Incorporating online teaching in an introductory pharmaceutical practice course: a study of student perceptions within an Australian University
Main Article Content
Keywords
Abstract
Objectives: To examine student perceptions regarding online lectures and quizzes undertaken during a pharmaceutical practice course for first year undergraduate students enrolled in the Bachelor of Pharmacy course at an Australian University.
Methods: The University uses a standard instrument to collect feedback from students regarding unit satisfaction. Data were collected for three different teaching modalities: traditional face-to-face, online and partially online.
Results: Descriptive statistics support that, from a student's perspective, partial online delivery is the preferred teaching methodology for an introductory pharmaceutical practice unit.
Conclusion: This study has served to highlight that while there are a few points of significant difference between traditional and online teaching and learning, a combination of the two provides a reasonable avenue for teaching exploration. This result has implications for teaching practice generally, and within the pharmacy discipline, specifically.
Keywords: Education, Pharmacy. Education, Distance. Computer-Assisted Instruction. Australia.
References
1. Dykman CA, Davis CK. Online Education Forum: Part Two - Teaching Online Versus Teaching Conventionally. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2008;19(2):157-164.
2. Tallent-Runnels MK, Thomas JA, Lan WY, Cooper S, Ahern TC, Shaw SM, Liu X. Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research. 2006;76(1):93-135.
3. NCVER (National Centre for Vocational Education Research). Flexibility through online learning, 2002 NCVER, Adelaide. http://www.ncver.edu.au/research/proj/nr1F12.pdf [accessed August 2009].
4. Geck C. The generation Z connection: Teaching information literacy to the newest net generation. Teacher Librarian. 2006;33(3):19-23.
5. Harper B, Hedberg J, Bennett S, Lockyer L. The on-line experience: The state of Australian education practices – Review of research. NCVER, 2000, Adelaide,
6. Franklin S, Peat M. Online learning; the first year biology way. Proceedings of ASCILITE Conference 1998, Wollongong, NSW, 241-249. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/asc98-pdf/franklinpeast.pdf [accessed August 2009].Dykman CA, Davis CK. Part One – the shift toward online education. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2008;19(1):11-16.
7. Dykman CA, Davis CK. Part One – the shift toward online education. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2008; 19(1):11-16.
8. Candy PC, Crebert G, O’Leary, J. Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Australian Government Publishing Service. 1994.
9. Faux TL, Black-Hughes C. A comparison of using the internet versus lectures to teach social work history. Research on Social Work Practice. 2000;10(4):454-466.
10. Brown BW, Liedholm CE. Can Web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? The American Economic Review. 2002;92(2):444-448.
11. Brown SW, Kulikowich, JM. Teaching statistics from a distance: What we have learned. International Journal of Instructional Media. 2004;31(1):19-35.
12. Maki RH, Maki WS, Patterson M, Whittaker PD. Evaluation of a Web-based introductory psychology course: Learning and satisfaction in on-line versus lecture courses. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers.2000;32:230-239.
13. Hauck WE. Online Versus Traditional Face-To-Face Learning in a Large Introductory Course. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences. 2006;98(4):27-29.
14. Fraser S, Dean E. Why Open Learning? Australian Universities Review. 1997;1:25-31.
15. Trigwell K, Prosser M. Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education. 1991;22:251-266.
16. Seok S, DaCosta B, Kinsell C, Tung CK. Comparison of instructor’s and students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2010;11(1):25–36.
17. Koohang A, Durante A. Learners’ perceptions toward the web-based distance learning activities/ assignments portion of an undergraduate hybrid instructional model. Journal of Informational Technology Education. 2003;2:105-113.
18. Freeman MK, Schrimsher RH, Kendrach MG. Student Perceptions of Online Lectures and WebCT in an Introductory Drug Information Course. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70:C1-8.
19. Crouch MA. An advanced cardiovascular pharmacotherapy course blending online and face-to-face instruction. Am J Pharm Educ. 2009; 73(3): 51.Oliver B, Tucker B, Gupta R, Yeo S. eValuate: an evaluation instrument for measuring student’s perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2008;33(6):619-630.
20. Oliver B, Tucker B, Gupta R, Yeo S. eValuate: an evaluation instrument for measuring student’s perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2008;33(6):619-630.
21. Keating B. Online learning opportunity. Pharmacy Practice (Mississauga). 2003;19(9):24B.
22. Deakin Learning Toolkit 08 [homepage on the internet]. 2008. [cited 2008 Nov 12]. Available from:http:/www.deakin.edu.au/dlt2008/deakin_online/success/index.html.
23. Larson-Birney, B. Evaluation case study of an introductory accounting course taught over the Internet using computer-based instruction. 2000. Ed.D. Northern Arizona University.
24. Ali NS, Hodson-Carlton K, Ryan M. Students’ perception of online learning: implications for teaching. Nurse Educ. 2004; 29(3): 111-5.Grimes, EB. Student perception of an online dental terminology course. Journal of Dental Education. 2002; 66(1): 100-7.Zemsky R, Massy WF. Why the E-Learning boom went bust. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004;50(44):B.6.
25. Grimes, EB. Student perception of an online dental terminology course. Journal of Dental Education. 2002;66(1):100-7.
26. Zemsky R, Massy WF. Why the E-Learning boom went bust. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004;50(44):B.6.
27. Nichols, J; Shaffer, B; Shockey, K. Changing the face of instruction: Is online or in-class more effective? College & Research Libraries. 2003;64(5):387-388.
