Periodic review sessions contribute to student learning across the disciplines in pharmacology.
Main Article Content
Background: The teaching of the discipline of pharmacology is in constant flux. In order to meet the challenges of teaching pharmacology effectively we investigated a new teaching and learning strategy. Aim: Our aim was to investigate whether structured periodic review sessions could improve teaching and learning for students in a multidisciplinary undergraduate pharmacology module. Methods: Following each lecture students were asked to identify topics of difficulty in pharmacology using the one minute paper classroom assessment technique (CAT). Three review sessions were then introduced based on the problematic issues identified by students. They completed a pre- and post-review session MCQ examination to gauge improvements in their learning. Feedback was obtained from students at the end of the module regarding the acceptability, advantages and limitations of the CATs and the review sessions. Results: There was active participation by students in all thirteen CATs (71.15% ± 1.2%), three review sessions (78.3% ± 1.6%) and the end of module questionnaire (81%). A significant increase in student learning across all disciplines was observed in all three review sessions (**, p<0.01; ***,p<0.001 and **, p<0.01 for review sessions 1-3 respectively). The majority of students (99%) expressed the opinion that the review sessions enhanced their learning of pharmacology. A limitation expressed by some students was the necessity to complete multiple CATs to support each of the three review sessions. Conclusion: Strategically structured student directed review sessions which are carefully designed and executed are an interesting and effective educational tool for improving and complementing student learning across the disciplines in pharmacology.
- Authors retain copyright and grant the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning (JoSoTL) right of first publication with the work simultaneously licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution License, (CC-BY) 4.0 International, allowing others to share the work with proper acknowledgement and citation of the work's authorship and initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- Authors are able to enter separate, additional contractual agreements for the non-exclusive distribution of the journal's published version of the work (e.g., post it to an institutional repository or publish it in a book), with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
- In pursuit of manuscripts of the highest quality, multiple opportunities for mentoring, and greater reach and citation of JoSoTL publications, JoSoTL encourages authors to share their drafts to seek feedback from relevant communities unless the manuscript is already under review or in the publication queue after being accepted. In other words, to be eligible for publication in JoSoTL, manuscripts should not be shared publicly (e.g., online), while under review (after being initially submitted, or after being revised and resubmitted for reconsideration), or upon notice of acceptance and before publication. Once published, authors are strongly encouraged to share the published version widely, with an acknowledgement of its initial publication in the Journal of the Scholarship of Teaching and Learning.
Achike, F. I., & Ogle, C. W. (2000). Information overload in the teaching of pharmacology. Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 40(2), 177-183. doi: 10.1177/00912700022008838
Angelo, T. (1991a). Introduction and overview: From classroom assessment to classroom research. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 46, 7-15. doi: 10.1002/tl.37219914603
Angelo T. (1991b). Ten easy pieces: Assessing higher learning in four dimensions. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 46, 17-31. doi: 10.1002/tl.37219914604
Angelo T. (1998). Classroom assessment and research: An update on uses, approaches, and research findings. New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 75, 1-2. doi: 10.1002/tl.7500
Angelo, T. A., & Cross, K. P. (1993). Classroom assessment techniques, 2nd ed., San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Banerjee, I., Roy, B., Sathian, B., Pugazhandhi, B., Saha, A., & Banerjee, I. (2013). Teaching aids in pharmacology teaching and learning methodology: A study from a medical college in Nepal. International Journal Interdisciplinary and Multidisciplinary Studies, 1(1), 1-7.
Bligh, D. A. (2000). What’s the use of lectures? San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Bloom, B. S., Engelhart, M. D., Furst, E. J., Hill, W., & Krathwohl, D. (1956). Taxonomy of educational objectives. The Cognative Domain. New York: McKay.
Brewer, G., & Hiscock, D. (2001). Medical education and practice in the information age. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 77(909), 425-427. doi: 10.1136/pmj.77.909.425
Brown, W. A., & Gamber, C. (2002). Cost containment in higher education – Issues and recommendations, ASHE-ERIC Higher Education Report. 28(5).
Byon, A. S. (2005). Classroom assessment tools and students’ affective stances: KFL classroom settings. Language and Education, 19(3), 173-93. doi: 10.1080/0950070508668673
Coleman, I. P. L., Foster, R. W., Hollingsworth, M., Morgan, R., Sewell, K., & Walker, J. (1995). Drug targets and transduction systems. British Journal of Pharmacology, 115, 159.
Cottell, P., & Harwood E. (1998). Do classroom assessment techniques (CATs) improve student learning? New Directions for Teaching and Learning, 75, 37-46. doi: 10.1002/tl.7504
Cronin Jones, L. L. (2003). Are lectures a thing of the past? Journal of College Science Teaching, 32(7), 453-457.
Darling-Hammond, L. (Ed.). (2008). Powerful learning: What we know about teaching for understanding. San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
Desai, M. (2009). Changing face of pharmacology practicals for medical undergraduates. Indian Journal of Pharmacology, 41(4), 151-152. doi: 10.4103/0253-7613.56062
Dewhurst, D. G., & Norris T. A. M. (2003). Helping teachers to embed e-learning materials into undergraduate pharmacology courses. Bioscience Education, 1(1).
Ebert-May, D., Brewer, M., & Allred, S. (1997). Innovation in large lectures-teaching for active learning. Bioscience, 47, 601-607. doi: 10.2307/1313166
Flexner, A. (1910). Medical education in the United States and Canada. A report to the Carnegie Foundation for the advancement of teaching. Bulletin 4. Boston: Updyke.
