title: Impact of abbreviated lecture with interactive mini-cases vs traditional lecture on student performance in the large classroom.
abstract: OBJECTIVE
  To compare the impact of 2 different teaching and learning methods on student mastery of learning objectives in a pharmacotherapy module in the large classroom setting.
  
  
  METHODS
  Two teaching and learning methods were implemented and compared in a required pharmacotherapy module for 2 years. The first year, multiple interactive mini-cases with inclass individual assessment and an abbreviated lecture were used to teach osteoarthritis; a traditional lecture with 1 inclass case discussion was used to teach gout. In the second year, the same topics were used but the methods were flipped. Student performance on pre/post individual readiness assessment tests (iRATs), case questions, and subsequent examinations were compared each year by the teaching and learning method and then between years by topic for each method. Students also voluntarily completed a 20-item evaluation of the teaching and learning methods.
  
  
  RESULTS
  Postpresentation iRATs were significantly higher than prepresentation iRATs for each topic each year with the interactive mini-cases; there was no significant difference in iRATs before and after traditional lecture. For osteoarthritis, postpresentation iRATs after interactive mini-cases in year 1 were significantly higher than postpresentation iRATs after traditional lecture in year 2; the difference in iRATs for gout per learning method was not significant. The difference between examination performance for osteoarthritis and gout was not significant when the teaching and learning methods were compared. On the student evaluations, 2 items were significant both years when answers were compared by teaching and learning method. Each year, students ranked their class participation higher with interactive cases than with traditional lecture, but both years they reported enjoying the traditional lecture format more.
  
  
  CONCLUSIONS
  Multiple interactive mini-cases with an abbreviated lecture improved immediate mastery of learning objectives compared to a traditional lecture format, regardless of therapeutic topic, but did not improve student performance on subsequent examinations.
authors: Mercer University College of Pharmacy, Atlanta, Georgia.
authors: Leisa L
authors: LL
authors: Marshall
authors: Mercer University College of Pharmacy, Atlanta, Georgia.
authors: Diane L
authors: DL
authors: Nykamp
authors: Mercer University College of Pharmacy, Atlanta, Georgia.
authors: Kathryn M
authors: KM
authors: Momary
mesh_terms: D000328:Adult; D003479:Curriculum; D004512:Education, Pharmacy / Q000379:methods*; D004521:Educational Measurement; D005260:Female; D006801:Humans; D008297:Male; D018794:Problem-Based Learning / Q000379:methods*; D013339:Students, Pharmacy
keywords: active learning; individual readiness assessment test; instructional design; pharmacotherapy; teaching and learning
references: Nurse Educ Today. 2008 Jul;28(5):572-9
references: 17983691
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2010 Feb 10;74(1):6
references: 20221357
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2011 Aug 10;75(6):118
references: 21931456
references: Adv Physiol Educ. 2011 Dec;35(4):456-9
references: 22139786
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2011 Sep 10;75(7):136
references: 21969722
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2008 Apr 15;72(2):28
references: 18483596
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2008 Apr 15;72(2):29
references: 18483597
references: Adv Physiol Educ. 2013 Mar;37(1):85-8
references: 23471254
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 May 13;77(4):70
references: 23716738
references: Nurse Educ Pract. 2006 Sep;6(5):261-7
references: 19040887
references: CBE Life Sci Educ. 2008 Winter;7(4):361-7
references: 19047423
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2012 Dec 12;76(10):196
references: 23275661
references: J Physician Assist Educ. 2013;24(1):5-14
references: 23858821
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 Oct 14;77(8):171
references: 24159212
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2009 Apr 7;73(2):22
references: 19513160
references: Nurse Educ. 2013 May-Jun;38(3):106-9
references: 23608909
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 Oct 14;77(8):162
references: 24159203
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2013 Aug 12;77(6):115
references: 23966718
references: Nurse Educ Today. 2013 Feb;33(2):148-51
references: 22115734
references: Acad Med. 2005 Mar;80(3):300-1
references: 15734817
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2011 Nov 10;75(9):186
references: 22171114
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2012 Mar 12;76(2):31
references: 22438603
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2011 May 10;75(4):68
references: 21769144
references: Am J Med Sci. 2014 Jul;348(1):52-6
references: 24113508
references: Acad Med. 2013 Feb;88(2):198-205
references: 23269297
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2012 Jun 18;76(5):87
references: 22761528
references: Adv Physiol Educ. 2011 Dec;35(4):408-15
references: 22139779
references: Biochem Mol Biol Educ. 2013 Nov-Dec;41(6):384-7
references: 24214182
references: Br Med J. 1973 Jul 14;3(5871):99-101
references: 4123949
references: Am J Pharm Educ. 2008 Oct 15;72(5):103
references: 19214257
references: J Allied Health. 2010 Summer;39(2):e37-41
references: 20539919
references: CBE Life Sci Educ. 2013 Spring;12(1):73-9
references: 23463230