Innovations 2014

DOCUMENTOFINNOVATIONS
2014
CompiledbytheTeachingandLearningCenter
2014
TableofContents
ListforLeahyFacultyAwardforLearningInnovations
Title
Name
Page
BrianColfer
Theimplementationofamultidisciplinarysimulationintointernational 10
businesscourses
ChristineFlanagan
THECHALLENGEOFCREATIVITY:AssigningCreativeProjectsin
16
"Academic"Courses
DianeHadley,
TeachingOthersPalliativeCareCommunicationSkills:Pilotingan
34
VarleishaGibbs,
InterprofessionalCommunicationWorkshipFocusedontheCareof
LoraPackel
OlderAdultswithLifelimitingIllness
DanaA.PapeZambito,Formalfacultymentoringleadstocriticalreflectiononteachingand 46
AlisonMostrom
improvedstudentperformanceandattitudes.
WinneroftheLeahyAward
MargaretReinhart
EmergingBiologicalThreatsandGlobalSustainability
62
ListforBrightIdeaFacultyAwardFinalists
Name
LeahComeau
DianeE.Hadley,
SanchitaSen,
RadhaVanmali,
KimberlyD.Ward,
JenniferPitonyak,
JoanF.Ward
PaulHalpern
LisaHoglund
TamarKlaiman
MelissaG.Marko,
JamesJohnson,
RobertGulay,
JasonPorter
ShelleyOtsuka,
KarleenMelody,
KatherineKoffer
JessicaM.Sautter
Title
SelfandOtherSelfPortraitProject
Page
ANovelUSciencesInterprofessionalEducation(IPE)Workshop
IntegratingPharmacy,PhysicalTherapy,OccupationalTherapy,
andPhysicianAssistantStudentsandFaculty
23
MakingWaves
40
UsingApprenNetandGroupPresentationstoPromoteLearning,
OpportunitiesForPeerFeedback,andReflectionInALarge
FacetoFaceClass
WinneroftheBrightIdeaAward
42
UsingTableTopSimulationstoTeachAboutPublicHealthEmergency 46
Preparedness
Antibiotics,ResistanceandInfection.OhMy!Theuseofcasestudies. 53
presentedorallyinclassandonlinetofostercriticalthinking,
understandingandlifelonglearning.
DevelopmentofBothsidesofthecoininaHealthCareProfessional: 57
TeachingEmpathyandEvidenceBasedPracticeAPilotStudy
Secondaryanalysisofexistingdatainsocialscienceresearch
66
JeanScholtz,
HenrySchwartz,
KatherineKoffer
UseofPharmacyStudentsasInstructorsinanIntroductoryDispensing 67
andCounselingSimulationLab
KimberlyWard,
EricPelletier
LauraWaite
AcademicCommunityPartnershipsforExperientialLearning,
EvidenceBasedPractice,andKnowledgeTranslation
70
KeepingItRe(n)al:NovelContentDeliveryofChronicKidney
DiseaseinaRequiredPharmacotherapySequence
77
LauraWaite,
DianeHadley,
AliceLim,
LauraBio
WhentheFatHitstheFan:InnovativeApproachestoTeaching
DyslipidemiaManagementinaRequiredPharmacyTherapeutics
Sequence
84
DocumentofInnovations
AttheUniversityoftheSciences
2014
The Teaching and Learning Center of the University of the Sciences is proud to produce the
fifteenth annual Document of Innovations. This document contains abstracts of the finalists for
the Leahy Faculty Award for Learning innovations and for the Bright Idea Award. Previous
editions of the Document of Innovations have been recognized as one of the best ways to know
how faculty is teaching. Many of these Leahy submissions reflect true Scholarship of Teaching
and Learning. Some of the faculty is ready to submit or have already submitted their ideas to
peer reviewed professional journals. We give Bright Idea Awards for creative ways to teach, or
assess students, including the use of educational technology.
The overall goal of this document is to improve teaching and learning. A compilation of all the
teaching practices allows others to learn about these ideas and adapt to them. This document
provides faculty ideas that have worked with our students.
This document is disseminated on the web throughout the campus and to interested people
outside the University to give increased recognition to individual faculty who strive to improve
their teaching as well as others who enable students to learn more. Hopefully, this document will
help faculty to collaborate on new ideas and will inspire others to try new methods to improve
their teaching and learning.
All of the faculty welcomes feedback on their ideas. If you use or adapt an innovation, please
give the author the credit and tell the original instructor how it worked.
To submit a description of an educational innovation for next years edition, please see
http://www,usciences.edu/teaching/innovations
Phyllis Blumberg, Ph.D.
Director of the Teaching and Learning Center
May 2013
10
Simulations have been used before in the Pharmaceutical and Healthcare Business
undergraduate and graduate majors. However, business simulations commonly focus on one
discipline such as marketing, sales, or organizational behavior. There are few comprehensive
business simulations for upper-level courses that require students to use prior course work and
knowledge in one setting. Upon taking over the undergraduate and graduate international
business courses, I noticed the courses were lacking in three areas: 1) although the courses
covered multiple disciplines required of an international business/marketing course, they were
not designed to integrate these disciplines into a structured project; 2) the courses lacked
objectives that focused on information and technological literacy; and 3) the course lacked the
use of social media and its application to marketing within international business. My answer to
correcting the above mentioned issues was the implementation of a global business simulator
with the following goals, which focus on the following educational goals developed by Hertell
and Millis: 1) transfer of knowledge; 2) skill development; and 3) application of both knowledge
and skills. These goals are currently being measured through use of the Association of American
Colleges & Universities (ACC&U) Critical Thinking, Information Literacy, and Teamwork
rubrics.
There are three reasons that the implementation of a multidisciplinary simulation can be
considered innovative. First, for both PB880 and PB437 this is the first time that a simulation
has been introduced in the classroom. These courses have been taught in the following styles:
lecture-based, recitation-style, mini-study abroad programs, 4-day 8 hour sessions as part of an
executive MBA program, and On-line. Prior syllabi can be furnished upon request. Therefore
this is a novel approach to teaching these courses at the university. Second, the
multidisciplinary aspect of the simulation is unique. And third, this is the first time the
ACC&U rubrics have been introduced into the course to collect data on student progress.
After the appropriate simulation was selected it was introduced into PB880 and PB437 in
the following ways. Graduate students enrolled in PB880 were provided with access to the
simulation and simulation manual two-weeks prior to class. They were allowed to choose teams
and start the simulation without any formal training except the manual and accompanying
presentations. Undergraduate students enrolled in PB437 were given access to the simulation, the
manual, and training presentations at the beginning of the semester. This was followed by a 3week trial run. Each week, the instructor guided the students on the decisions required during
the simulation.
Data is currently being collected in three ways: 1) grades; 2) student surveys; and 3) inclass discussions. The number of students, course number, and semesters offered is included in
Table 7 in the Appendix. Data collected through grading will be evaluated for statistical
differences by class, groups within classes, undergraduate versus graduate, and over all courses.
Results are also being evaluated to explore whether or not the simulation is working (Table 1).
Graded in-class assignments are linked to course objectives and learning outcomes and
are measured using specific rubrics (see Tables 2, 3, and 4 in the Appendix). This makes the
Goals and Objectives and the Student Learning Outcomes measureable. Further, because rubrics
are used throughout the semester student progress can be assessed multiple times over the 16week period.
11
Qualitative data about the student reaction to the simulation is being collected through
the universitys Student Feedback Survey and in-class discussions. The domains of Information
Literacy and Critical Thinking will be assessed through the survey responses. Examples of this
data can be seen in Table 5 in the Appendix. This information is being collated, coded, and
interpreted.
Preliminary data (grades/rubrics) show that students increase their Critical Thinking
related to the simulation over the course of the semester. So far, Information Literacy shows the
largest increase in scores. The survey responses and in-class discussions show that students are
reluctant to use the simulation and face a steep learning curve. Some spend 3+ hours per week
for the first 3-4 weeks learning how the simulation works. After the students become familiar
with the simulation they begin to incorporate the concepts they learn in class into their multidisciplined decision making process. Teams exhibiting teamwork-scores below the class average
tend to have one or more described non-performers or non-contributors. It has been
recommended (by students) that teams are allowed to trade or fire teammates.
Future analyses will focus on the student learning experience through continuous
improvement on the educational goals and learning outcomes for these courses and for a future
publication. Submission of a manuscript is scheduled for the summer semester or 2015. By this
time, data will have been collected from 3 semesters (not continuous) for 2 international business
courses and including data points for each measurement (grades, rubrics, and surveys). I will
continue to improve the use of the simulation using student feedback received through the
university student surveys. This project has been and will continue to be presented at teaching
conferences. Graduate students have co-presented at conferences. This allows students the
opportunity to engage in scholarly activity.
NOTE: This submission is accompanied by an Appendix, which includes only the tables
referenced above. One appendix was used for simplicity and was compiled using tables
currently being drafted for future research. Part of this submission was presented at the
Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs (ACBSP) Region 2 Conference in
November 2013. The presentation was titled, The Implementation of a Multidisciplinary
Simulation in International Business Courses. I presented the implementation process of the
simulation and the graduate student provided feedback from the students perspective. The
entire PPT can be provided for your review upon request.
Your time and effort to review this submission is appreciated. Thank you. Brian.
12
APPENDIX
Tables, Conferences, & References
Table2:PB880CourseRubrics
Class
Written
CLASS PB880
Part.
Assignment Proposal FinalProject
Total
RUBRIC
CT
CT&WC
CT&WC WCCTOCTW
9
DOMAINS
3,3
3,3
3,3,4,3
24
(withinrubric) 3
CT=CriticalThinking,WC=WrittenCommunication,TW=Teamwork,OC=OralCommunication
TABLE3:Outcome/Goals/ObjectiveslinkedtoRubrics&InitialResponses
Goals
Objectives
Student
Learning
Objectives
Rubrics
Findings
16
1,3,5
4,5,6
NA
7,8,10
710
Teamwork
CriticalThinking
InformationLiteracy
Underreview
Underreview
Underreview
Table4:GradingSheetwithStatisticsStudentNamesandIDNumbershavebeenremoved
13
Class:
Semester:
Year:
PB 880
FALL
2013
Student
1st
Name
Last
Name
ID#
Critical
Thinking
(45%)
Oral
Communication
(10%)
Team
Work
(5%)
Written
Communication
(40%)
Final
Grade
(100%)
49.5
10.0
5.0
31.0
95.4
47.6
9.2
4.3
28.9
90.0
48.1
9.3
4.5
29.9
91.7
48.6
9.3
5.0
30.5
93.4
49.2
9.3
4.5
30.2
93.1
47.6
9.5
5.0
27.9
90.0
47.6
9.3
4.3
29.9
91.0
48.4
9.3
5.0
29.6
92.3
10
46.8
9.8
5.0
31.2
92.7
11
48.2
9.0
5.0
29.1
91.2
12
48.8
9.4
4.5
29.5
92.2
13
51.6
9.7
4.5
31.7
97.5
14
48.1
9.0
4.5
30.8
92.4
15
49.2
9.0
4.5
30.6
93.3
16
46.7
7.8
3.5
29.0
87.0
17
48.0
9.0
4.5
29.1
90.5
18
49.2
9.5
4.5
30.0
93.2
19
47.7
8.9
4.5
29.3
90.4
51.6
9.5
5.0
30.6
96.6
29.71
92.26
Class Statistics
Average
Grade
Standard
Deviation
95%
Confidence
Int.
95% CI
Low
95% CI
High
48.43
9.41
4.71
1.31
0.46
0.38
0.95
2.46
0.03
0.01
0.01
0.02
0.06
48.39
9.40
4.70
29.69
92.19
48.46
9.42
4.72
29.74
92.32
Table5:SurveyResponses&StudentLearningObjectives
14
StudentLearningObjectives
StudentSurvey/LogDatabeingcollected
(Examples)
7.Differentiateandclassifymultiplehealthsystems
basedondifferencesinfinancing,delivery,and
organizationsmodels.
Simulationwasusedasasteppingstoneforlearning
aboutinternationalbusinessandhealthcaresystems
Onlinegamewasveryeffectiveandusefulin
understandingthemultidimensionalknowledgeof
internationalbusiness
8.DescribetheroletheUnitedStatesplaysintheglobal
healthinfrastructure.
9.Recognizeandcritiquedifferentglobalpricingand
reimbursementschemes.
Learnedaboutthemanycomponentsofbusinessand
theinteractionbetweenbusinessunitsacrosscountries
TheGameSimulationwasarichlearningexperience
whichhelpedstudentstounderstandtherolethatthe
USplaysinglobalhealth
Thesimulationrequiredstudentstothinkaboutand
discussinternationallogisticsincludingpricingissues
Studentshadtothinkaboutinternationalpricing
strategies
Studentswereforcedtothinkaboutinternational
reimbursementschemesandchannelsofdistribution
Thesimulationwasveryrealisticininternational
transactionsandtradebarriers
10.Predicttheimpactofinternationaltariffson
pharmaceutical&healthcarebusinessdecisions.
Thesimulationforcedstudentstothethinkaboutthe
multitudeofvariablesthatmustbeconsideredindoing
internationalbusiness
Table7:Participants
Hasbeenusedin6classes
Fall2012Grad
Spring2013UG
Spring2013Grad
Summer2013Grad
Spring2014
Classn:
S12:Grad=10
F12Grad=9
Sp13UG=16
Su13Grad=6
Sp14Grad=10
Sp14UG=16
Surveyn:
S12:=7
F12=4
Sp13=6
Su13=3
Conferences
12th Annual Faculty Conference on Teaching Excellence Friday, January 17, 2014
Accreditation Council for Business Schools and Programs Region 2 Conference, November 2, 2013
15
Co-presented with graduate student P.Tran
Teaching and Center Educational Innovations Poster Day, May 2013
References
Faria,A.,Hutchinson,D.,Wellington,W.,&Gold,S.(2009,August).DevelopmentsinBusinessGaming:A
ReviewofthePast40Years.SimulationandGaming,40(4),464487.
Hertel,J.,&Millis,B.(2002).UsingSimulationstoPromoteLearninginHigherEducation.Sterling,VA:
StylusPublishing.
Wolfe,J.(1993).AhistoryofbusinessteachinggamesinEnglishspeakingandpostsocialistcountries:
Theoriginationanddiffusionofamanagementeducationanddevelopmenttechnology.
Simulation&Gaming,24,446463.
16
ChrstineFlanagan
Innovation
Title of Innovation: THE CHALLENGE OF CREATIVITY: Assigning Creative Projects in
"Academic" Courses
Name of Innovator(s): Christine Flanagan, MFA
Telephone Number(s): 215.596.7543
Email Address(es): c.flanag@usciences.edu
Department(s): Humanities
Type of Students: Undergraduate
Type of course or activity where implemented: Core Curriculum/General Education
Course or activtity where implemented: IH 212 Nature and EN 312 Modern Drama
PleasecheckoneAwardonlytobeconsidered:LeahyAward
Narrative:
Creative expression and academic analysis are distinct areas of learning. My students don't draw
pictures of natural landscapes in an Intellectual Heritage-Nature course; I assign essay exams and
papers that test knowledge and critical thinking. Overall, my courses separate creative enterprise
(Playwriting: create original material) from academic enterprise (Modern Drama: analyze
existing literature). Likewise, a chemistry professor will separate the teaching material of the
lecture from the lab. Isn't that the best way to teach-and to give our students clear expectations?
Not really. We simply split our teaching material and methods into various courses because it is
an efficient (and presumably effective) way to teach.
What would happen, I wondered, if I removed the clean boundaries of academic vs. creative
learning? What if I required creative assignments in so-called "academic" courses (IH 212
Intellectual Heritage-Nature and EN 312 Modern Drama) to (a) enhance student comprehension
of course material and (b) challenge student expectations of course boundaries?
THECHALLENGEOFCREATIVITY:
17
AssigningCreativeProjectsinAcademicCourses
IH212IntellectualHeritageNatureandEN312ModernDrama
ChristineFlanagan,MFA,AssociateProfessorofEnglish,DepartmentofHumanities
RATIONALEORGOALSOFTHEEDUCATIONALACTIVITY
Creativeexpressionandacademicanalysisaredistinctareasoflearning.Mystudentsdontdraw
picturesofnaturallandscapesinanIntellectualHeritageNaturecourse;Iassignessayexamsandpapers
thattestknowledgeandcriticalthinking.Overall,mycoursesseparatecreativeenterprise(Playwriting:
createoriginalmaterial)fromacademicenterprise(ModernDrama:analyzeexistingliterature).
Likewise,achemistryprofessorwillseparatetheteachingmaterialofthelecturefromthelab.Isntthat
thebestwaytoteachandtogiveourstudentsclearexpectations?
Notreally.Wesimplysplitourteachingmaterialandmethodsintovariouscoursesbecauseitis
anefficient(andpresumablyeffective)waytoteach.
Whatwouldhappen,Iwondered,ifIremovedthecleanboundariesofacademicvs.creative
learning?WhatifIrequiredcreativeassignmentsinsocalledacademiccourses(IH212Intellectual
HeritageNatureandEN312ModernDrama)to(a)enhancestudentcomprehensionofcoursematerial
and(b)challengestudentexpectationsofcourseboundaries?1
THEINNOVATIONANDITSIMPLEMENTATION
Foroveradecade,IhaveofferedtraditionalassignmentsinIH212NatureandEN312ModernDrama,
primarilyessayexamsandacademicpapers.Overtwosemesters,Idecidedtoofferoptionalcreative
assignmentsasanexperimentintheseclasses.Thesetwocourseshavesimilarstandardcourse
assignments:Eachcoursehastwoexams;eachcourserequiresastudentwriteaonetotwopage
analysisofeverytextwereadthroughoutthesemester.Thecreativeassignmentsaredescribedindetail
intheAppendix.
SEMESTER1(Spring,2013)EN312ModernDrama.Thiscoursetypicallycompletesthesemesterwith
anacademicresearchpaperfocusedonasingleauthorandtext(EdwardAlbeesWhosAfraidof
VirginiaWoolf?).Thecreativeassignment2:Writeanoriginalplaywhereyourespondtoideasofan
authorORarguewithaplaywrightsideasinacreativeformat.Learningoutcomes(aswrittenon
syllabus):Showyouunderstandthecomponentsofdramaticwriting(usestagedirections&props,
constructbelievabledialogue,etc.).Illustratethroughyourwritinghowintellectualideasare
communicatedviacreativetexts.
Discussion:Overwhelmingly(17of18students),studentschosethecreativeoptionthoughnonehad
everbeforewrittenaplay.Studentswerenotgradedonqualityofplaywritingtheyweregradedon
thelearningoutcomesstatedabove.Didtheplayillustrateunderstandingofdramaticconflict?Useof
settingorpropstocommunicateideasaboutcharacters?Didtheauthorattempttocommunicatea
largerideathroughthecreativework?Anecdotallyfromgeneralstudentattitudesintheclassand
fromstudentevaluationsstudentshadasignificantlymorepositiveattitudetowardlearningthe
materialandenjoyedtheassignmentimmensely.Approximatelyfivestudentssubmittedcreative
projectstotheschoolliteraryjournal,TheElixiracompletelyunintendedoutcome.Twochanges
madetotheinnovation:1)IrealizedafterthesemesterwascompletedthatIwantedtoknowmore
Itisanongoingprojectofminetotakestudentswhoarecomfortableandsuccessfulintextbasedclassrooms
andimmersetheminradicallydifferentactivities(likeexperientiallearning/fieldtrips).Iamnotjusttryingto
deepentheirlearningofcoursematerial,buttomakethemmoreversatilelearnersinanyenvironment.
2
SeeAppendix(Semester1assignment)forfullassignment.
18
abouthowthestudentsexperiencedtheassignmentasthreatening?Easy?Idecidedtomakea
reflectionpaperapartofthenextsemestersproject.2)Inthecoursecomments,onestudent
recommendedthatthefinalprojectdeadlinesbesettoforcestudentstoworkonitthroughoutthe
semester.S/henoted,Iknowwehadtheoptiontoworkonitthroughoutthecoursebutletsfaceit,
procrastinationisarealityforeverycollegestudent.Forthesecondsemester,then,Idecidedtooffer
feedbackthroughoutthesemester(asopposedtoonefinalassignment).
STUDENTEVALUATIONSAMPLERESPONSESFROMEN312ModernDrama2013
SP 2013
SP 2009
(18
(25
2009 EN 312 Responses provided for comparison
students)
students)
STRONGLY
AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY
AGREE
AGREE
Responsibilities in the course were clearly explained