Fry, H., Ketteridge, S., & Marshall, S. (1999). A handbook for teaching and learning in higher education: Enhancing academic practice. Philadelphia, PA: Kogan Page Publishers.
Gardner, H. (1995). Reflections on multiple intelligences myths and messages. Phi Delta Kappan, 77(3), 200-209.
Gardner, H. (1999). Intelligence reframed: Multiple intelligences for the 21st Century. New York: Basic Books.
Gardner, H., & Boix Mansilla, V. (1994). Teaching for understanding within and across the disciplines. Educational Leadership, 51, 14-18.
Gregson, K., Romito, L. M., & Garetto, L. P. (2010). Students’ attitudes toward integrating problem-based learning into a D.D.S. pharmacology curriculum. Journal of Dental Education, 74(5), 489-498.
Greenglass, E. R., & Burke, R. J. (2003). Teacher stress: Occupational stress in the service proffessions. New York: Taylor & Francis.
Handelsman, J., Ebert-May, D., Beichner, R., Bruns, P., Chang, A., DeHaan, R., Gentile, J., Lauffer, S., Stewart, J., Tilghman, S. M., & Wood, W. B. (2004). Scientific teaching. Science, 304(5670), 521-522. doi: 10.1126/science.1096022
Joshi, A., & Trivedi M. (2010). Innovations in pharmacology teaching. International Journal of Pharmaceutical and Biomedical Research, 1(2), 62-64.
Klassen, R. M., Usher, E. L., & Bong, M. (2010). Teachers collective efficacy, job satisfaction and job stress in cross-cultural context. The Journal of Experimental Education, 78, 464-486. doi: 10.1080/00220970903292975
Kwan, C. Y. (2002). Problem-based learning and teaching of medical pharmacology. NaunynSchmiedebergs Archives in Pharmacology, 366, 10-17. doi: 10.1007/s00210-002-0561-y
Litke, R. A. (1995). Learning lessons from students: What they like most and least about large classes. Journal on Excellence in College Teaching, 6(2), 113-129.
Lymn, J. S., & Mostyn, A. (2010). Audience response technology: Engaging and empowering non-medical prescribing students in pharmacology learning. BMC Medical Education, 10, 73-83. doi: 10.1186/1472-6920-10-73
Markham, T., Jones, S. J., Hughes, I., & Sutcliffe, M. (1998). Survey of methods of teaching and learning in undergraduate pharmacology within UK higher education. Trends in Pharmacological Science, 19(7), 257-262. doi: 10.1016/S0165-6147(98)01221-8
McBane, S., & Mesaros, J. (2010). Teaching pharmacology in a physician assistant program. Journal of Physician Assisted Education, 21(3), 18-22.
McKeachie, W. J., Svinicki, M. D., & Hofer, B. K. (2006). McKeachie’s teaching tips: Strategies, research, and theory for college and university teachers. Boston: Houghton Mifflin.
Morgan, J. H. C. (2003). New approaches to training general practitioners. Postgraduate Medical Journal, 79(930), 187-188. doi: 10.1136/pmj.79.930.187
Oppenheim, A. N. (1992). Questionnaire design, interviewing and attitude measurement. (2nd ed.) London: St. Martin’s Press.
Rogers, K. M. A. (2012). A feasibility study on the development and integration of a teaching aid for pharmacology. International Journal of Modern Education Forum, 1(2), 53-61.
Rouseff-Baker, F., & Holm A. (2004). Engaging faculty and students in classroom assessment. New Directions for Community Colleges, 126, 29-42. doi: 10.1002/cc.152
Routledge, P. A. (1999). The inter-face between clinical and laboratory pharmacology. British Journal of Clinical Pharmacology, 47(6), 611-612.
Sekhri, K. (2012). Teaching methodologies in pharmacology. A survey of students’ perceptions and experiences. Journal of Education and Ethics in Dentistry, 2(1), 40-44. doi: 10.4103/09747761.115150
Skaalvik, E. M., & Skaalvik, S. (2007). Dimensions of teacher self-efficacy and relations with strain factors, perceived collective teacher efficacy, and teacher burnout. Journal of Educational Psychology, 99, 611-625. doi: 10.1037/0022-06188.8.131.521
Simpson-Beck, V. (2011). Assessing classroom assessment techniques. Active Learning in Higher Education, 12(2), 125-132. doi: 10.1177/1469787411402482
Stead, D. R. (2012). A review of the one minute paper. Active Learning in Higher Education, 6(2), 118-131. doi: 10.1177/1469787405054237
Udovic, D., Morris, D., Dickman, A., Postlethwait, J., & Wetherwax, P. (2002). Workshop biology: Demonstrating the effectiveness of active learning in an introductory biology course. BioScience, 52(3), 272-281. doi: 10.1641/0006-3568(2002)052[0272:WBDTEO]2.0.CO;2
Wiecha, J. M. (2003). Collaborative online learning (COL): A new distance learning method. Essential Drugs Monitor, 33, 36.
Wellington, J. (2000). Educational research: Contemporary issues and practical approaches. London: Continuum.
Zgheib, N. K., Simaan, J. A., & Sabra, R. (2010). Using team-based learning to teach pharmacology to second year medical students improves student performance. Medical Teaching, 32(2), 130-135. doi: 10.3109/01421590903548521