order to build on your prior knowledge. On the other hand a systems method may be better because you get to learn all about the particular system at one time. However, I feel like the regional method is better because you learn everything about the area, how it works, what may go wrong, this makes you feel like everything is finally coming together.

I believe that the regional approach to anatomy is better because it is easier for we, as students to understand. Especially students who have no previous exposure to anatomy. I believe it would be very confusing trying to learn the muscles of the upper extremity at the same time you are learning the lower extremity. There are so many similarities such as extensors, flexors, digiti minimis, and so forth. I would probably have to take this class three times instead the of two I have already, if the systems approach were being taught. I believe the systems approach would be better for students who have already had some previous knowledge of the human body. This way they could associate what they already know into the complete system and how it works together with the other systems.

The regional approach I feel is better for learning anatomy The regional approach I feel is better for learning anatomy. As a nursing major I can see how this is approach will benefit me in the long run. There are no times that I can think of that I will need to know the whole muscular system at one time, but there are plenty of times when I will need to know about the whole upper extremity or lower extremity. Knowing what muscles are innervated by what nerve in relation to the blood supply will be handy when it comes to treating patients. When there is an injury in say the leg I will be able to assess which muscles have been affected because of limited movement in certain areas. Whereas had I learned it systemically I may have not learned the leg in such great detail. I may not know that the injury has to be affecting this muscle because of limited movement in that area.