91%
0
90%
10%
Course had a reasonable workload
100%
0
70%
30%
Exams and assignments related to course content
91%
9%
80%
20%
Exams/assignments helped me learn course content
91%
9%
78%
22%
Overall, instructor was an effective teacher.
91%
9%
78%
22%
Learned a lot from this course
73%
27%
67%
33%
Overall, this was a good course
91%
9%
70%
30%
SEMESTER2(Fall,2013)IH212INTELLECTUALHERITAGENATURE
Duringthefirstweekofclass,Iintroducedasemesterlongprojectthatofferedstudentsacreative
option3.Thecreativeoptionwastocompleteaportfolioofwritingsbasedonclassreadingsthatallowed
writerstoargue,agree,orrespondtotextmaterial.(Makeafilmifyoulike,Isaidandonestudent
wroteandediteda20minutefilmforclass!)Learningoutcomes(aswrittenonsyllabus):Develop
criticalandinterpretativeskills,learntoappreciatethepowerandrelevanceofgreatideas,andlearn
howtochallengeandquestiontheseideas.
Discussion:Moststudents(15of16)completedacreativeoption,sincesomanyopportunitieswere
offered.Studentswerenotgradedonqualityofcreativewriting,thoughongoingfeedbackhelpedeach
studentcommunicateideasmoreeffectively.Attheendofthesemester,studentshadasignificantly
morepositiveattitudetowardlearningthematerialandenjoyedtheassignmentsimmensely.Thatsaid,
morethanhalfthestudentswereveryuncomfortablewiththeprocess.Iattributethistoacoupleof
things:1)thecreativeassignmentoptionisintendedtotakethemawayfromthecomfortsofbeinga
booksmartstudent2)unliketheEN312classwhoseprojectcameattheendofthesemester
studentsdidnothaveasenseoftheirgradeaverageearlyinthesemester.(Theytendtorelaxabout
experimentalassignmentsoncetheyreceiveagoodexamgrade,forexample.)Atleastfourstudents
submittedcreativeprojectstotheschoolliteraryjournal,TheElixirbutthistime,Ipromotedtheidea
ofpublication.
InthesecoursereflectionessaysIreceivedasimilarcommenttotheonefromthefirst
semester.Onestudentwrote,Inoticedwasthattheintroductiontothisprojectwasdoneinthe
beginningoftheyear.Withthecrazinessofadjustingbacktoschoolafteralongsummer,itwasdifficult
tounderstandthewholeprojectandasthesemesterwenton,itwaseasytoforgetabouttheproject
untilthedeadlinewasapproaching.Isuggestintroducingthisprojectafterafewweeksofcomingback
SeeAppendix(Semester2assignment)forfullassignment.
19
toschoolsostudentswillfullyunderstandwhatisrequiredofthem.Thissuggestionconfusesmesince
Iprovidedfeedbackthroughoutthesemesterbutitremindsmethatstudentsneedregularreviewand
feedbackduringsemesterlongassignments.
STUDENTEVALUATIONSSAMPLERESPONSESFROMIH212Nature2013
SP 2013
2007-2013
(380
2007-2013 IH 212 Responses provided for comparison (16
students)
students)
STRONGLY
AGREE
AGREE
STRONGLY
AGREE
AGREE
Responsibilities in the course were clearly explained

100%
0
73%
23%
Course had a reasonable workload
88%
13%
65%
29%
Exams and assignments related to course content
100%
0
72%
26%
Exams/assignments helped me learn course content
88%
13%
65%
30%
Overall, instructor was an effective teacher.
100%
0
79%
20%
Learned a lot from this course
88%
13%
69%
24%
Overall, this was a good course
100%
0
77%
19%
IMPACTOFINNOVATION:Whatisworking;Studentreactiontoinnovation4
Inresponsetotheassignment,onestudentwrote,Thecreativeportionfortheportfolio
allowedmetousesomeofmycreativeideastogetmultipleblogsgoingregardingwhatifquestions
aboutthereadingsandauthorsfromclass.Atfirst,Ifeltalittlebitunsureandscaredofwritingthis
typeofessay,saidanother,butasIgotwriting,mybrainwasproducingthoughtsfasterthanmy
handscouldtype!Andfinally:Theamountofopennesswasagoodchangeinascienceschoolwhere
thereisusuallyonlyoneanswer.
AnhistorianwhoteachesIHNaturemightexpandhislecturestolookmoredeeplyintothe
industrialrevolution.AsacreativewriteratUSciences,Ihaveoftenbeenuncomfortableusingmy
greateststrengths,optingformoretraditionalacademiclecturingandassignments.Thisinnovation
convincesmethatthatathoughtfulapplicationofcreativitycanchallengeandstimulatetheintellectof
ourstudents.Understandingcreativitymakesusmoreversatilelearnersinanyenvironmentandthat
iswhythisteachinginnovationissomethingIwillcontinuetorefineandrevise.
SEMESTER1:CREATIVEASSIGNMENTOPTIONFOREN312(SP2013)
FinalPaperAssignment
Option1:
CriticalEssayonPlay/Playwright
Constructanoriginalargument(thesis)thatyousupportina610pagepaper(typed,double
spaced).
Utilize57scholarlysources(literarycriticism,notbookortheatrereviews)fromEBSCO,JStore,
orProQuest.MLACitationformatrequired.
Option2:
CreativeWork
Writeanoriginalplay,20120pages(dramaticformat)
SeeAppendixforSemester2Studentcommentsoncreativeassignments
20
Ideas:Respondtoideasofanauthor;arguewithaplaywrightsideasinacreativeformat;write
whatoccursthedayafteroneofourplaysends;writeyourversionofoneoftheplayswe
read.
Showyouunderstandthecomponentsofdramaticwriting(usestagedirections&props,
constructbelievabledialogue,etc.).Ifyoudlike,conductastagedreadingoftheplaybefore
yousubmitit.
SEMESTER2:
CREATIVEASSIGNMENTOPTIONFORIH212(FA2013)
Part1:AssignmentProvidedFirstWeekofClassandReviewedthroughoutSemester
IH212PROJECT:Chooseyourownadventure:ExperientialPortfolio,CreativePortfolio,ora
combinationofboth.Alloptionsrequire10entriestobecompletedbyNovember14.Thereareseveral
dates(seesyllabus)whenyoucanreceivefeedbackonyourworkbeforeitissubmittedforafinalgrade.
AfterNovember14,everyonewillwriteafinalpaper(academicorcreative).
OPTIONI:EXPERIENTIALPORTFOLIO(akaFieldTrips):AnExperientialTextoftencalledfieldtrip
engagesadifferentmuscleoftheintellect.Experiencenaturefirsthand:thevenomous,theparasitic,the
extraordinary,thebeautiful.Bringyourknowledge,curiosity,strengths,fears,andlimitationsintothe
worldaroundyouasawayofunderstandingtheconceptofIntellectualHeritageNature.Your
ExperientialProjectwilldocumenttheseactivitiesandhelpyouarticulatewhatyoudiscover.
WherecanIgo?Philadelphiaareaspots:ClarkPark,Wissahickonarea,BartramsGardens;NJArea
Spots:IslandBeachStatePark(TomsRiver,NJ)oranybeacharea(CapeMay,NJ),Pinelandsregion
hikes/kayaks/camping.
Whatformatcantheportfoliobein?Blog,fieldnotebook,electronicjournal.
WhatshouldIinclude?510imagesofnatureperfieldtrip.Eachentryhascorrectterminology,
concretephysicaldescription,50wordminimumperentry.*Sketchesorphotosoptional
OPTIONII:CREATIVEPORTFOLIO:Creativeintelligenceliesattheheartofscientific,artistic,and
humanisticinnovation.Behavioralandsocialpsychology,occupationalandphysicaltherapy,cognitive
science,philosophy,history,economics,businessallhavestudiedandutilizedvariousaspectsof
creativityasitrelatestoworkintheirfield.Creativewritingismostcommonlyassociatedwithartand
literature,communicationandaesthetics;however,itisanactivitythatenhancesbroadintellectual
growth.
Goal:Useanycreativewritingapproach(essays,poetry,plays,fictionalinterpretation,blogs)to
demonstrateyourunderstanding,interpretation,and/orextrapolationoftheideasofaworkcontained
inIHNature.Itwillhelpifyouhaveaparticularwritingtomodelyourwork(s)after.
SampleIdeas:FICTIONALBLOG(ModelWriting:PaulSimms,GodsBlogTheNewYorker,August8,
2011).WriteablogwhereyouadoptthevoiceorpersonaofaparticularIHNatureauthor.Showthat
21
youunderstandtheirideasindepthandprovideawindowofinterpretationwewerentabletoexplore
inclass.SHORTSTORY(FICTION)(ModelWriting:JohnHersey,MyPetitionforMoreSpaceIH
Reader).Writeashortstorythatreflectstheconcernsaboutnatureinthefutureasarticulatedbyone
IHauthor.POEM(ModelWriting:WaltWhitman,SongoftheOpenRoadIHReader).Writeapoem
thatreflectsyourunderstandingofakeycourseconceptorauthorsideas.PLAYorDRAMATIC
MONOLOGUERachelCarsonmeetsJohnMuirinabar(orinchurch).Whatideaswouldtheyshare?
FILMYoureallyhavetimetodothisone?Goforit.Wewillneedtohaveanofficialfilmscreeningand
redcarpetevent.
OPTIONIII:COMBO:DoacombinationofOption1andOption2.Completeaminimumofthreefrom
oneoption,please.
Part2:FinalPaperAssignedattheEndoftheSemesteraskedstudentstousematerialfromtheportfolio
project.
THEASSIGNMENT:ContributeanoriginalessaytotheIHReaderonNature.Thismeanswritingapaper
thatproposesanoriginalideaaboutnatureaconcretethesisthatwehaventyetencounteredthis
semesterthatissupportedthrougharangeofmaterial.*Thepapermaybecreativeoracademic.
LENGTH:
58pages+academiccitations(MLA)ifappropriate
Typed,doublespaced,12pointfont
22
SEMESTER2:STUDENTREFLECTIONESSAYEXCERPTS
ComingintothisclassIwasnotsuretoexpect.HerewasacoursethatIhadnever
heardaboutbefore.Iwonderedhowthecourseloadwouldbeandwhatexactlyabout
Naturewewouldlearnabout.Overall,thisclasswasaninformativeandinquisitive
experience.Thediscussionswereopenandrelatable.Thelessonswereenthusiasticand
theinterpretationswereinteresting.Theamountofopennesswasagoodchangeina
scienceschoolwherethereisusuallyonlyoneanswer.
Asfarasthecreativeportionoftheportfoliogoes,IfoundthatItrulyenjoyedwritingall
ofit.Inthiscollegetherehaventbeenanychancesforcreativewriting,andafterthis
assignmentIrealizedhowmuchImisswritingforfun.WhenIwrotethepoemabout
thestarsIrememberedhowIusedtofreewriteonmycomputerandtypewhatever
cametomymind,andthenfromthewordsIwouldwritepoetry.Itsamazinghowwe
canforgethowmuchweenjoysomething,onlytofindlateronthatwehavebeen
missingit.Iknowpersonallythatcreativewritingisntmystrongsuit,butIfelt
comfortablewiththeassignmentinthisclassandwasntworriedaboutmygrade
sufferingforit.
Duringthiscourseweweregivenmanyoptionsforthemajorproject.Onewas
experientialwhereweweretoldtovisittenplacesandthenwritedetailedobservations
abouteachone.Collectivelyitcreatedajournaloffieldtrips.Theotheroptionwasa
creativeoption.Thisincludedanythingthatcametotheimagination.Itcouldinclude
blogs,diaryentries,poemsthatinanywaydescribednatureorthetopicsdiscussedin
class.Icompletelybelievethattheoptiontodoacombinationofthetwowasbotha
fairandgreatidea.Thisallowedmetoexperienceboththelogicalandartisticaspectsof
writing.ItmademepayattentiontocloserdetailsoIcouldcontributetoboth.
Thecontinuationformyfinalpaperinordertocompletetheportfoliowasalsoan
interestingprocess.IwasnervouswhenProfessorFlanagangavememypaperwiththe
wholemiddlepartcrossedout,butasIcutmoreandmoreoutofthestory,Isawthatit
actuallymadethepiecebetter.Ididnthavetoexplaineverything.Makingthereader
seewhatIwantedratherthantellingthemwasmuchmoreeffective.
[Coursewriting]didntjustincludesummariesandinterpretationsofliterature,but
highlightedtheimportanceofgoingoutthereandexperiencingnatureyourself.This
thenrequiredyoutoapplyitinawaythatshowedthatyoulearnedtheskillsofinquiry,
observation,andcriticalthinking.Ithinkthisassignmentwaswaybetterthana
traditionalpaperforthisreason.
23
A Novel USciences Interprofessional Education (IPE) Workshop Integrating Pharmacy, Physical

Therapy, Occupational Therapy, and Physician Assistant Students and Faculty
Diane E. Hadley, PharmD, BCACP

Sanchita Sen, PharmD, BCPS
Radha Vanmali, PharmD, BCACP
Kimberly D. Ward, PT, DPT, MPH
Jennifer Pitonyak, PhD, OTR/L, SCFES, CIMI
Joan F. Ward, MS, PA-C
Phone Numbers:
Diane E. Hadley, PharmD, BCACP
215-596-7124
Sanchita Sen, PharmD, BCPS
215-596-7216
Radha Vanmali, PharmD, BCACP
404-414-1165
Kimberly D. Ward, PT, DPT, MPH 215-596-8723

Jennifer Pitonyak, PhD, OTR/L, SCFES, CIMI 215-596-8694
Joan F. Ward, MS, PA-C
Email addresses:
d.hadley@usciences.edu
s.sen@usciences.edu
rvanmali85@gmail.com
k.ward@usciences.edu
j.pitonyak@usciences.edu
j.ward@usciences.edu
Department (s) Included:
215-596-7142
24
Department of Pharmacy Practice/ Pharmacy Administration, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy

Department of Physical Therapy, Samson College of Health Sciences
Department of Occupational Therapy, Samson College of Health Sciences
Department of Physician Assistant Studies, Samson College of Health Sciences
Type of Students:
Pharmacy Students- third professional year (P3)
Physical Therapy Students first professional year (P1)
Occupational Therapy Students- third (P3) and fourth (P4) professional years
Physician Assistant Students- first professional year (P1)
Type of Activity:
Interprofessional Education (IPE) Workshop focused on Transition of Care (TOC)
Course Involved:
Pharmacy Students- PP 516 Pharmacist in Transition of Care (professional pharmacy therapeutic elective)
Physical Therapy Students- extra credit in PT 463 Documentation and Communication
Occupational Therapy Students- OT 630 Community Based Practice & OT 687 Program Development
Physician Assistant Students- extra credit in PHA 510 History and Physical I and PHA 530 Pharmacology
course
Background and Rationale
25
Currently, in professional education there is a trend to have students learn interprofessionally to replicate
the growing trend to practice collaboratively in clinical settings. Recently, an organization called the
Interprofessional Education Collaborative (IPEC) was created with representatives from the following
organizations: American Association of Colleges of Nursing, American Association of College of
Osteopathic Medicine, Association of Schools of Public Health, American Association of College of
Pharmacy, American Dental Education Association and the Association of American Medical
Colleges. IPEC has created core competencies for interprofessional education (IPE) and divided these
into four domains: roles/responsibilities, value/ethics, teamwork, and interprofessional
communication.[i] Additional professional organizations are becoming involved in this organization and
overall in IPE. Several new accrediting bodies are also beginning to include IPE as a standard, therefore
making this an expectation within healthcare education.
In summer and early fall 2013, a novel IPE workshop was developed and organized at University of the
Sciences (USciences). In October 2013, it was implemented. This workshop included all of the
professional programs on USciences campus including pharmacy, physician assistant, physical therapy
and occupational therapy. This was the first venture to facilitate IPE to occur among all the professions in
any of the curricular programs. Previously, IPE was occurring within two or three of the USciences
professional programs. However, this workshop was the foundation to have all four of the professions
work together.
Goals of the Innovation
To ensure that the IPE workshop had an effective outcome, the IPEC domains of roles/responsibility,
values/ethics, interprofessional communication and teamwork were interwoven through the workshops
various introductory and concept based activities that focused on transitions of care. In addition, to the
IPEC domains, the workshop aimed to facilitate an interactive interprofessional learning environment to
build a professional unity on campus.
Innovation Description and Implementation
The workshop occurred over three hours, included a total of approximately 62 student learners, and
consisted of three main components: (1) interprofessional team building; (2) case-based work and (3)
debriefing. Initially the students discussed their perspectives of the other professions in a small group
interprofessional team building exercise. The discussion was led by the students, based on their preworkshop research of each professions academic training. Faculty from the different professions
facilitated these discussions. This fruitful discussion highlighted perceptions/stereotypes about
26
professions and helped students identify their perspectives on the role of each of the professions within an
interdisciplinary team.
After these initial discussions, students from the individual professions met as a group to discuss an
assigned patient case. The patient case was built by the interprofessional core faculty planning group to
ensure that each profession was well represented. Additionally, the patient case was created to mimic a
patient following acute admission for a stroke and the patients subsequent discharge plan. These
profession-specific discussions allowed varying levels of student learners to discuss their professional role
in the case, Earlier-year students required more background information and guidance in their roles, while
later-year students were able to reflect on their own clinical experiences that related to the case. The
interprofessional core faculty planning group felt it was critical for the students to be confident in their
own roles within the case prior to creating an interdisciplinary team plan.
After the individual profession discussions, the interdisciplinary teams reassembled to discuss the
interdisciplinary plan for the patient. Once the teams formed plans, each groups facilitator served as a
standardized patient with whom the group provided discharge counseling through role-playing
scenarios. The teams determined the format of the counseling and determined how each profession would
be incorporated and represented.
Lastly, de-briefing sessions were built into the workshop to allow the students an opportunity to voice
their triumphs and struggles within the workshop. Please see the de-briefing questions used within the
appendix listed below. Additionally, the students were only surveyed for workshop improvement
suggestions since this activity did not go through IRB approval for research purposes. Please see attached
facilitator guide in appendix A to view the type of debriefing questions asked and an outline of the
workshop structure.
Students Assessment of the Workshop
Within a post-workshop survey, the students were asked the following open-ended items and questions.
Overall, the students comments highlighted aspects of what each profession wants to achieve and
interestingly related back to the IPEC domains. These included communication, professionalism, patient
centered care, teamwork, collaboration and advanced clinical reasoning with other professions. The
responses to these questions below are some of the themes, which are representative of responses from all
students, but not comprehensive:
1. Provide aspects that went well during this IPE learning experience.
27
a. Loved learning more about other professions and was impressed with their ability to
come up with a plan.
b. The spirit of this exercise felt very cooperative.
c. Great to meet other professionals and understand what they do.
d. Great to work with these professions and see how it is in real life to deal with a patient,
which is a great learning experience and also great in building confidence in real future
settings.
2. Provide areas to be improved during this IPE experience.
a. More prep time because some professions are within their first semesters.
b. More information for rehabilitation specialist. (Maybe include their evaluation or a
note to gain more insight into the function of the patient)
c. More time with the professional team to discuss plan of care.
d. Timing of groups split time to discuss with our profession then to collaborate with the
team more evenly.
e. Have these experiences with students on the same educational and experiential level.
3. Did you feel that everyone worked as a team? If not, how could you create better team dynamics
in the future?
a. Yes. Everyone really supported each other and we were on the same page. Overall, the
students felt that they had well-formed team dynamics.
b. Yes, team work was in effect; we all knew our limitations and were able to understand
what we can do with what is presented to us and when to acknowledge another
profession.
c. Yes, everyone was easy to work with and were willing to listen to each other. Everyone
respected each other's professions as well
d. Yes. There was a strong sense of cohesion between all. Learning and patient outcomes
were placed in the forefront of the experience.
4. Write three things this workshop taught you and you will use in your professional career.
a. To keep terminology simple for patients. How I can use other professions expertise to
help get the patient better. The ability to ask questions to other professionals and bounce
ideas off each other.
b. Communication with different professionals. Know your limitations as a professional,
don't be afraid to consult others.
c. It taught me how to better communicate with other healthcare professionals and also the
importance of effective interdisciplinary communication. It taught me how to be
confident in the information that I know about my profession. It taught me how to better
deal with a difficult patient.
d. Team work is key - communication! Every health profession has different strengths to
add to the plan. Discuss with the team before meeting with the patient.
e. Communication. Collaboration. Thought process.
Insightful Reflection of Workshop
Workshop Successes and Strengths
28
This workshop was an innovative venture to combine all of the healthcare disciplines on USciences
campus in a case-based activity. It served as a foundational event to build interprofessional relationships
among the students as well as among the core faculty and additional faculty facilitators. This workshop
was designed to match the needs of our students, addressing both multiple learning levels and diverse
learning styles. Additionally, it allowed for team growth, an introduction to interprofessional team
dynamics and an activity focused on interprofessional communication. This introductory IPE workshop
was crucial for introducing students to the interprofessional expectations of clinical practice. Due to the
majority of this innovation being successful, the core faculty group is already preparing avenues to
improve the workshop in Fall 2014.
Future Changes and Considerations for IPE Workshops/Experiences
Time allocations will be adjusted in future workshops. For example more time will be allocated for the
initial group conversations to allow teams to form relationships. IPE Workshop Fall 2013 had 20 minutes
allotted for this component; however the core faculty found that at 20 minutes the groups were still very
involved in discussions which needed to be interrupted in order to maintain the schedule. Additionally,
more time will be allocated for the de-briefing and counseling sessions, as both of these components were
cut short during meaningful interactions and discussions. Furthermore, within the 2013 workshop, the
pre-workshop assignment consisted of the students researching all of the other professions other than their
own. This was helpful, however it did not allow for the depth of knowledge the core faculty was
expecting. Therefore, it is being considered, for each profession to research one other assigned profession
and then teach the group what was learned. Lastly, the case will need slight adjustments. Although the
core faculty concentrated on representing elements for each profession within the patient case, some of
the students struggled with the objective to create a discharge plan. This could be secondary to the
varying levels of learners but will be defined in future workshops. The core faculty members are, also,
considering providing additional resources such as creating or using existing videos that can provide
students with some insight on how to approach the different professionals and patients. Lastly, the PT
students were not able to participate in the beginning of the team building conversations secondary to a
course schedule conflict. The PT students spent additional time prior to the workshop discussing the
different professions to help accommodate for this conflict. In future workshops this will be changed to
allow all professions to be involved in the initial team building exercises. The core faculty that created
this workshop has spent time both de-briefing on this activity and have begun planning future IPE
workshops.
Future Implementation of IPE Workshops on USciences Campus
29
The ability for student participation for future IPE workshops is feasible, through multiple methods as
demonstrated within our workshop; these include newly developed courses, voluntarily participation or
pre-planning to incorporate it within existing courses. The participation in this workshop was counted
differently for credit by the different professions. OT students were required to participate in the IPE
event in lieu of their
OT 630 Community Based Practice & OT 687 Program Development course that day. The PA and PT
programs provided their students with extra credit. For pharmacy students, this workshop was counted
both towards participation and communication grades within a newly created elective course, PP516,
Pharmacist Roles in Transitions of Care. PP516 was held once weekly for a two hour period. Since this
workshop was three hours and required pre-work it was counted as four hours or two class periods. The
course creators and coordinators felt that dedicating time to interprofessional education was crucial for the
enrolled pharmacy students and therefore the workshop was built in during the planning stage.
Conclusion
This IPE workshop was the first of its kind implemented in any course. We plan to implement similar
workshops to include all of USciences professional programs in the PP516 course and as part of other
disciplines. It showed that various methods can be used to give credit for student participation and
therefore will make it feasible to sustain in future workshops. This is crucial because IPE is not only an
area of great focus for the University but is becoming an expectation from accrediting bodies, is soughtout by applicants and will prepare our students to be strong leaders in interprofessional clinical practice.
[i] Interprofessional Education Collaborative (2011). Core Competencies for Interprofessional

