EXPLORING TEACHING APPROACHES IN THE TRANSITION TO ... Barajas Alonso Thesis.pdf · ii Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy KEYWORDS

EXPLORING TEACHING APPROACHES IN

THE TRANSITION TO CONTEMPORARY

CURRICULA IN PHARMACY

Elia Barajas Alonso

Bachelor of Pharmacy

Submitted in fulfilment of the requirements for the degree of

Masters by Research

School of Clinical Sciences

Faculty of Health

Queensland University of Technology

[2018]

ii Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

KEYWORDS

Behaviourism

Cognitivism

Connectivism

Continuous professional development (CPD)

Curricula

Curriculum

Field notes

Health-related disciplines

Higher education

Humanism

Key performance indicator (KPI)

Observations

Paradigm

Pharmacy

Philosophies

Problem-based learning (PBL)

Questionnaires

Social constructivism

Survey

Teaching approaches

Teaching and learning (T & L)

Theory of learning

Health care consumer domain (HCCD)

Synonyms for better understanding of the thesis.

• Curriculum: program, course, programme, plan of study, educational

program, syllabus.

• Unit: class, subject, module, lesson.

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy iii

ABSTRACT

Over the last 20 years, the delivery of courses in health disciplines has

undergone enormous transformation in the way that contemporary curricula are

designed and delivered. Traditional teaching styles and theories of learning are

shifting to more contemporary teaching and learning approaches that can better adapt

to healthcare professionals’ current demands. The student’s way of learning is

shaped by how the academics teach and deliver the courses. Currently, there is a

need to explore academics’ teaching practices and the grounds of their pedagogical

approaches in order to identify how those teaching practices are shaped and prepared

for transitioning into contemporary curricula. The pharmacy course at Queensland

University of Technology (QUT) was in the process of transitioning to introduce

more contemporary teaching and learning approaches. The simultaneous delivery of

the traditional and contemporary curriculum in the pharmacy discipline provides a

unique opportunity to observe and compare academics' teaching practices.

This study aimed to investigate and identify the teaching approaches in

traditional and contemporary courses, and teaching practices that were employed by

academics from the discipline of pharmacy who were involved in the curriculum

transition. A sequential mixed methods study design was employed in the research,

the study began with the survey and it was followed by the observational research.

When designing the study, the research question was: “What are the current and

desired teaching approaches perspectives of academics in Clinical Sciences?”. A

survey was designed to investigate the predominant teaching techniques, strategies,

and styles used by the academics to deliver content and engage students currently;

and what they would ideally like to use, particularly given the opportunity for a

transition in curriculum. Respondents were also asked to provide commentary on

perceived barriers and facilitators to achieving this transition. Academics from the

School of Clinical Sciences at QUT, consisting of the disciplines of Pharmacy,

Medical Imaging, Radiation Therapy, Podiatry and Paramedic Science, were invited

to complete the self-administered survey. In the teaching period after the survey was

disseminated, pharmacy academics teaching in both the traditional and contemporary

curricula were observed in the classroom, to investigate the enacted teaching

iv Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

techniques, strategies and styles. The subsequent research question investigated

during the Phase 2 of the research was: “What are the current learning theories that

academics employ to deliver the Pharmacy curricula?”. For the purposes of these

observations, the survey questions were converted into a checklist to identify the

predominant teaching and learning theories underpinning the classroom activities.

The survey results suggested academics were willing to shift into more

contemporary teaching approaches. This was in alignment with the observations,

which revealed a moderate transition from traditional to contemporary approaches in

the academics’ teaching practices. These results suggest and reinforce that support

strategies for academics are important for facilitating transition from curricula that is

designed and underpinned by traditional methods to more contemporary approaches.

Further research is needed for the validation of the survey in pharmacy and other

disciplines. A tool designed to gauge academics’ practices in the transition from

traditional to contemporary curricula may be useful for supporting this transition

process.

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy v

TABLE OF CONTENTS

Keywords ................................................................................................................... ii

Abstract ..................................................................................................................... iii

Table of Contents ........................................................................................................ v

List of Figures ......................................................................................................... viii

List of Tables ............................................................................................................. ix

List of Abbreviations ................................................................................................... x

Statement of Original Authorship ............................................................................... xi

Acknowledgements ...................................................................................................xii

Chapter 1: Introduction ............................................................................................ 13

1.1 Background ........................................................................................................ 13

1.2 Aims and objectives ........................................................................................... 15

1.3 Significance, scope and definitions ..................................................................... 16

1.3.1 Definitions ........................................................................................ 17

1.4 Thesis Outline .................................................................................................... 21

Chapter 2: Literature Review ................................................................................... 23

2.1 Introduction ........................................................................................................ 23

2.2 Historical Background ........................................................................................ 24

2.3 Higher health degree courses in Clinical Sciences education............................... 27

2.3.1 Regulations that shape higher education ............................................ 28

2.4 Curriculum ......................................................................................................... 29

2.4.1 Elements of curricula......................................................................... 31

2.4.2 Levels of curricula............................................................................. 33

2.4.3 Approaches to curricula ..................................................................... 36

2.5 Theories of learning............................................................................................ 37

2.5.1 Behaviourism .................................................................................... 38

2.5.2 Cognitivism ....................................................................................... 39

2.5.3 Social constructivism ........................................................................ 40

2.5.4 Humanism ......................................................................................... 41

2.5.5 Connectivism .................................................................................... 42

2.6 Traditional and contemporary approaches........................................................... 43

2.7 The role of the learning theories in curriculum design ........................................ 44

2.8 Pharmacy Academics ......................................................................................... 45

vi Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

2.9 Summary and Implications ................................................................................. 46

Chapter 3: Research Design ..................................................................................... 48

3.1 Methodology ...................................................................................................... 48

3.2 Ethic approach of the research............................................................................ 53

3.3 Survey. Phase 1: academics’ perceptions on current and desired teaching

approaches ......................................................................................................... 54

3.3.1 Participants ....................................................................................... 54

3.3.2 Sampling .......................................................................................... 54

3.3.3 Survey design and data collection ..................................................... 55

3.3.4 Participant recruitment and data collection ........................................ 56

3.3.5 Analysis of survey results ................................................................. 57

3.3.6 Ethics ................................................................................................ 57

Data management ................................................................ 57

3.4 Observations ...................................................................................................... 57

3.4.1 Participants ....................................................................................... 58

3.4.2 Sampling .......................................................................................... 58

3.4.3 Observational design and data collection tools .................................. 59

3.4.4 Observation design ........................................................................... 61

3.4.5 Participant recruitment and data collection ........................................ 63

3.4.6 Analysis of the results ....................................................................... 63

Analysis of the field notes .................................................... 63

3.4.7 Ethics ................................................................................................ 64

Data management ................................................................ 64

Chapter 4: Results .................................................................................................... 66

4.1 Phase 1. Results from the survey ........................................................................ 66

4.1.1 Recruitment of Participants ............................................................... 66

4.1.2 Sampling .......................................................................................... 66

4.1.3 Academics’ perspectives ................................................................... 67

4.1.4 Barriers and facilitators ..................................................................... 69

4.2 Phase 2. Results from the observations ............................................................... 71

4.2.1 Recruitment of participants ............................................................... 71

4.2.2 Sampling .......................................................................................... 71

4.2.3 Observational data results ................................................................. 71

General overview of the teaching approaches of the pharmacy

curriculum observed during the research ........................................... 72

Comparison of traditional and contemporary curricula ......... 74

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy vii

Comparison of lectures in the traditional curriculum and

workshops for the contemporary curriculum ...................................... 76

Comparison of traditional and contemporary practicals ........ 79

Comparison of traditional and contemporary tutorials .......... 82

Chapter 5: Discussion .............................................................................................. 86

5.1 Current and desired teaching approaches perspectives of academics in Clinical

Sciences ............................................................................................................. 87

5.2 Pedagogical differences observed in the teaching approaches instruction and

delivery of a traditional and a contemporary curriculum within the same pharmacy

discipline ............................................................................................................ 89

5.3 Implications of the findings: from undergraduate teaching to Health careers ....... 92

5.3.1 Implications for academics ................................................................ 92

5.3.2 Implications for universities .............................................................. 93

5.4 Limitations ......................................................................................................... 95

5.5 Further research .................................................................................................. 96

Chapter 6: Conclusion .............................................................................................. 98

Chapter 7: References ............................................................................................ 100

Chapter 8: Appendices ........................................................................................... 128

Appendix A: Survey questionnaire ............................................................ 128

Appendix B: Main Features Checklist ....................................................... 134

Appendix C: Survey Mirrored Checklist .................................................... 136

viii Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

LIST OF FIGURES

Figure 1. Prescriptive model adapted from Tyler (1949/2013). ............................... 31

Figure 2. The three levels of curriculum (Extracted from Prideaux, 2003)............... 35

Figure 3. Maslow’s pyramid of needs. Adapted from Maslow’s hierarchy of

needs (Maslow, 1943). Extracted from McLeod (2007). ............................ 41

Figure 4. Framework for research extracted from Creswell (2014). ......................... 49

Figure 5. Timeline of the research. Phase 1 (survey), light coloured squares and

phase 2 (observations), dark coloured squares. .......................................... 51

Figure 6. Timeframes and dates of the observation research process. ...................... 64

Figure 7. Percentage of answers linked to each theory of learning as reported

by the participants about their current and desired teaching approaches

in the survey (n=20). ................................................................................. 67

Figure 8. Current teaching approaches. Academics’ response rate linked to

each theory of leaning as reported by the participants for their current

teaching approaches (n=20)....................................................................... 68

Figure 9. Desired teaching approaches. Academics’ response rate linked to

each educational theory as reported by the participants for their

desired teaching approaches (n=20). ......................................................... 68

Figure 10. The overall learning theories related to each of the teaching

strategies and each of the questions. (n=9) ................................................ 73

Figure 11. Comparison of the traditional (left side of the graph) and the

contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum sample of teaching

approaches. ............................................................................................... 74

Figure 12. Lecture observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and

the contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum sample of

teaching approaches. ................................................................................. 77

Figure 13. Practical observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and

contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum samples of teaching

approaches. ............................................................................................... 80

Figure 14. Tutorials observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and

the contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum sample of

teaching approaches. ................................................................................. 83

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy ix

LIST OF TABLES

Table 1. Definitions and terms ................................................................................ 18

Table 2. Traditional and contemporary curriculum classroom observations

(from Survey Mirrored Checklist). .......................................................................... 72

x Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

LIST OF ABBREVIATIONS

AHPRA Australian Health Practitioner Regulation Agency

APC Australian Pharmacy Council

AQF

CPD

Australian Qualifications Framework

Continuous Professional Development

EOI Expression of Interest

HCCD Health care consumer domain

MFC

MOPP

Main Features Checklist

Manual of Policies and Procedures

OECD Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development

PBA Pharmacy Board of Australia

PBL Problem-Based Learning

PSA Pharmaceutical Society of Australia

Q&A Questions and answers

QUT

SMC

Queensland University of Technology

Survey Mirrored Checklist

TEQSA Tertiary Education Quality and Standards Agency

TPACK Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge

T & L Teaching and learning

UHREC University Human Research Ethics Committee

UK United Kingdom

USA United States of America

WHO World Health Organization

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy xi

STATEMENT OF ORIGINAL AUTHORSHIP

The work contained in this thesis has not been previously submitted to meet

requirements for an award at this or any other higher education institution. To the

best of my knowledge and belief, the thesis contains no material previously

published or written by another person except where due reference is made.

Signature: QUT Verified Signature

Date: April 2018

xii Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

I would like to express my gratitude to my principal supervisor Dr. Jose

Manuel Serrano Santos for his expertise, motivation, and patience during this

Masters project. Also, his involvement and assistance in every step throughout the

process was vital. I would also like to express my appreciation to my supervisory

team Dr. Esther TL Lau and Dr. Michelle Mukherjee who have guided me during

this long process with advice that has been priceless for the development of the

research. In addition, I would like to thank Prof. Lisa Nissen and Prof. Vivienne

Tippett, for their valuable guidance.

I would also like to thank Ms. Karin Hosking for her diligent proofreading her

diligent proofreading. I gratefully indebted to her for her very valuable comments

which had undoubtedly improved this thesis. My appreciation also extends to Ms.

Jennifer Thomas for her valuable comments during the research.

Special thanks to my family and my partner who have given me the necessary

support and encouragement during the long nights and have provided support

towards achieving my goals. I would also like to thank my friends and colleagues

who have been very helpful and supportive and have experienced with me the

difficulties of the research.

Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy 13

Chapter 1: Introduction

This first chapter introduces the current situation of the pharmacy educational

landscape, including current changes happening in the health and pharmacy sectors

that have prompted shifts in curriculum and teaching methods, as discussed in

section (1.1). The aims of the research and the objectives are explained in section

(1.2). Section (1.3) discusses the significance of the research; the scope and

definitions will also be addressed in this section. The thesis outline, section (1.4), is

the last section in this chapter and describes the structure that the thesis follows.

1.1 Background

The skills and attributes that society demands of pharmacists and pharmacy

graduates are changing. Pharmacists are facing a competitive market environment

within the pharmacy landscape (Singleton & Nissen, 2014). The roles pharmacists as

healthcare professionals perform in community and hospital environments have

transformed. The traditional roles of dispensing and compounding medicines, have

evolved into roles involving professional and cognitive services, with a strong

patient-centred care focus (Ali, Fejzic, Grant, & Nissen, 2015; Austin & Ensom,

2008; Wiedenmayer, Summers, Mackie, Gous, & Everard, 2006). These changes

demand graduates who are ready to perform their jobs in a changing and challenging

professional environment.

Pharmacy schools in and outside of Australia are shifting their curricula from a

teacher-centred approach towards a more student-oriented style (Estai & Bunt, 2016;

Oelschlaeger, 2017). Traditional teaching approaches used for instruction create

graduates who enter the job market with knowledge and skills based on the

memorisation of content (Biggs, 1999; Kember & Ginns, 2012). The memorisation

of content, on which traditional learning theories are based, is important but does not

contribute as much as other learning theories to student learning and to the

acquisition of skills (Tadesse & Gillies, 2015). Hence, there is a need for

redevelopment and renewal of pharmacy curricula to incorporate teaching

approaches to help to produce graduates who meet the emerging demands of the

14 Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy

industry (Katajavuori et al., 2009; McLaughlin, Dean, Mumper, Blouin, & Roth,

2013). These changes in the pharmacy curricula involve not only the inclusion of

educational reforms and the upgrading of new knowledge in the written curricula but

also the introduction and implementation of different teaching strategies and

approaches (Blouin et al., 2009). The shift in teaching and learning approaches is

bringing a more student-centred approach that contributes to fostering and enhancing

collaboration between students (Blouin et al., 2009).

Any modification to the curriculum of pharmacy programs in Australia must

comply with the accreditation standards issued by the Australian Pharmacy Council

(APC). The program must also meet the requirements of the Tertiary Education

Quality and Standards Agency (TEQSA), and the Australian Qualifications

Framework (AQF). For example, the pharmacy degree is considered a bachelor level

degree; corresponding to an AQF level 7. AQF level 7 must enable graduates to

demonstrate and apply the learning outcomes expressed as knowledge and skills.

Other pharmacy qualifications such as the Bachelor of Pharmacy with Honours

(BPharm (Hons)) have an AQF level 8 (Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, 2017b),

and include more research components embedded in the curriculum.

The calls for reforms of the pharmacy curricula are devised to cater for new

requirements of students’ learning, and the challenges and demands that will

continue to shape their learning in the future (McLaughlin et al., 2014). The majority

of the literature about teaching and learning focuses on students and learning

outcomes. Many studies focus on learning approaches and the strategies used by

students in pharmacy education (Hagemeier & Holly, 2011; Lee & Danby, 2012;

Smith et al., 2007). Many of these studies have valuable information about how the

students perceive the pharmacy education and the assessment system (Hagemeier &

Holly, 2011). However, the exploration and examination of academics’ perceptions,

conceptions and points of view about their teaching approaches and theories of

learning is a topic that has not been fully investigated despite its increasing interest

(Biggs, 1999; Englund, Olofsson, & Price, 2017; Kember & Kwan, 2000; Kirkwood,

2012). For instance, Hagemeier (2011) suggested that academics “must be willing to

teach students how to study”. The literature offers little information about teaching

approaches that could be beneficial for achieving this aim. Instead, the literature


encourages the implementation and upgrade of the curricula to enhance teaching and

learning approaches (Hussain, Malik, & Abdullah, 2017).

