Student engagement in pharmacology courses using online learning tools

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Volumn 77, Issue 6, 2013, Pages

  Karaksha, Abdullah ^a   Grant, Gary ^a   Anoopkumar Dukie, Shailendra ^a   Nirthanan, S Niru ^a   Davey, Andrew K ^a  

^a GRIFFITH UNIVERSITY   (Australia)

Author keywords

e tools; Engagement; Internet; Online instruction; Pharmacology

Indexed keywords

ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION; HUMAN; INTERNET; LEARNING; PHARMACY STUDENT; PROCEDURES; SCHOOL; TEACHING; ARTICLE; E-TOOLS; ENGAGEMENT; METHODOLOGY; ONLINE INSTRUCTION; PHARMACOLOGY;

ATTITUDE TO COMPUTERS; COMPUTER-ASSISTED INSTRUCTION; CURRICULUM; EDUCATION, PHARMACY; EDUCATIONAL MEASUREMENT; HUMANS; INTERNET; LEARNING; SCHOOLS, PHARMACY; STUDENTS, PHARMACY; TEACHING MATERIALS;

E-TOOLS; ENGAGEMENT; INTERNET; ONLINE INSTRUCTION; PHARMACOLOGY;

EID: 84881509807     PISSN: 00029459     EISSN: 15536467     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.5688/ajpe776125     Document Type: Article

References (42)