Collaborative Practice. https://ipecollaborative.org/uploads/IPEC-Core-Competencies.pdf
Appendix Faculty Guide with Team Building and Debriefing Questions
A. Introduction at the beginning of the workshop Timing of this portion:10 minutes

i.
This will be conducted by the core faculty group
B. Team Assignments (please see excel spreadsheet for your Team Assignment)
C. Part 1: Break into groups for discussion Timing of this portion: 20 minutes
30
iii.
Please have reach student introduce themselves with the following information
below
i.
iv.
Name, program, and year of training
Facilitator Note: Your role is to facilitate the discussion among the professions
by facilitating dialogue of the pre-work questions below. The students have been
given time to prior to this workshop to think of responses to these questions. PT
will be finishing a class and will not be present for this discussion.
i.
Research the training and broad view of curriculum of each profession

other than your own. Professions included in this workshop are PT, PA,
OT, and RX. Of note, students were provided link to the different
professional USciences curriculums.
ii.
Research the roles of each profession within a healthcare team and

different career paths
i.
Have the students brainstorm where they see themselves in 5

years and what profession they may be working with.
iii.
Identifying which misconceptions were proven false by their research of

the different professions
iv.
What do you hope to get out of this interprofessional education (IPE)

workshop?
D. De-briefing in large group about initial discussions- Timing of this Portion: 20

minutes
i.
Facilitator Note: This will be conducted by the core faculty group

v.
What did you learn in the discussion?
vi.
Discuss overall perceptions and misconceptions within the
professions.
-------------------------------------------------------10 minute Break-------------------------------
E. Part 2: Review of Case 20 minutes (stroke case)

vii.
Each profession will review the case together in their individual professions and
then come back into assigned teams.
i.
Breakdown of the 20 minutes: 15 minutes to work with the same

profession; 5 minutes to read the case
ii.
Facilitator Note: Your role is to help your individual professions make

an action plan for their role within their team. Please only help the
students if they get stuck and are not letting thinking of ways to be
31
involved in the discharge planning. Otherwise, please let the students

have an open discussion.
F. Part 3: Creation of Action Plan within assigned IPE teams- Timing of this portion: 30
minutes
viii.
ix.
Each student works together to create a plan as a team for the patient to discuss in
discharge meeting with patient.
Facilitator Note: Your role is to ensure that the team is moving forward in
creating an action plan. Please do not be too prescriptive in your facilitating of
the group as this may hurt the building of team dynamics. Instead please only
interrupt their planning if unprofessional behavior is noted such as one person
dominating the conversation or putting down another students ideas.
h. Part 4: Discussion of Action Plan with the Patient (facilitator will play the patient)
Timing of the portion: 15 minutes
Facilitator Note: You will be counseled by the team in the form of discharge counseling.
You had a stroke two days ago and are very confused. You are frustrated because you
want to go home and dont understand why so many people need to talk to you. Please be
somewhat difficult initially for the team but then become agreeable to their counseling
and action plan. Of note, you want to remain independent and your son is unavailable
therefore you insist having this conversation without him present.
i.
Part 5: De-briefing as a small group with facilitator- Timing of this portion: 15

minutes
Facilitator Note: Please discuss the questions below within your team
i.
What skills did your team use to clinical reason through the case
ii.
If to repeat the exercise what you improve on?
iii.
Picked one concept that you learned in todays workshop
iv.
What will you take away from this workshop to improve your communication
skills
j.
Part 6: De-briefing as a large group- Timing of this portion: 20 minutes

i.
Facilitator Note: This will be run by the core faculty group
ii.
Have the teams explain what their approach was?
iii.
What is your ah-ha moment during the workshop?
32
Thank you from the core faculty group as participating as a facilitator for this TOC Usciences
Interprofessional Education (IPE) Workshop. You were an asset to this workshop and we appreciate your
help!
33
34
35
36
37
38
39
40
Innovation
Title of Innovation: Making Waves
Name of Innovator(s): Paul Halpern
Telephone Number(s): (215) 596-8913
Email Address(es): p.halper@usciences.edu
Department(s): Math, Physics, Statistics
Type of Students: PT, Biology; other majors
Type of course or activity where implemented: Required
Course or activtity where implemented: Introductory Physics

PleasecheckoneAwardonlytobeconsidered:BrightIdeaAward
Narrative:
My innovation involves interactive demonstrations of different kinds of wave motions-transverse, longitudinal and electromagnetic--through students lining up and acting as if they are
particles in the wave. For transverse waves, students stand in a line and raise their arms up and
down in succession (similar to &amp;quot;the wave&amp;quot; at sports
events. The demonstration shows how the particle motion is perpendicular to the wave velocity.
Then, to demonstrate longitudinal waves, I ask each student in the line to take one step forward
and one step back, as soon as they see the student in front of them doing so. That shows how for
longitudinal waves, the particle motion is parallel to the wave velocity. Finally, for
electromagnetic waves, such as radio waves, there are three directions, that of the electric field,
magnetic field and wave velocity. I ask students to demonstrate that by having one be the DJ and
transmitter, thinking of a song and transmitting a
&amp;quot;signal&amp;quot; by raising and lowering his/her arms. Students
in a line then act successively as electric fields, raising arms up and down, and magnetic fields,
moving arms back and forth. Yet another student, acting as the &amp;quot;receiving
antenna&amp;quot; picks up the signal and tries to guess the name of the song
&amp;quot;transmitted by radio.&amp;quot; (Guessing the song adds an
element of fun and chance to the demonstration). Pre- and post-surveys were given to the
41
students before and after the electromagnetic wave demonstration that show an improved
perception of electromagnetic wave motion. Students seemed to enjoy as well as learn from the
demonstrations.
Thisemailwasgeneratedbytheformat
http://www.usciences.edu/teaching/innovations/InnovationForm/Default.aspx
MakingWaves:ASubmissionfortheBrightIdeaAward
PaulHalpern,Math,PhysicsandStatistics
p.halper@usciences.edu
ImplementedinIntroductoryPhysicsIandII
Myinnovationinvolvesinteractivedemonstrationsofdifferentkindsofwavemotionstransverse,
longitudinalandelectromagneticthroughstudentsliningupandactingasiftheyareparticlesinthe
wave.Fortransversewaves,studentsstandinalineandraisetheirarmsupanddowninsuccession
(similarto"thewave"atsportsevents.Thedemonstrationshowshowtheparticlemotionis
perpendiculartothewavevelocity.Then,todemonstratelongitudinalwaves,Iaskeachstudentinthe
linetotakeonestepforwardandonestepback,assoonastheyseethestudentinfrontofthemdoing
so.Thatshowshowforlongitudinalwaves,theparticlemotionisparalleltothewavevelocity.Finally,
forelectromagneticwaves,suchasradiowaves,therearethreedirections,thatoftheelectricfield,
magneticfieldandwavevelocity.IaskstudentstodemonstratethatbyhavingonebetheDJand
transmitter,thinkingofasongandtransmittinga"signal"byraisingandloweringhis/herarms.
Studentsinalinethenactsuccessivelyaselectricfields,raisingarmsupanddown,andmagneticfields,
movingarmsbackandforth.Yetanotherstudent,actingasthe"receivingantenna"picksupthesignal
andtriestoguessthenameofthesong"transmittedbyradio."(Guessingthesongaddsanelementof
funandchancetothedemonstration).Preandpostsurveysweregiventothestudentsbeforeand
aftertheelectromagneticwavedemonstrationthatshowanimprovedperceptionofelectromagnetic
wavemotion.Studentsseemedtoenjoyaswellaslearnfromthedemonstrations.
42
Title of Innovation: Using ApprenNet and Group Presentations to Promote Learning,

Opportunities For Peer Feedback, and Reflection In A Large Face-to-Face Class
Name of Innovator(s): Lisa T. Hoglund, PT, PhD, OCS, Cert MDT
Telephone Number(s): (215) 596-8541
Email Address(es): l.hoglund@usciences.edu
Department(s): Physical Therapy
Type of Students: DPT student - professional phase
Type of course or activity where implemented: Required, Professional or Advanced
Course or activtity where implemented: PT 509 Differential Diagnosis

Narrative:
The Physical Therapy Major at the University of the Sciences has more than doubled in
enrollment since the entry-level Doctor of Physical Therapy (DPT) degree has been awarded.
The first DPT graduating class was in 2009 with 28 graduates. The Class of 2014 contains 54
students and the Class of 2015 currently has an enrollment of 68 students. The larger class size is
a testament to the increased exposure of the DPT Major to the general public and it is wonderful
for the University of the Sciences (USciences). But the larger class size can be a challenge for
faculty, especially to those who use active learning techniques in face-to-face classes. These
challenges include insufficient classroom space for student dyad or small group activities,
insufficient time to allow all groups to present and/or discuss topics, insufficient time to grade
written assignments and give feedback to students, and insufficient time to grade student
reflections on their learning of course content.
I have encountered all of these challenges to teaching and learning in teaching PT 509
Differential Diagnosis, a 3-credit course in the 2nd professional year of the DPT curriculum. In
addition, our large student cohorts, high number of face-to-face course hours per week for each
cohort in the professional phase of the program, and limited classroom space at USciences has
made it unrealistic for the class to be divided into multiple sections. As a result, one active
learning activity and assessment, in-class group presentations, was removed from the course in
2011. I stopped this assessment since the time necessary for all of the student groups to present
would have required removal of other critical course content. Unfortunately, removal of this
assessment removed the learning activity that required students to transfer their knowledge of
43
content learned from lectures, in-class activities, and textbook readings to analyze and learn from
a case reported in the scientific literature. In 2014, I decided to use ApprenNet to resume group
presentations, but outside of class time.
My goals for using ApprenNet for student group presentations in PT 509 Differential Diagnosis
built on the objectives of the course. The course description states: "This course explores the
differential diagnostic process within physical therapy, screening for the presence of medical
disease or other pathologies and conditions whose treatment is beyond the scope of physical
therapist practice." A critical component of the course is for the students to learn "the process of
determining when it is most appropriate to: 1) implement physical therapy care, 2) consult with
other healthcare providers regarding patient care, or 3) refer the patient to another healthcare
provider, in order to maximize individual patient outcomes." Specific course objectives which
the ApprenNet group presentation addressed include the following:
1) Integrate the concepts of patient/client management, as described in the Guide to Physical
Therapist Practice, with knowledge of risk factors for specific diseases (including race/ethnicity,
gender, age, family & medical history, etc.) to determine the appropriateness of/need for physical
therapy intervention, consultation with and/or referral to other healthcare providers.
2) Apply the concepts of a medical screening exam for each body system.
3) Integrate knowledge of pathophysiology in addition to cardiopulmonary, integumentary,
musculoskeletal, and neurological screening concepts into the process of patient examination
across the lifespan.
In addressing these course objectives, my goal was for the learners to transfer knowledge from
course lectures, textbook readings, and active learning activities to critically analyze a case
report describing a patient referred to physical therapy who actually had a medical illness or
condition that required referral to a medical physician. A second goal was for the learners to
develop skill in application of the differential diagnosis screening process to an actual patient
case. Finally, this learning activity would require the students to work as a team on a project, to
practice giving constructive feedback, and to offer an opportunity for reflection on the learning
experience.
Using ApprenNet for submission and viewing of group presentations required that I work with
the support staff of ApprenNet to customize this activity. I selected four case reports that each
described a different patient case and the treating physical therapist's clinical decision making
regarding the decision to treat the patient, refer the patient to another healthcare provider, or treat
and refer simultaneously. Students selected group members (4 students per group); each group
was then assigned one case for their group presentation (4 groups for 3 cases, 5 groups for 1
case). Four "meets" were created in ApprenNet, one per case. During the Challenge phase of the
ApprenNet meet, one member of each group uploaded the group presentation to ApprenNet.
Following the deadline for submission of presentations, the Peer Review phase began. Students
were required to view at least one presentation from each of the three meets different from their
own case. ApprenNet randomly selects group presentations for students, ensuring that all student
groups received feedback. Following viewing each presentation, students used a custom rubric
that I created to score each presentation. Students were required to give qualitative feedback as
well. Following the conclusion of the Peer Review phase, the Analysis phase began. In this phase
the course instructor can view and download Reports for the meet. These reports include: Rubric
Review Results, a list of those who Failed to Review, Top Reviewed Submissions, and more.
44
This information allowed me to post links to the submissions receiving the highest score on the
rubric so that students could learn from strong submissions. The results available to the course
instructor also enabled me to efficiently judge student participation in the peer review phase, to
view the feedback given by students to their classmates, determine a grade from the rubric, and
view representative presentations. In addition to this ApprenNet group presentation, I required
the students to each submit a reflection on their work as a team member, assessments of their
fellow group members as team members, and a group written paper to be graded by the course
instructor. This use of ApprenNet can be easily adapted to a variety of courses and topics.
I believe that this innovation offers students in a large face-to-face class the opportunity for
deeper, active learning of course content in analyzing a case report and the treating physical
therapist's clinical decision making. This gives them an opportunity to apply the concepts of
screening for medical referral taught in this course, to learn from the "expert" clinicians
described in the case report, and to develop their skill in practicing the standardized decisionmaking model taught in PT 509 Differential Diagnosis. Through critical analysis of a published
case report, the students learn about the medical pathologic condition and, more importantly,
they learn how experienced clinicians screen for the presence of conditions requiring referral. In
creation of presentations for ApprenNet, student groups were required to critically analyze their
assigned case report and summarize the critical findings and a clinical "bottom line" for viewers.
Through the requirement to view additional, different cases, scaffolding was used to promote
learning the critical course concept of the screening for medical referral model and its application
to different pathologic conditions. Additionally, weaker students may learn from students with
stronger analytic skills - both while working as group members and in viewing presentations.
The use of custom rubrics as well as qualitative feedback required students to consider each
presentation viewed rather than simply scoring each presentation with the rubric. Learner
participation in viewing presentations was promoted by ApprenNet since the software keeps a
record of each student's participation in the number of presentations viewed. The inclusion of
group member peer assessment promoted student work as team members. Self-assessments
provided students the opportunity to reflect on their role as a team member.
I believe that ApprenNet is helping me to more efficiently grade this group presentation and
student participation. I am able to use the average scores from the rubric, available to the
instructor, and use this as the presentation grade. I can also read the student feedback for each
presentation. The presentations that are scored the highest are visible to me, so I can be sure to
watch those presentations in their entirety. Since I am also reading and grading the
accompanying written paper, I am giving the students my feedback on their assignment. Finally,
I am able to use the ApprenNet Report feature to determine students who did not participate
sufficiently during the Peer Review phase.
To determine the student reaction to this use of ApprenNet for a group presentation assessment, I
will be analyzing their responses to an anonymous survey. In addition, I routinely have students
complete a questionnaire on the first class of the semester and at the end of the semester. I
analyze this data as a pretest-posttest measure to assess learning of key course concepts. I plan to
analyze this data as a measure of their learning. In the future I will compare these results to
previous cohorts who did not have this group presentation assessment with ApprenNet.
45
This was my first time using ApprenNet as a method for group presentations outside of
traditional face-to-face class time. There was some confusion on the part of a few students
regarding which cases they should review. In future years I may have only one meet to which all
student groups upload their presentations. This would simplify my determination of participation
in the Peer Review phase. It may also be less confusing to the students. I plan to review the
student feedback from the anonymous survey for their reactions to the assessment. However, I do
plan to continue using ApprenNet for group presentations in PT 509 Differential Diagnosis. I
believe that this active learning activity is an excellent way to achieve the course objectives
which are at a higher Bloom's taxonomy level. It requires the students to apply the knowledge
learned in the course as well as integrate this knowledge with concepts learned in previous
courses. This use of technology is one way that faculty can incorporate active learning activities
with larger class sizes and for a wide variety of content.
46
Innovation
Title of Innovation: Using Table Top Simulations to Teach About Public Health Emergency
Preparedness
Name of Innovator(s): Tamar Klaiman
Telephone Number(s): 215-596-7031
Email Address(es): t.klaiman@usciences.edu
Department(s): Public Health
Type of Students: MPH
Course or activtity where implemented: Public Health Management and Policy

