Jennifer M Trujillo1, Joseph J Saseen2, Sunny A Linnebur1, Laura M Borgelt2, Brian A Hemstreet3, Douglas N Fish1. 1. Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 2. Skaggs School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado ; University of Colorado School of Medicine, University of Colorado, Aurora, Colorado. 3. Regis University School of Pharmacy, Denver, CO.
Abstract
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of incorporating student-directed (SD) vs instructor-directed (ID) active learning on student performance in a pharmacotherapy capstone course. DESIGN: This 9-credit course was redesigned from exclusively ID case discussions to a format in which half were SD and half were ID. Student performance on evaluation questions derived from SD sessions was compared with that from ID sessions. ASSESSMENT: Overall, students (n=299) performed better on ID-session questions than on SD-session questions (78.7% vs 75.3%, correctly answered, respectively; p<0.001). For written evaluations, students performed better on ID-session questions than on SD-session questions (79.8% vs 73.9%, respectively; p<0.001). For verbal evaluations, students performed better on SD-session questions than on ID-session questions (79.5% vs 74.5%, respectively; p<0.001). After the course revision, student confidence regarding their ability to think critically, solve problems, make decisions, and pursue lifelong learning was high, and student and faculty feedback was positive. CONCLUSION: Student performance in a pharmacotherapy capstone course remained acceptable when a combination of SD and ID active learning was used, but the addition of SD learning did not translate to better performance on course evaluations.
OBJECTIVE: To evaluate the impact of incorporating student-directed (SD) vs instructor-directed (ID) active learning on student performance in a pharmacotherapy capstone course. DESIGN: This 9-credit course was redesigned from exclusively ID case discussions to a format in which half were SD and half were ID. Student performance on evaluation questions derived from SD sessions was compared with that from ID sessions. ASSESSMENT: Overall, students (n=299) performed better on ID-session questions than on SD-session questions (78.7% vs 75.3%, correctly answered, respectively; p<0.001). For written evaluations, students performed better on ID-session questions than on SD-session questions (79.8% vs 73.9%, respectively; p<0.001). For verbal evaluations, students performed better on SD-session questions than on ID-session questions (79.5% vs 74.5%, respectively; p<0.001). After the course revision, student confidence regarding their ability to think critically, solve problems, make decisions, and pursue lifelong learning was high, and student and faculty feedback was positive. CONCLUSION: Student performance in a pharmacotherapy capstone course remained acceptable when a combination of SD and ID active learning was used, but the addition of SD learning did not translate to better performance on course evaluations.
Authors: Joseph J Saseen; Sunny A Linnebur; Laura M Borgelt; Jennifer Trujillo; Douglas N Fish; Scott Mueller Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2017-04 Impact factor: 2.047