There is growing interest in teaching practices and the perceptions of

academics to contribute and improve teaching in higher education. A recent literature

review by Hussain (2017) covered 52 articles from 2005 to 2015, with pharmacy

curriculum and pharmacy practice as some of the terms of the research. The findings

of this study were intended to address the gap in the literature about the pedagogical

perceptions and trends academics use for their practice in pharmacy and clinical

sciences higher education. The results showed the beginning of the shift to the

implementation of more contemporary teaching approaches. Investigation of

academics’ teaching approaches can be useful for guiding and developing future

training for academics, and by extension for the students they teach in higher

education. However, the transition into contemporary teaching approaches and the

perspectives of academics has not previously been intensively explored.

As such, the research described herein focused on identifying teaching

approaches for the delivery of one pharmacy curriculum. To explore the opinions and

perspectives of academics, Clinical Sciences and Pharmacy academics were invited

to complete a survey about their pedagogical instruction strategies and techniques,

and some academics were also observed in the classroom. The discipline of

Pharmacy was, at the time of this research, undergoing a curriculum review, and was

simultaneously delivering a traditional curriculum (being discontinued) and a

contemporary curriculum (being introduced). This situation provided a unique

opportunity to compare the different perspectives, views and approaches of the

academics in the delivery of both courses. The projects described were carried out

between August 2015 and December 2016.

1.2 Aims and objectives

The research aimed to explore the surveyed academics’ teaching approaches

and to relate them to five theories of learning, firstly by identifying what is used in

the traditional and contemporary curricula and then investigating current teaching

approaches for the delivery of the Clinical Sciences curriculum with a special interest

in pharmacy curriculum.

The objectives that guided the research were:


- To investigate the perspectives of academics in terms of current and desired

theories of learning and identifying whether the learning theories they used

for the delivery of classes were different from those they desired to be

using.

- To compare teaching approaches of traditional and contemporary curricula

within the same pharmacy discipline.

A novel survey designed by the main researcher was selected for the first phase

of the study to explore the teaching perspectives of academics from a personal self-

reported approach. The exploration of the perceptions the academics had about their

teaching approaches was a cornerstone of the study. The self-report of the

academics’ viewpoints, together with the investigation of barriers and facilitators to

changing teaching and learning styles, provided a strongly supported rationale for the

design of the second part of the study, which was grounded on observations of

academics delivering their lessons. The survey was based on literature in higher

education teaching (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012) and it has the potential to be used for

benchmarking the teaching approaches of academics in transition towards

contemporary courses.

1.3 Significance, scope and definitions

The detection of trends in teaching practices and their underlying educational

theories among academics can give an insight and provide information about the

enacted curriculum. The identification of academics’ learning theories perspectives

and the differences and similarities observed in their teaching approaches during

class delivery can help to identify any shift towards contemporary approaches.

Identifying trends in predominant theories of learning can give academics a

framework to comprehend what is actually happening during the instruction in the

classroom, and ways they could enhance students’ learning.

The rapid changes in society and the jobs that pharmacist are currently

demanded to perform in their workplace is linked to what they are expected to know.

The changes in the working skills, competences, and roles that pharmacy

professionals have to accomplish in the day to day jobs should be intrinsically related

with the knowledge and learning that the institutions provide. Teaching

contemporary pharmacy curricula with learning theories that are anachronous may


not seem useful for the students learning. Therefore, the upskilling and the CPD of

academics in teaching techniques and pedagogies may ultimately beneficiate the

pharmacy students.

The findings of this study may also help to construct recommendations for

academics, curriculum change leaders and accreditation bodies on how to facilitate

the transition into contemporary learning theories trends in tertiary education

teaching. The information extracted from this research may be useful for the

creation, development, and implementation of health curricula. The terms traditional

and contemporary are associated with the curriculum. Thus, they comprise all levels

of curricula: the formal, enacted, experienced and hidden curriculum. Changes of the

formal curriculum may lead to changes on the other levels. As the content is different

the academics may reflect that changes in their teaching delivery. The information

can lead to recommendations for other higher educational institutions in the

transition from traditional curricula towards the incorporation of new types of

curricula.

The questions in the survey are applicable not only to health-related subjects

but to other types of degrees that reinforce the competencies of graduates through

experimentation and discovery of information instead of repetition and

memorisation. The mixed methods approach, utilising survey and observations,

allows the collection of information from various sources, thus widening the

landscape and the flexibility of the tool. The research has implications for academics,

students, accreditation organisations universities and healthcare professionals. The

findings reveal it is of value to investigate the theories of learning used by academics

in the delivery of classes, and how each may better prepare graduates through the

shift of the enacted curriculum.

1.3.1 Definitions

The terms in the Table 1 are explained to ensure a consistent understanding of

the concepts for the purposes of the research described herein, since different

institutes may have slightly different interpretations of these terms.


Table 1. Definitions and terms

Term Definition

Course is defined at QUT as “An approved program of study in a discipline

or field leading to an award from the university. See also award

course and study package” (Queensland University of Technology,

2017a).

Competency combination of knowledge, skills, values and attitudes (Organisation

for Economic Co-operation and Development, 2005).

Curriculum/a the courses offered by an educational institution, also known as a set

of courses constituting an area of specialisation (Queensland

University of Technology, 2017b).

Higher

Education

education which is beyond the secondary level. It is also known as

the education provided by a college or university. The higher

education system in Australia entails private universities, autonomous

public universities, and institutions that award higher education

qualifications (Group of Eight Australia, 2012).

Learning

theory

as suggested by Dewey (1938/1997), involves actions and cognition,

acting without cognition has limited value for learning. It is a

“relatively permanent change in behaviour with behaviour including

both observable activity and internal processes such as thinking,

attitudes and emotions” (Dunn, 2002; Learning Theory, 2006).

Learning theories are conceptual frameworks describing how

knowledge is absorbed, processed, and retained during learning

(Simandan, 2013).


Lecture is defined at QUT as a “class in which an academic staff member

gives formal instruction in the subject matter to students enrolled in

that unit” (Queensland University of Technology, 2017c). It is the

formal instruction of information provided by an academic. The

academic talks to the student audience but there is limited or no

group discussion (Queensland University of Technology, 2017c).

Pedagogies the art, science, or profession of teaching. The term can also be found

in the text as a paradigm and teaching approach.

Practical or

Practicum

is defined at QUT as a “part of a course or study designed to develop

practical skills or to demonstrate the practical foundation of a

theory” (Queensland University of Technology, 2017d). It involves

the application of discipline based learning and the acquisition of

skills (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012). Although practicals may include

different environments such as placements or fieldwork, this research

has only explored laboratory learning practical environments.

Stakeholders

(of

pharmacy

programs)

are the academics, preceptors, the profession, the pharmacy program

accreditation body and the general population (Stupans, Hughes,

March, Krass, & Clifford, 2013).

Tutorials defined at QUT as a “group learning situation led by a tutor and

based on the materials presented during lectures” (Queensland

University of Technology, 2017e). Tutorials bring a learning

opportunity in which students can ask questions, clarify what they

have learnt, and discuss the key topics, concepts and ideas of the

course with their tutors. Usually they are smaller classes where

students can participate in activities, and present homework. For the

development of the tutorial, students are expected to prepare

beforehand by reading required material and preparing questions

and/or answers.


Unit defined at QUT as a “set of classes that run over a teaching period

and provide instruction on a particular subject matter. A unit

generally has three or four contact hours per week and may be

designated as core or elective. See also co-requisite, anti-requisite

and pre-requisite” (Queensland University of Technology, 2017f).

Units have usually a weekly lecture and a weekly tutorial (1 to 3 hour

classes) (Queensland University of Technology, 2017f). A Unit is

defined as a structured and coherent set of learning activities that

normally work in concert with other units to contribute to one or

more course learning outcomes. Each unit is assigned a unit code and

a credit point value and approved by academic faculty boards of the

provider. At QUT, the term unit refers to the lessons taught to the

graduates during the course of a semester.

Workshops there are several definitions of workshop but, for the purpose of this

thesis, a workshop is an activity where the content is delivered in a

discursive and interactive manner and where the discovery of content

is made by the students. These workshops replace the traditional

delivery of lectures and can often embed “tutorial-like” activities

where the lecturer is a facilitator of knowledge. The workshops

described in this document involve the lecturer or tutor presenting the

students a short introduction in which a specific problem is identified.

The academic assists the students and encourages them to collaborate

with their peers and contribute to develop their skills and

understanding (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012). This is followed by

discussion and activities in which students work collaboratively to

investigate, analyse and formulate a solution to the problem.

Outcomes may be presented by groups or by individual students at

the completion of the workshop (University of South Australia,

2014). Workshops are designed for smaller numbers of students than

lectures and tutorials. The workshop’s objective is to enable the

development of graduates’ skills and prepare students to succeed in

their projects (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).


1.4 Thesis Outline

This research contributes to the identification of teaching approaches in

pharmacy higher education. The research explored current teaching approaches in

pharmacy and health-related education (clinical sciences). The study has focused on

the five most common learning theories used for teaching delivery, identifying the

trends currently utilised in the teaching approaches at QUT.

Chapter 1 introduces the context of the research.

Chapter 2 presents a literature review of the changes inside and outside

academia that have motivated the research. It focuses on the actual teaching

landscape in health disciplines with a special focus on pharmacy (2.3). This section

will provide a brief historical background for understanding the types of curriculum

and also the pedagogical knowledge of pharmacy academics (2.4), explaining and

identifying the most common learning theories (2.5).

Chapter 3 presents the methodology and methods of the research.

Phase 1 presents the survey findings from the literature review used to inform

study design. A tool was designed for the identification of the academics’

perspectives in the matter of their pedagogical approaches. This phase presents the

final survey designed to explore the perspectives of Clinical Sciences academics

about their teaching.

Phase 2 presents the observational research designed to identify the academics’

current pedagogical approaches during teaching delivery. The observational study

used a mixed method approach to explore the paradigms academics were using to

deliver units.

Chapter 4 presents the results and findings of the research. This section

analyses the results from the survey and the observational research, and illustrates the

perspectives of the academics’ approaches.

Chapter 5 discusses the findings of the study, the implications, and

recommendations of the research for the participants in the educational process.

Chapter 6 finalises the document with a conclusion of the project giving future

recommendations and directions on how to explore teaching approaches in future


studies from different points of view. It also offers implications for different levels of

organisation when shifting teaching approaches.

In summary, this study focused on exploring academics’ teaching approaches

and how they related to five of the most predominant teaching approaches between

the two curricula, investigating current teaching approaches when delivering the

pharmacy curriculum. The study explored the personal perspectives of academics

and observed academics’ teaching approaches on pharmacy courses.


Chapter 2: Literature Review

Firstly, this chapter will explore current literature about teaching approaches

relevant in pharmacy education. In addition, a summary of the current literature

about teaching and learning approaches in the pharmacy discipline and other higher

degree courses within health education will be presented. Then, the following

sections will provide a review of the curriculum levels and elements of the curricula.

Finally, traditional and contemporary approaches will be considered and the role of

learning theories and pharmacy academics’ approaches to teaching will be explained.

The type of literature search was conducted using terms related to curriculum

in pharmacy discipline, the degree, Clinical Sciences education, and the five learning

theories of learning previously explained in the document (behaviourism,

cognitivism…), as no standard methodology was identified by the researcher to be

suitable for the study. The literature review was conceptual analysing the learning

current and desired learning theories of the pharmacy academics (Grant, 2009).

2.1 Introduction

It is important to understand the current situation of pharmacy instruction and

the teaching strategies that academics are using. This research has focused on

investigating the teaching approaches of pharmacy academics during the instruction

of pharmacy courses. The aim of the research was to investigate current teaching

approaches for the delivery of the Clinical Sciences and Pharmacy curriculum. To

achieve this, the study explored academics’ teaching approaches in two pharmacy

curricula that were simultaneously delivered, in the undergraduate pharmacy degree,

at an Australian institution.

The data generated during the investigation was collected from a group of

academics at a Queensland University (Queensland University of Technology). The

study explored and identified the learning theories of academics from Clinical

Sciences and Pharmacy courses. The study was designed to explore the five most

common learning theories used for the delivery of the pharmacy courses using a

mixed method approach. An overview from two viewpoints regarding the curriculum

was obtained from the academic cohort, on one hand, from the perceptions and


perspectives of academics and on the other hand, from an external point of view

(classroom observations).

2.2 Historical Background

The instruction of pharmacy students and health professionals has always been

evolving. According to Marriott (2008), Australia has been providing formal training

for the instruction of pharmacists over the last 125 years. During the first decades of

the 20th century pharmacy education in Australia was based on apprenticeships,

meaning that it was partly university training, and partly supervised by a mentoring

pharmacist (Knehans, 2005; Pharmaceutical Society of Australia, 2017a). Later, in

the 1960s, standardised courses were introduced for pharmacy instruction all over the

country by state and territory registration boards (Benrimoj & Frommer, 2004). At

that time, pharmacy was a three-year bachelor degree program (BPharm). In the mid-

1990s the pharmacy degree (BPharm) changed from a three to a four-year degree.

Currently, to practice pharmacy in Australia, a practitioner is required to hold at least

a four-year degree which includes undergoing a mandatory pharmacy practice

placement program for accreditation (Hattingh, Low, & Forrester, 2013). In addition,

in order to be eligible for registration as a pharmacist, a one-year supervised

internship has to be satisfactorily completed following graduation (Benrimoj &

Frommer, 2004; Low, Hattingh, & Forrester, 2009; Moles & Stehlik, 2015). On

balance, institutions providing pharmacy education have seen the need to adapt their

teaching approaches in response to the health industry’s increasing demands for job-

ready graduates (Izadnegahdar et al., 2008; Walker et al., 2013).

In recent decades, the demands of society and the new business models’

approaches have emphasised the need for changes in the education of pharmacy

professionals, to equip them for new professional roles (Benrimoj & Frommer,

2004). According to Benrimoj & Frommer (2004), pharmacy institutions have seen

the need for transformation, shifting the curriculum towards a more clinical angle. In

the same way, Katajavuori (2009) emphasises the call for achieving “optimal

learning outcomes, the focus of the Pharmacy curriculum design, lies in the learning

process, not only in the content of the curriculum, lectures, assignments and

practical periods”. The disconnection between what is demanded of graduates and


the expectations of academics has been the driver for changes in the curriculum and

the teaching approaches associated with it (Richard, 2002).

In recent times, there has been a transformation in focus and the roles of health

professionals which has supported the shift from a product and dispensary-oriented

perspective to a patient-centred focus (Greene, Tuzzio, & Cherkin, 2012; Moles &

Stehlik, 2015). Many authors acknowledge that requests for upgrading teaching

approaches have had an impact on academia (Al-Abri, 2007; Australian Commission

on Safety and Quality in Health Care, 2012; Greenfield et al., 2015). As healthcare

has moved to a patient centred focus, some educators are moving towards a student

centred learning paradigm.

According to the Lancet Commission (Frenk et al., 2010), professional

education has not kept pace with challenges being presented to the health system.

The International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP) notes the need for shifts and

reforms in the education of pharmacy professionals (International Pharmaceutical

Federation, 2008). The shift in demands of the health system requires changes in

curricular design and educational methods (Frenk et al., 2010; McLaughlin et al.,

2017; Speedie et al., 2012). All this has generated an increased interest in

transforming curricula (Gehrke, 1998; McLaughlin et al., 2017).

The Lancet Commission (Frenk et al., 2010), provided recommendations such

as the adoption of a more competency-based curriculum to achieve the competencies

graduates require. For example, academics need to equip graduates with the

necessary abilities and leadership skills to face the challenges of the workforce, such

as working in interdisciplinary teams and constantly upgrading the competencies

related to patient-centred care (Frenk et al., 2010; McLaughlin et al., 2013).