Narrative:
Innovation:
The Public Health Management and Policy course (HE 720) is a Master's in Public Health core
course that focuses on various public health issues surrounding the public health policy process.
Students learn about informatics, managing essential resources, quality improvement, systems
thinking, and leadership. Emergency preparedness and response cuts across all topics covered in
the course. The use of a table top exercise in which students take on various public health agency
roles while responding to a real-world emergency scenario offers them an opportunity to
operationalize the concepts learned throughout the preceding weeks. The activity is innovative
because it translates topics covered in didactic sessions into a simulation, thereby allowing for a
higher level of understanding among students.
Goals:
The goal of this activity is for students to apply concepts learned throughout the course to a
hypothetical scenario.
Implementation:
Students are assigned roles in teams (local health department director, CDC staff,
epidemiologist, White House representative, etc.), and they must respond to a scenario that
47
includes periodic injects that change the course of the response. The activity is modeled after
table top exercises conducted by government agencies to prepare for emergencies.
Reflection on why it is working:
The use of a table top exercise works because students apply their knowledge in an exciting and
fast-paced simulation. They understand how the concepts they have learned are applied in the
real world.
Student Reaction:
Student feedback has been overwhelmingly positive, and many students appreciate the practical
application of concepts covered during the course. Many students have been surprised by how
much they have learned in preceding weeks.
Continuation of Innovation:
Future exercises will include assessment activities such as a pre-post test and exercise specific
student evaluations. Similar activities may be used in Inter-Professional education activities or
other courses to help students apply concepts to real-world scenarios.
48
Formal faculty mentoring leads to critical reflection on teaching and improved student
performance and attitudes.
Dana A. Pape-Zambito, Ph.D. and Alison M. Mostrom, Ph.D.
WinneroftheLeahyAward
New instructors with Ph.D. degrees have extensive research training, but limited training in
teaching and little knowledge of the teaching and learning literature. One common mistake of
many new instructors is having lofty expectations of undergraduate students. Given that the
faculty member was likely most recently engaged in planning, executing, interpreting and
creating his/her own research papers, it can be challenging to teach and assess students at
lower cognitive levels (Anderson et al., 2001). This lack of adjustment to the new student
environment can lead to poor student evaluations in the first year of teaching, and frustration
from the students and the new instructor.
New instructors can feel overwhelmed due to the new environment, responsibilities,
expectations and workload during the first year of university employment. Traditional formal
mentoring pairs senior and junior faculty members within that first year. This can cause anxiety
for the new faculty member because of his/her perceived inability to match the mentors
expectations. Furthermore, if teaching philosophies of the mentor and mentee are not
congruent the relationship can be unproductive. In this proposal we provide an innovative
formal active mentoring model for instructors, based on a research-centered mentoring model
(Edwards et al., 2011), and is established in the second year of the mentees appointment.
Allowing a new faculty member to settle into the department for one year provides time for the
mentee to critically reflect on his/her teaching and identify the most important challenge area(s).
Additionally, this year allows the mentee time to get to know department faculty members in
order to select an appropriate mentor. This self-selection process is important to identify a
mentor with a similar teaching and learning philosophy, teaching style, and compatible
personality. Additionally, self-selection fosters self-governance which leads to a mutually
beneficial and productive relationship between mentor and mentee.
The goal of this innovation was to improve student performance and attitude through critical
reflection of teaching that was facilitated by a formal active mentoring process. In this
mentoring relationship the roles and goals of the mentee and mentor were explicitly stated and
both actively participated in the process (Edwards et al., 2011). Our model involves the
following phases: incubation; initiation; productivity; emergence; and maturation. The incubation
phase occurs during the first year of the mentees appointment, in which the mentee identifies
his/her challenge areas. The initiation phase occurs when the mentoring relationship begins
with focused and open discussions of teaching and learning techniques that can address the
mentees identified challenge areas. The productivity phase involves implementation of the
teaching and learning techniques into the mentees classroom(s). Emergence occurs when the
mentoring partners assess, reflect and modify these teaching and learning techniques.
Maturation arises as the mentee becomes independent of the mentor. Both the mentee and
mentor have unique but unified responsibilities and goals during these phases. This active
mentoring model has several advantages for the mentee and mentor, but notably is designed
to improve student learning outcomes in part due to the productive mentoring relationship.
49
In this formal active mentoring relationship the mentee (Dr. Dana Pape-Zambito) identified that
aspects of her BS 103 (General Biology I) course were misaligned. Alignment requires that
course objectives, teaching and learning activities and assessments are presented at the same
cognitive levels (Biggs, 1999). For BS 103 the majority of the course objectives and teaching
and learning activities are at the remember/understand (R/U) cognitive levels, but assessments
(i.e. exams) in the mentees section had too high a percentage of questions at the analyze and
evaluate (A/E) levels. A goal of the mentoring relationship was to improve the alignment within
the course and thereby improve students performance on exams and attitudes towards the
course.
Alignment was implemented by adjusting the proportion of exam questions at the R/U level
(Anderson et al., 2001) compared with those at the A/E level. Furthermore, new teaching and
learning activities were added in Fall 2012 and continued in 2013. These included in-class
demonstrations of concepts and question modeling sessions. A/E level multiple-choice
questions were given to the students via clickers as formative assessments the week before
each exam. Students answered these questions anonymously to ascertain if they could apply
their knowledge to novel situations. Immediately afterwards Dr. Pape-Zambito modeled the
reasoning and logic for why the incorrect answer choices could be eliminated and why the
correct answer was the best choice. As the semester progressed students modeled to each
other which choices were incorrect and which were the most correct.
One way to determine the efficacy of this innovation is to measure student
performance by comparing exam scores before mentoring (2011) and during mentoring (2012
and 2013). The mean score of the 4 exams, not including the cumulative final exam, averaged
70.64 1.41% (SE ), 80.88 1.27% and 78.7% 1.52% in Fall 2011, 2012 and 2013,
respectively. Another way to examine how this innovation is working is to measure students
attitudes about the course. End of the semester evaluations in 2012 and 2013 were similar to
each other and were considerably more positive compared with those from 2011. One
evaluation question that addresses alignment is Are the exams and assignments related to
course content? In 2011, 25% of students strongly disagreed with the statement, whereas only
3% and 0% strongly disagreed with this statement in 2012 and 2013. In addition, individual
student comments were reviewed. The students perceptions of how much they learned
changed over the 3 years. In 2011, only 35% of students strongly agreed or agreed with the
statement Learned a lot from this course compared with 84 and 90% of students in 2012 and
2013. Remarkably 21% of the students strongly disagreed with this statement in 2011, whereas
0% and 2% strongly disagreed in 2012 and 2013. The students reactions dramatically shifted
between the pre-mentoring and during mentoring years and we believe this is in part due to
aligning the course objectives and student learning outcomes with teaching and learning
activities and assessments.
The work presented here is innovative because it quantitatively demonstrates that alignment
can positively impact student performance and perception of learning. The concept of
alignment is not new, but it is not well recognized and implemented (Blumberg, 2009). This is
particularly relevant for new faculty members who are likely unaware (as was Dr. Pape-Zambito)
of the negative impact misalignment can have on student learning and perceptions of the
50
course. In contrast, alignment can be beneficial because it requires close scrutiny of course
objectives, student learning outcomes, teaching and learning activities, and summative and
formative assessments. Given the positive impacts of alignment in Dr. Pape-Zambitos course,
she will continue to align this and all other courses she teaches.
The formal active mentoring model that we developed and implemented is also innovative. Our
model emphasizes self-selection by allowing the mentee to select an appropriate mentor to
work with during the second year of employment. This is in contrast to most formal mentoring
relationships where the department chair designates a mentor for the mentee. This selfgoverning relationship allows the mentee to identify his/her most prominent challenge area(s).
The mentor and mentee then work together towards improving the mentees teaching methods
which can improve student learning outcomes and attitudes. Furthermore, this model was
successful in its first year of implementation because the mentee reached maturation during that
year. Maturation was achieved by three measures. First, Dr. Pape-Zambito is willing to serve
as a mentor for new BS 103/104 faculty members who will in part be mentored on the
importance and impact of alignment. Second, if selected, Dr. Pape-Zambito looks forward to
mentoring new faculty members that join our department and to help them identify and improve
their chosen challenge area(s). Third, Drs. Pape-Zambito and Mostrom presented a poster
highlighting our mentoring model at the 2013 Teaching Professor Conference. We will present
a revised poster at the 2014 Lilly Conference on College and University Teaching, and will be
submitting a scholarly article to The Journal of College Science Teaching in the summer of
2014.
51
Appendix
100
2011
90
2012
2013
ExamAverage(%)
80
70
60
50
40
30
20
10
0
1
ExamNumber
Figure 1. Average exam scores in BS 103. Four exams are given in BS 103. The data above
represent the average student score on Exams 1, 2, 3, and 4, in Fall 2011, 2012, and 2013.
52
Figure2.Studentresponsestothe
statementExamsandassignmentsrelated
tocoursecontent.Dataarepresented
fromFall2011,2012,and2013for
comparison.
Figure3.Studentresponsestothe
statementLearnedalotfromthiscourse.
DataarepresentedfromFall2011,2012,
and2013forcomparison.
53
TitleofInnovation:Antibiotics,ResistanceandInfection.OhMy!Theuseofcasestudiespresentedorally
inclassandonlinetofostercriticalthinking,understandingandlifelonglearning.
Name of Innovator(s): Melissa G. Marko, James Johnson, Robert Gulay, and Jason Porter
Email Address(es): m.marko@usciences.edu
Department(s): Biological Sciences
Type of Students: pharmacy and physician assistant majors
Course or activtity where implemented: BS241 Microbiology Laboratory

Narrative:
A case study is a descriptive, exploratory or explanatory analysis of a person, group or event.
Case studies provide a real life story application, which enhances comprehension and critical
thinking skills. As future health professionals, pharmacist and physician assistant students need
to understand how the information they are learning in the classroom and laboratory will be used
in their future careers. This is especially true in the laboratory setting. Often, students who are
not necessarily fond of the laboratory exercises do not comprehend the rationale for the exercise.
In the microbiology laboratory (BS241-pharmacy and physician assistant majors) we have
implemented five clinical case studies that address antibiotic sensitivity and bacterial resistance,
and established the importance of applying the theory supporting laboratory exercises into real
life practice (see attached for example). In past semesters students discussed and presented these
case studies in groups during the last scheduled laboratory meeting before the practical exam on
antibiotic sensitivity / resistance. This practice allowed for oral discussion in-class. The group
presentation assignment was not graded and did not count toward the students' grade other than
participation in completing the required laboratory class attendance.
This past semester, due to the excessive number of snow days, we transformed the case studies
into an online assessment with multiple choice questions and written feedback on the correct
answers rather than the oral in-class discussion. This assignment was made available for a six
day period on Blackboard to make up the one day we missed due to snow. The assignment was
graded, but the student's score did not get calculated into their final grade. Students were
required, however, to complete the online assignment or be penalized 10% on the practical exam.
54
This statement was included since it was considered one of our missed laboratory class meetings
and should be completed for attendance. We received 100% participation in the online
assessment.
Through this online assessment, our goal was to determine if students perform better on the
practical exam with an oral discussion versus the online multiple choice based assessments with
written feedback. We evaluated student success by comparing performance on the antibiotic
sensitivity / resistance practical exam from fall 2013 (oral discussion case studies) and spring
2014 (written, online case studies). Based on preliminary analysis the average scores on the
practical exam in fall 2013 was a 72.4 and spring 2014 was a 72.3, indicating that there was little
impact between the oral versus written assignment on total score on the practical exam.
However, performance on one particular question on the exam that has given students trouble in
past semesters had a 28% increase in student performance after the online assignment (spring
2014) compared to fall 2013.
In-class discussions with students revealed that many were reluctant at first to be required to do
an online assessment outside of class. One student mentioned that he would have preferred the in
class assignment because it would have taken less time. Another student, when asked her
thoughts on the online assessment after completion, mentioned that all of her subjects died (or
succumbed to infection due to choosing the incorrect antibiotic), but she now understood why
her answers were incorrect. This particular student earned one of the highest scores on the
practical exam.
As BS241 is a course that is taught every semester, including summer, we hope to evaluate this
online case study assessment again this summer. With more time to prepare I plan to provide a
written questionnaire to obtain student feedback and assessment on the online assignment. We
also have four past summer semesters (2010-2013) where the oral in-class discussion was used to
compare performance.
Case study assessments, both in the oral in-class setting, online, or in combination, can stimulate
discussion and critical thinking skills that can be applied to a student's specific career and may be
adapted to all learning environments and educational topics. In future semesters of BS241 we
plan to possibly use both the online and in-class discussion formats to further enhance and
prepare students for the antibiotic sensitivity / resistance practical exam.
Appendix
Case Study Example
A 45-year old man is admitted to a burn unit with chemical burns over 10% of his body. After
residing in the unit for two days the charge nurse notices blue-green pus oozing from some of his
open wounds. The resident on duty immediately prescribes PO tetracycline and sent a specimen
of the pus to the clinical microbiology lab to identify the bacteria. After 36 hours of being on this
course of therapy, blue-green pus is oozing from every open wound of the patient.
55
Antibiotic Zone of Inhibition (mm)

