What an honor it is to work at Eastern Virginia Medical School

So many amazing things are happening at EVMS including the service learning happening in our own community. Our amazing, caring and driven students are supported by some pretty awesome faculty and staff. ❤

 http://youtu.be/WJkoHWwn-Wo

Advertisements

Do we need to “cover every fact” in science learning?  This article supports the use of TBL to help students with higher order thinking

http://www.facultyfocus.com/articles/teaching-professor-blog/course-content-can-fulfill-multiple-roles/

The answer?  An excerpt from the article sums it up nicely:

…nobody is teaching a course on the telephone book. His point: “we should not teach science (or other subjects) as though every fact is worth knowing, any more than we would use a telephone book to help us memorize numbers… Memorizing facts is not as important as knowing how to ask questions and how to synthesize information to formulate an answer.” –

Google Glass in Simulation Centers and Beyond!

U.C. Irvine using google glass in simulation centers to give medical students a first hand view of what they look like to the patient. The device is also useful in documenting group dynamics and helping groups playback a recording of the interactions among group members to learn about empathy, leadership and problem solving. http://m.youtube.com/watch?v=-ArwcrqNCoQ&feature=youtu.be

Tech envy

I want a pair and I admit it. I have tech envy. University of California Irvine medical school students are getting Google glass just think of all the cool things they can do with it. http://www.cnet.com/news/google-glass-handed-out-to-all-medical-students-at-uc-irvine/

My vision of utilizing Google glass in medical education and in medical practice would be to include a dictation component to the medical record so doctors can seamlessly collect information while they are seeing a patient. Instead of stopping and typing or waiting until the encounter is over to record the information the doctor can dictate directly to the record while looking at the record this is what I envision.

Integrative Pharmacotherapeutics Learning Communities

LCIPoster

Accepted Poster Presentation for the Learning Communities Institute Conference at the National Conference for American Association of Medical Colleges (AAMC)

Title  Integrative Pharmacotherapeutics Learning Communities

Primary Presenter  Julie Bridges

Authors and affiliations  Elza Mylona, Associate Dean for Faculty Affairs and Professional Development  Thomas Lynch, Course Director Integrative Pharmacotherapeutics,  Ed Davidson, Adjunct Faculty Integrative Pharmacotherapeutics.

 Introduction/Aim(s)

Revision of pharmacology curriculum to include integrative pharmacotherapeutics cases in learning communities.

 Program Description

The second year medical school curriculum for the pharmacology curriculum was substantially revised to include integrative pharmacotherapeutics cases.  The course revision included 9 cases to be presented to the learning communities formed in the second year courses.  These learning communities are also used in another integrative course Introduction to the Patient so the students spend some time working together in the second year in multiple scenarios.  As part of the regular integrative pharmacotherapeutics course, the 139 second year medical students were placed in groups of 6 or 7.  The cases were written by subject matter experts Tom Lynch, PharmD and Ed Davidson, PharmD, MPH on a variety of common multi-dimensional problems such as hypertension, AFib, antithrombotic therapy, Peptic ulcer disease, COPD, and Diabetes among others.  Students were presented with cases as a mechanism of review before exams.  The students used electronic resources as well as a panel of faculty experts to answer questions posed in the cases.  Groups were chosen at random to present their answers to the case questions.

 Program Evaluation

A mid-course evaluation was used to formatively evaluate the yearlong course at mid-term.  A final course evaluation was used at the end as well as a specific evaluation of the case usage.

Discussion

The course evaluations were well received and immediately brought improvement in the course evaluations at mid-course that remained throughout the year.  Initially, attendance was required, but not taken at all sessions.  The students remained committed to attending the sessions even when the attendance was not taken.  Student comments reflected their appreciation of the interactivity of the sessions.

 Lessons Learned

Of the 22 groups in the learning community, 2 were dysfunctional and probably needed intervention early in the course.  The body language displayed, lack of communication in class between group members and comments on evaluations showed a distinct lack of functionality within the group.  Next year, an earlier group functionality assessment and intervention will hopefully help dysfunctional groups.  We are planning to work with our Director of Academic Development to help us do earlier interventions to improve communication and functionality in groups.

 References

Abdelkhalek, N., A. Hussein, et al. (2010). “Using team-based learning to prepare medical students for future problem-based learning.” Medical Teacher 32(2): 123-129.

Anwar, K., A. A. Shaikh, et al. (2012). “Comparing the efficacy of team based learning strategies in a problem based learning curriculum.” APMIS 120(9): 718-723.

Beatty, S. J., K. A. Kelley, et al. (2009). “Team-based Learning in Therapeutics Workshop Sessions.” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 73(6): 1-7.

Burgess, A. W., G. Ramsey-Stewart, et al. (2012). “Team-based learning methods in teaching topographical anatomy by dissection.” ANZ Journal of Surgery 82(6): 457-460.

Fujikura, T., T. Takeshita, et al. (2013). “Team-based Learning Using an Audience Response System: A Possible New Strategy for Interactive Medical Education.” Journal of Nippon Medical School 80(1): 63-69.

Hye-Jung, L. and L. Cheolil (2012). “Peer Evaluation in Blended Team Project-Based Learning: What Do Students Find Important?” Journal of Educational Technology & Society 15(4): 214-224.

Kim, P., J.-S. Hong, et al. (2011). “Effects of group reflection variations in project-based learning integrated in a Web 2.0 learning space.” Interactive Learning Environments 19(4): 333-349.

Kolluru, S., D. M. Roesch, et al. (2012). “A Multi-Instructor, Team-Based, Active-Learning Exercise to Integrate Basic and Clinical Sciences Content.” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 76(2): 1-7.

Learning Communities Institute Web site. Retrieved from  http://sites.tufts.edu/lci/presentations

Liaison Committee on Medical Education. Accreditation Standards. Retrieved from  http://www.lcme.org/standard.htm

Moye, P. M., N. L. Metzger, et al. (2012). “Modified team-based learning (MTBL) and long-term retention in a large classroom setting.” Journal of Pharmaceutical Education & Research 3(2): 1-6.

Ofstad, W. and L. J. Brunner (2013). “Team-Based Learning in Pharmacy Education.” American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 77(4): 1-11. Parmelee, D. X., D. DeStephen, et al. (2009). “Medical Students’ Attitudes about Team-Based Learning in a Pre-Clinical Curriculum.” Medical Education Online 14(1): 1-7.

Parmelee, D. X. and L. K. Michaelsen (2010). “Twelve tips for doing effective Team-Based Learning (TBL).” Medical Teacher 32(2): 118-122.