However, McLaughlin (2017) argues that in the inclusion of contemporary

teaching and learning approaches, the “curricular overload, and immature

assessment tools and techniques combine to create concern about whether sufficient

progress has yet been achieved in the transition” from teacher-centred to more

contemporary student-centred education. According to Gubbins (2014) although the

pedagogical knowledge of pharmacy academics is not mandatory it is recognised as

valuable. In the same vein, although the faculty focuses on the educational mission,

academics may sometimes lack “educational methodology to hone their teaching

skills” (Gubbins, 2014).


The identification of the teaching competencies and theories of learning used

for the education of health professionals can represent a challenge for academics

(Lie, Carter-Pokras, Braun, & Coleman, 2012; Thibault, 2013). In a study carried out

by Jungnickel et al. (2009) about the competencies of future pharmacists, a list of

competencies was developed to aid in pharmacy education. It is also acknowledged

in the literature that the competencies required by individuals “to meet their goals

have become more complex, requiring more than the mastery of certain narrowly

defined skills” (Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development 2005;

Priestley & Biesta, 2013). The Nanjing Statements developed by the International

Pharmaceutical Federation were published at the beginning of 2017 to guide the

process of educational reform and improve pharmaceutical educational and

professional standards worldwide. In light of these developments, understanding the

way academics teach is crucial to transitioning from traditional into more

contemporary types of curricula (International Pharmaceutical Federation, 2017).

Teaching and learning approaches used in pharmacy education in Australia

have experienced considerable change over the past decade (Marriott et al., 2008).

Current reforms of the curricula focus on graduates acquiring not only knowledge

but also the abilities, attitudes and skills that society demands as essential in

healthcare professionals (Blackmore & Kandiko, 2012b) . In addition, skills such as

collaboration in interdisciplinary groups are necessary for graduates to perform in

multiple environments (Frenk et al., 2010; Horton, 2010).

The curriculum and teaching approaches used in health education in Australia

have seen a need to adapt to the new trends to better prepare students for the

workforce (Australian Teaching and Learning Council, 2011). The implementation

of changes in current health education provides the opportunity to explore the

prevalence of the most common paradigms currently utilised by academics in

practice in both the traditional and the contemporary curriculum. These theories of

learning are behaviourism, cognitivism, social constructivism, humanism and

connectivism (Ng, 2015; Refai, Klapper, & Thompson, 2015; Siemens, 2005).

In order to provide context for the research presented in this thesis, it is

important to explore thoroughly some of the components that form the landscape of

tertiary education in health, and how these components are related.


2.3 Higher health degree courses in Clinical Sciences education

Changes in technology, economics, and demographics have affected and

transformed the way people live, work and do business and, therefore, they have also

affected the way people teach and learn. Higher education, as is health education, is

in constant transformation, adapting to changes demanded by the workforce and the

environment. Changes in the education of health professionals have been emphasised

in recent decades, adapting to the demands of society and new business model

approaches. Employers inside and outside health care are demanding skilled

graduates who can adapt to the actual workforce environment (McLaughlin et al.,

2017). The demand for graduates with transferable skills has influenced or motivated

higher education institutions to review the learning theories utilised by academics

and the ways in which they educate healthcare professionals. An understanding of

these past developments is crucial in order to know how to drive the transition from

traditional into more contemporary curricula.

The Flexner report (Flexner, Pritchet, & Henry, 1910/1972) contributed to a

historical revolution in the landscape of the education of health professionals. The

report stated that changes in relation to medical and health education provided in

America and Canada at that time were needed. Contemporary articles and revisions

of the report (Cooke, Irby, Sullivan, & Ludmerer, 2006; Frenk et al., 2010) reflect on

the contributions the Flexner report made towards the transformation of the academic

environment, and health students’ instruction in United States. The report has

influenced many different countries (United States of America, Europe, Canada, and

Australia), contributing to the current state of health education. Despite belonging to

the early 20th century, the Flexner report is still an inspiration for many educational

reviews. It led to educational reforms and changes carried out in an effort to equip

students with the skills and knowledge of a competent and adaptable healthcare

professional.

The disruption of technology, the ageing of the population, and health and

social care budgetary constraints are some of the factors that have contributed to

changes in higher education curricula, causing tertiary education to face the

challenge of adapting and integrating those factors as a necessity. Tara Tietjen-Smith

(2016) explains that current “higher education health programs will need to be more

diligent in preparing future public health professionals”. This highlights the need for


a shift in the way the academics are currently instructing the graduates, suggesting a

gap that can be investigated with this research.

2.3.1 Regulations that shape higher education

Understanding the regulations that shape higher education is important in order

to identify the scope of teaching practice in which changes can be applied when

reviewing curricula. Any recommendations made when transitioning to

contemporary courses need to comply with the expectations set up by the

accreditation bodies. Similarly, those recommendations can serve as an example to

help academics understand how those expectations can be implemented.

The regulatory bodies and frameworks include: TEQSA, which regulates the

higher education sector; the Australian Qualifications Framework, which is a

national body for regulated qualifications; and the Australian Pharmacy Council,

which controls pharmacy. TEQSA, as a regulatory and quality agency, has the role of

regulating the profession and programs (Australian Government, 2017b). APC has

the role of protecting the community by maintaining the standards of pharmacy

education and assessing the competence of Australian and overseas pharmacists

(Australian Pharmacy Council, 2017).

In Australia, health education providers (e.g. Universities) must meet the

registration, category, and course standards from different organisations and health-

related boards to be accredited as educational institutions. Providers of higher

education need to be registered “under Part 3 of the Tertiary Education Quality and

Standards Agency Act 2011 (Cth) and listed on a national register” (Group of Eight

Australia, 2012). For example, a pharmacy course must be accredited by the

Australian Pharmacy Council (APC). The programs which are eligible for the

accreditation are those providing a program of study consistent with the qualification

type and the time required to achieve the learning outcomes. . The APC guidelines

recognise the pharmacy degree program developments in the curriculum and the

need to provide students with the “comprehensive knowledge and expertise needed

to achieve the pharmacy learning outcomes” (APC, 2015). The pharmacy learning

domains presented in the APC document are not offered as prescriptive but as

indicative, and therefore is “not intended to be imposed on the Pharmacy Schools

curricula” (APC, 2015). Nevertheless, the learning domains will be reviewed to

http://www.teqsa.gov.au/national-register


reflect the advances the profession and educational needs arising from matters unique

to Australian or New Zealand pharmacy practice, and/or health and educational

systems.

The integration of knowledge, skills, judgment, and attributes that people need

to perform a job effectively is referred as competencies. AQF explains competency

as “the possession and application of both knowledge and skills to defined standards,

expressed as outcomes, which correspond to relevant workplace requirements”

(AQF, 2007). Academics learning theories can contribute to enhance student

competencies as they often supporting the increase of knowledge and skills, but they

may require considerable time for reflection and development. However, complex

competencies cannot usually be directly observed.

To become a pharmacist in Australia, the student must complete firstly a

pharmacy degree (board-approved pharmacy program of study). Then, they must

apply for provisional registration. Pharmacy graduates are required to complete a

supervised practice internship with an approved preceptor to receive the pharmacy

qualification. The graduates then need to enrol in a pharmacy intern training program

and undertake examinations to test their competency, and finally, they need to apply

for general registration so they can be registered by the Pharmacy Board of Australia

(PBA) as practitioners.

Institutions delivering pharmacy courses are required to provide a national and

shared standard through their courses. In a further regulatory development in

Australia, it has also been mandatory for all higher education providers to comply

with the Threshold Standards of the Tertiary Education and Quality Standards

Agency (TEQSA) since 29 January 2012. The Threshold Standards consist of

Provider Standards (comprising Provider Registration Standards, Provider Category

Standards and Provider Course Accreditation Standards) and Qualification Standards

(Australian Pharmacy Council, 2012).

2.4 Curriculum

The term curriculum is defined by the Australian Government “to set

consistent national standards to improve learning outcomes, through content

descriptions and achievement standards, what students should be taught and

achieve” (Australian Government, 2017a). In particular, at QUT, the term


curriculum “captures far more than a list of content to be mastered or a list of units

in sequence. It is a learning environment: a planned arrangement of space, time,

resources, people and ideas (adapted from a definition by Gail Halliwell, 1990). It is

designed to assist students to achieve particular desired learning outcomes of a

course. Students and teachers both contribute to the human dimension of the

learning environment, but the teacher’s role as a learning leader is particularly

important” (Queensland University of Technology, 2011).

The first book on curriculum was published by John Franklin Bobbitt (1918).

Bobbitt (1918) and Dewey (1959/2008) were two authors who developed curricula.

They had the common idea that the curriculum can be explained as an experience in

its own right (Dewey, 1959/2008). Bobbitt's classifies at one end the scope of

education in the course of study (or permanent school subjects) and at the other all

learning experiences throughout life (Bobbitt, 1918). Goodlad (1994) indicated that

curriculum problems could be analysed from three analytical angles. Literature about

curriculum theory was analysed by Goodlad through three aspects: social-political,

substantive and technical-professional (Akker, 2006).

Curriculum in health-related disciplines is experiencing change in Australia,

shifting from traditional and adapting to more contemporary curricula. This is

represented by the development of competencies in the contemporary design of

curricula, promoting interdisciplinary and professional identity development

(Langendyk, Mason, & Wang, 2016). It is a dynamic process that works to improve

education. Four of the leading figures in the creation and development of models of

curriculum are Ralph Tyler, Hilda Taba, Galen Saylor and William Alexander.

It is important to highlight and identify the differences and similarities between

the traditional curriculum and the integration of a contemporary curriculum, in our

case, the specific context is the pharmacy curriculum. The exploration of the

approaches and activities utilised in the curriculum provides an opportunity to create

a balanced curriculum that gives students a set of educational experiences. This may

serve as a response to the needs and demands of both learners and society (Kelly,

2004). Hence, in the creation and planning of a curriculum, attention is focused on

the development of interpersonal skills which are considered to be a valuable

contribution. This brings attention to those delivering and coordinating programs,


such as academics involved in teaching, who often take the role of gatekeepers of the

curriculum, and therefore their perspectives need to be explored.

2.4.1 Elements of curricula

Models of curricula are related to the framework design. Curricula can be

considered as prescriptive, descriptive models or both (Ellis, 2004; Glatthorn,

Boschee, & Whitehead, 2009), and can be supported by different designs, indicative

elements and postulates.

Prescriptive models are those in which the curriculum’s designer indicates

what the curriculum should include, an intended program set to happen in the course

of study. Tyler (1949/2013) and Taba (1962) created a curriculum design based on

the belief that designing the best curricula improves the educational practices

(Marsh, 2004; Tyler, 1949/2013). Tyler (1949/2013) created a model considering the

curriculum as a logical and linear process. Building it focused on four fundamental

questions or principles examining any curriculum: these issues are related to the

objectives, learning experiences, the organisation of those learning experiences and

the posterior evaluation (Figure 1).

Figure 1. Prescriptive model adapted from Tyler (1949/2013).

Afterwards, Hilda Taba (1962) presented a model, which was based on the

instructional design, but developed other principles as the focus for the curriculum.

This model had five teaching and learning elements (objectives, content, learning

experiences, teaching strategies and evaluations) interacting with each other.

Prescriptive models postulate: a desired end (objectives), ways to reach the end

Objectives

Selecting learning

experiences

Organising learning

experiences

Evaluation


(learning experiences) and the process (evaluation) (Walker, 1971). Later on, other

models of curriculum emerged based on the use and development of prescriptive

(classical) models.

Saylor and Alexander Saylor and Alexander (1966) designed a model which

firstly stated the goals and learning objectives, and then the designers of the

curriculum can carry out the planning. The learning experiences are classified under

four domains: personal development, social competence, sustained learning skills,

and specialisation. Firstly, there is the design of the curriculum; the planners of the

curriculum seek learning opportunities and investigate when each opportunity will

become available. Then, the implementation of the curriculum takes place;

academics select the teaching methods and strategies for the students’ learning.

Finally, there is an evaluation of the curriculum to identify whether the goals and

objectives have been achieved (Saylor & Alexander, 1966).

Descriptive models support the curriculum “in action” (Glatthorn et al., 2009).

Descriptive models postulate: the start (platform), end (design), and process

(deliberation) (Walker, 1971). This means that although there is a planned

curriculum that academics have to follow, the focus is on experiences and what is

actually happening in classrooms (Ellis, 2004). For instance, descriptive models are

those in which the curriculum’s designers describe what the curriculum does, which

explains why those authors supporting descriptive models are based on organisation

and interaction of individuals and groups (Marsh, 2004). Walker (1971) designed a

naturalist model that describes the curriculum planning process as valuable for

teachers and planners (Marsh, 2004). Other examples of newer models include spiral

curriculum (Bruner, 1977), learner-centred curriculum (McCombs & Whisler, 1997),

and transformational curriculum (Parker, 2003). Although it is important to

acknowledge the presence of these newer models, they are not predominantly utilised

in the creation and design of pharmacy curricula.

A closer look at recent models and the elements of curricula indicates the

development of the models to be more inclusive and flexible. The models presented

previously were mainly developed during the last century. The number of models

created during the last decade has increased exponentially, presenting an increased

interest in curriculum design and a fast evolution of reviews in curricula. This


confirms the importance of the iterative process of evaluation of the curriculum and

the components utilised in its delivery.

2.4.2 Levels of curricula

As indicated in the literature by various authors (Bradley, Steven, & Ashcroft,

2011; Hafferty, 1998; Prideaux, 2003), there are three different levels of curriculum

which can be observed in undergraduate programmes and health curricula. These

three concepts are often known as “planned curriculum”, “delivered curriculum”

and “experienced curriculum” respectively.

The hidden curriculum sits aside these three levels and comprises “what else is

taught, but that is not part of the curriculum”. Glatthorn (2009) claims that hidden

curriculum learning is not considered to be part of the types of curriculum as it is not

considered to be intentional (Glatthorn et al., 2009). However, there are experiences

and lessons learned inadvertedly by students, that may answer the question of what

else is being taught. Any learning from the hidden curriculum is encompassed as part

of the experienced curriculum, considering it is embedded in the experiences that the

students learn. Even though some authors consider the hidden curriculum as the

fourth level of curriculum there is dispute amongst authors, and still no agreement to

incorporate the hidden curriculum as another level (Martimianakis & Hafferty, 2016;

Mossop, Dennick, Hammond, & Robbé, 2013).

The planned curriculum (also known as the official, written or formal

curriculum) is “what is planned for the students”. It is the intentional study program,

which encompasses the content, goals and learning outcomes planned to be offered

by an institution (Bradley et al., 2011; Hafferty, 1998; Plaza, Draugalis, Slack,

Skrepnek, & Sauer, 2007). The written document is offered by higher education

institutions to promote the acquisition of knowledge, skills and abilities during

courses (Marriott et al., 2008). The planned curriculum refers to the teaching

materials that support an intentional instructional structure of a degree. It is a

structured approach for building a common and collective pathway for

administrators, curriculum designers and teachers.

The delivered curriculum (also known as enacted curriculum) refers to “what

is organised by the administrators” and “what is taught by the teachers” (Prideaux,

2003). The enacted curriculum is constructed on the perspectives, the exploration of


the ways of teaching, and decisions academics adopt for teaching the content and

learning approaches for students. The delivered curriculum underpins the teaching

and learning approaches, strategies, and techniques the academics implement to

reach the learning outcomes (Bradley et al., 2011; Hafferty, 1998; Porter, 2002).

How the planned curriculum is enacted is important when analysing the

curriculum. Academics’ knowledge, interpretation, and teaching perspectives may

influence and affect transition to more contemporary planned curricula (Putnam &

Borko, 1997). Also, content must be delivered by appropriate teaching and learning

methods. Even when the same curriculum is being taught, variability between the

implementation of the teaching approaches by different individuals may have

different learning outcomes (Kilpatrick, 2003). This means that the decisions and

considerations made by the academics over the implementation, of the written

curriculum, using different techniques and strategies will have an impact on the

delivered curriculum (Tarr, Chávez, Reys, & Reys, 2006).

The experienced curriculum (also known as tested curriculum) refers to “what

is learned by the students”. This level of curriculum focuses on how and what the

students experience in their learning. More precisely, this level of curriculum has as

its target, how students engage and learn from the surrounding environment, learning

from events, materials and other individuals (Erickson & Pinnegar, 2010). This

curriculum is centred on the activities that students perform while they learn at the

academic institution, including motivations and behaviours induced by the

environment (Bradley et al., 2011; Hafferty, 1998). Figure 2 provides a visual

representation of the three levels of curriculum previously mentioned.