Bacitracin 8
Ceftriaxone 13
Ciprofloxacin 33
Erythromycin 20
Neomycin 12
Oxacillin 10
Penicillin 20
Polymyxin B 15
Tetracycline 11
Vancomycin 7
3a. Based on the bacterium discussed in lab what possible bacteria is oozing from the man's
wounds?
a. Proteus mirabilis
b. Pseudomonas aeruginosa
c. Escherichia coli
d. Enterococcus faecalis
e. Staphylococcus aureus
Feedback: Answer "b" is correct. Based on the color morphology of the blue-green bacteria
oozing from the patient's wounds we could hypothesize that the bacteria is Pseudomonas
aeruginosa which we described in class as possessing a blue-green characteristic grown as a lawn
MHA at 35?C.
3b. Based on your interpretation of the antibiogram results in the table above, why do you think
the therapy was not effective?
a. The bacteria causing the infection were sensitive to tetracycline
b. The bacteria causing the infection had intermediate sensitivity to tetracycline
c. The bacteria causing the infection were resistant to tetracycline.
Feedback: Answer "c" is correct. After comparing the measurements to Table 1 on page 4 of the
module II handout it can be determined that a zone of inhibition for tetracycline of 11mm
indicates that the bacteria are resistant to tetracycline.
3c. What should the first course of treatment have been for this patient rather than tetracycline?
a. Begin treatment with Ciprofloxacin
b. Begin treatment with Erythromycin
c. Begin treatment with Polymyxin B
Feedback: Answer "c" is correct. Since the original wound was cutaneous in nature (burns on the
surface of the skin) treatment with a topical antibiotic should be the first choice. Polymixin B is
the only topical antibiotic that the bacteria indicate to be sensitive to and should therefore be the
first course of treatment. Once the bacteria began to ooze out of every wound the infection was
56
spreading and becoming more systemic in nature and another course of treatment would be
necessary, such as Ciprofloxacin or Erythromycin. Erythromycin may be the slightly better first
choice over Ciprofloxin because it is slightly narrower in spectrum effecting specifically Gram
negative bacteria, such as P. aeruginosa.
3d. After 36 hours of tetracycline treatment, blue-green pus is oozing from every open wound of
the patient and therefore the clinicians switch to a course of IV erythromycin therapy. The
patient develops a severe reaction and suffers cardiac arrest. What is the most likely cause for
this result?
a. The patient experienced endotoxic shock
b. The patient had high cholesterol clogging his arteries
c. The patient had an allergic reaction
d. The patient had a history of high blood pressure
Feedback: Answer "a" is correct. Pseudomonas aeruginosa is a Gram negative bacteria, which
contains lipopolysaccharides (LPS), an endotoxin located in its outer membrane, and is known to
elicit a strong immune response in mammals. The presence of endotoxins in the blood is called
endotoxemia and can lead to septic shock, which if not rapidly brought under control, the patient
usually dies of multiple organ failure and cardiac arrest.
Thisemailwasgeneratedbytheformat
http://www.usciences.edu/teaching/innovations/InnovationForm/default.aspx
TitleofInnovation:
DevelopmentofBothsidesofthecoininaHealthCareProfessional:TeachingEmpathyandEvidenceBased
PracticeAPilotStudy
57
Name(s)ofInnovator:
ShelleyOtsuka,PharmD,BCACP
KarleenMelody,PharmD,BCACP
KatherineKoffer,PharmD,CDE
TelephoneNumber(s):
2155967207(Otsuka)
2155967208(Melody)
2155967243(Koffer)
EmailAddress(es):
s.otsuka@usciences.edu
k.melody@usciences.edu
k.koffer@usciences.edu
Department(s):
PharmacyPractice/PharmacyAdministration
TypeofStudents:
PCPDoctorofPharmacyStudentsThirdProfessionalYear
Typeofcourse/activity:
TherapeuticsElective
Nameofactivity/course:
PP540:CareforthePatientwithDiabetes
TypeofAward:
BrightIdeaAward
Narrative:
DevelopmentofBothSidesoftheCoininaHealthCareProfessional:TeachingEmpathyandEvidenceBased
PracticeAPilotStudy
Background
Theimportanceofempathyinadditiontoclinicalcompetenceindoctorofpharmacystudentsiswelldocumented.
TheAccreditationCouncilforPharmacyEducation(ACPE)1inthepreadvancedpharmacypracticeexperiences
(APPE)coredomainsandtheAmericanAssociationofCollegesofPharmacy(AACP)CenterforAdvancementof
PharmacyEducation(CAPE)EducationalOutcomes20132bothspecifythatanentrylevelpharmacistshould
possessempathyasanattitude.Therefore,asuccessfulhealthcareprofessionalisonewhousesandapplies
knowledgeusingevidencebasedpractice(EBP)toguidetherapywhilealsodemonstratingempathywithpatients;
onewhoexemplifiesbothsidesofthecoin.Thisisconsistentwiththeeducationofotherhealthcare
professionalsincludingoccupationalandphysicaltherapy.3,4,5
UsingEBPknowledgewithoutexpressingempathymayleadtononadherenceandpotentialtreatmentfailuresif
patientsdonotfeelincludedinthedecisionmakingprocess.However,displayingempathywithoutafoundation
ofEBPknowledge,mayleadtoineffectiveorinappropriatetreatmentregimens.Apositiverelationshipincluding
empathyhasbeenassociatedwithabeneficialclinicaloutcome,specificallyinpersonwithdiabetes(PWD).6
58
Previousstudieshavemeasuredempathyinpharmacy,medical,andnursingstudentsinactivitiesincludingclinical
rotations,objectivestructuredclinicalexaminations,individualclassroomactivitiesandcourses.Moststudies
evaluatingempathyinacoursewerecommunicationcourses,notaclinicalortherapeuticbasedcourse.There
havealsobeennumerousarticlespublisheddemonstratingclinicalknowledgecompetenceusingnumerous
teachingtechniques.However,theliteraturelacksdemonstratingbothsidesofthecoininonestudy.Thegoalof
thediabeteselectivewastocultivatebothsidesofthecoinwithvarioussimulationsoflivingwithdiabetesand
EBPknowledgeactivities.Theprimaryobjectiveofthispilotstudyaimstoassessthechangeinempathyand
knowledgeamongdoctorofpharmacystudentsininthiselective.
CareforthePatientWithDiabetes(PP540)
Duringtheonesemestercourse,studentsinthePP540wereprovidedanumberoflearningopportunities
includinginclassactivelearningactivitiesandoutofclassassignments.Knowledgebasedactivitiesweredesigned
tocomplementinformationprovidedinthePharmacotherapyandTherapeuticsaswellasthePracticalLaband
CaseStudiesCourseSeries.
TheEBPKnowledgeBasedSideoftheCoinActivitiesincluded:
1)DiabetesJeopardy
Agameshowformattoreviewbasicdiabetesinformationincludingphysiology,diagnosis,treatmentgoals,
medications,complicationsandselfmanagementtechniques.
*Studentreaction:Studentswerehighlyengagedwhichstimulatedgreatdiscussionthroughoutthegame.
2)LandmarktrialsPresentations
Studentgroupsgavepresentationstosummarizekeyclinicalpearlsoflandmarktrialsindiabetescaretotheir
fellowclassmates.Theyalsodevelopedtestquestionsfromtheirmaterial.Thequestionswerepooledtocreatea
landmarktrialquiz.
*StudentReaction:Studentsaskedinsightfulquestionsoftheirpeerpresenters,whichstimulatedgreat
discussion.Presentationsweregivenatahighlevelofcompetenceandprofessionalism.
3)MedicationClassPresentations
Studentgroupsgavepresentationsofmajordrugclassesusedinthetreatmentofdiabetestotheirfellow
classmates.Theformatwasthatthepresentationwastobedirectedtowardadiabetespatienteducationclass.
Thisrequiredthemtoknowthematerialwellenoughtoteachittopatientsusingnonmedicaljargon.Theclass
wasalsoencouragedtoaskquestionsofthepresentersasiftheywerepatients.
*StudentReaction:Studentswereengagedinroleplayingthepartofapatientintheaudienceincludingasking
questions.Thestudentsdidanexcellentjobansweringsometimesdifficultinformationinpatientfriendlyterms.
4)InpatientandOutpatientManagementofDiabetes
Aninpatientpractitioner(pharmacist)andoutpatientpractitioner(physician)providedareviewofcurrent
guidelinespertinenttotheirpracticesitesandminicasesonhowtomanagepatientswithdiabetes
*StudentReaction:Studentsfoundthesereallifeminicasesveryhelpful,asthenuancesofinsulindosingare
verydifficulttolearnandrequirepractice.
5)InsulinPumpTherapyDemonstration
Studentswereprovidedademonstrationoninsulinpumps.Thisincludedhowapatientwouldlearnhowtoinsert
andchangetheinsulincartridgesaswellashowtoselfadministerinsulin.
*StudentReaction:Manycommentedthattheyhadpatientswhouseinsulinpumpsfillprescriptionwhilethey
wereinapharmacy,anditwashelpfultounderstandthisinsulindeliverysystem.
TheEmpathyBasedSideoftheCoinActivitiesincluded:
59
1)MotivationalInterviewing(MI)Roleplaying
Studentsfirstcompletedapersuasionexercisewherestudent1hadtoconvincestudent2tomakeachange
bytellingthemwhyitwasimportanttheymakethechange,explainbenefitsofthechange,andtellthemhowto
makethechange.Themesofhowthepersonbeingconvincedfeltwerethenidentified.AfterMIprincipleswere
discussedalisteningexercisewascompletedwherestudent1askedstudent2questionsaboutwhythey
wantedtomakethechange,howtheywouldforeseegoingaboutmakingthechange,andwhatwerethree
reasonstheywantedtomakethechange.Themesforthisexercisewerealsoidentifiedandcomparedtothe
persuasionexercise.StudentsalsoroleplayedhowtheywouldrespondtorealpatientquotesusingMIprinciples.
FinallyvideosonlineofgoodpharmacistpatientinteractionswerecomparedandcontrastedidentifyingMI
techniquesusedorthatshouldhavebeenused.
*StudentReaction:Studentswereveryinteractivewiththepersuasionandlisteningexercisesfuelinggreat
conversationtothedifferingtechniques.Bringingrealquotesfrompatientsforstudentswascommentedonas
veryinsightful.
2)FoodDiaryAssignment
StudentswererequiredtokeepafooddiaryforthreedaystounderstandthedifficultiesofoneaspectofaPWD.
Theyhadtoreflectontheeasiestandmostdifficultparts,whatresourcestheyusedandhowthisactivitymay
impacttheirfutureinteractionswithaPWD.
*StudentReaction:Thereflectionsshowedthatthestudentsunderstoodthemainobjectiveoftheassignment.
Excerptsfromreflectionincluded:
a)Inowhavefirsthandexperienceonhowthedifficultiesandchallengesofmaintainingaconsistentdiet,let
aloneonethatishealthyandconsistent.Consequently,IbelieveIwillbemuchmoreempatheticindealingwith
individualswhohavetocompletesuchatask.
b)WhenIinteractwithpatientssuchasthese,Iwillencouragethemtocontinuerecordingtheirdietandtell
themthattheyshouldntfeeldiscouraged.Theyshouldseetheirdailylogasagoal/improvementsheet.
c)Overall,thisactivitymademerealizethatdietcontrolcanbeoneofthebiggestchallengesforapatientItisa
lifestyletransformationthattakesalotofdedicationandsupport.
d)Wheninteractingwithanoverweightpatientwithdiabetes,Ifeelitisimportanttobeempatheticand
understanding.Encouragethepatienttobeopenandhonestabouttheirstrugglesandletthemknowthatlifestyle
modificationssuchaseatingahealthydietcannothappenovernight.
3)GroceryStoreAssignment
Studentsweregivenapatientscenarioandtoldtocreateafivedaymealplanandgogroceryshoppingona
specifiedbudgetforthatscenario.Scenarioscouldbeadiabeticgrandmotherwithacarblimitof45gpermeal
whohashergrandkidsforluncheverydayorafamilyof4witha8yearoldpatientwithtype1diabeteswhohates
greenvegetables.Studentsalsohadtoreflectonhowdifficultoreasyitwastoshopfortheirscenario,what
adjustmentstheyhadtomakeoncestartingtoshop,themostandleastsurprisingaspectoftheassignment,and
howthisactivitymayimpacttheirfutureinteractionswithaPWD.
*StudentReaction:Thereflectionsshowedthatthestudentsunderstoodthemainobjectiveoftheassignment.
Excerptsfromreflectionincluded:
a)Thisactivitygavemeadifferentperspectiveofdiabeticpatientsandtheirpersonaldietary
restrictionspatientsmaynotalwayshaveaccesstohealthyfoodandmustworkunderacertainbudget.Italso
mademerealizethatIhavetotaketheirpreferencesintoaccountinorderformetobuildatrustworthy
relationshipwiththem.
b)Ithinkthatinthefuture,Iwillbemoreempathetictowardsthefinancialburdenoffoodshoppingasadiabetic.
Icanexplaintothemthattheydonotnecessarilyhavetogiveuptheirfavoritefoods,butthatwecanwork
togethertocomeupwithamealplanthatstillsatisfiestheirpersonalcravings,meetsglycemicgoals,andremains
withintheirbudget.
c)Ifapatientexplainshowdifficultthelifestylechangeis,Iwillbeabletoempathize,butIwillalsoknowthatitis
possible.
60
d)Afterhavingthisexperience,Iwillbeabletounderstandsomeofthedifficultiesofbothplanningadiabetes
friendlymeal,andpurchasingfoodonalimitedbudget.Iwillbeabletorecommendusefulresourcesfor
calculatingthenutritionalvalueofmeals,andIwillbeabletoadvisepatientsonsomewaystomaketheirmoney
gofurtheratthegrocerystore.
4)MileinMyShoesAssignment
Studentsweregiveafourdayassignmentwheretheybecameapersonwithdiabetesandexperiencedthe
challengesbytakingmedication,monitoringbloodglucose,countingcarbohydrates,andusingvariousmethodsto
experiencesometothecomplicationsofdiabetes.Inaddition,eachday,theywereprovidedwithadvicefroma
helpfulneighborwhoeitherprovidedinformationormisinformation.Thestudentwasthenrequiredtosearch
theinternettoexperiencehowmuchinformation/misinformationisavailabletopatients.Thestudentswrotea
reflectiveessayandpostedcommentsonadiscussionboard.
*StudentReaction:Thereflectionsdemonstratedthatthestudentswereamazedhowchallengingbasictasks
personswithdiabetesare.Reflectionsinclude:
a)IfoundtheexperienceextremelyeyeopeningandhumblingasIhopeIcantaketheseexperiencesintomy
pharmacyprofessiongoingforward
b)ThelifestyleandconcernsofadiabeticpatientIbelieveisthemosteffectiveactivityinallofmyyearsof
schooling,andisanexperiencethatIwillrememberandutilizeafterIgraduateandpracticepharmacyinthe
future.Ineverrealizedhowdifficultitisforapatientwithachronicdiseasetomanagenotonlytheirmedications,
butalsotheireverydaylives.
c)Ithelpedmeimaginewhatdiabeticsarefacedwitheveryday.Ialsodidnottakeintoaccountthemanyother
problemsthatpatientswithdiabetesfaceonadailybasis.
d)Completingtheeverydayactivitiesofadiabeticpatientmadethediseasestatemuchmorerelatableforme.I
hopetospendmoretimewithmyfuturediabeticpatientstoensuretheircomfortinmanagingtheircondition.In
doingthisassignment,IbelievethatIammuchmorepreparedandqualifiedtoproperlycounselandadvisemy
futurepatients.
5)PatientInterviewActivity
Afinalactivityrequiredthestudentsinterviewapatientusingskillssuchasmotivationalinterviewingand
exhibitingempathythenprepareacareplanbyapplyingEBP.Theywillbegradedonoralcommunicationforthe
interviewandtheircareplantheydeveloped.Thisactivityallowsthestudentstodemonstratecompetencywith
bothknowledgeandempathy.
*StudentReaction:Inprogress
Conclusions
Resultsofthisstudywillbeusedtofurtherdevelopthecurrentknowledgeandempathyactivitiesandtocreate
newactivitiestobeexecutedinsubsequentelectiveofferings.Futuregoalsforthisprojectistoextendthis
scholarlyresearchtosucceedingofferingsofthiselectivetobuildamorerobustsample.Resultswillbeavailable
byMay2014andbepresentedinthePosterPresentation.
References
1.AccreditationCouncilforPharmacyEducation.AccreditationStandardsandGuidelinesfortheProfessional
PrograminPharmacyLeadingtotheDoctorofPharmacyDegree.2011.www.acpeaccredit.org.Accessed
January16,2013.
2.MedinaMS,PlazaCM,StoweCD,RobinsonET,DeLanderG,BeckDE,MelchertRB,Supernaw
RB,RocheVF,GleasonBL,StrongMN,BainA,MeyerGE,DongBJ,RochonJ,JohnstonP.Centerforthe
AdvancementofPharmacyEducation(CAPE)EducationalOutcomes2013.AmJPharmEduc.2013.
3.ChristiansenCH.Measuringempathyinoccupationaltherapystudents.AmJOccupTher.1977Jan;31(1):1922.
61
4.GabardDL,LoweDL,DeusingerSS,StelznerDM,CrandallSJ.
AnalysisofempathyinDoctorofPhysicalTherapystudents:amultisitestudy.JAlliedHealth.2013Spring;42(1:10
6.
5.BrownT,WilliamsB,BoyleM,MolloyA,McKennaL,MolloyL,LewisB.
Levelsofempathyinundergraduateoccupationaltherapystudents.
OccupTherInt.2010Sep;17(3):13541.
6.HojatM,LouisDZ,MarkhamFW,WenderR,RabinowitzC,GonnellaJS.AcadMed.2011March86(3)35964
LearningInnovationforLeahyAward
62
NameofCourse:BS490SpecialTopicsinBiology:EmergingBiologicalThreatsandGlobal
Sustainability
Instructor:MargaretReinhart,DepartmentofBiologicalSciences
BackgroundforDevelopingtheCourse
Thisisabrandnewcourseopentothirdandfourthyearstudentsofanymajor.Itwasofferedasa
SpecialTopicscoursewiththeintentionofmakingitapermanentcourseifitwassuccessful.Theidea
forthiscoursebeganwhenIwasdoingresearchonemergingparasiticdiseasesinfarmanimals.Much
oftheresearchindicatedthatthesediseasesarespreadingandincreasingasglobalclimatechanges.I
gaveanoralpresentationonthistopicattheThirdAsianConferenceonGlobalSustainabilityinMay
2013inOsaka,Japan.Mywork,togetherwithothertopicspresentedattheconference,becamethe
basisforthiscourse.
A.Innovation
Asascienceinstitution,wedohaveanobligationtoourstudentstonotonlyteachthemtheprinciples,
concepts,andlanguageofscience,butalsoequipthemwithskillstoassumeleadershiprolesinthe
challengingandchangingworldtheyhaveinherited.Sustainabilitygoesfarbeyondsuchthingsas
recyclingtrashandplantingtrees,andourstudentsshouldgraduatewithawarenessandtheabilityto
understand,analyze,andhelpsolvethesustainabilitychallengesintheirfuture.Studentsalsoneedto
befamiliarwiththemannerinwhichpopularnewspresentstheseissues,aswellastheverycomplex
politicalwebsurroundingmanysustainabilitytopics.Thisisthefirstandonlysuchcourseofferedat
thisinstitutionwhichaddressesthesecriticalsubjectsfromallperspectives.
Also,Iusedinnovativeassessmentssuchasgradingstudentblogandblogcomments,andaonehour
oralfinalpereachstudent.
B.Descriptionofwhatwasdone
1)GoalsofCourse
AnothernameforthiscoursecouldbeEverythingyouLearnedinyourBiologyCoursesDoesnot
NecessarilyApplyintheRealWorld,orbetteryet:HumansandtheirImpactontheEarth:The
UltimateUncontrolledExperiment.Thegoalsofthiscoursearethefollowing:
tostimulatestudentstothinkabouttheirrolesasscientistcitizensinthemodernworld
forstudentstodeveloptheabilitytoinvestigatetheimpacthumansarehavingonthe
environmentbyreadingandanalyzingscientificliterature,andthencomparingthesefindings
withinformationpresentedinthenewsandpopularliterature
tounderstandthatwhiletestingforonlyoneunknownandcontrollingallothervariablesis
desirableinalaboratorysetting,itisnotpossibletocontrolallvariablesintherealworld
63
forstudentstogainawarenessoftherangeofcriticalsustainabilitychallenges,analyzethe
sciencebehindthem,andthenuncoverthepoliticalcomplicationssurroundingthem.
2)Implementation
Basedonthestatedgoals,readingsinbothscientificandpopularnewswereessential,aswasaforum
forstudentstopresenttheiranalysesandgetfeedbackfromothers.ThusIchoseamixofboth
scientificandpopularformats:oralpresentations,posterpresentations,discussiongroups,watching
andcommentingonvideos,andwhatbecameoneofthemajorassignments,blogs.Studentswere
expectedtochooseatopicamongthelist(appendixA),investigateandfollowitthroughoutthe
semester,andsharetheirfindingswiththeclassthroughtheaboveformats.Gradeswerebasedon
participation,fourblogentriesthroughoutthesemesteraswellascommentingonothers(using
blackboard),oralandposterpresentations,studentleddiscussiongroups,essaysonvideos,andafinal
reviewpaper.Withsuchintenseexpectations,Icappedtheclassat12,thoughIendedupwith16
studentsintheclass.
3.)Impactand(4)ReasonforImpact
StudentscommentedthroughoutthesemesterIneverrealized,Ihadnoidea..Thiscourse
presentedanentirelydifferentviewofbiology.Students,usedtoworkingwithmolecules,cell
pathways,andatmostorgansandorganisms,nowaredealingwithahugepictureofmanyinterrelated
processes,theoutcomesofwhichareoftenunknownbecausetheyaffectsomanyotherthings.An
exampleishowintensiveagriculturalmonoculturesrequiretheneedformorediseaseintervention,
increasedfertilization,andthusgreaterimpactonnaturalandagriculturaldiversity,increasedcarbon
outputetc.Eachofthesetheninturnaffectsotherprocesses.Further,thepoliticsoffactoryfarm
governmentalsubsidies,megabusinesspressuresetc.comeintoplay,justasoneexample.Thisclass
hasahugeimpactbecauseitisanentirelynewwayoflookingatanddealingwithsciencethanwhatthe
studentshavebeenaccustomedtointheirthreetofouryearshere,aswellashavingtotakethenon
scienceaspectintoconsideration.
5)WhytheCourseisWorkingand(6)StudentReaction
Iknowthecourseworkedbasedonboththeexcellenceofthestudentsworkaswellastheircomments
onaspecialsurveyandevaluationgiveninthe10thweekofthesemester.Regardingtheirwork,an
exampleofimprovementisthat11/15studentsimprovedatleastonelettergradefromtheirrough
draftoftheirfinalpapertothefinaldraftofthepaper.Brieflyregardingthesurvey,15/15studentsfelt
theylearnedalotandweregladtheytooktheclass.15/15feltitwasausefulenoughcoursetokeepin
thecurriculum.However,only8/15felttheblogexerciseswereusefulandonly6/15feltthecoursewas
easy.SeeAppendixBfordetailedsurveyresults.
C.OutcomesandOutcomesAssessment
Reflectonhowyoulearnbiologyand
seethereallybigpicture:theultimate
Gradingrubricswereusedtoassessstudent
blogsandcommentsonblogs;Innovativeone
64
uncontrolledexperiment
Workoutadefinitionforsustainability
houroralfinalworkedwellinassessingthis
outcome
Thiswasdoneinawholeclassdiscussion
format,thenbrokendownintogroups(rubric
usedtograde)
Assessmentoforalandposterpresentations,
Describewhatisneededforhumansto
finalpaperaswellasblogentriesusinggrading
continuetolivesustainably
rubric.Also,answerstoquestionsinoralfinal.
Investigatepotentialbiologicalthreatsthat
Gradingrubricsonoralpresentations,poster
mayaffectthefutureforus,otherspeciesand presentations,blogs,discussionsandfinal
theearth.
paperwithregardto:
*Searchingscientific,peerreviewed
literatureforresearchonspecificbiological
threats
*Criticallyreadingresearcharticles,
organizingandintegratingthedataand
informationintoameaningfulreview,
interpretationofthethreat,andhowitwill
affectourfutures
*Tracingtheoriginsofthethreat,andhowit
haschangedovertime
*Readingandkeepingwellinformedon
popularnewsandinformationonthetopic
*Synthesizingconclusionsandpossible
resolutionstotheproblem
D.AnalysisofInnovationImprovementandContinuation
Throughoutthesemester,Icontinuallysolicitedfeedbackfromstudentsastowhattheyfeelwas
workingandnot.Infact,inthesurveyseveralstudentscommentedoninstructoradaptabilityto
suggestions.Basedonstudentfeedback,Ichanged:duedate/timesfromFridaynoontoSunday
evening,allowedindividualstudentstoaligntheirtopicswithotherstudentscloselyrelatedtopics,and
otherminorchanges.ThesurveyadministeredinNovemberwasverydetailed(Ihadstudentsdoit
duringclasstoassurecompletion),andwillguidemeonimprovementsfortheFall2014coursewhichis
alreadyscheduled.
Inotonlyplantocontinueteachingthiscourse,butplantosubmititforgenedapproval,andamreally
hopingthatbasedontheveryimportantoutcomes,sometypeofsustainabilityrequirementwill
eventuallybeexpectedofallstudents.
AppendixAStudentTopics
65
1.
2.
3.
4.
5.
6.
7.
8.
9.
10.
11.
12.
13.
14.
15.
16.
Antibioticresistance
Decreaseininvertebratediversity
Decreaseinplantdiversity
Impactofnonnativespecies
Thefutureofwater:aquiferdepletionanddams
Thepromise/threatofgeneticengineering
Humanpopulationgrowthindevelopingcountries
Emergingviraldiseases
Tropicaldiseases:malaria,TB,intestinalworms
Forests,oceansandpeatbogs:carbonsinksandsources
Humancausesofglobalclimatechange
Globalclimatechangeandemergingdiseasesinanimalsandhumans
Agriculture:plantdiseases
Environmentalimpactofagriculture
Healthcare,infantmortality,andlongevity
Toomuchfood/toolittlefood:associateddiseasesandhealthrisks
AppendixBSurveyResults
Someofthesurveyresponses(completesurveywillbeavailableatpostersession):
Disagreeneutralagree
Iamenjoyingresearchingmytopic
Ifoundmostoftheoralpresentationstobeengagingand
interesting
Ithinktheblogformatwasusefulandcontributedtomy
knowledge
Ivelearnedalotinthiscourse
Doyouthinkthiswasausefulenoughcoursetokeepinthe
curriculum?
Ibelievemytopicisamajorthreattosustainability
Myviewpointaboutmytopicisnowdifferentthanwhatitwasin
thebeginning
12
13
15
15
3
5
12
5
Asampleofsomestudentcomments:
WhatIlikedbestaboutcourse:Varietyoftopicsandvarietyofpresentationformats,abilitytofocuson
atopic,adaptabilityofinstructor,blogs,researchingmytopic,individuallearning,seeingsometopicsin
afreshlight,discussionsafterpresentations,notalecturebasedcourse.
WhatIlikedleastaboutcourse:Alotofwork,doingthepresentationalotofassignments,blogswere
hardtodo,clarifyposteroutline,assignmentsdueataparticulartime,havingclassattendancecountfor
points.
66
Title of Innovation: Secondary analysis of existing data in social science research
Name of Innovator(s): Jessica M. Sautter
Email Address(es): j.sautter@usciences.edu
Department(s): Social Sciences
Type of Students: Advanced
Type of course or activity where implemented: Elective
Course or activtity where implemented: SO 498 Directed Research in Sociology

