1 / 25

Implementing Active Learning Strategies in a Large Class Setting

Implementing Active Learning Strategies in a Large Class Setting. Travis White, Pharm.D., Assistant Professor Kristy Lucas, Pharm.D., Professor Pharmacy Practice Department. Outline. Background: Why change? Course description: What changed? Outcomes: Student and Faculty response

herman-carter
Download Presentation

Implementing Active Learning Strategies in a Large Class Setting

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. Implementing Active Learning Strategies in a Large Class Setting Travis White, Pharm.D., Assistant Professor Kristy Lucas, Pharm.D., Professor Pharmacy Practice Department

  2. Outline • Background: Why change? • Course description: What changed? • Outcomes: Student and Faculty response • Future direction: How to make it better?

  3. Background: UCSOP • 4 year Doctor of Pharmacy graduate program began in 2006 • Class size 70-80 students • First 1.5 yr = basic sciences • Clinical content (pharmacotherapy course) begins in 2nd yr • Team-taught • 4th year: Experiential clinical rotations

  4. Pharmacotherapy Course • 3 semesters x 8 hour course each • 24 hr of Pharm.D. curriculum • Historically: • slides-based lectures • Assessment: M/C exams ~ 6 per semester

  5. Why Change? • Students unfamiliar with content provided outside of slides (i.e., not reading textbook) • Exam preparation consisted of memorizing slides • Application of content & recall tested in 4th year (clinical rotations): seek improvement

  6. Why Change? • GOAL: • Increase student abilities & clinical skills by incorporating ACTIVE LEARNING in the classroom • Strategies: • Impose penalty for not reading in advance, individual responsibility for ability to apply content • Create environment of discussion in each class session • Provide case days for team work application of content

  7. What Changed?Pharmacotherapy Course Revised • New format: • Discussion-based lectures • Class participation points allocated by answering questions from required reading • IRATs (guide student preparation for class) • CP points = 20% of course grade • Text geared toward application: case-based

  8. Pharmacotherapy Course Revised • Continued M/C exams (5), added comprehensive final exam (52% course grade) • Required to achieve exam average 70% or higher to pass course • Built in team case days (every other week) • Create a patient’s therapy management plan • IRATs & TRATs • Self & Peer evaluations • Overall 28% of course grade

  9. Outcomes • Student Responses • Based on course evaluations • Faculty Responses • Faculty Attitudes Toward Teaching Survey (FATTS)

  10. Faculty Responses • Faculty Attitudes Toward Teaching Survey • Administered twice with minor differences • Prior to beginning of course • 11 surveys returned • Following course completion and before the next semester • 5 surveys returned

  11. Survey Content • Teaching experience of the instructor • Responsibility for learning • Concerns about the new format • Positive aspects of the change • Feeling of instructor preparedness

  12. Survey Content Continued • Thoughts on expanding format to other courses • Faculty development needs • Opinions about benefits of active learning strategies • Other comments section

  13. FATTS Experience

  14. FATTS Active Learning

  15. FATTS Responsibility Primary Responsibility for Student Learning % Respondents

  16. FATTS Concerns Scale: 1= Not concerned at all 5= Extremely concerned

  17. FATTS Positives Scale: 1= Not positive at all 5= Extremely positive

  18. Student Responses • Based on course evaluations • Three different perspectives • Pharmacotherapy 2 (Fall) • Pharmacotherapy 3 (Spring) • Pharmacotherapy 1 • Spring semester 2011 • Second year students Both third year students

  19. First Impressions • Most Positive • Learning/Retaining • More discussion • Helping my grade • IRAT • Reading • Most Negative • Class participation points • No lecturing • Case grading • IRAT • Amount of reading

  20. Moving Forward • Changes Based on Student Feedback • Class Participation Points • Individual Readiness Assessment Tests • Patient Case Grading Rubric

  21. Class Participation Points • Originally 20% of final grade • 70% class participation questions • 30% IRATs and other assignments • Changed to 15% of final grade • Class participation questions • Other assignments • Eliminated IRAT altogether

  22. Patient Case Rubric • Changed point structure • Previous rubric resulted in large gap in student grade with little gap in information • Collaboration between faculty to encourage consistency

  23. Round Two • Continued course structure during Spring semester with changes implemented • Pharmacotherapy 3 (Third year students) • Student Feedback • Course evaluations were much improved • Focused on course content rather than course structure

  24. Differing Perspectives • Second Year Students • First experience with course and format • Very positive evaluations • Minimal negative feedback • Positives • Class Format • Active Learning Strategies • Class Participation Questions • More prepared for exam • Retained material better

  25. Conclusions • Challenges are likely when switching teaching strategies but can be overcome • Faculty have done well adapting to the change and enjoy the increased interaction • Students had differing opinions at first but have done well with the new format

More Related