28. Chandra V, Fisher DL. Students’ perception of a blended web-based learning environment. Learning Environ Res. 2009;12:31-44.
29. Pittinger A, Doering A. Influence of motivational design on completion rates in online self-study pharmacy-content courses. Distance Education. 2010;31(3):275-293.
2. Tallent-Runnels MK, Thomas JA, Lan WY, Cooper S, Ahern TC, Shaw SM, Liu X. Teaching Courses Online: A Review of the Research. Review of Educational Research. 2006;76(1):93-135.
3. NCVER (National Centre for Vocational Education Research). Flexibility through online learning, 2002 NCVER, Adelaide. http://www.ncver.edu.au/research/proj/nr1F12.pdf [accessed August 2009].
4. Geck C. The generation Z connection: Teaching information literacy to the newest net generation. Teacher Librarian. 2006;33(3):19-23.
5. Harper B, Hedberg J, Bennett S, Lockyer L. The on-line experience: The state of Australian education practices – Review of research. NCVER, 2000, Adelaide,
6. Franklin S, Peat M. Online learning; the first year biology way. Proceedings of ASCILITE Conference 1998, Wollongong, NSW, 241-249. http://www.ascilite.org.au/conferences/wollongong98/asc98-pdf/franklinpeast.pdf [accessed August 2009].Dykman CA, Davis CK. Part One – the shift toward online education. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2008;19(1):11-16.
7. Dykman CA, Davis CK. Part One – the shift toward online education. Journal of Information Systems Education. 2008; 19(1):11-16.
8. Candy PC, Crebert G, O’Leary, J. Developing lifelong learners through undergraduate education. National Board of Employment, Education and Training, Australian Government Publishing Service. 1994.
9. Faux TL, Black-Hughes C. A comparison of using the internet versus lectures to teach social work history. Research on Social Work Practice. 2000;10(4):454-466.
10. Brown BW, Liedholm CE. Can Web courses replace the classroom in principles of microeconomics? The American Economic Review. 2002;92(2):444-448.
11. Brown SW, Kulikowich, JM. Teaching statistics from a distance: What we have learned. International Journal of Instructional Media. 2004;31(1):19-35.
12. Maki RH, Maki WS, Patterson M, Whittaker PD. Evaluation of a Web-based introductory psychology course: Learning and satisfaction in on-line versus lecture courses. Behaviour Research Methods, Instruments & Computers.2000;32:230-239.
13. Hauck WE. Online Versus Traditional Face-To-Face Learning in a Large Introductory Course. Journal of Family and Consumer Sciences. 2006;98(4):27-29.
14. Fraser S, Dean E. Why Open Learning? Australian Universities Review. 1997;1:25-31.
15. Trigwell K, Prosser M. Improving the quality of student learning: the influence of learning context and student approaches to learning on learning outcomes. Higher Education. 1991;22:251-266.
16. Seok S, DaCosta B, Kinsell C, Tung CK. Comparison of instructor’s and students’ perceptions of the effectiveness of online courses. The Quarterly Review of Distance Education. 2010;11(1):25–36.
17. Koohang A, Durante A. Learners’ perceptions toward the web-based distance learning activities/ assignments portion of an undergraduate hybrid instructional model. Journal of Informational Technology Education. 2003;2:105-113.
18. Freeman MK, Schrimsher RH, Kendrach MG. Student Perceptions of Online Lectures and WebCT in an Introductory Drug Information Course. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70:C1-8.
19. Crouch MA. An advanced cardiovascular pharmacotherapy course blending online and face-to-face instruction. Am J Pharm Educ. 2009; 73(3): 51.Oliver B, Tucker B, Gupta R, Yeo S. eValuate: an evaluation instrument for measuring student’s perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2008;33(6):619-630.
20. Oliver B, Tucker B, Gupta R, Yeo S. eValuate: an evaluation instrument for measuring student’s perceptions of their engagement and learning outcomes. Assessment & Evaluation in Higher Education. 2008;33(6):619-630.
21. Keating B. Online learning opportunity. Pharmacy Practice (Mississauga). 2003;19(9):24B.
22. Deakin Learning Toolkit 08 [homepage on the internet]. 2008. [cited 2008 Nov 12]. Available from:http:/www.deakin.edu.au/dlt2008/deakin_online/success/index.html.
23. Larson-Birney, B. Evaluation case study of an introductory accounting course taught over the Internet using computer-based instruction. 2000. Ed.D. Northern Arizona University.
24. Ali NS, Hodson-Carlton K, Ryan M. Students’ perception of online learning: implications for teaching. Nurse Educ. 2004; 29(3): 111-5.Grimes, EB. Student perception of an online dental terminology course. Journal of Dental Education. 2002; 66(1): 100-7.Zemsky R, Massy WF. Why the E-Learning boom went bust. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004;50(44):B.6.
25. Grimes, EB. Student perception of an online dental terminology course. Journal of Dental Education. 2002;66(1):100-7.
26. Zemsky R, Massy WF. Why the E-Learning boom went bust. The Chronicle of Higher Education. 2004;50(44):B.6.
27. Nichols, J; Shaffer, B; Shockey, K. Changing the face of instruction: Is online or in-class more effective? College & Research Libraries. 2003;64(5):387-388.
28. Chandra V, Fisher DL. Students’ perception of a blended web-based learning environment. Learning Environ Res. 2009;12:31-44.
29. Pittinger A, Doering A. Influence of motivational design on completion rates in online self-study pharmacy-content courses. Distance Education. 2010;31(3):275-293.