Narrative:
Secondary analysis of existing data is an important model for social science research, allowing
students to integrate and apply the knowledge gained through minor or major coursework.
Briefly, students identify connections between concepts learned through coursework, identify
appropriate data and statistical methods to answer relevant research questions, and use statistical
modeling to demonstrate and interpret relationships between concepts. Through learning
activities that include a research proposal, IRB proposal, annotated bibliography, research
journal, and final presentation, students gain applied analytical skills and make progress toward
undergraduate learning goals of self-directed learning, critical thinking, scientific reasoning,
statistical analysis, and oral and written communication. Advantages of the secondary analysis
model include efficiency, publishable outcomes, transferrable skills, and student-faculty
collaboration. This model is especially effective for students pursuing careers in the health
sciences because it provides a complementary approach to understanding health problems and
develops skills and content knowledge necessary for success in medical/professional school or
analytical careers.
67
TitleofInnovation:
UseofPharmacyStudentsasInstructorsinanIntroductoryDispensingandCounselingSimulationLab
Name(s)ofInnovator:
JeanScholtz,PharmD
HenrySchwartz,PharmD
KatherineKoffer,PharmD
TelephoneNumber(s):
2155968524(Scholtz)
2155968688(Schwartz)
2155967243(Koffer)
EmailAddress(es):
j.scholtz@usciences.edu
h.schwartz@usciences.edu
k.koffer@usciences.edu
Department(s):
PharmacyPractice/PharmacyAdministration
TypeofStudents:
PCPDoctorofPharmacyStudents(First,ThirdandFourthProfessionalyear)
Typeofcourse/activity:
Required/ProfessionalforFirstProfessionalYearStudents
VolunteerTeachingActivityforThirdandFourthProfessionalYearStudents
Nameofactivity/course:
PP317IntroductoryPharmacyPracticeExperience(IPPE)
TypeofAward:
BrightIdeaAward
Narrative:
Introductorypharmacypracticeexperiences(IPPEs)arearequiredcomponentofpharmacyeducation.The
AccreditationCouncilforPharmacyEducation(ACPE)expectsthatstudentswilldemonstrateachievementofthe
coreabilitiesineachpreAdvancedPharmacyPracticeExperience(APPE)performancedomains.Twoofthecore
domainsinclude1)patientsafetyandtheaccuracyofdispensingmedicationsinwhichthestudentsdemonstratea
commitmenttoandavaluingofpatientsafetybyassuringaccuratepreparation,labeling,dispensing,and
distributionofprescriptionsandmedicationorderand2)generalcommunicationabilitiesinwhichstudents
demonstrateeffectivecommunicationabilitiesininteractionswithpatients,theirfamiliesandcaregivers,and
otherhealthcareproviders.(ACPE2011AppendixD)Furthermore,theseopportunitiesshouldoccurina
progressivemannerandinvolvevariedexperiences.Simulations,whichexposethestudentstotheseactivities,
havebeenadoptedinawidespectrumofhealthcareeducationandtrainingprogramstoimprovethequalityof
patientcareandenhancepatientsafety.
68
TheIPPEsoccurinavarietyofsettings,includingcommunitypharmacy.ThePCPCommunityPharmacyIPPE
experienceoccursduringthespringofthestudentsFirstProfessionalYear(P1).However,IPPEpreceptorshave
providedfeedbackthatourstudentscouldbebetterpreparedindispensingandcounselingpriortotheir
CommunityPharmacyIPPEs.Currently,formaldispensingandcounselinglaboratoryclassesareofferedinthe
springofthesecondprofessional(P2)yearduringPracticalLabII(PP468).AsPP468occursafterthecommunity
pharmacyIPPE,thisisadisadvantageforourstudents.
Insummer2013,severalfacultymembersofthePCPDepartmentofPharmacyPracticeandAdministration
(DOP/PA),soughttoimprovestudentpreparednessfortheCommunityPharmacyIPPEs,specificallyinthe
dispensingandcounseling.WorkingwithaFourthProfessionalYear(P4)DoctorofPharmacystudent,wecreated
activitiestoprovidenoveldispensingandcounselingsimulationsforPP317,offeredinFallP1.Thesenovel
simulations,heldintheCenterforAdvancedPharmacyStudies(CAPS)LaboratoryComplex,allowedtheP1
studentstoparticipateinsimulationsofverifying,filling,anddispensingamedication,aswellascounselinga
patientonaprescription.
Indevelopingthesimulations,wesoughttohaveasimilarfacultystudentratio(1:6)asinthePracticalLabCourse
Series(PP467,PP468,PP567,PP568).However,itwasnotfeasibletoscheduleeitherfulltimeoradjunctfaculty
forthePP317DispensingandCounselingSimulationLaboratories.Weagreedthatstudentswhohavesuccessfully
completedbothPP468andtheirCommunityPharmacyIPPEs,underthesupervisionofDOPPAfaculty,couldbe
effectiveinstructors.ThisisconsistentwithACPEstandardsthatstatethecollegeorschoolcurriculumshould
fosterthedevelopmentofstudentsasleadersandthatthecollegeorschoolshouldrequireandassiststudents
toparticipateintheeducationofothers,includingpatients,caregivers,otherstudents,andhealthcareproviders.
WethereforesolicitedvolunteerP3andP4studentstoserveaslabinstructorstoprovideinstruction,directclass
flowandroleplayaspatientsandprescribers.Therefore,thissimulationexperienceprovidedanopportunityfor
P3/P4studentstoteachandmentorP1students.
WEEKONEACTIVITIES(P3studenttosuperviselabflow)
Station#1MinilectureonDispensing(P4studentaslecturer)
Station#2DispensingActivity
*ReviewPrescription
*Obtainmissinginformationfrompatient(P3studenttoroleplayaspatient)
*Obtainmissinginformationfromprescriber(P3studenttoroleplayasprovider)
*Generatelabel(P3studentstosuperviseandassistingeneratingaccuratelabel)
*Count/Pour(P3studenttosuperviseanddetermineaccuracy)
*IdentifyappropriatePatientEducationMaterial(P3studenttosuperviseandassistinobtainingappropriate
patienteducationmaterial)
Station#3InteractiveDrugPackageInsertActivity (P4studenttosupervise)
*Studentsrequiredtoanswerworksheetfortheirprescriptiondrugusingactualdrugpackageinserts
WEEKTWOACTIVITIES(P3studenttosuperviselabflow)
Station#1MinilectureonCounseling(P4studentaslecturer)
Station#2PatientMedicationHistoryInterviewActivity(P3/P4studentstoroleplayaschallengingpatient).
*Studenttoobtainamedicationhistoryfromachallengingpatient.
*PatienttoprovidestudentwithanunknownmedicationforidentificationinStation#3
Station#3DrugIdentificationActivity(P3studentstosuperviseandassist)
*StudenttouseLexicompDataBasetoidentifythedrugprovidedbythepatientinActivity#2
Station#4InteractiveMedicationReconciliationActivity(P3studentstosuperviseandassist)
69
Station#5InteractiveRiskEvaluationandMitigationStrategies(REMS)andMedicationGuideActivity(P4student
tosuperviseandassist)
Datatobepresentedintheposter
1.TheeffectivenessoftheexperiencefortheP1Students
*CurrentP1students):PreandPostSimulationExperience
*CurrentP1vs.CurrentP2Students:Post(offcampus)IPPEPracticeExperiencesComparison
2.TheeffectivenessoftheexperiencefortheP3/P4Students
*SurveydatafromP3/P4students
ByimplementingthissimulationtoolinthePP317,wewereabletoprovideopportunitiestodispenseandcounsel
earlierintheDoctorofPharmacycurriculum,priortotheCommunityPharmacyIPPEs.Thisopportunitywill
provideafoundationofthecoredomainsforstudentstocarrywiththemduringtheirIPPEsaswellasAPPEs.We
plantocontinuetouseandimprovetheseactivitiesinPP317Fall2014.
70
TitleofInnovation:AcademicCommunityPartnershipsforExperientialLearning,EvidenceBased
Practice,andKnowledgeTranslation
NamesofInnovators:KimberlyD.Ward,PT,DPT,MPHandEricPelletier,PT,DPT,PCS
TelephoneNumbers:2155968723(Ward);2155968724(Pelletier)
EmailAddresses:k.ward@usciences.edu
e.pelletier@usciences.edu
Department:PhysicalTherapy
TypeofStudents:Thirdyearprofessionalphysicaltherapystudents(P3)
TypeofCourse/Activity:Required
NameofActivity/Course:PT602:PediatricPhysicalTherapy
TypeofAward:BrightIdeaAward
Narrative:
Innovation:Thisprojectoutlinesamodelofacademiccommunitypartnershipsbetweenanentrylevel
doctorofphysicaltherapy(DPT)programandlocalpediatricphysicaltherapistsforexperientiallearning,
evidencebasedpracticeapplication,andknowledgetranslation.Ourmodelofacademiccommunity
partnershipsconsistsoffivecomponents:
1)
2)
3)
4)
5)
Experientiallearning
Topic/issueselection
Literaturereview
Developmentofanevidencebasedproject
Knowledgetranslation.
71
ThismodelwasinitiallydevelopedforaDPTcapstoneresearchprojectwithtwoDPTstudents.
Subsequently,themodelwasmodifiedandutilizedinconjunctionwithanewlydevelopedpediatric
physicaltherapycoursewith55finalyearDPTstudents.Theexperientiallearningcomponentsofthis
modelwerepartiallymodeledfrommodelsofcommunitypartnerships(Braveman,Helfrich,&Fisher,
2001;Minkler&Wallerstein,2002),andinteractiveandclinicallyintegratedteaching(Schreiberetal.,
2011;Khan&Coomarasamy,2006;DeMuth,Svien,&Dole,2006).
Description
Goals:
Thegoalsofthismodelareto(1)provideopportunitiesforactivestudentlearningthrough
experientiallearningwithpracticingclinicians,(2)promotestudentandclinicianevidencebased
practicethroughclinicalexpertise,patient/clientvaluesandcircumstances,andavailableresearch,and
(3)promoteknowledgetranslationbetweenstudentsandpracticingclinicians.
72
Implementation:
Followingthismodel,smallgroupsoftwotofourDPTstudentswerepairedwithlocalpediatric
physicaltherapistsfromavarietyofpracticesettingsincludingearlyintervention,centerbased
preschool,schoolbased,outpatient,acutecare,andinpatientrehabilitation.Studentscompleteda
seriesofthreeexperientiallearningvisitswiththeirassignedcliniciantolearnaboutpediatricPT
servicesintheassignedsettingandtoworkwithchildrenreceivingservices.Physicaltherapystudents
andtheirassignedcliniciancollaborativelyidentifiedaresearchtopicrelevanttotheirexperience.The
studentsthenconductedliteraturereviewsanddevelopedanevidencebasedprojectbasedonthe
identifiedtopicofinterest.Theprojectsweresharedwiththeparticipatingclinicians,thuspromoting
knowledgetranslation.Projectsalsoprovidedopportunitiesforthoughtfuldiscussionbetweenstudents
andthecourseprofessorsbothinandoutofclasstime.Completedevidencebasedprojectsincluded:
Clinicianintendedmaterials
o Literaturereviewsofparticulardiagnosesandinterventions
Child/youthintendedmaterials
o Childfriendlyhomeexercisevideos
o VideosdescribingspecificPTinterventions
o Returntoschoolfollowingpediatricspinalcordinjury(forpeers)
o Preparationforpostsecondarytransitionforyouthwithdisabilities
Parentintendedmaterials
o Earlyinterventionandscreeningformotordelaysininfants
o Caregivingstressorsandstrategies
Communitymemberintendedmaterials
o Hippotherapyvolunteertrainingmaterials
o Quantitativestudyoftheuseofoutcomemeasuresinhippotherapy(pilotgroup
capstoneresearchproject)
Reflectiononwhyitisworking:
Thisacademiccommunitypartnershipmodelbenefittedbothstudentsandclinicians.Students
benefitedfromcliniciansclinicalexpertiseandrealworldinteractionsthatcouldntbefully
reconstructedintheclassroom.Participatingcliniciansbenefitedfromthestudentsevidencebased
projects,whichmaynotbefeasiblefortherapistswithlimitedtimeorinformationalresources.This
modelsupportedmultiplecomponentsofevidencebasedpracticeasstudentslearnedfromclinicians
clinicalexpertise,utilizedpublishedevidencetosupportinterventions,andthenhelpedfacilitate
knowledgetranslationwithpracticingtherapists.Thisacademiccommunitypartnershipmodel,based
onsimilarpartnershipandcommunityorganizationmodels,canprovideopportunitiesforacademic
institutionsandpracticingtherapiststopromoteexperientiallearning,evidencebasedpractice,and
knowledgetranslation.
Studentreaction:
73
Studentsweresurveyedattheendofthecourseand85%ofstudentsagreedorstronglyagreed
thattheexperienceexpandedtheirlearningfromthedidacticcourse,91%agreedorstronglyagreed
thattheexperienceshowedthemanewaspectofphysicaltherapy,and70%respondedthat3ormore
sessionsofexperientiallearningwouldbemostappropriateforthecourse.Selectedquotesfrom
studentsonhowtheexperientiallearningusedinthismodelcontributedtotheirlearninginclude:
Allowedustoapplytheorieslearnedinclass
Our[clinician]wassoawesome.[Ourclinician]wasreallypassionateandtaughtussomuchin
only3weeks.Sheansweredallofourquestionsandwasfuntoworkwith.
Ithinkyoulearnthemostoutsideoftheclassroom.IenjoyeditbecauseitwasanaspectofPT
Ihaveneverbeenexposedto.
TheexperientiallearningwasveryvaluableasitexposedmetoanareathatIhadnever
experiencedbefore,andwasabletointeractwithchildrenIprobablyneverwouldhavetreated
inanyclinicalexperience.
Theexperientiallearningwaspossiblythemostvaluablepartofthiscourse.Thebestpartwas
beingabletofollowupatthesamelocationwiththesamekid.
IbelievethiscomponentoftheclassallowedmetoseeadifferentaspectofpediatricPT.It
alsohelpedmerealizetheimportanceoffamilyparticipationwhenworkingwiththis
population.
Talkingwiththepediatrictherapistandgettingtheirviewpointwasbeneficialandgotme
thinkinginadifferentway.
Participatingcliniciansreactions:
Participatingclinicianswereaskedtoprovidetheirreactionstothisexperience.Cliniciansreported
thattheyenjoyedworkingwiththestudents,thattheexperienceallowedforstudentlearning,thatthe
projectswereprofessionalandcomprehensive,andthatsomeoftheprojectsopenedupopportunities
fordiscussionwithpatientsthathadnotbeenpreviouslydiscussed.Selectedquotesfromparticipating
cliniciansinclude:
Weallenjoyedhavingthestudentsandwerequiteimpressedwiththeproject.Itisvery
professionalandcomprehensive.
Thiswasagreattopicfortheirproject(resourcesforaftergraduation)[theyouth]andher
motherwerereallyenthusiasticasshehasnotreallythoughtaboutpossibilitiesthatwillbe
availabletoher.Thanksforyourguidanceinthisregard!
Aswithallfirstsitwasalearningexperience.Overall,Ibelievethatitwasgreattobeableto
havethestudentshaveaglimpseintotheworldofpediatrics...Theseareallexperiencesthat
youcannotteachinaclassroom.
Ithinkthatitwasagoodminiexposuretotheworldonpediatrics.Itallowedthemtonotjust
learnitinabook,butchallengedthemtojumpintotheworld.
TheclassroomhasitslimitationswhenpreparinganovicePTtoprovidetherapyinthenatural
environmentofthepatient...Ithinkthiswasavaluableopportunityforstudentstobecome
awareofEarlyInterventionandtoencompassabroaderperspectiveofyourrolenotonlyasa
PTbutalsoasaresourcethatwillteachfamilieshowtounderstandandcopewithdiagnosis;
74
provideknowledgeinallareasofdevelopment;buildtrustingrelationships;encourage
caregiverstoincorporaterecommendedstrategiesintotheirdailyroutines,thusempowering
themtobecometheirchild'sgreatestadvocate.
75
Analysisofhowtheinnovationwillcontinue:
This academic-community partnership model may be used in a variety of academic disciplines to
foster experiential learning, evidence-based practice, and knowledge translation among undergraduate and
graduate students and community partners. This model may be improved in the future by integrating it
with other courses in order to help further experiential learning and collaborations between the university
and the professional community.
Within the DPT curriculum, it is anticipated that this model will continue to be used in the
pediatric physical therapy course with final-year professional students. Integral to continuing this model
is maintaining positive collaborative relationships with community partners and practicing clinicians and
fostering new collaborative relationships to ensure ample opportunities for future students. Some
challenges and strategies for improvement of use of this model in a class of approximately 70 DPT
students include:
Challenge
Time-intensive preparation
Travel time for students
Some sites were not able

to allow hands-on student
involvement
Condensed 8-week
semester schedule limited
further collaboration with
clinicians on evidencebased projects
Group size, depending on
site
Strategy for Improvement

Participating clinicians from fall 2013 have
already been asked if they would be willing to
participate again. This will reduce the time
needed to identify and establish partnerships
with participating clinicians.
Priority is given to quality partnering sites that
are closer to the USciences campus. Identifying
more partnering sites that are closer to
USciences will reduce travel time for students.
Priority will be given to those sites that can
allow for hands-on student involvement. As this
pediatrics class only involves students who have
completed at least 3 clinical affiliations, handson student involvement is appropriate and
preferred, to best facilitate active student
learning.
It is anticipated that this course will continue to
be held in a condensed semester. The next time
this course is held (Fall 2014), the professors
will ensure that all students understand that they
are to work collaboratively with their assigned
clinician to identify the topic and main ideas for
their evidence-based project.
Growing class sizes make effective use of this
model a challenge. We will continue to work
with participating clinicians to best identify how
to maximize student learning in small groups
that are conducive to the therapeutic
environment.
76
The model may also be used more in student research projects. The unique aspects of this model
allow for student experience with practicing clinicians and provide an intentional means of knowledge
translation.
While initial student reactions were captured through pre- and post-course surveys, a more
thoughtful approach to measuring student outcomes and student perceptions of the model would help
better understand the impact of this model and on opportunities for improvement in the future. Similarly,
surveying participating community partners who are involved with this model would help gather more
information on the impact of this model and on opportunities for improvement in the future.
References:
Braveman,B.H.,Helfrich,C.A.,andFisher,GJ.S.(2001).Developingandmaintainingcommunity
partnershipswithinascholarshipofpractice.Occupationaltherapyinhealthcare.15(12),109
125.
DeMuth,S.,Svien,L.,andDole,R.(eds.)(2006)Acompendiumforteachingprofessionalentrylevel
pediatriccontent.Alexandria,VA:SectiononPediatricsAmericanPhysicalTherapy
Association.
Khan,K.S.,andCoomarasamy,A.(2006).Ahierarchyofeffectiveteachingandlearningtoacquire
competenceinevidencebasedpractice.BMCMedicalEducation.6(59).doi:10.1186/1472
6920659
Minkler,M.,andWallerstein,N.B.(2002).Improvinghealththroughcommunityorganizationand
communitybuilding.InK.Glanz,B.K.Rimer,andF.M.Lewis(Eds.),Healthbehaviorandhealth
education(pp.279311).SanFrancisco,CA:JosseyBass.
Schreiber,J.,Goodgold,S.,Moerchen,V.A.,Remec,N,Aaron,C.,andKreger,A.(2011).Adescriptionof
professionalpediatricphysicaltherapyeducation.PediatricPhysicalTherapy.23,201204.
77
Title of Innovation: Keeping It Re(n)al: Novel Content Delivery of Chronic Kidney Disease in a
Required Pharmacotherapy Sequence
Name of Innovator(s): Laura H. Waite, PharmD, BCPS, CLS, BC-ADM