Figure 2. The three levels of curriculum (Extracted from Prideaux, 2003).

While academics can deliver the content of the formal curriculum through

various learning theories they can also use only one teaching approach for the

delivery of the lesson. Along similar lines Gardner (p130) argues that when the

academic “is able to employ different pedagogical approaches, there is the

possibility of reaching more students in more effective ways” (Illeris, 2018). This

describes the wide variety of learning theories that academics can select when

designing and delivering the curriculum (Ramsden, 2012).

As suggested by Luna Scott (2015) the adoption of a 21st century pedagogy

requires academics to rethink their position about ‘what’ they teach, ‘who’ are they

teaching to, and the reasoning about ‘why’ are they teaching it. In addition, it

requests an effort on behalf of the academics to “resituate themselves professionally,

not as a traditional teacher, but as a highly skilled advanced learner” (Saavedra and

Opfer, 2012).

In summary, the planned curriculum is tailored towards students’ acquisition of

knowledge, skills and abilities for reaching the learning outcomes. The planned

curriculum content and concepts have little margin to differ between universities and

pharmacy curriculum guides. In contrast, the “delivered curriculum” and the

“experienced curriculum” are more variable because they are highly personalised

Experienced curriculum

What students learn

Delivered curriculum

What the academics teach

(Organised by administrators)

Planned curriculum

What designers propose


and reliant on the pedagogical approaches used by academics. Therefore, it is

meaningful to identify academics’ understanding of the learning theories, as well as

to explore and provide strategic pathways to better transition into purposively

designed curricula.

2.4.3 Approaches to curricula

Traditional curricula are usually associated with a teacher-centred approach,

focusing on the acquisition of knowledge, whereas new trends in curriculum design

pursue a student-centred approach, focusing on the acquisition and improvement of

skills and abilities. Contemporary curriculum is used for teaching and learning and is

frequently grounded in the learning by practising (Blumberg, 2009; Hubball & Burt,

2004; Waterfield, 2011). Traditional curricula have limitations and barriers that

prevent adaptation to changes in and demands of the current pharmacy market,

making them less effective when compared to other types of curriculum (Pearson &

Hubball, 2012; Schmidt et al., 1996).

The traditional curriculum used for the instruction of pharmacy and medical

students in recent decades, as suggested by the literature, had units (also known as

modules or subjects); these involved a structured and coherent set of learning

activities. At QUT, the term units referred to classes teaching the same subject area

without interrelation between them (Nieminen, Lindblom-Yläne, & Lonka, 2004)

and chunks of time allocated for the individual disciplines (Harden, 2000). However,

this way of teaching and learning does not align with contemporary goals in teaching

practices, where integrated curricula provide students with real-world experiences

(Harden, 2000). For example, multidisciplinary and transdisciplinary programs are

more student-centred. Students are responsible for the integration of concepts and

skills, which need to be combined when addressing complex goals like patients’

health.

In an attempt to improve that approach, new types of curriculum show a trend

where concepts and units are combined in a whole integrated curriculum with

interrelated concepts (Barnett, Parry, & Coate, 2001; Hubball & Burt, 2004;

Katajavuori et al., 2009). These modern concepts of curriculum support co-operation

between planners and faculty members in the design of curricula which enhance

appropriate pedagogical instruction of academics, with the objective of improving


the development of critical thinking and lifelong learning skills that prepare students

for their future practice (Pearson & Hubball, 2012). On one hand, there is the

interdisciplinary curriculum, where the organisation and design focus on common

learnings across the disciplines’ content (Harden, 2000). The academic explains and

connects the content from a combination of several curricular areas simultaneously,

providing valuable information from other subjects. On the other hand, an integrative

curriculum focuses on a problem and its resolutions; thus, relevant knowledge from

other disciplines will be explained to resolve the problem. A contemporary

curriculum design has both integrative and interdisciplinary approaches (Klein,

2005), and follows a student-centred approach, but may have differences in the

structure and design.

Holley (2017) reported that “interdisciplinary pedagogical approaches usually

align with the idea of integrative learning”. Supporting the claim made by DeZure

(2010) about integrative learning, the implementation of contemporary approaches

includes the “connection of knowledge” and application of different skills and

abilities. Graduates’ competencies will be influenced by academics’ instructional

efforts towards approaches to teaching and learning (DeZure, 2010). Therefore,

identifying the current teaching strategies used in teaching and learning and

recognising that there is a gap between education and professional practice, as

discussed in the research introduction, can help in the design of an appropriate

pharmacy curriculum.

2.5 Theories of learning

The term learning theory is defined by Burns (1995) as the conception “of a

relatively permanent change in behaviour with behaviour including both observable

activity and internal processes such as thinking, attitudes and emotions” (Dunn,

2002). Learning theories are conceptual frameworks describing how knowledge is

absorbed, processed, and retained during learning. It is also important to understand

that pedagogy is the function or work of a teacher. It is also the study of teaching

methods, including the aims of education and the ways in which such goals may be

achieved (Peel, 2017). There are many different learning theories (Dunn, 2002).

The learning theories most commonly associated with the historical trends of

pharmaceutical instruction, as referenced by the literature, are behaviourism,

https://www.britannica.com/topic/teaching

https://www.britannica.com/topic/education


cognitivism, and social constructivism (Aliakbari, Parvin, Heidari, & Haghani, 2015;

Refai, Klapper, & Thompson, 2015). Humanism and connectivism are also theories

identified in the literature but have not been clearly associated with pharmacy

education (Ng, 2015; Siemens, 2005). The main characteristics of each of these

learning theories will be explained below in more detail. The current need to increase

pedagogical literacy between academics and stakeholders is supported by authors

such as Dieckelmann (2003) and Brown, Kirkpatrick, Mangum, & Avery (2008).

2.5.1 Behaviourism

Behaviourism is a traditional approach predominant in education in the 20th

century. It is a theory which focuses on an individual’s behaviour and states that

human behaviour can be shaped by stimuli and environment (Aliakbari, Parvin,

Heidari, & Haghani, 2015). The theory focuses on using positive and negative

reinforcement to produce adequate responses. Therefore, academics develop

students’ rational and conceptual reasoning using reinforcement techniques (Merriam

& Bierema, 2013; Westbrook et al., 2013). Teaching based on the behaviourist

paradigm is didactic with teacher-centred instruction. Behaviourism’s idea of

learning can also be described with the traditional metaphor of the learner’s mind

being seen as a container that should be filled up with knowledge because it is an

“empty vessel” (Fox, 2001; Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).

J.B. Watson and B.F. Skinner are considered as the pioneers of behaviourism

(Knowles, 1990). Watson demonstrated the classical conditioning theory described

by Pavlov (Mergel, 1998). Classical conditioning is a learning process that occurs

when a reflex (natural stimulus) becomes associated with a specific environmental

stimulus. This classical conditioning theory is a type of learning had deep influence

behaviourism (Davis, 2008). Behaviourism roots on the assumption that learning

occurs through the interactions with the environment. Watson predicted and showed

the conditioning of emotional responses and identified the mechanisms of trial and

error learning, which remained unsolved at that time (Rilling, 2000). However, the

theory presented by Watson was only fully explained when Skinner proposed

explanations for the problems that Watson had previously identified a decade earlier,

introducing the concepts of operant conditioning and shaping. Skinner proposed

operant conditioning as when a pattern associated with the desired behaviour in the

student is accomplished. The academic rewards the student, reinforcing the response


making it more likely to be repeated, while undesired behaviours are ignored or

punished.

Behaviourism has been embedded in academic practice for decades. Teaching

strategies associated with behaviourism can be convenient for teaching information

that is fixed (e.g. formulas) and foundational content. The strength of behaviourism

is that it focuses on observable behaviours. However, there are things that cannot be

controlled.

2.5.2 Cognitivism

During the period of mid-1950 until 1980’s the cognitivism paradigm had its

apogee (Robins, 2009). This paradigm is related to the development of a schema,

with the organisation process and understanding as the main focus. Cognitive

theories highlight the importance of producing meaningful knowledge and organising

and linking prior memorised knowledge to new information (Bruner, 1966; Ertmer &

Newby, 2013). It is a discovery learning model in which students learn in social

environments by observing and imitating other people (Bandura, 1986; Schunk,

2008). The information is given to students in an organised, ordered and motivated

way. Subsequently, previously learned information is combined with what it is going

to be learned, creating a schema. Cognitivism is a learning theory that focuses on

“how information is received, organised, stored, and retrieved by the mind” (Ertmer

& Newby, 2013). This paradigm consequently is set within a student-centred

learning paradigm, as a facilitator, the academic´s key role is to provide support and

assistance to the students when necessary to facilitate learning. With this approach,

there is significant usage of analogies or metaphors to help attach meaning and

assimilate new learning (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012). It focuses on the idea that anyone

can teach anything with an appropriate methodology (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012). As

Ertmer (2013) explained, during the 1950s there was a shift from behaviourism

towards learning theories and models of cognitive sciences, in an attempt to evolve

learning theories as conditions evolved.

This paradigm, based on traditional teaching approaches, is associated with

higher learning skills, and with a teacher-centred approach. Teaching strategies based

on cognitivism improve the understanding of information based on the information

taught by the academic (e.g. flowcharts and diagrams). Consequently, this teaching


strategy, while a valid and an important way to explain content to students, does not

encourage the students to create or develop content. One of the strengths of

cognitivism is that the learner can acquire knowledge by absorbing the information

as a passive recipient. On the other hand one of the weaknesses of this theory is that

cognitive processes are heavily subjective as they are internal processes.

2.5.3 Social constructivism

In this paradigm, social interactions influence the construction of

understanding, such as language, culture, and social involvement. Social

constructivism has been increasing during the last decades its presence in the

curriculum. Social constructivism has been employed in the design of the curriculum

and instruction for several decades and is mostly utilised in service-learning and

experiential activities (Brophy, 2006). This paradigm has, as one of its pillars, the

process of social negotiation. Construction of knowledge is developed by interactions

and collaborations with experts, facilitators and colleagues but it needs to be

facilitated by a favourable environment (Jain & Tedman, 2007). This perspective

enhances the importance of scaffolding by teachers to expand individual student

learning. One of the important things to highlight from this theory of learning is what

Vygotsky (1978) described as the concept of “Zone of Proximal Development” in

which students should be encouraged by academics to explore as individuals outside

their “Comfort Zone” to develop their abilities (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).

Constructivism considers students to be active learners and processors of

knowledge who elaborate, develop and interpret information. Constructivist

approaches have an emphasis on the apprenticeship as a hands-on experience that

prepares and trains students for the future job. Through authentic cases, the

academics build situations that contribute to the development of skills and abilities to

build on and adapt to future experiences (Ertmer & Newby, 2013). The students

change from passive recipients of knowledge to become active constructors of

meaning. Although there is an emphasis on the learners, the lecturers’ role is

essential (Reigeluth, 1989). The academic takes the role of facilitator instead of

lecturer, drawing knowledge of students and enabling students to develop their

competencies.


2.5.4 Humanism

The focus of this paradigm is based on the intellectual needs of individuals

instead of learning processes. Humanistic approaches to learning have historically

been present in literature for centuries (Sharp, 2012). Authors, such as John Dewey

and Maria Montessori, have contributed to the development of humanism in modern

learning theories, supporting and developing humanistic approaches during the

twentieth century. More recently, other authors as Lillard (2005), contemplate

humanism as an important approach that can currently contribute in “both in

traditional subjects areas as well as in social and creative development”. It is about

humans’ perceptions and their personal understanding of the world. The two main

proponents of humanism are Abraham Maslow (1943) and Carl Rogers (1969).

Maslow’s theory focused on the complexity of human behaviour (Maslow, Frager,

Fadiman, McReynolds, & Cox, 1970). The conditioning theories (such as

behaviourism and cognitivism) did not take into consideration the complexity of

human nature. Figure 3 is a hierarchical representation of the psychological and

physiological needs as stated by Maslow.

Figure 3. Maslow’s pyramid of needs. Adapted from Maslow’s hierarchy of

needs (Maslow, 1943). Extracted from McLeod (2007).

Maslow considers that students’ learning skills can only develop if their basic

needs are fulfilled (Maslow, 1943). This perspective suggests that humans are free to

make their own choices which will, therefore, define their behaviour (Merriam &

Bierema, 2013). This paradigm builds on the needs and motivation of each person

(Caffarella, 1993). This perspective is related to the affective domain (Ertmer &

Newby, 2013). It highlights the development and growth motivation of an individual

Self-actualisation

Esteem

Belonging

Safety

Physiological


(trying to be what each is capable of becoming) through a more self-directed learning

process (Merriam & Bierema, 2013). Rogers’ theory is rooted in Maslow’s theory in

the development of humanistic approaches to education (Rogers, 1969). The

humanist perspective is a student-centred approach where the responsibility for

learning depends on the student, with teachers acting as facilitators (Rogers, 1969;

Tangney, 2014). Teachers guide students to find new concepts while the students are

the ones that seek information (Caffarella, 1993). Teaching strategies based on

humanism can be considered contemporary since they focus on values and attitudes

developed by students. This teaching is based on mutual respect between the

academic and the student, and grants the student freedom of choice in learning

guided by their curiosity (Aliakbari et al., 2015). The academics’ role is more related

to contemporary approaches (such as social constructivism and connectivism) in

which the lecturer acts as a facilitator supporting a student-centred approach (Hodge,

2010; Schunk, 2008). Learning requires active participation on the part of the student

while the facilitator creates the climate and provides support and resources towards

clarifying the student’s goals. Contemporary approaches to curricula incorporate the

humanistic perspective as a holistic concept for the development of students’

learning.

2.5.5 Connectivism

This paradigm considers that learning entails connecting nodes and that it

happens when the learner recognises and interprets information and patterns and then

creates new connections (Siemens, 2006; Siemens, 2008). This paradigm has

increased its presence on the curriculum since the beginning of the 21st century

(Siemens, 2004). The influencing factor in connectivism is the diversity of networks.

Tools like the internet enhance opportunities to create flexible virtual settings and

social networks to facilitate a personalised space in which learners can connect with

a group. This promotes collaborative construction of knowledge and allows the

exchange of experiences and fluent communication (Del Moral, Cernea, &

Villalustre, 2013). Connectivism acknowledges that the way a student can access

information is currently changing at a fast pace. The importance is not the knowledge

that the students have already acquired, but the capacity to appraise, evaluate and

interconnect specific information. It is more important to have the abilities and skills

to access and interconnect the nodes. In this theory, external knowledge has more


importance than the learner’s previous knowledge (Duke, Harper, & Johnston, 2013;

Siemens, 2005).

2.6 Traditional and contemporary approaches

Bradshaw (2016) in his book “Innovative teaching strategies in nursing and

related health professions” mentions that there are a variety of teaching strategies

that can be employed to engage students. Since there are teaching approaches that are

more related to a specific learning theory, paradigms do not easily fit into a

traditional or contemporary curricula. Anyhow, there are key features in the learning

theories that make them more prone to be incorporated more into traditional

curriculum styles (e.g. a more teacher-centred lesson), while more contemporary

approaches have other features that makes them more aligned with a more

contemporary curriculum (e.g. learning through social interaction). In traditional

approaches, academics rely on didactic paradigms to deliver the lessons. The

traditional paradigms as previously explained have the primary focus on the

memorisation of knowledge, delivered by the teacher. Therefore, they are considered

to take a teacher-centred approach. For instance, the theory of learning called

behaviourism focuses on an individual’s behaviour and how stimuli and environment

can shape human behaviour. This theory uses positive and negative reinforcement to

produce adequate responses (Merriam & Bierema, 2013; Westbrook et al., 2013).

Other learning theory that can be considered traditional is cognitivism. Cognitivism,

is associated with the development of a schema (diagrammatic representation) of the

concepts and understanding. This theory highlights and focuses on the importance of

producing valuable knowledge, and on organising and linking prior memorised

knowledge to new information (Bruner, 1966; Ertmer & Newby, 2013).

