The role of human dissection in modern medical curricula has been a topic of intense debate. In part, this is because dissection can be time-consuming and curricular hours are being monitored more carefully. This has led some to question the efficacy and importance of dissection as a teaching method. While this topic has received considerable attention in the literature, the question of how dissection impacts learning has been difficult to evaluate in a real-world, high-stakes setting since participation in dissection is often one of many variables. In this study, this challenge was overcome due to a change in the curriculum of a Special Master Program (SMP) that permitted a comparison between two years of students that learned anatomy using prosection only and two years of students that participated in dissection laboratories. Since each class of SMP students took courses in the medical school, and the medical school anatomy curriculum was constant, medical student performance served as a control throughout the study period. Results demonstrate that SMP students who learned through prosection had lower performance on anatomy practical and written examinations compared to medical students. When the SMP program changed and students started participating in dissection, there were measurable improvements in both practical and written examinations. These findings provide evidence of dissection's role in learning and applying anatomy knowledge both within and outside the gross anatomy laboratory.