Please use this identifier to cite or link to this item: https://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/13971
Full metadata record
DC FieldValueLanguage
dc.contributor.authorLloyd, Hilaryen
dc.contributor.authorHinton, Tinaen
dc.contributor.authorBullock, Shaneen
dc.contributor.authorBabey, Anna-Marieen
dc.contributor.authorDavis, Elizabethen
dc.contributor.authorFernandes, Lynetteen
dc.contributor.authorHart, Joanneen
dc.contributor.authorMusgrave, Ianen
dc.contributor.authorZiogas, Jamesen
dc.date.accessioned2014-02-10T14:14:00Z-
dc.date.issued2013-
dc.identifier.citationBMC Medical Education, v.13, p. 1-15en
dc.identifier.issn1472-6920en
dc.identifier.urihttps://hdl.handle.net/1959.11/13971-
dc.description.abstractBackground: Pharmacology is a biomedical discipline taught in basic science and professional degree programs. In order to provide information that would facilitate pharmacology curricula to be refined and developed, and approaches to teaching to be updated, a national survey was undertaken in Australia that investigated pharmacology course content, teaching and summative assessment methods. Methods: Twenty-two institutions participated in a purpose-built online questionnaire, which enabled an evaluation of 147 courses taught in 10 different degrees. To enable comparison, degrees were grouped into four major degree programs, namely science, pharmacy, medicine and nursing. The pharmacology content was then classified into 16 lecture themes, with 2-21 lecture topics identified per theme. The resultant data were analysed for similarities and differences in pharmacology curricula across the degree programs. Results: While all lecture themes were taught across degree programs, curriculum content differed with respect to the breadth and hours of coverage. Overall, lecture themes were taught most broadly in medicine and with greatest coverage in pharmacy. Reflecting a more traditional approach, lectures were a dominant teaching method (at least 90% of courses). Sixty-three percent of science courses provided practical classes but such sessions occurred much less frequently in other degree programs, while tutorials were much more common in pharmacy degree programs (70%). Notably, problem-based learning was common across medical programs. Considerable diversity was found in the types of summative assessment tasks employed. In science courses the most common form of in-semester assessment was practical reports, whereas in other programs pen-and-paper quizzes predominated. End-of-semester assessment contributed 50-80% to overall assessment across degree programs. Conclusion: The similarity in lecture themes taught across the four different degree programs shows that common knowledge- and competency-based learning outcomes can be defined for pharmacology. The authors contend that it is the differences in breadth and coverage of material for each lecture theme, and the differing teaching modes and assessment that characterise particular degree programs. Adoption of pharmacology knowledge-based learning outcomes that could be tailored to suit individual degree programs would better facilitate the sharing of expertise and teaching practice than the current model where pharmacology curricula are degree-specific.en
dc.languageenen
dc.publisherBioMed Central Ltden
dc.relation.ispartofBMC Medical Educationen
dc.titleAn evaluation of pharmacology curricula in Australian science and health-related degree programsen
dc.typeJournal Articleen
dc.identifier.doi10.1186/1472-6920-13-153en
dcterms.accessRightsGolden
dc.subject.keywordsCurriculum and Pedagogyen
dc.subject.keywordsMedicine, Nursing and Health Curriculum and Pedagogyen
local.contributor.firstnameHilaryen
local.contributor.firstnameTinaen
local.contributor.firstnameShaneen
local.contributor.firstnameAnna-Marieen
local.contributor.firstnameElizabethen
local.contributor.firstnameLynetteen
local.contributor.firstnameJoanneen
local.contributor.firstnameIanen
local.contributor.firstnameJamesen
local.subject.for2008130299 Curriculum and Pedagogy not elsewhere classifieden
local.subject.for2008130209 Medicine, Nursing and Health Curriculum and Pedagogyen
local.subject.seo2008930302 Syllabus and Curriculum Developmenten
local.subject.seo2008930301 Assessment and Evaluation of Curriculumen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolSchool of Rural Medicineen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.schoolHuman Biology and Physiologyen
local.profile.emailhilary.lloyd@sydney.edu.auen
local.profile.emailtina.hinton@sydney.edu.auen
local.profile.emailshane.bullock@med.monash.edu.auen
local.profile.emailababey@une.edu.auen
local.profile.emailelizabeth.davis@med.monash.edu.auen
local.profile.emaillynette.fernandes@uwa.edu.auen
local.profile.emailjoanne.favarolo@rmit.edu.auen
local.profile.emailian.musgrave@adelaide.edu.auen
local.profile.emailjamesz@melbourne.edu.auen
local.output.categoryC1en
local.record.placeauen
local.record.institutionUniversity of New Englanden
local.identifier.epublicationsrecordune-20131127-12130en
local.publisher.placeUnited Kingdomen
local.identifier.runningnumber153en
local.format.startpage1en
local.format.endpage15en
local.identifier.scopusid84887661520en
local.peerreviewedYesen
local.identifier.volume13en
local.access.fulltextYesen
local.contributor.lastnameLloyden
local.contributor.lastnameHintonen
local.contributor.lastnameBullocken
local.contributor.lastnameBabeyen
local.contributor.lastnameDavisen
local.contributor.lastnameFernandesen
local.contributor.lastnameHarten
local.contributor.lastnameMusgraveen
local.contributor.lastnameZiogasen
dc.identifier.staffune-id:ababeyen
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.profile.roleauthoren
local.identifier.unepublicationidune:14184en
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
dc.identifier.academiclevelAcademicen
local.title.maintitleAn evaluation of pharmacology curricula in Australian science and health-related degree programsen
local.output.categorydescriptionC1 Refereed Article in a Scholarly Journalen
local.search.authorLloyd, Hilaryen
local.search.authorHinton, Tinaen
local.search.authorBullock, Shaneen
local.search.authorBabey, Anna-Marieen
local.search.authorDavis, Elizabethen
local.search.authorFernandes, Lynetteen
local.search.authorHart, Joanneen
local.search.authorMusgrave, Ianen
local.search.authorZiogas, Jamesen
local.uneassociationUnknownen
local.identifier.wosid000328495100002en
local.year.published2013en
local.subject.for2020390199 Curriculum and pedagogy not elsewhere classifieden
local.subject.for2020390110 Medicine, nursing and health curriculum and pedagogyen
local.subject.seo2020160301 Assessment, development and evaluation of curriculumen
Appears in Collections:Journal Article
Files in This Item:
2 files
File Description SizeFormat 
Show simple item record

SCOPUSTM   
Citations

14
checked on Jul 13, 2024

Page view(s)

1,298
checked on May 7, 2023
Google Media

Google ScholarTM

Check

Altmetric


Items in Research UNE are protected by copyright, with all rights reserved, unless otherwise indicated.