The humanist perspective suggests that students are free to make choices,

which will, therefore, define their behaviour (Merriam & Bierema, 2013), by

building on the needs and motivation of each person (Caffarella, 1993). While this

approach is considered traditional, humanistic values such as reflection and self-

directed learning are essential for health professionals, enabling and supporting the

incorporation of this learning theory into contemporary curricula (Veugelers, 2011).

Contemporary approaches on the other hand focus on developing the skills and

abilities of students. These approaches are often aligned with principles akin to social


constructivism and connectivism. Social constructivism focuses on the construction

of knowledge developed by interactions and collaborations with experts, facilitators

and peers, and enabling a collaborative environment (Jain & Tedman, 2007).

Connectivism considers that learning involves connecting nodes (sources of

information) creating the information and that it happens when the learner recognises

and interprets the information and the patterns to then create new connections

(Downes, 2008; Siemens, 2006).

2.7 The role of the learning theories in curriculum design

Worldwide curricula delivery during the first half of the 20th century was

teacher-centred, with its focus on the content delivered by academics (Gurpinar,

Musal, Aksakoglu, & Ucku, 2005). More recently, during the final decade of the 20th

and beginning of the 21st century, pharmacy practice and pharmacy education have

been subject to a series of changes and reforms (Marriott et al., 2008). Interestingly,

this has meant that more contemporary education trends have been incorporated, thus

supporting the implementation of a curriculum focused on problem-based learning

with a student-centred learning focus (Frenk et al., 2010).

For many years, traditional teaching strategies have focused on

communication, retention, and repetition of factual information by students.

However, there has been a shift in the current teaching model. Several studies

(Laurillard, 2008; Lindblom-Ylänne, Trigwell, Nevgi, & Ashwin, 2006; Sharma,

Verma, Kapoor, & Chopra, 2004) have reported the change in instruction, from a

teacher-centred to a student-centred focus, and academics need to develop new

strategies for their teaching

Theories of behaviourism and cognitivism lead to a teacher-centred focus as

they reinforce the idea that learning could not be achieved without a teacher who

provides information and knowledge. Social constructivism, on the other hand, has a

student-centred approach where the student has the potential for individual learning

(Briggs et al., 2015). Individual learning in social constructivism is achieved within

an environment where people interpret things they see and experience with the ideas

and knowledge they previously possessed (Jain & Tedman, 2007). Thus, students

exchange their experiences with the group and learn from each other to construct

their own learning (Briggs et al., 2015). Through this process of constructing


knowledge, students can develop higher order thinking skills which will contribute to

adapting their previous knowledge to new situations (Jain & Tedman, 2007).

From the behaviourists’ and cognitivists’ perspectives, knowledge is external

to the student, and the act of internalising knowledge is considered to be the learning

process. Conversely, from a constructivist view, learning is difficult and chaotic, and

it is the learners work to actively try creating meaning (Siemens, 2005). Humanism

focuses on the self-development of the learner through their own motivation. In a

society where information is continually being updated, connectivism considers the

learner to be focused on recognising, appraising, evaluating, and developing tools

and strategies to use in the future (Duke et al., 2013; Siemens, 2005).

Student peer activities and interaction, such as “concept integration,

communication, critical and creative thinking, and practical implementation of

knowledge” can aid in the development of higher intellectual abilities (Blouin,

Joyner, & Pollack, 2008). As these activities that shape the practice of academics are

underpinned by learning theories, it would be of great value to design a standardised

tool that helps with identifying the teaching strategies represented in the classroom.

2.8 Pharmacy Academics

Academics from pharmacy and Clinical Sciences may have clinical expertise

related to their fields, but many of them may not have a background in education,

curriculum design, theories of learning, or pedagogies (Reddy, Searle, Shawa, &

Teferra, 2016; World Health Organization, 2013). Thus, the teaching approaches in

pharmacy programs are sometimes based on techniques that academics have

experienced or learnt while they were students themselves. In contrast to current

trends, these teaching activities are often based on didactic lectures and more

traditional pedagogical approaches (Oleson & Hora, 2014).

Holley (2017) suggests that the rapidly changing environment “of higher

education shapes the way instructors approach interdisciplinary courses”. In a study

carried out by Lindblom (2006) the academics were described as having two

different teaching approaches in the ways they delivered classes: a teacher-centred

approach (focusing on the content) and a student-centred approach (focusing on the

development of students learning). The academics with teacher-centred approach

considered the content taught, over the way that it was taught. The academics who


had a student-centred approach focused on the relation and the facilitation of the

students’ learning and the knowledge to construct understanding (Lindblom-Ylänne

et al., 2006).

As indicated by Blouin (2009) one of the problems towards adopting teaching

and learning approaches is that academics from tertiary education do not have

training as “educational scholars”. Pharmacy academics have pointed out some of

the challenges that limit them from engaging in teaching and learning activities such

as the lack of mentoring, support from the faculty and inadequate incentives, and

appropriate promotion (Blouin et al., 2009; Smesny et al., 2007). Also, the academics

are normally focused in their area of expertise and are comfortable researching in

their academic discipline scope (Blouin et al., 2009).

Postareff et al. (2007) conducted a study looking at the effects of pedagogical

training on teachers’ self-efficacy beliefs. The study demonstrated that the academics

who completed an extensive course about pedagogies rated higher than those who

had only completed a short course and those who did not receive any pedagogical

training. Those who received the short pedagogical course were more uncertain

about their pedagogical training and scored less than those who did not receive any

training at all (Lindblom-Ylänne et al., 2006). In light of those results, it seems that

there is a need for academics to receive training about the theories of learning so they

can use them in the delivery of classes.

2.9 Summary and Implications

This chapter has described the pharmacy higher education landscape, along

with the changes that are happening in higher education and tertiary education

systems globally. The review of the literature has revealed that pharmacy curricula in

Australia have undertaken many changes during recent years (Marriott et al., 2008).

The implementation of those changes in the pharmacy curriculum has provided an

opportunity for exploring the transition to emerging learning theories and curriculum

models.

This review has revealed that there appear to be gaps in the literature, about

which are the predominant teaching and learning approaches and learning theories

for the current delivery of pharmacy courses. Advocates for a more contemporary

curriculum highlight that “while disciplines may change, the dominant structure of


higher education has not” (Holley, 2017). It is important to highlight the need to

explore whether planned curricula and enacted curricula learning theories are aligned

with contemporary teaching approaches. The implementation of contemporary

curricula is essential, but they need to be carefully implemented (Petit, Foriers, &

Rombaut, 2008).

Changes in the levels of curricula require the development and adaptation of

formal and enacted curriculum (also known as informal and delivered curriculum).

Demands to improve graduates’ skills have encouraged changes in the formal

curriculum and have presented the opportunity of unravelling the enacted curriculum

and its impact on the experienced curriculum. However, the changes to curriculum

need to embed the requirements needed for accreditation as imposed by professional

boards and agencies.

The curriculum changes bring an opportunity to observe current trends in

teaching approaches in the pharmacy discipline. Several authors indicate that

teaching approaches can be categorised into two groups: teacher and student-centred

approaches (Kaartinen-Koutaniemi & Katajavuori, 2006; Prosser & Trigwell, 1999).

On this basis, more research is needed about academics’ perspectives, and their

knowledge and understanding of the teaching approaches. As more contemporary

designs of curricula are implemented, there is a need to explore which teaching and

learning approaches work for pharmacy teaching delivery, paving the way to the

implementation of different and more student-related learning theories that can also

make academics “more satisfied with their teaching” (Kaartinen-Koutaniemi &

Katajavuori, 2006; Prosser & Trigwell, 1999). Thus, the renovation of the curriculum

and the continuous changes in the education landscape need to facilitate and support

the transition to more contemporary theories of learning (Petit et al., 2008).

Next, the methodological procedures of the study will be outlined. Chapter 3

will present a detailed description of the mixed method research.


Chapter 3: Research Design

The first section of this chapter discusses the methodology used for the

research (3.1). The chapter is then divided into two different phases: Phase 1, survey

(3.2), and Phase 2, observational research (3.3). For each phase of the study, the

participants, sampling, design of the data collection tools used in each phase,

procedure, analysis of the results, and ethics reviews will be described.

3.1 Methodology

The study was carried out as a mixed method sequential exploratory design

(Creswell, Plano Clark, Gutmann, & Hanson, 2003; Plano Clark & Creswell, 2008),

which is considered to be one of the most appropriate for research in educational

settings (Greene, Caracelli, & Graham, 1989).

Timing within a mixed methods design is classified in one of two ways:

concurrent or sequential (Morse, 1991). Concurrent timing occurs when the

researcher implements both quantitative and qualitative methods during a single

phase of the research study. This means that the quantitative and qualitative data are

collected, analysed, and interpreted at (approximately) the same time. Sequential

timing occurs when the researcher implements the methods in two distinct phases,

using (collecting and analysing) one type of data before using the other data type.

There are two options for sequential timing. The first option as suggested by

Creswell (2011) is that the researcher may decide to start collecting and analysing

quantitative data and may then subsequently collect and analyse qualitative data. The

second option, also provided by Creswell (2011) was that the reverse was also

possible: Qualitative data are firstly collected and analysed and soon after the

quantitative data would be also collected and analysed (Creswell, 2011).

The use of surveys and observations entailed, obtaining both, quantitative and

qualitative data. The strength of obtaining both qualitative and quantitative

information and collecting data with two research strategies is to obtain information

that could not be achieved by only using one method (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010).

By obtaining quantitative and qualitative data from surveys and observations, the

strategy was to increase and supplement the data collected, “increasing the scope


and comprehensiveness of the study” (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2010). Several authors

advocate for the combination of quantitative and qualitative research approaches for

a research study (compatibility thesis, use of both methods together) (Johnson &

Christensen, 2008; Tashakkori & Teddlie, 1998). Johnson (2008, p. 450) indicates

that a mixed research design is appropriate when studying educational problems.

Thus, the use of multiple perspectives is, in educational studies, perceived as a

strength. For example, quantitative data is relatively quick to collect and is useful for

obtaining data that “allow quantitative predictions to be made” and qualitative

research can be “useful for describing complex phenomena” but by using multiple

sources of evidence it can justify the claims (Johnson & Turner, 2003). Furthermore,

if the researcher has evidence of effective practices then Dewey’s standard is met,

according to which it provides the research with a warranted assertability (standard

for good evidence) (Johnson & Turner, 2003).

The philosophical orientation that has been brought to the study by the

candidate was considered following the mixed methods approach to the research.

The figure 4. below outlines the framework for this study. Framework for research

extracted from Creswell (2014).

Figure 4. Framework for research extracted from Creswell (2014).

The researcher’s worldview is a mix of both Pragmatism and Constructivism.

As suggested by Creswell (2014), mixed methods allowed the candidate to achieve

the exploration for both, quantitative and qualitative elements. The researcher


employed surveys and observations to explore the learning theories of the academics.

While pragmatism is seen as the paradigm that provides the underlying philosophical

framework for mixed-methods research (Tashakkori & Teddlie, 2003; Somekh &

Lewin, 2005), the constructivist paradigm helps the candidate to search for the

“complexity of views rather than narrowing meanings into a few categories or

ideas” (Creswell, 2014). The utilisation of the constructivist view in this research

was to rely on the participants’ views of the current and desired approaches and the

situations that observations studied. The constructivist worldview includes some

elements as empirical observations and measurements, verification and/or generation

of theory, understanding, different view and multiple participant meanings.

The pragmatism worldview includes some elements as the pluralistic, problem-

centred, consequence of actions, pluralistic and real-world practice oriented.

(Creswell, 2014). The previous elements are important for the research problem,

design, data collection and analysis. By using both a pragmatism and constructivism

view the study had a more complex understanding than by only using one view. The

study followed a mixed methods sequential exploratory design to develop an

understanding of the current perspectives and the obstacles that they experience in

their teaching. The quantitative and qualitative data from the surveys provided the

candidate with useful information prior to the beginning of the observations. The

utilisation of a mixed method approach helped in the identification of the instruments

for the research to best fit the sample under study.

The study used the survey method to explore the perspectives of academics

about their pedagogical practices and their teaching approaches and observations to

explore teaching practices in the classroom. Survey methodology is described as a

systematic method for gathering information from a sample of individuals for the

purpose of describing the attributes of the larger population of which the individuals

are members (Glasow, 2005). The use of this approach for the research study

provides a mutual confirmation of the validity of the results (Johnson & Turner,

2003), and also allowed the research to overcome any possible disadvantages

implicit in the selected methods (Creswell, 2013; Dawson, 2009). Observational

research is described as a “purposeful examination of teaching and/or learning

events through the systematic processing of data collection and analysis”. The use of

mixed method approaches as stated by Wragg (2012) indicate that quantitative and


qualitative approaches “can complement each other” (O'Leary, 2014). The

observations were designed to investigate and capture the teaching approaches of the

academics in the class and the theories underpinning those practices, identifying the

theories of learning and pedagogical differences noted in teaching approaches to a

traditional and a contemporary curriculum within the same pharmacy discipline. The

study followed a sequential exploratory design. Figure 5, summarises the major dates

and events in the timeline of the research.

Figure 5. Timeline of the research. Phase 1 (survey), light coloured squares and

phase 2 (observations), dark coloured squares.

For Phase 1, the survey was the chosen method to gather and collect the

perspectives of the academics. Surveys are a valid way to collect quantitative data for

the explanation and quantitative description of a sample (Fink, 2003; Groves, 2009).

This is because surveys can be used to efficiently gather valid and reliable data

(Smith, 1997) and are accessible tools to ask participants about their opinions and

attitudes as they cannot be observed (Leong & Austin, 2006). Surveys, when

compared to qualitative interviews and focus groups, are also considered to be a

time-efficient method of obtaining an overview of perceptions while safeguarding

the anonymity of results (Queensland Health, 2007).

There is value in the use of a survey method to investigate the perceptions of

academics and current teaching approaches for the delivery of the Clinical Sciences

and Pharmacy curriculum. It is important to provide the opportunity for open

Pre-piloting of the survey

•September 2015

Survey

•26 September 2015

Pre-piloting of observation s

• from 01/08/2016 until 18/08/2016

Observations

• from 22/08/2016 until 10/10/2016


answers and open comments when designing a survey and this could be valuable for

identifying the teaching approach preference of academics (O'Cathain & Thomas,

2004). The advantage of using surveys is the simplicity in the processing and

collection of unambiguous answers about academic perspectives of teaching

approaches, leading to quantitative data for analysis (Bowling, 2002). However, a

possible disadvantage is that the pre-set (pre-coded) choices may not be sufficiently

comprehensive, and not all answers may be easily accommodated, so respondents

might be “forced” to choose inappropriate pre-coded answers that do not represent

their views (Bowling, 2002). To compensate for this disadvantage, there was a space

for further comments (open questions) at the end of the questionnaire so respondents

could also add any other comments that were not fully represented by the pre-coded

answers. Respondents were also asked for their opinions on barriers and facilitators

when shifting from their current to their desired teaching approaches. For the purpose

of this research, a comparison between the teaching and learning approaches used by

academics in the delivery of two pharmacy curricula was made: the traditional

pharmacy curriculum to be extinguished and the recently implemented contemporary

pharmacy curriculum. The research had a special interest, in particular, on when

academics were teaching similar content in two separated curricula that were

designed and underpinned by different teaching and learning approaches.

For Phase 2, the research method used to gather data was classroom

observations. This observational study complemented the findings of Phase 1 of the

research project. It is important to collect information from classrooms where the

delivery is occurring and not to rely on the disposition of academics to provide their

perspectives. Direct (face to face) observations were considered and selected to

capture the academics’ theories of learning as this method can provide an accurate

and reliable reflection of reality (O'Leary, 2014).

The curriculum delivered by the discipline of Pharmacy at the School of

Clinical Sciences, QUT, was at the time of this research study, under transition and

two curricula were being taught concurrently in the pharmacy course. This provided

the researcher with a unique opportunity to explore the transition between the

traditional and contemporary formal curriculum of the teaching approaches of the

academics and the most predominant enacted theories of learning. This could be

considered as a limitation for the research due to contamination of styles but, because


the size of the sample was small and the lessons were taught by academics who were

really teaching both curricula during the same semester, it was actually considered an

opportunity.