1. Kuh GD. The national survey of student engagement: conceptual and empirical foundations. New Dir Inst Res. 2009;2009(141):5-20.
2. Kuh GD, Cruce TM, Shoup R, Kinzie J, Gonyea RM. Unmasking the effects of student engagement on first-year college grades and rersistence. J Higher Educ. 2008;79(5):540-563.
3. Pace R. The Undergraduates: A Report of Their Activities and Progress in College in the 1980's. California University, LA: Center for the Study of Evaluation; 1990.
4. Coates H. Attracting, Engaging and Retaining: New Conversations About Learning, Australasian Student Engagement Report. Camberwell, Vic: Australian Council for Educational Research Ltd; 2008.
5. Radlof A, Coates H. Doing More for Learning: Enhancing Engagement and Outcomes: Australasian Survey of Student Engagement: Australasian Student Engagement Report. Camberwell: Australian Council for Educational Research (ACER); 2010.
6. Barnett R, Coate K. Engaging the Curriculum in Higher Education. England: McGraw-Hill Education; 2005.
7. Franklin T, Van Harmelen M. Web 2.0 for content for learning and teaching in higher education. 2007. http://www.jisc.ac.uk/media/documents/programmes/digitalrepositories/web2-content-learningand-teaching.pdf. Accessed May 15, 2012.
8. Haggis T. Pedagogies for diversity: retaining critical challenge amidst fears of'dumbing down'. Stud Higher Educ. 2006;31(5): 521-535.
9. Ramsden P. Learning to Teach in Higher Education: Approaches to Learning, 2nd edition. New Fetter Lane, London: Routledge Falmer; 2003.
10. Biggs J. Setting the stage for effective teaching. In: Teaching for Quality Learning at University: What the Student Does, 2nd edition. Buckingham, England: SRHE and open University Press; 2003:56-73.
11. Yelland N, Tsembas S, Hall L. E learning: issues of pedagogy and practice for the information age. In: Kell P, Vialle W, Konza D and Vogyl G, ed. Introduction - Learning and the Learner: Exploring Learning for New Times: University of Wollongong; 2008:95-111.
12. Berman N, Fall L, Maloney C, Levine D. Computer-assisted instruction in clinical education: a roadmap to increasing CAI implementation. Adv Hhealth Sci Educ Theory Pract. 2008;13(3): 373-383.
13. Cole M. Using Wiki technology to support student engagement: lessons from the trenches. Comput Educ. 2009;52(1):141-146.
14. Prensky MH. sapiens digital: from digital immigrants and digital natives to digital wisdom. Innovate. 2009;5(3):1-9.
15. Lewis MJ, Davies R, Jenkins D, Tait MI. A review of evaluative studies of computer-based learning in nursing education. Nurse Educ Today. 2005;25(8):586-597.
16. Grigg P, Stephens CD. Computer-assisted learning in dentistry a view from the UK. J Dent. 1998;26(5-6):387-395.
17. Nieder GL, Borges NJ, Pearson JC. Medical student use of online lectures: exam performance, learning styles, achievement motivation and gender. J Int Assoc Med Sci Educ. 2011;21(3):222-228.
18. Charsky D, Ressler W. "Games are made for fun": lessons on the effects of concept maps in the classroom use of computer games. Comput Educ. 2011;56(3):604-615.
19. Biggs J, Tang C. Teaching according to how students learn. In: Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th edition. Berkshire, England: Open University Press (McGraw-Hill Education); 2007: 15-30.
20. Karaksha A, Grant G, Davey AK, Anoopkumar-Dukie S. Development and evaluation of computer-assisted learning (CAL) teaching tools compared to the conventional didactic lecture in pharmacology education. Proceedings of EDULEARN11 Conference. 4-6 July 2011, Barcelona, Spain. 2011:3580-3589.
21. Chen P-SD, Lambert AD, Guidry KR. Engaging online learners: the impact of web-based learning technology on college student engagement. Comput Educ. 2010;54(4):1222-1232.
22. Johnson RD. Gender differences in e-learning: communication, social presence, and learning outcomes. J Organ End User Comput. 2011;23(1):79-94.
23. Taplin RH, Low LH, Brown AM. Students' satisfaction and valuation of web-based lecture recording technologies. Aust J Educ Technol. 2011;27(2):175-191.
24. MacLean J, Scott K, Marshall T, Asperen P. Evaluation of an e-learning teaching resource: what is the medical student perspective? Aust N Z Assoc Health Prof Educ. 2011;13(2):53-63.
25. Euzent P, Martin T, Moskal P, Moskal P. Assessing student performance and perceptions in lecture capture vs. face-to-face course delivery. J Inf Technol Educ. 2011;10:295-307.
26. Hunt L, Eagle L, Kitchen PJ. Balancing marketing education and information technology: Matching needs or needing a better match? J Mark Educ. 2004;26(1):75-88.
27. Lindquist T, Long H. How can educational technology facilitate student engagement with online primary sources?: a user needs assessment. Libr Hi Tech. 2011;29(2):224-241.
28. Mogey N. So you are thinking about using learning technology. In: Stoner G, ed. Implementing Learning Technology. Heriot-Watt University, Edinburgh: Learning Technology Dissemination Initiative; 1999:21-27.
29. Thirunarayanan M, Lezcano H, McKee M, Roque G. "Digital nerds" and "digital normals:" not "digital natives" and "digital immigrants." Int J Instr Tecnol Digital Learn. 2011;8(2). http://www.itdl.org/Journal/Feb_11/article03.htm. Accessed October 10, 2012.
30. Lohnes S, Kinzer C. Questioning assumptions about students' expectations for technology in college classrooms. Innovate. 2007; 5(3). http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view5article&id5431. Accessed October 12, 2012.
31. Garcia P, Qin J. Identifying the generation gap in higher education: where do the differences really lie? Innovate. 2007;3(4). http://www.innovateonline.info/index.php?view5article&id5379. Accessed October 12, 2012.
32. Biggs J, Tang C. Designing intended learning outcomes. In: Teaching for Quality Learning at University, 4th edition. Berkshire, England: Open University Press (McGraw-Hill Education); 2007: 113-133.
33. Allin L, Turnock C, Thompson J. Enhancing teaching and learning with technology through collaborative research with students. Proceedings of The London SoTL 8th International Conference. 13-14 May 2011, London, UK. 2011:9-16
34. Martin E, Prosser M, Trigwell K, Ramsden P, Benjamin J. What university teachers teach and how they teach it. Instr Sci. 2000; 28(5):387-412.
35. Cassidy S. Learning style and student self-assessment skill. Educ Train. 2006;48(2/3):170-177.
36. Helsper E, Enyon R. Digital natives: where is the evidence? Br Educ Res J. 2010;36(3):503-520.
37. McCabe DB, Meuter ML. A student view of technology in the classroom: does it enhance the seven principles of good practice in undergraduate education? J Mark educ. 2011;33(2):149-159.
38. Norton L. Assessing students learning. In: Fry H, Ketteridge S, Marshall S, eds. A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 3rd edition. London: Routledge (Taylor & Francis Group); 2009:132-149.
39. Fry H, Ketteridge S, Marshall S. Understanding student learning. In: A Handbook for Teaching and Learning in Higher Education, 2nd edition. London: Kogan Page; 2003:9-25.
40. Meyers NM, Nulty DD. How to use (five) curriculum design principles to align authentic learning environments, assessment, students' approaches to thinking and learning outcomes. Assess Eval Higher Educ. 2009;34(5):565-577.
41. Rosenberg H, Grad H, Matear D. The effectiveness of computeraided, self-instructional programs in dental education: a systematic review of the literature. J Dent Educ. 2003;67(5):524-532.
42. Smith SD, Caruso JB. The ECAR Study of Undergraduate Students and Information Technology, 2010: ECAR Research Study 6, EDUCAUSE Center for Applied Research, Boulder, CO; 2010.