Email Address(es): l.waite@usciences.edu
Department(s): Pharmacy Practice/Pharmacy Administration
Type of Students: PCP Doctor of Pharmacy Students (third professional year)
Type of course or activity where implemented: Required, Professional or Advanced
Course or activtity where implemented: PP566 Human Disease and Application of Therapeutics
III
Narrative:
Background and Rationale
Throughout the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy (PCP) Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD)
curriculum, students are required to participate in two concurrent courses focused on disease
state management. In the spring semester of the third professional year (P3), the bulk of the
content is delivered in a four credit hour didactic course based primarily on lecture material
delivered in large blocks of time (PP566: Human Disease and Application of Therapeutics III).
The majority of the therapeutic modules are presented utilizing traditional didactic lectures with
interactive content via audience response questions, and pre-class preparation is accomplished
through extensive textbook readings assigned by the instructor.
Chronic kidney disease is one of the major foundational disease states in this course sequence
and involves several different conditions related to the sequelae of declining renal function. Due
to the variety of related disorders and medications involved in managing those disorders, this
therapeutic module has traditionally posed significant challenges for students attempting to
master the material. Although earlier courses provide an introduction to assessing kidney
function, PP566 is the only course in the curriculum in which students receive formal instruction
on chronic kidney disease management. In previous course offerings, this therapeutic module
was taught as described above, utilizing three hours of didactic lecture with active learning
exercises via Turning Point software and extensive pre-class assigned textbook readings. Due
to anecdotal feedback from students regarding the complexity of the material, I attempted to
78
reformat the delivery of the course content to allow for application of the information to enhance
understanding.
Goals of the Innovation
Introducing innovative content delivery methods in the chronic kidney disease module of PP566
served a variety of purposes. First, since students had traditionally struggled to grasp even the
basic concepts of the information, the novel delivery of both pre-class and in-class content was
aimed to assist them in identifying the most important information to understand and retain,
increasing their efficiency in studying. Second, the novel delivery of in-class content was to
assist the students in applying the material to patient care. Because the entire therapeutics
sequence is extremely challenging for students, many simply memorize the information in class
and focus on achieving a specific grade instead of learning the material to be able to use it in
practice; I attempted to shift their perspective from concentrating on the "what" of the
information to the "why" of the information. Third, as the PCP PharmD curriculum undergoes
revision and faculty are looking to recreate and update the courses, I hoped to demonstrate that a
flipped classroom model could be successful and effective even in a large required course.
Finally, the innovation is serving as the cornerstone for a research project where I (along with
my co-investigator) am trying to determine the most effective method of pre-class preparation
for pharmacy students in a flipped classroom model.
Innovation Description and Implementation
The primary platform for didactic content delivery involved three hours of lecture time in PP566
with a class size of approximately 179 students. As described above, this module previously
consisted of three hours of traditional didactic lecture with 3-5 audience response questions per
hour instituted throughout that time. In an effort to enhance student learning, the lecture module
was essentially redesigned to allow for multiple methods of pre-class preparation as well as to
devote the entire lecture block to active learning patient application exercises.
Prior to class, the instructor (L. Waite) selected textbook readings and made those selections
available to students on Blackboard in a manner similar to previous offerings of this course (and
previous courses in this sequence). Additionally, the instructor recorded six short Panopto
videos summarizing key content of the module, including: 1) an overview of chronic kidney
disease; 2) Fluid/Electrolyte Disorders and Metabolic Acidosis; 3) Anemia of chronic kidney
disease; 4) Chronic Kidney Disease - Bone and Mineral Disorder; 5) Comorbidities in chronic
kidney disease; and 6) Dialysis, all as separate files. The average length of each video was
approximately 15 minutes and was presented in Power Point format with the slides in a handout
available for download. The students were provided both the textbook readings and videos and
could select which method (i.e. readings, videos, both, or neither) to use to prepare for class. The
instructor meticulously ensured that the EXACT same content was included in both the textbook
readings and the videos. Notably, the students were informed several weeks prior to class that the
lecture hours would consist entirely of active learning exercises and were encouraged to prepare
adequately to participate in those exercises.
For the 3 hour class period, the entire lecture time consisted of an interactive, progressive patient
79
case that included all disorders related to chronic kidney disease and culminated in the need to
initiate dialysis. A handout with guided questions was provided for the students to utilize as they
worked through the patient case in class. The lecture was designed so that the instructor
presented the case in stages via Power Point slides, allowing the students to evaluate the patient
one disorder at a time (4-5 questions) individually first, then allowing time for the students to
convene in groups of 2-3 students and discuss their answers. The instructor's role was to walk
around the room during the student work periods and answer questions to facilitate discussion.
At the end of each disorder (4-5 questions), the instructor reviewed the answers to each question
with the entire class and provided an audience response question to gauge student
comprehension before moving to the next problem in the case. By the end of the three hour class
period, through the guided patient case, the students had 1) assessed and staged the patient's
chronic kidney disease; 2) assessed and recommended treatment for the patient's fluid and
electrolyte abnormalities; 3) assessed and recommended treatment for the patient's anemia; 4)
assessed and recommended treatment for the patient's mineral and bone disorder; 5) analyzed
and modified treatment for the patient's diabetes, hypertension, and hyperlipidemia; 6) assessed
the patient's need for dialysis; 7) compared and contrasted available dialysis modalities specific
to the patient in the case; 8) provided nutrition recommendations for the patient once dialysis
was initiated; 9) reevaluated and redesigned treatment regimens for ALL comorbidities in the
setting of dialysis initiation; and 10) reflected on the pharmacist's role in caring for patients with
chronic kidney disease.
Assessment
The assessment of these strategies occurred through multiple avenues. First, the students were
required to answer pre-class assessment test questions prior to the start of the lecture (this is a
required element for all therapeutic modules in the course sequence). These questions are meant
to be knowledge-level questions that do not assess application or higher level learning, since the
students have not yet covered the material formally in the course; they are graded for credit as a
measure of pre-class preparation. Second, the students answered a number of audience response
(Turning Point) questions during all three hours of the class period. These questions were
graded for credit, but each question (and answer choices) was discussed during the class period
immediately after answers were submitted. Third, the first exam for PP566 included six
questions (3 multiple choice, 1 matching and 2 extended multiple choice questions) that tested
the students' knowledge of chronic kidney disease and related disorders as well as the ability to
apply available treatment options to a specific patient case. Finally, the students completed a
survey at the end of the class period as well as after the first exam where they were asked to rate
how prepared they felt for the pre-class assessment questions, the in-class activities, and the
exam questions.
Changes to the Implementation
This was the first attempt at utilizing these novel strategies; no changes have yet been
implemented. Notably, during the lecture, the instructor's computer with the lecture Power Point
presentation was not functional for a brief period of time, requiring IT support for repair. Class
progressed as planned with the students utilizing their guided handout, and the instructor lectured
without the use of slides with no perceived changes in student learning during that period. The
80
Power Point slides were posted on Blackboard for all the students to access after the conclusion
of the lecture time.
Outcomes
The success of these innovative strategies was measured in several ways.
Pre-Class Assessment Test (PAT) Questions are designed to measure the students' preparedness
for class. The students had to answer six multiple choice questions, one fill-in-the-blank
question, one true-false question, one extended multiple choice (multiple answer) question, and
one matching question related to the content presented in both the textbook and the videos
(answers were found in both sources). 169 students answered the PAT questions, representing
94% of the total class. The students scored an average of 98% or above on every PAT question,
indicating basic understanding of the material regardless of pre-class preparation method used
(textbook readings, videos, both, or neither). Data relating PAT question score to pre-class
preparation method used will be available in the summer of 2014.
PP566 In-Class Turning Point Questions were provided to the students throughout the three
lecture hours. The questions were presented to the students at the end of each stage of the patient
case (i.e. each chronic kidney disease complication) and focused on the major points of that
complication. Approximately 130 students answered the questions, with an average of 93%
selecting the correct answer across all fifteen questions (range 74% - 100%).
PP566 Exam 1 contained six questions (3 multiple choice, 1 matching and 2 extended multiple
choice questions) to test the students' knowledge and ability to apply information to a specific
patient case. No exam questions were debated, changed, or removed from the scores based on
student (or faculty) feedback. Of the 3 multiple choice questions, all of those questions on test
version A had point biserials greater than 0.15, with 2 of the 3 questions having point biserials
>0.3; the average scores ranged from 67-94%. On test version B, all of the multiple choice
questions had point biserials greater than 0.1, with 2 of the 6 questions having point biserials
>0.4; average scores ranged from 73-96%. For the matching question, 99% of the class received
full credit for the correct answers to all the match options. For the extended multiple choice
questions, 53% and 95% received at least partial credit for the first and second questions,
respectively.
Students completed a voluntary survey after the lecture as well as the first exam. The questions
asked the students to provide which method they used to prepare for each activity, how much
time they spent preparing for each activity, how prepared they felt for that activity, how prepared
they felt in comparison with other disease states in the therapeutics sequence, and how they
would choose to prepare if they had to repeat the activity again. Results for the questions
regarding the lecture are as follows: approximately 52% of students used only the Panopto
videos to prepare for class, while 8% used both the readings and the Panopto videos, 4% used
the readings only, and 36% did not prepare for class. 91% of students reported requiring <2
hours to prepare for the PAT questions; in comparison with other disease state topics in the
course sequence, 91% felt "more prepared" or "equally as prepared" for the PAT questions. 69%
of the students felt "very prepared" or "somewhat prepared" for the interactive patient class
81
presented in class. If they had to prepare for the in-class activity again, 84% of the students
stated that they would watch the Panopto videos or use a combination of the Panopto videos
and the textbook reading. Results for the questions regarding the chronic kidney disease material
on the first exam are as follows: 65% of the students used the Panopto videos and the recorded
class lecture to prepare (i.e. no textbook readings at all), while 15% used the readings and
Panopto videos and recorded lecture, 9% used readings and the Panopto0 videos , and 8%
used only the Panopto1 videos. 91% of students spent >3 hours preparing for the chronic
kidney disease portion of the exam, and 98% of students felt either "very prepared" or
"somewhat prepared" for the exam questions. Notably, 48% of students claimed that they felt
"more prepared" than for other disease state exam questions on this exam, and 44% of students
felt "equally as prepared". 85% of students stated that if they had to prepare for the exam again,
they would utilize either the Panopto2 videos and the recorded class lecture or a combination
of the readings, the Panopto3 videos, and the recorded class lecture.
Student Reaction
Formal instructor (L. Waite) evaluations were conducted at the midpoint of the semester, with
approximately 165 student responses. Subjective comments are not yet available. The following
results represent the percentage of students who answered "strongly agree" or "agree" on each of
these selected and relevant questions: "Instructor communicated content effectively" = 91%;
"Instructor stimulated interest in learning material" = 86%; "Instructor interacted effectively with
students" = 95%; "exams and/or assignments helped me learn course content" = 91%; "Overall,
instructor was an effective teacher" = 94%.
Below are comments received via e-mail/notes:
"Thank you for the pre-class lecture with the cases in class, they complemented each other very
well and it helped me to understand the application of the information presented."
"Thank you for taking the time to make those panapto [sic] videos. They are very clear, easy to
follow, and for once in therapeutics I actually have a clear picture for what's going on and the
way I'll be tested (case type like in class)."
Will this innovation be sustained within the course: Yes
Describe anything you will do differently while sustaining the innovation
The innovation will be sustained in exactly the same manner for the next course offering in order
to gather data on this teaching method for a research project, as discussed in the "Goals of the
Innovation" section (the project is already approved by the USciences IRB).
Will you implement in other courses: Yes.
Within the current PharmD curriculum at the Philadelphia College of Pharmacy, the instructor
for this didactic module has already implemented the interactive patient case style of
presentation in the PP466: Human Diseases and Therapeutics I course. The patient case activity
is adaptable to any disease state; a progressive sequencing of information, presented by the
instructor in stages with time for students to work individually and then in groups before
82
reviewing the correct answers, can be utilized for most fields of study in any size classroom.
Additionally, pre-class preparation through videos and/or textbook readings can be (and has
been) successfully applied to essentially any content, regardless of discipline.
Reflection on Success of the Innovation

As students progress through the PharmD curriculum, they are expected to increase their abilities
not only to learn and retain information, but to apply that information to treatment of a patient.
While they receive some practice in application in concurrent courses, most of the content that
faculty expect the students to apply is delivered in a traditional lecture format with interaction
accomplished solely through Turning Point4 questions. This innovation allowed for learning
and application of content to occur simultaneously through an interactive classroom format that
involved individual contact between students as well as with the instructor directly. Students
could easily see why specific information was important and how to use that information in
treatment of a patient in a low-stakes environment; the very positive reaction as indicated in the
"Student Reaction" section indicated that they viewed this experience as an effective method of
enhancing their knowledge base.
One of the main reasons for the traditional lecture format of the required PharmD therapeutics
courses involves the technical challenges in instructing a very large class in a lecture-hall
designed classroom. While faculty understand the need for active learning and opportunities for
content application, it is difficult to overcome the logistical difficulties in accomplishing this
feat. This innovation provided a creative solution to these technical issues and is a method that
can be adapted effectively to even the largest class size in a restrictive environment.
Conclusion
Extensive literature in recent years has guided educators away from a traditional didactic lecture
method and into the use of more innovative approaches to present complicated content. The
students enrolled in the spring 2014 offering of PP566 were exposed to chronic kidney disease
management in a method distinctly different from any other therapeutic module in the course
sequence, which enhanced their learning and provided an example for other instructors looking
to implement novel approaches in a large required course.
References
Pierce R and Fox J. Vodcasts and Active-Learning Exercises in a "Flipped Classroom" Model of
a Renal Pharmacotherapy Module. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2012; 76(10):
196.
Stoner SC and Fincham JE. Faculty Role in Classroom Engagement and Attendance. American
Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2012; 76(5): 75.
Walvoord BE, and Anderson VJ (1998). Effective grading: A tool for learning and assessment.
San Francisco: Jossey-Bass.
83
Hake R. Interactive-engagement versus traditional methods: A six-thousand-student survey of