Although there are many learning theories available for teaching, it would be

impractical to explore them all in detail. The research explored the five most

common teaching strategies aligning with behaviourism, cognitivism, social

constructivism, humanism and connectivism. These were chosen for the survey and

therefore were also chosen as the teaching strategies for the observational study.

The strong link between the phases of the research presented in this thesis

draws a roadmap of the research process. The use of mixed methods is defined by

Creswell (2014) as “an approach to research in the social, behavioural, and Health

Sciences in which the investigator gathers both quantitative and qualitative data,

integrates them together and then draws interpretations based on the combined

strengths of both sets of data to understand research problems”. Following the

approach of Creswell (2014), the research was designed to allow the collection of

two types of data (i.e. quantitative and qualitative) that could complement each other,

adding value to the developed tool designed to record surveys and classroom

observations. Accordingly, during the observations, the researcher completed two

sets of data and these were supplemented by the collection of field notes that

described the teaching environment and the interaction of academics with students.

As suggested by Taylor (2016) observations can be challenging for the researcher

and they are useful “only to the extent that they can be remembered and recorded”.

3.2 Ethic approach of the research

The ethics committee provided clearance in agreement with the National

Statement on Ethical Conduct in Human Research as the study secured the

confidentiality of the data, the anonymity of the participants and implemented

principles that avoided coercion.

The participants in both studies (surveys and observations) made the personal

decision of voluntary participating. The day of the survey the candidate provided

verbal information about the survey to for the volunteers to understand the purpose

of the study, the demands and the potential benefits that the survey could provide.


The participants could complete the survey or leave it blank. The completion of the

demographic details from participants was optional.

The observations followed the Guidelines for low/negligible risk provided by

the University Human Research Ethics Committee (UHREC) at QUT. The

information about the participants was confidential, only supervisors and candidate

had access to the information, and records were confidential and the data was kept at

QUT.

3.3 Survey. Phase 1: academics’ perceptions on current and desired

teaching approaches

The survey was utilised to describe the reported teaching practices as perceived

by academics in Pharmacy and Clinical Sciences at QUT. The survey tool was

designed to gather quantitative and qualitative data in the identification of the

teaching approaches the Clinical Sciences academics utilised for the delivery of

lessons, and opinions about barriers and facilitators of academics while teaching in

the School of Clinical Sciences.

3.3.1 Participants

The target sample was formed by academics volunteering to participate from

the disciplines of Pharmacy, Medical Imaging, Radiation Therapy, Podiatry, and

Paramedic Science in the School of Clinical Sciences at QUT (Brisbane, Australia)

who were invited to participate in the survey. The data collected from the surveys

was non-identifiable. The potential number of participants for the survey study was

45. The number of respondents that met the inclusion criteria was n=20. The range of

experience, for the total of 20 participants, was between one and 18 years, with a

mean of 8.2 years.

3.3.2 Sampling

A convenience sample of academics volunteering to participate in the research

was selected as they were “easily accessible and willing to participate” in the

research (Salkind, 2010; Teddlie & Yu, 2007). The non-probability sampling was

conducted to address the study research question (Salkind, 2010; Teddlie & Yu,

2007) which was: “What are the current and desired teaching approaches

perspectives of academics in Clinical Sciences?”. One reason for choosing this


convenience sample was that the individuals volunteering to participate all had

experience in teaching Clinical Sciences related subjects, and they were available

and accessible to participate in the research (Etikan, Musa, & Alkassim, 2016;

Salkind, 2010).

3.3.3 Survey design and data collection

The first part of the survey included two optional questions requesting

demographic information. The first of these questions was about the disciplines the

academics were teaching, and the second question asked about the number of years

that academics had been teaching.

The first part of the survey was designed to obtain quantitative information

about the theoretical approaches underpinning teaching activities, through the

identification of what academics say they are doing and where they say they want to

be in the future. The questions in the survey were designed to be “short and

focused” (Driscoll, 2011). There were six questions, each with five possible answers,

and the participants were encouraged to choose one answer from the column of

“what I am doing now” and “what I would like to do in the future” (current and

desired approaches) for each question. Six major constructs were explored:

1) the overall teaching approach

2) delivery of the content

3) design of the content regarding the teaching material

4) strategies primarily used in the design of the teaching

5) teaching techniques

6) strategies to engage students

These key features of the teaching strategies and the constructs of the questions

were adapted from Hunt and Chalmers (2012), to have a common vocabulary

between the project developed, and the expert definitions and explanations from the

literature. A sample of the survey is detailed in Appendix A (survey questionnaire).

The final section of the survey was designed to collect qualitative data exploring

perspectives about barriers and facilitators of academics.


The strength of the close-ended questions was that they helped to align the

answers with the perspective of the academics, reducing researcher bias. Every

option from the multiple-choice questions was linked directly to a learning theory

from the five most commonly identified in tertiary education (Hunt & Chalmers,

2012). The questions and answers aligned with learning theories. Open-ended

questions were used to explore barriers and facilitators. The survey also included one

open question about barriers and facilitators when shifting from their current to their

desired teaching approaches (see Appendix A). In addition, at the end of the survey,

another open question provided the opportunity for any other comments the

academic wished to add.

According to Fowler (2014), as surveys are intended to be self-administered, a

pre-test is required to clarify comprehension problems and difficulties that the

participants may encounter while completing the survey. Face validity checks were

carried out through peer-review discussions of the questionnaire with the candidate´s

academic supervisors. Further, a preliminary version of the questionnaire was pre-

tested for readability and face validity by three academics from the School of

Clinical Sciences (Cline, Mott, & Schommer, 1999; Driscoll, 2011). The pre-test was

carried out to optimise the instructions and to confirm that academics could

understand the questions (Dillman & Redline, 2004; Fowler, 2014). The feedback

provided by the three academics was included in the survey tool after the pre-testing.

3.3.4 Participant recruitment and data collection

The main researcher, after orally inviting the participants, explained the

research to the participants prior to commencing personally distributing the survey

amongst the participants. The participants were free to consider their willingness to

complete the survey, and to ask the researcher any questions they considered. The

data from the survey was collected after the presentation of the research to the

academics (after one hour had elapsed).

Verbal instructions were given to the participants to select only one option on

each question of the survey that best reflected the current and desired approaches in

their teaching delivery and pedagogical practices. The researcher took the results

from those volunteers willing to participate. Only data obtained from surveys fully

and correctly completed was analysed. Surveys were considered inappropriate for


analysis when they were not correctly completed, blank or were from non-consenting

volunteers.

3.3.5 Analysis of survey results

The results obtained from the anonymous multiple-choice survey were

analysed in two ways for the quantitative and qualitative data. A descriptive statistics

analysis to find the distribution of the pedagogical trends was carried out for the

quantitative data of the multiple-choice questions. Qualitative data obtained from the

answers to the open questions was analysed thematically by the researcher.

Following the steps suggested by Braun (2006), the qualitative information gathered

during the survey was identified and similar theme topics emerged.

3.3.6 Ethics

Ethics approval was requested from the Queensland University of Technology

Human Research Ethics Committee (QUT, Brisbane) which granted an ethical

exemption (exemption number 1600000324).

Data management

The data from the survey was collected on paper and securely stored in order to

comply with the data management and security requirements of QUT. The survey

data was securely stored after the activity.

3.4 Observations

Observations are considered a valid way to gather information for investigating

the theories of learning in education (Fortune, 2000; O'Leary, 2014; Wajnryb, 1992).

After using a survey to preliminary explore the perceptions of academics teaching in

the School of Clinical Sciences at QUT during Phase 1, the second phase of the

research started. Observations explored which of the teaching strategies aligning with

the five dominant learning theories (previously explained) academics were currently

delivering for the instruction of students. In order to increase the strength of the

observations a mixed method approach was selected. Quantitative and qualitative

approaches to observation were used to gather data during the classes. Checklists

were used as a structured way to collect quantitative data While field notes were used

as an unstructured way to record qualitative data, both (qualitative and quantitative)


complementing each other (Wragg, 2012). As indicated by O’Leary (2014), this can

provide “a more accurate and credible reflection of a teacher’s competence”

(O'Leary, 2014). Allwright (2014) describes the checklist as a tool to objectively

record the categories, timeframes and frequency of the research (Allwright, 2014).

The shift to more contemporary curricula has been happening across many

disciplines in the School of Clinical Sciences (QUT) during recent years. At the time

of the research, the discipline of Pharmacy was actively transitioning between

curricula. This provided the researcher with the opportunity to compare traditional

and contemporary pharmacy course designs, and to observe the preferences and

approaches of the academics’ in the delivery of the courses. The results from the

overall trends from the observations were then compared to the academics’

perspectives (survey), to explore the reality of what teaching strategies academics

were currently delivering during their classes.

3.4.1 Participants

A convenience sample of academics volunteering to participate, from the

Discipline of Pharmacy at QUT (Brisbane, Australia), was invited to participate in

the study. The data collected during the observations was non-identifiable. No

personal data about the academics were collected.

The gender, or the years of experience, of the participants was not recorded,

and field notes only described the number of academics present during the class.

3.4.2 Sampling

The participants were a convenience volunteer sample of academics from the

discipline of Pharmacy teaching pharmacy units in the School of Clinical Sciences at

QUT (Brisbane, Australia). The sampling only focused on academics from the

discipline of Pharmacy. An Expression of Interest (EOI) was sent to all academics in

the discipline of Pharmacy at QUT who were currently teaching in the pharmacy

course, inviting them to participate in the study. Only those academics teaching

during the semester when data collection took place were eligible to participate in the

study. The research team supervisor, on behalf of the main researcher, sent the

general EOI email to the pharmacy academics, and a reminder a week later to


express their interest in participating in the research. Academics were invited to give

their written consent for the observations.

A total of 17 academics were eligible to be included in the study which was

also the total number of academics teaching pharmacy courses at QUT during that

semester. There were no inclusion or exclusion criteria for the observational research

but it was mentioned on the Ethics documentation that the participants needed to be

academics teaching pharmacy courses at the time of the investigation to be invited to

participate in it. Therefore, the potential number of participants was 17, but as it was

described in the expression of interest (EOI) and also in the participant information

documents for QUT research project, to be a participant in the study the academic/s

needed to be observed during their teaching delivery at least twice. It was described

in the documents that the research participants needed to be observed during two or

more teaching activities (about one hour of time per activity) for the candidate to

collect enough data to carry out the research.

3.4.3 Observational design and data collection tools

The researcher used a mixed method design structured and unstructured tools

in a parallel manner, collecting quantitative and qualitative data from the

observations (Teddlie & Tashakkori, 2009).

As a structured approach, a frequency distribution table was used to capture the

teaching approaches that appeared during the delivery of the class. Emerson (1981)

suggested when performing a pre-structured observation “using pre-established

schedules of observational categories” to collect data. The data collected was

conceptualised in terms of "the frequency distribution of behaviour events" that are

assumed to have objective meaning that can be grasped by the outside observer

(Schwartz & Merten, 1971).

Pre-structured observation studies essentially employ a survey design, with

pre-specified procedures for when and what to observe or sample. Checklists were

designed to identify the underlying learning theories as described in the literature

(Hunt & Chalmers, 2012). This was to establish the predominant teaching

approaches used during pharmacy lessons.

The checklist had two different formats. The Main Features Checklist (MFC)

was considered “format 1” and the Survey Mirrored Checklist (SMC) was considered


“format 2”. Format 1 was the checklist exploring the main features and it was

designed to capture the key features of the five learning theories that were

predominant and could be observed during the lesson (MFC, see Appendix B). This

allowed the researcher to explore the consistency of the teaching approaches during

the observational study. Format 2 of the tool explored an overall view of the teaching

approaches. The survey mirrored checklist, (SMC, see Appendix C) was the

checklist mirroring the survey and was used for the generation of questions from the

questionnaire. The overall view checklist (second format of the tool) was the one

which allowed the investigation of predominance and trends. This checklist format

had questions concerning: Q1. The overall teaching approach, Q2. The delivery of

the content, Q3. The design of the content regarding the teaching material, Q4. The

strategies primarily used in the designing of the teaching, Q5. The teaching

techniques, Q6. The strategy to engage students.

The MFC (see Appendix B) was created to investigate the presence/absence of

an underlying learning theory. It was designed to record whether a teaching strategy

was present in the classroom and was based on frequency counts, to help the

researcher with the classroom observations (Chesterfield, 1997). Both of the

checklist formats, the MFC and SMC, were divided into four 15-minutes-observation

intervals to record an hour of class. The MFC had the main features of the learning

theories and had the 15-minutes-observation intervals to aid the researcher in

identifying and focusing on the paradigms.

The SMC (see Appendix C) included the six research questions as previously

explained in the survey. Below each of the questions there were five rows of possible

answers and each answer was associated with a paradigm. The SMC also had four

15-minute-intervals columns plus an additional column (final column) so that the

observer could select the theory of learning that best reflected the teaching approach

and mode of instruction for each of the intervals and each of the questions.

In contrast, field notes provided an unstructured approach for the investigation

of the learning theories of academics. Field notes are considered a valid form of

qualitative data collection for educational research purposes (Bogdan & Biklen,

2007). Zohrabi considers the combination of field notes and checklists as a way to

complement the information collected (Zohrabi, 2013). The purpose of the field

notes was to obtain more detailed information, providing context and the social


situations of the study to explore the teaching approaches in more depth. Merriam

(1998) suggests that notes collected from observations give a “first-hand account of

the phenomenon of interest studied”.

3.4.4 Observation design

The observations were scheduled to take place during the second semester of

2016. The observations timeframes of the project were pre-piloting from 01/08/2016

to 12/08/2016 (week two and week three of the QUT academic calendar), and the

observational research from 15/08/2016 until 10/10/2016 (week four until week 11 of

the QUT academic calendar). Before the observations were carried out, face to face

meetings were organised between the main researcher and each of the academics to

emphasise the importance of the normal delivery of units and to continue with their

usual learning theories and teaching approaches.

In order to capture the normal delivery of the class, an overt non-participant

observation was considered the best option for not altering in any way in the

development of the class (Wells, 2010). The researcher conducted the study with the

collaboration of the participating pharmacy academics. The participating academics

of the survey and the observational research knew the purpose of the study. There

were concerns before the beginning of the study about the possible bias: that

academics whether consciously or not, could try to shift their teaching approaches.

Nevertheless, it was a limitation considered and due to that fact it was explained by

the candidate during the personal meetings (Merriam, 2015). The researcher agreed

with the participants to observe at least two lessons from the same subject, with the

focus set on the learning theories and pedagogies of the lesson. Moreover, the

academics knew the researcher was observing lessons from both of the curricula

taught during that semester.

It was overt, because academics were aware of the presence of the observer,

and students were informed at the beginning of the classes that there was a researcher

in the room. The observer did not ask questions or interfere in the delivery of the

teaching activities (Creswell, 2014). The observer sat at the back of the class to

interfere as little as possible. This approach tried to avoid being a distraction for both

academics and students, as they all knew that there was a researcher in the classroom

looking for the learning theories the academics were using for teaching delivery


(Dawson, 2009). Participation is unnecessary as explained by Emerson because

“there is no concern with trying to enter the worlds of meaning of those studied”.

Except for its practical impossibility in most natural settings, concealed observation

would be the recommended procedure in pre-structured observation settings

(Emerson, 1981).

The researcher used the checklists as structured observational tools and

collected field notes as unstructured observational tools in a parallel manner,

concurrently collecting two types of data, quantitative and qualitative (Teddlie &

Tashakkori, 2009). Although the replication of the qualitative results is difficult, the

use of both methods (checklists and field notes) for the observational study of

academics gives a more complete approach (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2008).

Phase 2 of the study was carried out in two stages:

Pilot stage of the tools. The main researcher and one skilled academic

supervisor, with knowledge in education and a broad educational experience

background, and also experienced in observational research, performed a pilot study

during the first two weeks after receiving approval from the human ethics committee

(01/08/2016 to 12/08/2016), to validate and improve the checklists and the collection

of field notes. During the classes, the main researcher completed both checklists and

took detailed field notes about the teaching strategies observed during the class.

The experienced academic and the main researcher went together to a tutorial

and a lecture to pilot the checklist tool. The main researcher was instructed by the

academic on how to take field notes and do the observations to observe the teaching

strategies used in the delivery of the class. After each of those observations, the

supervisor and the researcher compared and discussed the results until they achieved

consensus on the interpretation of the data collected. The main researcher continued

with the observations independently once the supervisor was confident of the

researcher’s interpretation of the data observed. The main researcher also performed

the piloting of a lecture and a practical alone, to verify that the checklist tool could

operate for different classes and in various teaching environments. To contribute to

the validity of the observations, the study aimed to observe two or more class

sessions of the unit, and sessions from different courses (lectures, workshops,

tutorials and practicals).


During the second stage, from 22/08/2016 until 10/10/2016 (corresponding to

the second semester at QUT), the main researcher, using the checklists improved

from the piloting, observed classes completing both checklists and taking field notes

of the teaching approaches academics delivered during the lessons.

3.4.5 Participant recruitment and data collection

The main researcher’s supervisor sent an electronic EOI to the academic staff

teaching pharmacy units during the semester of the study (n=17), to gauge their

interest in participating in the research.

Face to face meetings were organised by the main researcher with those

academics who expressed interest in participating in the research in order to provide

further information and obtain consent prior to the observations.

The procedure used for the observations was attendance at the lessons

delivered by the academics. The MFC, key teaching strategies features checklist,

SMC, overall view of the predominant teaching approaches, and the field notes were

taken concurrently during the class.

3.4.6 Analysis of the results

The data was analysed using descriptive statistics for the quantitative part.

Following the statements about thematic analysis presented by Braun and Clark

(2006), it is a method for “identifying, analysing and reporting patterns (themes)

within data”. Therefore, with the analysed data, the main researcher carried out

interpretations, searching for understanding and consequently writing up a report

about the qualitative field notes. The field notes were utilised as a tool to aid in

recognition of trends and contribute support for the quantitative trends related to the

five theories of learning. Due to the large amount of field notes collected by the

researcher the results section will illustrate the most significant examples recorded

during classroom observations.

Analysis of the field notes

As previously mentioned, at the time of the study, the field notes recorded (on

paper) the researcher’s description of the approaches observed during the classes.

Throughout the analysis of the notes, main themes were identified. The identification


of emerging features in the field notes about the academics’ teaching practices came

directly from the data using deductive thematic analysis allowing the creation of five

main categories (Hsieh & Shannon, 2005; Vaismoradi, Turunen, & Bondas, 2013).

The analysis of the field notes was carried out using an inductive approach and

the themes were manually created looking at the information (Bryman, 2015). The

themes captured in the field notes about the academics’ approaches shaped the main

patterns.

3.4.7 Ethics

For the observational study, the Queensland University of Technology (QUT)

Human Research Ethics Committee (QUT; Brisbane, Australia) granted ethical

approval on 29/07/2016 (QUT Ethics Approval Number 1600000612). See Figure 6

for the timeframes and dates of the observation research process.

Figure 6. Timeframes and dates of the observation research process.

Data management

The data collected during the study was non-identifiable. No personal data

about the academics were collected. The gender of the participants was not recorded,

and field notes only described the number of academics present during the class. The

July 2016

Ethical approval

29/07/2016

August 2016

Prepiloting of checklist

01/08/2016 to 18/08/2016

EOI

1st sent 11/08/2016

2nd sent 17/08/2016

Observations starts

22/08/2016

September 2016

Observations in progress

October 2016

Observations end

10/10/2016


data was recorded both on paper and electronically, and transferred to an electronic

device in preparation for analysis.

The data from the observations was securely stored in order to comply with the

data management and security requirements of QUT.


Chapter 4: Results

This chapter provides the details of the results of the study. The data gathered

from Phase 1, the survey, will be described first, followed by Phase 2, the

observational research.

4.1 Phase 1. Results from the survey

The survey was designed to gather data addressing the research question (a):

“What are the current and desired teaching approaches perspectives of academics in

Clinical Sciences?”.

4.1.1 Recruitment of Participants

A total of 27 out of 45 academics (53%) participated in the survey activity,

with a final number of 20 surveys included for analysis. The remaining surveys were

excluded from the analysis as they had not been completed correctly (multiple

questions left blank, ticked more than one answer for each of the columns on each of

the questions). The survey had the two first optional questions with the sole purpose

of excluding people who were not Clinical Sciences academics but may have been

there the day of the survey. Information about the number of academics in each

discipline, names and number of years teaching, of the study participants was

considered anonymous.

4.1.2 Sampling

The convenience sample of academics volunteering to participate in the

research had a maximum target number of 45 participants. This maximum target was

the number of academics present during the activity (lecturers from the School of

Clinical Sciences). The number of surveys that was finally considered for the

analysis was 20. From those 20 participants who completed the research questions of

the survey, 16 of them answered both optional questions: about the disciplines the

academics were teaching, and the number of years of experience teaching.


4.1.3 Academics’ perspectives

The most common theories of learning for current teaching approaches in the

survey were, in this order, behaviourism, cognitivism, social constructivism

humanism and connectivism as shown in Figure 7. The most common response in

desired approaches showed a reversed trend, with connectivism being the most

predominant and behaviourism becoming the least preferred choice. It can also be

observed that the social constructivism and humanism paradigms have similar trends

for current and desired teaching approaches.

Figure 7. Percentage of answers linked to each theory of learning as reported by the

participants about their current and desired teaching approaches in the survey (n=20).

As shown in Figure 8 for current approaches, academics reported the use of

cognitivist based teaching strategies for question 1 as their prevalent overall

approach, although the answers selected by the respondents in the other questions of

the survey show that they predominantly identify their practice with behaviourist

theories. In contrast, all the desired approaches questions (Figure 9), concurred with

connectivism as the predominant educational theory. These results strongly align

with the answers from question 2 to question 6 where connectivism is predominant

and other learning theories have a secondary focus (Figure 9).

0

5

10

15

20

25

30

35

40

45

50

Behaviourism Cognitivism Social

Constructivism

Humanism ConnectivismPer

cen

tage

of

an

swer

s (%

) (n

=2

0)

Pedagogical theories reported by participants

Current teaching approaches (%) Desired teaching approaches (%)


Figure 8. Current teaching approaches. Academics’ response rate linked to each theory of

leaning as reported by the participants for their current teaching approaches (n=20).

Figure 9. Desired teaching approaches. Academics’ response rate linked to each educational

theory as reported by the participants for their desired teaching approaches (n=20).

When comparing Figures 8 and 9, for current perspectives, academics

identified traditional approaches such as cognitivism as predominant with an overall

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Q.1

Overall

approach

Q.2

Content

delivery

Q.3

Content

design

Q.4

Teaching

design

strategies

Q.5

Enacted

teaching

technique

Q.6

Student

engagement

Res

po

nse

rate

fro

m

aca

dem

ics

(%)

(n=

20)

Pedagogical trends for the questions in survey

Behaviourism Cognitivism Social Constructivism Humanism Connectivism

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

Q.1

Overall

approach

Q.2

Content

delivery

Q.3

Content

design

Q.4

Teaching

design

strategies

Q.5

Enacted

teaching

technique

Q.6

Student

engagement

Res

pon

se r

ate

fro

m

aca

dem

ics

(%)

(n=

20)

Pedagogical trends for the questions in the survey

Behaviourism Cognitivsm Social Constructivism Humanism Connectivism


rate of 50% while, in the desired approaches, more contemporary trends like

connectivism were predominant (65% of the answers). For the delivery of content,

the current predominant paradigm was social constructivism with 40% of the

answers, in contrast with the desired approaches where participants reported their

wish to implement connectivist approaches that replace completely traditional

theories like behaviourism and cognitivism. The same phenomena are observed in

content design, teaching strategies, techniques, and in the way they engaged students.

However, this rise in connectivism occurs in the presence of all the other teaching

approaches. For example, student engagement activities highlighted a decrease in the

combinations of behaviourism and cognitivism from 50% (for current approaches) to

15% in the desired approaches. The content design of the teaching in current

perspectives of the academics was supported by 45% of the answers being related to

behaviourism versus humanist and connectivist, each having 35% of the answers, in

the desired approach. The current strategies the academics primarily use in designing

their teaching were identified with behaviourism (35%) contrasted with the

connectivism (40%) identified in the desired approaches. Behaviourism was also the

basis of the most used currently enacted teaching technique with 40% versus 45% of

connectivist recognised in the desired approaches. The strategies used to engage the

students by the academics were predominantly humanist (35%) in contrast to the

high predominance of connectivism (40%) for the desired approaches.

In summary, the results from the survey show a trend predominantly based on

traditional theories of learning for the current teaching approaches, while the

academics’ perspectives show a trend towards more student-centred learning theories

such as connectivism and social constructivism.

4.1.4 Barriers and facilitators

The academics who completed the survey, when asked to comment about

factors and challenges that might affect their implementation of the desired teaching

strategies (during the open-ended questions) responded with analogous comments.

The academics underpinned similar ideas, and five categories were generated. The

participants reported that the major concerns were: time management, engagement of

students, organisational support, resources and techniques. These five were the most

commonly stated on the open questions of the survey, by the respondents. Below, the


candidate provides an explanation of the five main categories. Each explanation was

a compendium of the answers provided by the respondents. In addition, in order to

provide more detail about the barriers and facilitators, a comment or two written by a

participant of the survey that best explained the category was extracted directly from

the data and was also attached to the explanation as an example.

- Time: The academics acknowledged issues with planning, time spent in

class and time used for daily activities. The time constraints may result in

difficulties for the academics to deliver the classes in another way than the

traditional approaches. This was emphasised by following responses:

“Time, overload of daily activities.”

“Barrier: Time spent in the classroom versus preparation time.”

- Engagement of the students: Some academics also highlighted resistance to

change from students. The fact that students could still be accustomed to

traditional methods may become a barrier to the acceptability of new

approaches, when academics implement contemporary curriculum:

“[Students] still want to be spoon-fed.”

- Organisational support: Academics reported on the need for more support

from the institution, leaders and colleagues to collaborate in shifting the

curricula and the use of more contemporary trends and paradigms. The

academics indicated that support was required in the transition to new

teaching approaches because staff feel stuck in their ways or may not be

aware of different ways of teaching:

“Stakeholders state it is heading in an innovative and new ideals

direction. However, it has staff that has been involved in ‘same’ for

years and are reticent to change or new ways.”

- Resources and techniques: The participants reported that the allocation of

more resources and related training for the academics could help them to

embrace new trends in curricula and change to more contemporary teaching

approaches. The resources and techniques have to be individualised and

supported by leadership in order to adapt to different stages in the courses

and to different subjects, as acknowledged by one of the participants:


“The approach to teaching is unit specific. E.g. early technical skills

acquisition vs. final year.”

4.2 Phase 2. Results from the observations

The survey was designed to gather data addressing the research question (b):

What are the current learning theories that academics employ to deliver the

Pharmacy curricula?”. The observation checklists can be seen in Appendices B & C.

4.2.1 Recruitment of participants

The final number of 12 was then further reduced by three participants down to

a total of nine selected participants for the analysis (53% of the maximum target).

The three rejected participants were observed only on one occasion, and therefore did

not meet the requirements to be included in the study, as stated in the Ethics

documentation.

4.2.2 Sampling

The convenience sample of pharmacy academics volunteering to participate in

the research had a maximum target number of 17 participants. The potential number

of participants for the observations was the number of people who received the

expression of interest (EOI). This maximum target was the number of academics

teaching courses in the pharmacy discipline during the second semester of 2016

(lecturers from pharmacy discipline). From the 17 academics that were sent the email

with the EOI, data from nine participants (n=9) was analysed for the research.

4.2.3 Observational data results

The results gathered from the observational research were analysed and each of

the questions explored were aligned with one of the teaching approaches. The data

collected about the intervals and the final columns was processed, with a total of 88

hours of teaching activities observed. Each of the theories of learning from the SMC

questions was converted into percentages for each of the types of lessons

(lectures/workshops, practicals and tutorials). The final percentages about each

question from the different types of lessons were depicted in a column chart and

compared with each other.


Table 2. Traditional and contemporary curriculum classroom observations (from Survey

Mirrored Checklist).

Lectures/

Workshops Practical Tutorial Total

Traditional

curriculum 17 3 35 55

Contemporary

curriculum 15 6 12 33

Total 32 9 47 88

The researcher observed 17 hours of lectures from the traditional curriculum

and 15 hours of workshops from the contemporary curriculum. The table above and

the figure below provide a comprehensive explanation of the classrooms

observations.

General overview of the teaching approaches of the

pharmacy curriculum observed during the research

Figure 10 provides an overview of the observed teaching approaches used for

the delivery of the pharmacy curriculum (traditional and contemporary) collected

from quantitative data of the observations. The graph shows the general prevalence

of the teaching approaches in pharmacy education.


Figure 10. The overall learning theories related to each of the teaching strategies and each of

the questions. (n=9)

Q1. The overall teaching approaches. Q2. The delivery of the content. Q3. The design of the

content regarding the teaching material. Q4. The strategies primarily used in the designing of

the teaching. Q5. The teaching techniques. Q6. The strategy to engage students

A high predominance of answers (observations by the researcher) aligned with

cognitivism and can be observed through all the questions in the research study.

Social constructivism was identified as the second most predominant approach.

Humanism was the least predominant approach on questions 1 to 4 and, for questions

5 and 6, connectivism and social constructivism respectively were the least

predominant approaches.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

Q.1 Q.2 Q.3 Q.4 Q.5 Q.6

Per

cen

tag

es o

f le

arn

ing

th

eori

es

ob

serv

ed d

uri

ng

th

e re

searc

h (

n=

9)

Pedagogical trend for the questions in the observational research



Comparison of traditional and contemporary curricula

The following graph (Figure 11) draws a comparison between the five most

common teaching approaches for the traditional curriculum and the contemporary

curriculum. Having both pieces of information facing each other, there are visible

similarities and differences between the traditional and contemporary curricula.


Figure 11. Comparison of the traditional (left side of the graph) and the contemporary (right

side of the graph) curriculum sample of teaching approaches.


content regarding the teaching material. Q4. The strategies primarily used in the designing of the teaching. Q5. The teaching techniques. Q6. The strategy to engage students

When teaching the traditional curriculum, the lessons focused on the formal

instruction of information provided by an academic. The academic spoke to the

student audience, explaining the content, and the students were passive recipients of

the information.

-100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Curricula

Traditional vs. Contemporary


Meanwhile, on the contemporary curriculum the information was uploaded

online, students already have seen and have understood the content prior to the

beginning of the lesson. Therefore, lessons do not provide new knowledge to the

student but help the student relate the information and ask questions. The focus of the

workshops is to encourage the sharing of knowledge and to help the students to

collaborate with their peers and contribute to develop their skills and understanding

(Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).

The majority of the lectures from the traditional curriculum were designed and

built on the contemporary curriculum, to be delivered as workshops, therefore the

comparison was made between the lectures and workshops delivering similar content

on traditional and contemporary curricula respectively.

The results from the traditional curriculum when compared to the

contemporary delivery show that there is a shift in the theories of learning. Looking

at the results from the observations of the traditional curriculum in pharmacy

courses, the teaching approach is predominantly reported to be cognitivism. On the

other hand, the contemporary curricula overview is reported to be more inclusive of

different teaching approaches. The general trend throughout the observations of the

contemporary curriculum does not clearly show alignment with a prevalent learning

theory.

When comparing traditional and contemporary curricula there is a rise in the

social constructivist paradigm in most of the questions. Besides, the design and

delivery of content in the contemporary curriculum demonstrate a shift towards the

utilisation of social constructivist teaching approaches. However, on the fourth

question which queried the strategies primarily used in teaching, design,

connectivism is the predominant paradigm in the contemporary curriculum. These

results contrast with those obtained from question 6 (Figure 11), where behaviourism

was the most predominant paradigm to engage students and social constructivism

was the least.

The results show a variation in the predominance of the theories of learning

between traditional and contemporary curricula. The delivery of the classes from the

traditional courses was predominantly focused on cognitivist approaches. In contrast,

social constructivism was the most common paradigm in the delivery of

contemporary courses. Although teaching approaches such as behaviourism and


cognitivism are still utilised when teaching contemporary curricula, there is a

considerable increase in the social constructivist approach. For example, question 4,

which explored the design of teaching material, showed an evident difference

between traditional and contemporary curricula. The traditional curriculum had

cognitivism as the primary paradigm, while for the contemporary curriculum the

highest percentages were connectivism and social constructivism. In other words, the

shift of percentages shows that cognitivism has been replaced, and teaching

approaches are shifting toward more contemporary theories of learning.