mechanics test data for introductory physics courses. American Journal of Physics 1998; 66:6474.
Lage MJ, Platt GJ, and Treglia M. Inverting the classroom: A gateway to creating an inclusive
learning environment. The Journal of Economic Education 2000; 31:30-43.
Meyer R. "The Post-Lecture Classroom: How Will Students Fare?" Available at
http://www.theatlantic.com/technology/archive/2013/09/the-post-lecture-classroom-how-willstudents-fare/279663. Accessed November 8, 2013.
84
WhentheFatHitstheFan:InnovativeApproachestoTeachingDyslipidemiaManagementina
RequiredPharmacyTherapeuticsSequence
LauraWaite,PharmD,BCPS,CLS,BCADM
DianeHadley,PharmD,BCACP
AliceLim,PharmD,BCACP
LauraBio,PharmD,BCPS
BackgroundandRationale
ThroughoutthePhiladelphiaCollegeofPharmacy(PCP)DoctorofPharmacy(PharmD)curriculum,
studentsarerequiredtoparticipateintwoconcurrentcoursesfocusedondiseasestatemanagement.
Inthespringsemesterofthesecondprofessionalyear(P2),thebulkofthecontentisdeliveredinafour
credithourdidacticcoursebasedprimarilyonlecturematerialdeliveredinlargeblocksoftime(PP466:
HumanDiseaseandApplicationofTherapeuticsI),aswellasarequiredonecredithourcompanioncase
studiesandlaboratoryskillscourse(PP468:PracticalLab/CaseStudiesII)thatfocusesonapplication
throughtheuseofpatientcasesandsimulationofrelatedskillstoenhanceunderstandingofthe
material.Dyslipidemiaisoneofthemajorfoundationaldiseasestatesinthiscoursesequence,as
subsequentdiseasestatesinvolveand/orimpactdyslipidemiamanagementandpharmacistsencounter
thisdiseasestateregardlessofpracticesetting.PP466andPP468aretheonlycoursesinthecurriculum
inwhichstudentsreceiveformalinstructionondyslipidemiamanagement.Inpreviouscourseofferings,
thistherapeuticmodulewastaughtutilizingfourhoursofdidacticlecturewithminimalinteractive
content(PP466)andapatientcaserequiringaformalwrittenassessmentandplanfordrugtherapy
(PP468).
Sincethepreviousofferingofthistherapeuticmoduleaspartofthiscoursesequenceinspring2013,a
newsetofdyslipidemiamanagementguidelineswaspublishedbytheAmericanCollegeofCardiology
andtheAmericanHeartAssociation.However,theupdateddyslipidemiaguidelineshavepresenteda
numberofhotlydebatedclinicalcontroversiesandarenotyetwidelyacceptedinclinicalpractice.
Therefore,thecontentforspring2014requiredupdatingtoincludeboththeprevious(2001and2004)
guidelinesaswellasthenew2013recommendations,whichwouldhaverequiredsignificantlymore
didacticandcasestudiestimeifpreviousmethodswerecontinued.Inthesettingofmajormodule
revisions,weelectedtoattemptanoveldesignformaterialpresentationandapplicationthatwould
helpthestudentscomparepreviousandcurrentclinicalrecommendationsforpatientswith
dyslipidemiaaswellasapplythatknowledgetopatienttreatmentthroughavarietyofnew
mechanisms.
Goalsofthisinnovation
Thepurposeofredesigningthedyslipidemiamodulewasprimarilytoenhancethestudentsabilityto
applytheinformationthattheyhadlearnedaboutdyslipidemiatoappropriatepatienttreatment.
85
Anecdotalreportsfromstudentsandfacultymembersafterpreviouscourseofferingsindicateda
generallackofunderstandingofthedyslipidemiacoursematerialandinabilitytoapplythatinformation
toanalysisandselectionofappropriatedrugtherapyplans.Thisinnovationtargetedanovelmethodof
informationpresentationalongwithdeeperapplicationoftheknowledgeduringclassactivitiesto
addressthisdeficit.Anotherpurposeoftheinnovationinvolvedincreasingstudentengagementinthe
course.Becausethetherapeuticssequenceisextremelychallengingforstudents,manysimply
memorizetheinformationprovidedinclassandfocusonachievingaspecificgradeinsteadoffocusing
onlearningthematerialtobeabletouseitinpractice.Wehopedtohelpthestudentsviewthecourse
materialfromadifferentperspectiveandunderstandthewhyoftheinformationinsteadofjustthe
what.
InnovationDescriptionandImplementation
PP466:HumanDiseaseandApplicationofTherapeuticsI
TheprimaryplatformfordidacticcontentdeliveryinvolvedfourhoursoflecturetimeinPP466witha
classsizeofapproximately202students.Asdescribedabove,thispreviouslyconsistedoffourhoursof
traditionaldidacticlecturewithapproximately35multiplechoiceturningpointaudienceresponse
questionsinstitutedthroughoutthattime.Inanefforttoincludenewtreatmentrecommendationsand
literature,aswellasenhancestudentslearning,thefourhourlecturetimewasdividedintoanewthree
partseries.
Hours1and2:DidacticLecture
Thebeginningoftheclassconsistedofprimarilydidacticlecturebasedonprereadingsassignedtothe
class.Thenumberofaudienceresponsequestionswasincreasedtoenhancetheinteractivecomponent
andtoensurethatthestudentsunderstoodtheimportantpointsofthematerial.Duringthistwohour
block,thestudentswereintroducedtoboththepreviousdyslipidemiaguidelinesaswellastheupdated
dyslipidemiaguidelinesaspreparationfortheremainingactivities.
Hour3:PanelDiscussion
Thenexthourconsistedoffivepatientcases,whichwerepresentedasapaneldiscussioninvolving
threefacultymembers.Onefacultymemberservedasamoderatortofacilitatediscussion,whiletwo
facultymembersassessedthepatientcaseandprovideddifferentclinicalopinions(attimesinadebate
styleformat)astotheappropriatetreatmentofthepatientusingeitherthepreviousguidelinesorthe
updatedguidelinestosupporttheirrecommendations.Thepurposeofthispaneldiscussionwasto
allowthefacultymemberstorolemodelcriticalthinkingintheapplicationofallavailableclinical
recommendationstoavarietyofdifferentclinicalscenarios,aswellasdemonstraterespectful
interactionsbetweenhealthcareproviderswithdissentingopinions.Thestudentsreceivedahandout,
formattedasanotespage,forthemtofollowalongasthefacultymemberspresentedacase,
discussedmultipleapproachestotreatingthepatientandprovidedexamplesofwaystoapplyboththe
86
previousguidelinesandthenewguidelinestoeachpatient.Thisallowedthestudentstoeasilycompare
andcontrastthetwosetsofguidelinesinthecontextofpatienttreatment.Forsomepatientcases,
primaryliteraturewaspresentedandevaluatedinordertoenhancetheapplicabilityofalltypesof
informationtoeachpatient.Attheconclusionofeachcase,thestudentsparticipatedinanaudience
responsequestiontoensurethattheyunderstoodthemajorpointofeachcase.
Hour4:ProgressivePatientCase
Thefinalhouroflectureconsistedofaninteractive,progressivepatientcasemodeledafterthepatient
casesinthepaneldiscussion.Again,ahandoutwithguidedquestionswasprovidedforthestudentsto
utilizeastheyworkedthroughthepatientcase,involvingallavailablesetsofdyslipidemiaguidelines.
Thehourwasdesignedsothattheinstructorpresentedthecaseinstages,allowingthestudentsto
evaluatethepatientonestepatatime(45questions)individuallyfirst,thenallowingtimeforthe
studentstoconveneingroupsof23studentsanddiscusstheiranswers.Theinstructorsrolewasto
walkaroundtheroomduringthestudentworkperiodsandanswerquestionstofacilitatelearning.At
theendofeachstage(45questions),theinstructorreviewedtheanswerstoeachquestionwiththe
entireclassandprovidedanaudienceresponsequestiontogaugestudentcomprehensionbefore
movingtothenextstageofthecase.Bytheendofthehour,throughtheguidedpatientcase,the
studentshad1)initiatedtherapyforadyslipidemiapatient;2)reassessedthepatientandreformulated
themedicationtherapyplanwhenaclinicaleventoccurred;3)reassessedandrevisedtherapywhenthe
patientfailedthepreviouslyinitiatedtherapy;4)addedadditionaltherapyforadditionaldyslipidemia
relatedproblems;5)identifiedpotentialadverseeffectsofallrecommendedmedications;and6)
providedcounselingpointsforeachdrugrecommended.
PP468:PracticalLab/CaseStudiesII
Thecompanionpracticelabandcasestudiescourse,PP468,providesatwohourclassperiodforthe
studentstocontinuetheprocessofapplyingthetherapeuticsmaterialdirectlytoapatientcase.
Studentsaredividedintosmallsections(1516studentspergroup)forthiscourse;withinthesesmaller
sections,thestudentsaresubdividedintopodsof34studentsforclassassignmentsanddiscussion.
Eachstudentatthepodisgivenaletter,AD,toidentifyhis/herassignedactivityduringclasstimes.
Typically,forcasestudies,studentsareassignedapatientcasethatcoincideswiththetherapeutics
contentschedule;theassignmententailsreviewingthepatientcasetoidentifydrugtherapyproblems
andformulatingatherapeuticplanbasedonthepatientshistory,condition,andmore.Eachstudent
composesaSOAP(subjectivedata,objectivedata,assessmentandplan)noteforthepatientcaseand
submitsthenoteonBlackboardpriortoclass.Inpreviouscourseofferings,thecasestudiesclass
coincidingwithdyslipidemiainvolvedanassignedpatientcaseforwhichstudentsdevelopedand
electronicallysubmittedaSOAPnotepriortoclass,participatedinclassdiscussionaboutthepatient
case,andreceivedagradeafterclassforthewrittenSOAPnoteassignment.Thissemester,wechoseto
engagethestudentsinalternateactivitiestoenhancetheircriticaldecisionmakingskills.Theactivity
wascomprisedofthreemainparts:jigsawlearningtoevaluatejournalarticles,MedWatchreportofan
adversedrugevent,andgroupreviewofpatientcaseswithanimmediatefeedbackassessmenttool
87
(IFAT).Thestudentswerealsoevaluatedfortheircommunicationandparticipationthroughoutthe
classdurationusingacoursespecificrubric.
Part1oftheclassinvolvedevaluationofajournalarticlerelatedtotreatmentofaknownadverseeffect
ofacommonlyuseddrugclassfordyslipidemia.Priortoclass,studentswereassignedtoread1of4
articlesaddressingtheappropriatetreatmentforthisadverseeffect(specifically,eachstudentwithin
eachpodwasassignedadifferentarticletoread).Studentarticleselectionwasdeterminedbypod
number(i.e.podseatA,podseatB,etc).Theywererequiredtoevaluatetheirassignedarticlewitha
techniquepreviouslyunknowntothem,thePIESmethod(population,intervention,endpoints,statistics)
andbringacompletedPIESworksheetwiththemtoclass[Appendix1].Atthebeginningofclasstime,
thestudentsconvenedwiththeotherstudentsintheirsectionthathadbeenassignedthesamearticle
(allpodseatAstudentsmet,allpodseatBstudentsmet,etc).Theywereaskedtodiscusstheirarticle
anddevelopareasonableconclusionastohowtoapplytheresultsofthearticleinclinicalpractice.
Afterthisdiscussion,thestudentsreturnedtotheiroriginalpodstopresenttheirarticletotheother
studentswhodidnotreadthatarticle.Thepodthenutilizedtheinformationfromallofthearticlesto
cometoaconsensusontheirpodsrecommendationfortreatmentforaspecificpatientcaseinvolving
theknownadversedrugevent.Eachpodcreatedasummaryofrecommendedtreatmentand
submitteditonBlackboardduringclassforcredit.Additionally,allofthepodsineachsection
participatedinagroupdiscussionwiththesectionfacilitatoraboutallofthearticlesandthepertinent
informationgleanedtomakeanappropriatetreatmentdecision.
Part2involvedcompletionofaUnitedStatesFoodandDrugAdministration(FDA)MedWatchformon
behalfofthepatientinthecasefromPart1ofclass.Allhealthcareprofessionalswhoencountera
patientexperiencinganadverseeffectfromanydrugarerequestedtoreportthatinformationtothe
FDAthroughtheuseofaMedWatchform,sothattheFDAcancompiledataaboutadversedrugeffects
inacentralrepository.ThisisanewexerciseforthestudentsinPP468,andnotably,thisisnewtothe
curriculumastheonlytimethattheyareprovidedanopportunitytopracticecompletionoftheform.
Thisactivitywasevaluatedandgradedforcompletion.
Part3involvedstudentpodevaluationofpatientcaseswiththeuseofananswertool,specificallythe
ImmediateFeedbackAssessmentTechnique(IFAT)card.IFATcardsaredesignedsimilartoalottery
ticket.Thereareatotalof10rowswithanswerchoicesAthroughE.Eachletteroptionwithintherow
ishiddenbysilvermaterialthatcanberemovedbyscratchingthecardwithacoinorotherobject;the
correctletteranswercontainsastarunderneaththescratchoffmaterial.Studentsreviewedthree
patientcases,followedbyamultiplechoicequestionassociatedwitheachcase.Aftercomingtoa
groupconsensusonthecorrectanswerforeachquestion,theyusedtheIFATcardandscratchedoff
theirchoice.Ifthefirstscratchoffwasnotthecorrectanswer,thestudentsmovedontotheirsecond
choice,thenthirdchoice,etc.Fullcreditwasgiventothegroupforeachquestionwhenthecorrect
answerwaschosenonthefirstattempt,withpartialcreditgivenforeachattemptthereafter.This
allowedstudentstoprofessionallycollaboratetosolveapatientrelatedproblemwhilealsoreceiving
immediatefeedbackontheiranswerchoices.
88
Assessment
Theassessmentofthesestrategiesoccurredthroughmultipleavenues.First,thestudentsanswereda
numberofmultiplechoiceaudienceresponse(TurningPoint)questionsduringallfourhoursofthe
PP466didacticclassperiod.Thesequestionsweregradedforcredit,buteachquestion(andanswer
choices)wasdiscussedduringtheclassperiodimmediatelyafteranswersweresubmitted.Secondly,
thesecondexamforPP466includedninequestions(6multiplechoice,1shortanswer,1matchingand1
extendedmultiplechoicequestion)thattestedthestudentsknowledgeofdyslipidemiaandabilityto
applyavailabletreatmentoptionstoaspecificpatientcase.Third,studentswereaskedtosubmitan
evaluationofthePIESmethodforevaluatingjournalarticlesinPP468;thepurposeofthisevaluation
wastogaugetheirabilitytousethetoolandinterestinusingitinthefuture.Finally,mostofthe
assignmentsinthePP468classwereevaluatedandgraded.
ChangestotheImplementation
TheinteractivepatientcaseinHour4ofPP466wasoriginallyintendedtooccurinaliveclassroom
settingwithinteractionbetweenthestudentsandlecturer.However,duetoclasscancellationfor
inclementweather,theinteractivepatientcaseinHour4ofPP466wasrecordedviaPanoptoand
postedforthestudentstoreviewindividually.Duringthevideo,thelecturerpresentedthecasethe
samewaythatsheintendedtodoinaliveclassroom,butaskedthestudentstopausethevideotoallow
themselvestimetoworkonthequestions.Theinstructorthenproceededtodiscusstheanswersto
eachquestioninstagesaswasintendedfortheliveclassroom.Theaudienceresponsequestionswere
includedinthePanoptovideoanddiscussedbythelecturerbutnotevaluated.Throughoutthevideo,
thelecturerencouragedstudentstocontactherindividuallyforquestionsasneeded.
InsomesectionsofPP468,thestudentswereunabletocompletetheMedWatchformelectronicallyas
designedduetotechnologyissuesintheclassroom.Insteadofcompletingformsindividually,students
hadtoworkinverylargegroupsandobserveonlyafewstudentscompletingtheforms.
Outcomes
Thesuccessoftheseinnovativestrategieswasmeasuredinseveralways.
PP466InClassTurningPointQuestionswereprovidedtothestudentsthroughoutthethreelive
lecturehours.Duringhours1and2,thequestionsfocusedonrecallofdidacticcontentandservedasa
reviewfortheinformationpresentedimmediatelyprecedingthequestion.Approximately190students
answeredthequestions,withanaverageof89%ofthestudentsselectingthecorrectansweracrossall
tenquestions(range77%97%).Duringhour3(thepaneldiscussion),thequestionsfocusedonspecific
aspectsofthepatientcasesandservedasamethodofsummarizingthemostimportantpoint(s)ofeach
case.Approximately189studentsansweredthesequestions,withanaverageof91%ofthestudents
selectingthecorrectansweracrossthefivequestions(range85%98%).
89
PP466Exam2contained6multiplechoicequestions,1shortanswerquestion,1matchingquestion,and
1extendedmultiplechoicequestionaboutdyslipidemiatotestthestudentsknowledgeandabilityto
applyinformationtoaspecificpatientcase.Noexamquestionsweredebated,changed,orremoved
fromthescoresbasedonstudent(orfaculty)feedback.Ofthe6multiplechoicequestions,allofthose
questionsontestversionAhadpointbiserialsgreaterthan0.2,with4ofthe6questionshavingpoint
biserials>0.3;theaveragescoresrangedfrom6092%.OntestversionB,allofthemultiplechoice
questionshadpointbiserialsgreaterthan0.1,with3ofthe6questionshavingpointbiserials>0.3;
averagescoresrangedfrom4996%.Theshortanswerquestionrequiredthestudentstocalculatean
expectedcholesterollevelinthesettingofaspecificmedicaltherapy(similartoaTurningPoint
questionaskedduringtheclassperiod),and57.6%ofthestudentsansweredcorrectly.Thematching
questionandtheextendedmultiplechoicequestionbothallowedforpartialcredit,with65.2%and
73.3%ofstudentsreceivingeitherpartialorfullcredit,respectively.
PP468classevaluationswerecompletedbystudentsattheconclusionofclass.AsurveyinBlackboard
offeredfivequestionsspecifictothePIESmethodandinclassactivities,withanswerchoicesofpoor,
fair,acceptable,goodandexcellent;115studentsparticipatedintheevaluation.Forthe
purposesofevaluatingthisexercise,weconsideredapositiveresponseeithergoodorexcellent,a
neutralresponseacceptable,andanegativeresponsefairorpoor.Theoverallevaluationwas
positive,withanaverageof67%oftheclassrespondinggoodorexcellentacrossallsurvey
questionsandonlyapproximately14%respondingpoororfair.Resultsforspecificquestionsareas
follows:1)IfoundthePIESmethodhelpful=55%positive,23%negative;2)Ifoundithelpfultodiscuss
mytrialwithotherstudentsthathadreadthesamearticle=84%positive,7%negative;3)Ifelt
confidentwhendiscussingmytrialwithotherpodmembers=78%positive,8%negative;4)Thelipid
caseshelpedfurthermyunderstandingofwhatwasdiscussedinclass=66%positive,12%negative;5)I
wouldliketohavemorecaseactivitiesthathavemereviewprimaryliterature(clinicaltrials)andhave
groupdiscussions=50%positive,20%negative.
PP468inclassactivitygradeswereearnedforcommunicationandparticipationinclass,thepods
summaryrecommendationsbasedonarticlediscussion,andthepodsanswerstopatientcase
questionsusingtheIFATcards.The202studentsinPP468scoredanaverageof99%on
communication/participation(range75100%),anaverageof96.5%onthepodsummary
recommendationsdocuments(range37.5100%),andanaverageof66.25%onthepatientcase
activityusingtheIFATcards(range37.5100%).
StudentReaction
PP466:HumanDiseaseandApplicationofTherapeuticsI
FormalinstructorevaluationsforPP466wereconductedatthemidpointofthesemester.150students
providedresponses,withselectedsubjectivecommentsasbelow:
Dyslipidemiadiscussionreallyhelpedmelearnthematerial.Continuethiswayinthefuture
90
Worksheetsandclassdiscussionswereverycreativeandhelpfulinunderstandingcontent
Thehandfulofcasesprovidedwerehelpfulandotherprofessorsshoulddothesametogiveamore
practicalapplicationforourknowledge
Additionalsubjectivecommentsfromstudentsandfacultyprovidedviaemail/handwrittennotesareas
follows:
Verywellorganized,developedanddelivered
ItwasSOhelpfultoshowcomparisonsoftheATPIIIvstheATPIVguidelinesaswellasthestepsto
approachingapatientcaseingeneral!Pleasecontinuetodothisforfutureyearsbecauseitwasa
wonderfulideaforinclassapplicationofknowledge.
PP468:PracticalLab/CaseStudiesII
Whatawonderfullessonplan(i.e.PIES,ptscenarios,etc.)youbuiltforthiscase.Iwassoimpressed
withhowengagedallofmystudentswereduringeverysinglestepandhowpreparedtheywereduring
thefacilitateddiscussion!WithnoexaggerationIcantellyouwehadablast![faculty]
Selectedstudentcommentsonapplicationofdidacticlecturetoclinicalscenarios:
Ihopetherearemoresuchactivitiesthatcombinedidacticandhandsonlearning!
Ilikedthatthiscasewaseffortbasedandthefocuswasmoreontheactivitiesinclass.Thisisopposed
tohavingmanygradedhighstakesactivities.IlikedoingtolearnactivitieswhereIcanfocuson
learningratherthantryingtobeperfecttogetagoodgrade.Ittakesthepressureoffandmakesita
muchmorepositivelearningenvironment.
Thediscussionofthepatientcaseshelpedmeunderstandtheclassnotesbetterbecausemygroupwas
abletohelpme.
Selectedstudentcommentsonworkinginteams:
Ienjoyedthediscussionofthecases,becausehearingotherviewpointsandtakesonthestudieswas
helpful.
Ilikehowtheactivitytodayinvolvedworkingwithotherswhoreadthesameclinicaltrialandthen
presentingthesummarizedkeydiscussionpointsoftheclinicaltrialwithourpodgroups.Itwas
interestingtohearwhatarticlestheotherstudentsinmypodreadandtoworktogetherindetermining
arationaleforthespecificpatientcasepresentedinclass.
Studentcommentsonimprovementsforthefuture:
IwouldhavelikedthePIEScharttobeexplainedinapriorclasssoIhadabetterunderstandingofwhat
wentintoeachcategory.IthoughtthatIhadfilledmineoutcorrectly,butupondiscussingwith
classmates,someofusfeltdifferentpiecesofinformationwentintothecategories.
91
Sincenotallofthearticleswereclinicaltrials,itmadethePIEStabledifficulttocomplete(ex.CoQ10
articlewasareviewofseveralstudiesandthereforedidnothaveadefinedpatientpopulation).
Discussionofthearticlewithmembersofotherpodswhoreadthesameonewashoweverhelpful.
Willthisinnovationbesustainedwithinthecourse:Yes
Describeanythingyouwilldodifferentlywhilesustainingtheinnovation
Barringinclementweather,inthefuture,theinteractivepatientcaseinHour4ofthedidacticlecture
materialwillbeprovidedasalivelecturetoallowstudentstotakefulladvantageofthegroup
discussions.
InordertoensureadequateexposuretotheMedWatchform,thecomputersintheclassroomfor
PP468willbetestedforfunctionalitypriortoclass.IfBlackboardisnotfunctional,theFDAwebsitewill
beavailableasbackup.Iftheinternetisnotfunctional,papercopiesoftheformwillbemadeavailable.
ThePIESexerciseiswelldesignedforanalysisofsingleclinicaltrials;however,itsusefulnessislessclear
whenusedtoanalyzesystemicreviewsofmultipletrials,asseveralstudentsnotedabove(seethe
StudentReactionsection).Infutureofferingsofthiscourse,alternativearticleswithsimilar
methodologyandcomplexitycanbechosen,allowingstudentstobecomefamiliarwiththePIES
evaluationmethodwhileminimizingunnecessaryconfusion.
Willyouimplementinothercourses:Yes.
WithinthecurrentPharmDcurriculumatthePhiladelphiaCollegeofPharmacy,thelecturerforthe
dyslipidemiadidacticmaterialhasalreadyimplementedtheinteractivepatientcase(Hour4)styleof
presentationinthePP566:HumanDiseasesandTherapeuticsIIIcourse.Additionally,studentsinother
PracticalLab/CaseStudiescourseshavehadexposuretotheuseofIFATcards.ThePIESjournalarticle
evaluationmethodhasalreadybeenincorporatedintofourdiseasestatebasedtopicdiscussions,in
boththeclinicalsettingandoncampus,aspartoftheexperientialambulatorycareAdvancedPharmacy
PracticeExperience(APPE)inthefinalyearofthePharmDcurriculum.Movingforward,completionof
MedWatchformscaneasilybeinsertedintoanydiscussionofadversedrugevents,whichoccursatall
levelsoftheprogram.
However,theseexercisesarenotsolelyusefulaspartofpharmacyeducation.Thepaneldiscussion
betweenfacultymembersandtheinteractive,groupdiscussiontechniquesusedinPP466canbe
successfullyappliedtoalllargeclassroomsforessentiallyanylecturecontent.Notably,newguidelines
orrecommendationsemergeeveryfewyearsformanydisciplinesandspecialties,andfacultyarefaced
withthetaskofreworkinginstructionalmaterialswhilepresentingmultipleguidelines.Applicationof
92
thesetechniquesnotonlyallowsstudentstodistinguishbetweenvariousrecommendations,butthey
alsoallowstudentstovisualizehowaspecialistwouldnavigatewhatcanbeoverwhelmingand
conflictingdata.Additionally,theuseofIFATcardstofacilitategroupdiscussionandproblemsolving(as
inPP468)canalsobeappliedtoallcontentacrossdisciplines.
ReflectiononSuccessoftheInnovation
Oneofthemostsignificantmeasuresofasuccessfuleducationalinterventionliesintheabilityofthe
studenttoutilizetheinformationorskillslearnedduringthatinterventioninarealworldscenario.The
abilitytotransitionfromrotememorizationtoapplicationintheclinicalsettingcanbeenhancedby
facultymodelingaswellasincreasedstudentengagement.Inredesigningthedyslipidemiamodule,we
attemptedtodemonstratehowthedidacticcontentcouldbeappliedinmultiplesituationsthatthe
studentswillencounterinthecourseoftheircareers,specifically:1)interactionswithotherhealthcare
professionals(paneldiscussioninPP466);2)determiningappropriatetreatmentforaspecificpatient
(Hour4ofPP466andPart1ofPP468);3)evaluatingliteratureforapplicationtoapatientcase(Part1of
PP468);4)reportingadverseeventstoappropriateentities(Part2ofPP468),and5)workinginteamsto
developadrugtherapyplan(Hour4ofPP466andallofPP468).Thepositivestudentreactionindicated
thattheywereengagedintheexercisesandusedtheopportunitytoenhanceunderstandingofthe
material,sothattheywillbebetterequippedtoapplytheknowledgethattheyhavegainedtotheir
professionallivesaspharmacists.
Conclusion
Extensiveliteratureinrecentyearshasguidededucatorsawayfromatraditionaldidacticlecture
methodandintotheuseofmoreinnovativeapproachestopresentcomplicatedcontent.Thepharmacy
studentsinPP466andPP468wereexposedtodyslipidemiamanagementthroughtheuseofseveral
innovativeapproachesthatcanberepeatedinothercoursestoenhancelearning.
References
StoneNJetal.2013ACC/AHAGuidelineontheTreatmentofBloodCholesteroltoReduce
AtheroscleroticCardiovascularRiskinAdults.Circulation2013;publishedonlineNovember12.
ExpertPanelonDetection,Evaluation,andTreatmentofHighBloodCholesterolinAdults.Executive
summaryonthethirdreportofthenationalcholesteroleducationprogram(NCEP)expertpanelon
detection,evaluation,andtreatmentofhighbloodcholesterolinadults(AdultTreatmentPanelIII).
JAMA2001;285(19):248697.
93
GrundySM,CleemanJI,MerzNB,etal.NCEPReport.ImplicationsofrecentclinicaltrialsfortheNational
CholesterolEducationProgramAdultTreatmentPanelIIIGuidelines.Circulation2004;110:22739.
BarolettiS,SzumitaPM.PIESmethodofcritique.CritPathwaysinCardiol2004;3:2058.
TheUnitedStatesFoodandDrugAdministrationSafetyInformationandAdverseEventReporting
Program.Availableatwww.accessdata.fda.gov/scripts/medwatch/.
Appendix1.ThePIESMethodofCriticallyEvaluatingClinicalTrials.AdaptedfromCritPathwaysin
Cardiol2004.
PatientPopulation:Summarizethepatientpopulation.Arethereanymajordifferencesinpatient
characteristicsthatmayconfoundtheresults?Evaluateinclusionandexclusioncriteriaserveasaguide
tothepatientsforwhomtheresultsmaybeapplicable.
Intervention:Summarizethepatientpopulation.Istheinterventionbeingtestedrepresentativeof
currentpracticeorderivedfrompreviouswellconductedstudies?
Endpoints:Summarizetheendpoints.Dotheendpointsofthetrialtrulyrepresentwhatisclaimedas
beingstudied?Istheendpointusedinthetrialclinicallysignificant?Ifsurrogateendpointisused,isit
validatedforthecorrelationtoahardclinicalendpoint?
Statistics:Summarizethestatistics.Arethestatisticaltestsusedtoevaluatethedataappropriate?Isthe
effectsizeclinicallyrelevant?Evaluatetheresultsinabsolutevaluesandcalculatenumberneededto
treat(NNT).

Innovations 2014

Hochgeladen von

Dokumentinformationen

Copyright

Verfügbare Formate

Dieses Dokument teilen

Dokument teilen oder einbetten

Freigabeoptionen

Stufen Sie dieses Dokument als nützlich ein?

Sind diese Inhalte unangemessen?

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

Innovations 2014

Hochgeladen von

Copyright:

Verfügbare Formate

DOCUMENTOFINNOVATIONS

Co-presented with graduate student P.Tran

Teaching and Center Educational Innovations Poster Day, May 2013

Name of Innovator(s): Christine Flanagan, MFA

Telephone Number(s): 215.596.7543

Email Address(es): c.flanag@usciences.edu

Type of Students: Undergraduate

Type of course or activity where implemented: Core Curriculum/General Education

Responsibilities in the course were clearly explained

Responsibilities in the course were clearly explained

A Novel USciences Interprofessional Education (IPE) Workshop Integrating Pharmacy, Physical

Diane E. Hadley, PharmD, BCACP

Sanchita Sen, PharmD, BCPS

Radha Vanmali, PharmD, BCACP

Kimberly D. Ward, PT, DPT, MPH 215-596-8723

Department (s) Included:

Department of Pharmacy Practice/ Pharmacy Administration, Philadelphia College of Pharmacy

Physical Therapy Students- extra credit in PT 463 Documentation and Communication

Background and Rationale

Goals of the Innovation

Innovation Description and Implementation

Students Assessment of the Workshop

Workshop Successes and Strengths

Future Changes and Considerations for IPE Workshops/Experiences

Future Implementation of IPE Workshops on USciences Campus

[i] Interprofessional Education Collaborative (2011). Core Competencies for Interprofessional

Appendix Faculty Guide with Team Building and Debriefing Questions

A. Introduction at the beginning of the workshop Timing of this portion:10 minutes

This will be conducted by the core faculty group

Name, program, and year of training

Research the training and broad view of curriculum of each profession

Research the roles of each profession within a healthcare team and

Have the students brainstorm where they see themselves in 5

Identifying which misconceptions were proven false by their research of

What do you hope to get out of this interprofessional education (IPE)

D. De-briefing in large group about initial discussions- Timing of this Portion: 20

Facilitator Note: This will be conducted by the core faculty group

What did you learn in the discussion?

E. Part 2: Review of Case 20 minutes (stroke case)

Breakdown of the 20 minutes: 15 minutes to work with the same

Facilitator Note: Your role is to help your individual professions make

involved in the discharge planning. Otherwise, please let the students

Part 5: De-briefing as a small group with facilitator- Timing of this portion: 15

If to repeat the exercise what you improve on?

Picked one concept that you learned in todays workshop

Part 6: De-briefing as a large group- Timing of this portion: 20 minutes

Facilitator Note: This will be run by the core faculty group

Have the teams explain what their approach was?

What is your ah-ha moment during the workshop?

Name of Innovator(s): Paul Halpern

Telephone Number(s): (215) 596-8913

Email Address(es): p.halper@usciences.edu

Department(s): Math, Physics, Statistics

Type of Students: PT, Biology; other majors

Type of course or activity where implemented: Required

Course or activtity where implemented: Introductory Physics

Title of Innovation: Using ApprenNet and Group Presentations to Promote Learning,

Name of Innovator(s): Lisa T. Hoglund, PT, PhD, OCS, Cert MDT

Telephone Number(s): (215) 596-8541

Email Address(es): l.hoglund@usciences.edu

Department(s): Physical Therapy

Type of Students: DPT student - professional phase

Type of course or activity where implemented: Required, Professional or Advanced

Course or activtity where implemented: PT 509 Differential Diagnosis