Comparison of lectures in the traditional curriculum and

workshops for the contemporary curriculum

The results of the lectures (taught for traditional curriculum) and workshops

(taught for the units of the contemporary curriculum) seem to indicate that

behaviourist and cognitivist approaches are still the most predominant trends in

teaching (Figure 12).


-100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Traditional lectures vs. contemporary

workshops

Lectures vs. Workshops

Traditional lectures vs. Contemporary workshops


Figure 12. Lecture observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and the

contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum sample of teaching approaches.

Q1. The overall teaching approaches. Q2. The delivery of the content. Q3. The design of the content regarding the teaching material. Q4. The strategies primarily used in the designing of

the teaching. Q5. The teaching techniques. Q6. The strategy to engage students.

The results in both lectures and workshops are more aligned with the classical

style of delivering lectures using traditional learning theories. Whilst the traditional

curriculum lectures have behaviourism and cognitivism as the predominant

approaches, with barely any other teaching style present during class, the

contemporary curriculum shows an increase in the use of more contemporary

teaching approaches for the delivery of workshops. The increase in behaviourism is

evident in question 2, the delivery of the content, where cognitivism is not

predominant as it was in the traditional lectures, but the decrease of cognitivism

gives way to increases in other learning philosophies such as social constructivism,

humanism and connectivism. However, although connectivism did not become the

predominant learning theory for any of the responses, it highlights the shifting of the

curricula from the traditional delivery of classes to a more contemporary approach.

On the whole, there are substantial differences between the traditional ways of

delivering the content of the traditional curriculum and contemporary curriculum.

For instance, traditional curricula had lectures and tutorials with a cognitivist

approach predominant, which contrasts with the connectivist teaching approach

taken when delivering workshops for the contemporary curriculum.

4.2.3.3.1 Traditional curriculum lectures

The field notes describe the classroom observations. Behaviourism and

cognitivism were the most common approaches for the delivery of these types of

lessons. Some of the features that are linked to these types of approaches are the

utilisation of slides and prompts for delivering content, the repetition of content, and

breaking teaching sessions into manageable chunks throughout the delivery of the

lesson. This is evidenced by the following field notes:

o “The academic comments the slide shown on the whiteboard. The

academic then continues explaining and reinforcing the importance


while reading the slides, explaining the definitions, and providing

comparisons.” Academic 3.

o “Also, the academic provides an explanation and tries to include

different points of view and relevant information from other units to the

explanation. The academic goes step by step explaining each slide and

relating the information.” Academic 3.

o “Continues providing definitions about technical terms, asking

questions, explaining and encouraging the students to look for the info

and looking at online resources.” Academic 3.

This lecture from the traditional curriculum had a teacher-centred approach.

The academic guides the class and provides information from different viewpoints

(definitions, anecdotes and slides) to facilitate the students’ understanding of the

topic. The academic provides step by step attainment of the information. These

results are aligned with cognitivist and constructivist learning theories.

4.2.3.3.2 Contemporary curriculum workshop

The most common teaching approaches observed during the workshops were

behaviourism and cognitivism, but there were other teaching approaches such as

connectivism that were noticeable. One characteristic of the workshops is that in

comparison with lectures, they are more inclined to employ a student-centred

approach. Although the academic provides explanations, the use of activities and

questioning for the delivery of the class is more centred towards student attainment

of information. For example, the academic uses a more collaborative approach using

activities to deliver the lesson as captured by some descriptive examples from the

field notes:

o “The academic encourages the students to start the second activity and

explains the things that the students will have to address.” Academics 2

and 7.

o “The academics keep moving around the class trying to make the

students work in collaborative groups [...] One academic repeats the

same action a few times, while the other academic moves on to the next


table answering questions about what the students are doing.”

Academics 2 and 7.

o “The academic uses different resources to explain information to the

students. The academic hands out materials and provides an

explanation, and when the academic is asked about the content explains

it with metaphors”. Academics 2 and 7.

The example provided above describes the situation after the academic has

repeated the information needed for the activities. When the workshop started, it

utilised a behaviourist approach, with the academic at the centre of the explanation.

The example provides social interaction between students where the students can

debate their viewpoints on the activity with the academic and their peers. The

academic is not guiding the activity but it has the role of a facilitator encouraging the

students’ learning.

Although there is frequent use of slides and explanations (traditional learning

theories), the academic regularly provides anecdotes and metaphors to make the

students engage with the information, suggesting a more student-centred approach

(contemporary learning theories). The academic sets a series of tasks to be completed

by the students in groups (with their table colleagues). At that point, the academic

provides information, when requested, and uses questioning strategies to support the

students’ learning. This observation has a more student-centred focus with the use of

collaborative knowledge between the students to find the correct answers to the

questions requested.

Comparison of traditional and contemporary practicals

The number of practicals observed during this research was limited (three

practicals from the traditional curriculum and six from the contemporary

curriculum). The practicals presented in Figure 13. show evidence that when

teaching this type of unit there was not a wide range of learning theories used when

delivering the practical units. The three main learning theories used in teaching the

traditional curriculum are behaviourist, cognitivist and social constructivist.

Behaviourism appears to be the predominant approach for all the questions except

question 5 (teaching techniques). The trend for the contemporary curriculum was


observed to be based on social constructivism as the teaching approach which is most

related to contemporary teaching approaches in delivery of the curriculum.


Figure 13. Practical observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and contemporary

(right side of the graph) curriculum samples of teaching approaches.



the teaching. Q5. The teaching techniques. Q6. The strategy to engage students.

4.2.3.4.1 Traditional curriculum practicals

The learning theories that were observed during the delivery of the practicals

were predominantly behaviourist and cognitivist approaches for the traditional

curriculum, and social constructivist approaches, plus a range of other learning

theories, for the contemporary curriculum. Practical classes refer to a hands-on

experience where students need to perform certain activities. The academics’

-100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Practicals



learning theories are based on traditional approaches as the predominant instruction

style. As it can be seen in the following examples, the academic explains the key

elements the student must remember before allowing students to start the

experiments:

o “The academic does an explanation about content related to the

experiment. The academic walks around the class resolving the

questions of students.” Academic 4.

o “Then the academic does a general comment and relates the

experiments to the resources if needed. Encouraging the students to

look at the instructions and start the practical.” Academic 4.

o “Then goes through the quantities they would be using for the

practicals and provides the method they have to use for the practical

[…] The academic tells what they have to do for the practical, relating

the practical to previous practicals classes.” Academic 4.

Although it is a practical, which means it is a hands-on experience, the third

quote provides an example of the teacher specifying the structure and the

organisation of the activities and using step by step learning. Also, the academic built

on previous learning and encouraged the students to use the resources available. The

academic guides the students in the development of the tasks. The focus is on the

teacher designing the learning environment which is more approximate with

traditional teacher-centred types of curriculum.

4.2.3.4.2 Contemporary curriculum practicals

Turning now to another example, the learning theories observed during the

contemporary practicals were predominantly social constructivism, cognitivism and

connectivism. These learning theories are aligned with the quantitative results

obtained from the checklists. During the practicals, the focus was on the academic

setting the scenario for the experiment plus giving information and asking questions.

Also, the aid of a facilitator for the delivery of the classes and the explanations of the

experiment to the group were more focused on the students working as a group. For

example, the academic explains the necessary information but instead of leading the

exercise alone, the academic asks the students the answers to do the experiment:


o “The academic builds on previous learning about the practical case

they did last week and also explains systematically (step by step) the

process and asks questions of the students.” Academic 1.

o “The academic then starts doing the mixture and then provides a step

by step exemplification of how to do the experiment.” Academic 1.

o “Students are doing the experiment at their own pace. The academic

and the facilitator answer the questions. The academic shows how to do

the mixture personally to a student and gives tips on how to do it

better.” Academic 1.

o “The academic jokes and encourages the class to give an answer.

There is no answer and the academic makes a joke and encourages the

students to ask what they do not know.” Academic 1.

The contemporary practicals have evidence of still being based on learning

theories with traditional characteristics but they also include certain theories such as

connectivism and social constructivism which are more contemporary. The academic

explains at the beginning relevant information and then encourages the students to

work at their own pace. Although the differences between the traditional and the

contemporary curriculum practicals are modest, the transition between the different

curricula begins to be evident.

Comparison of traditional and contemporary tutorials

The tutorials were based on cognitivist and social constructivist teaching

approaches for both the traditional and contemporary curricula. Behaviourism was

almost non-existent in both traditional and contemporary curricula on the tutorial

results. This may be because in the tutorial, students are expected to prepare

beforehand, by reading required material and preparing questions and/or answers.

Connectivism was observed to have a similar presence in the traditional and

contemporary curricula, but it was observed to have more presence in the

contemporary curriculum. In addition, there was an increase in the presence of

humanism in the majority of the questions (except question 3) related to the design of

the content.


Overall, the approaches to the questions show the predominance of

cognitivism, and social constructivism, and the rise of humanism and connectivism

in the contemporary approaches. Tutorials show that there is a trend from the use of

the cognitivist approach towards a social constructivism approach as can be seen in

Figure 14.


Figure 14. Tutorials observations of the traditional (left side of the graph) and the

contemporary (right side of the graph) curriculum sample of teaching approaches.



the teaching. Q5. The teaching techniques. Q6. The strategy to engage students

4.2.3.5.1 Traditional curriculum tutorials

Evidence of learning theories was seen in the delivery of the traditional

tutorials. The most predominant paradigm observed during the tutorials was social

-100% -50% 0% 50% 100%

Q1

Q2

Q3

Q4

Q5

Q6

Tutorials



constructivism. For example, scenarios and cases for students provide a more

student-centred approach and the academic moves around the class to encourage the

building of collaborative knowledge.

o “The academic encourages the students to think relating information

from previous classes […] The academic uses questioning techniques to

identify what the students already know and try to build the content

from that point on.” Academic 7.

o “The academic questions the students, and after gives positive feedback

and links the information with another group of students. The academic

explains to two students the possible cases they will have to confront,

and what techniques they can use to benefit the patient.” Academic 7.

o “The academic positively encourages the students to go on through the

scenario giving feedback about the answers the students are giving. The

academic relates the information to previous lectures.” Academic 7.

The traditional tutorial had a social constructivist approach as the predominant theory

of learning. The field notes revealed that the teaching approaches were mostly

centred on the academic performing the role of a facilitator. The academic also

utilised some cognitivist features during the class trying to make the students discuss

and step by step understand and create new knowledge.

4.2.3.5.2 Contemporary curriculum tutorials

Social constructivism was the most predominant approach for the

contemporary tutorials. Although the tutorials seem to have the same structure as a

lecture they are more hands-on experience classes. The tutorials are based on the

students’ acquisition of information. Cognitivist learning theories, for example, can

be observed through the use of analogies or metaphors to help attach meaning and

assimilate new learning.

Where the students need to perform certain activities, the academics utilises

behaviourism as the predominant theory of learning providing a general explanation

to the class. These themes highlight the development of critical thinking and the

development of skills in the students, shifting from passive recipients of information

to active collaborators in the development of the activities.


o “The academics move on to the next question where they ask the

students to look for answers and to tell the academics an explanation.

One of the academics gives an explanation related to the real world.”

Academics 4 and 6.

o “The academic and the facilitator give personal anecdotes and related

information encouraging the students to follow the pharmaceutical

guidelines (students need to look for the information).” Academics 4

and 6.

o “The academics go around the class telling the counselling process and

the thinking and reflecting and practising techniques.” Academics 4

and 6.

o “The academic sets a time and leaves the students time to reflect on the

decisions that the students have made developing higher order skills

(analyse, evaluate, and create the answers)… creating a positive

environment to guide the learning of the students by themselves.”

Academics 4 and 6.

The class shifted from a social constructivist to a cognitivist approach and

connectivist approaches during the session. The academics used a range of cases for

the students to work out. During the last part of the class, students were more

engaged with the content. The academics focused on techniques and strategies as

well as skills that the students have to develop when counselling. The academics

employed different types of resources helping the students to explore, engage and

experience situations that they would be likely to encounter in the real world.


Chapter 5: Discussion

The exploration of the current trends in pharmacy education provided a first-

hand opportunity to look at a traditional and a contemporary curriculum

simultaneously, observing the similarities and differences in teaching when

delivering two types of formal curriculum enacted by academics of the same faculty.

In order to understand these teaching approaches, it was essential to incorporate the

perspectives of the academics and complement them with objective observations of

the teaching that is actually delivered in the classroom.

The utilisation of a mixed methods approach, helped to support the findings of

Phase 1 and Phase 2, allowing a better understanding of the gap between the teaching

approaches utilised by academics while delivering pharmacy courses, and the

approaches they declared they want to utilise. Understanding this gap is important to

improve the delivery of content to ensure students have an adequate skill set to

compete in a challenging and evolving labour market and healthcare system.

Overall, the results of the study align with what the literature suggests as a

change towards contemporary approaches (Simpson & Richards, 2015). Traditional

approaches based on teacher-centred styles were still present and dominant in the

instruction. With respect to the results, the relationship between the survey and the

observations indicated alignment between the theories of learning used in the

traditional curriculum. The research has also shown that behaviourism and

cognitivism were consistently the predominant theories of learning in terms of the

traditional curriculum.

It is interesting to note that the results of the research indicated that the

academics were changing their traditional teaching methods to incorporate more

social constructivist and connectivist approaches while delivering the units of a more

contemporary curriculum (Figure 11). The observations also showed a rise in the

adoption of humanism. Even though this theory of learning has never been a leading

teaching trend, it was incorporated and embedded in the teaching approaches

delivered in the more contemporary units (Ertmer & Newby, 2013).


The following sections will provide specific discussion on the interpretation of

the findings in relation to the objectives of the study as described in chapter 1.2.

Furthermore, the results from this study allow discussion of potential implications for

practice for the academics and the implications for other universities training

undergraduates to be health professionals.

5.1 Current and desired teaching approaches perspectives of academics in

Clinical Sciences

The academics who responded to the survey reported traditional theories of

learning as their preferred teaching delivery method. This may be due to the fact that

traditional didactic approaches used by academics in education for many years are

still actively being used for pharmacy instruction and therefore it is a method familiar

to students and academics (Delafuente, Araujo, & Legg, 1998; Yousif et al., 2014).

Nevertheless, the survey results revealed there was appetite from the participants

(academics) to embrace changes in teaching approaches when asked about their

desired practice.

The results from the survey highlighted that the theories of learning for the

current teaching approaches were predominantly based on behaviourism and

cognitivism which are didactic teacher-centred approaches. As mentioned before,

this could be interpreted as a sign that academics are comfortable teaching with

theories they already know. It coincides with previous literature where Blackmore

(2012a, pp. 129-135) explains that the shift in curricula involves changing existing

roles and practices and the adoption of new ones for both academics and students.

Baia (2016) supports that content knowledge is essential for pharmacy professionals,

while pedagogical knowledge is considered voluntary. Therefore “soft knowledge in

education” may not be seen as important as other discipline knowledge (Blackmore

& Kandiko, 2012a; Schon, 1983). This could explain why there is little motivation to

change from what the academics consider more stable teacher-centred approaches

(Postareff et al., 2007). Conversely, this could also be explained by the lack of

interest in change as supported by authors (Oleson & Hora, 2014; Postareff et al.,

2007) to shift to more student-centred approaches to teaching.

This reported predominance of the didactic approach could also be explained

by the challenges experienced by academics when shifting from traditional into more


contemporary teaching approaches. It may seem like a hurdle for some of the

participants, especially due to the time involved in adopting unfamiliar teaching

approaches that are perceived to be more time consuming than the traditional

methods (Brinkerhoff & Glazewski, 2004; Ertmer & Newby, 2013; Walker, 2015).

This position is also supported by the results of the open answers in the survey,

where participants highlighted time, workload and resistance from the students as

potential barriers to change. Other comments suggested the budget, limited support

from peers, leaders and/or university as obstacles for changing their teaching

approaches.

On the other hand, the results of the desired learning theories from the survey

show an obvious preference to use connectivism and humanism as the leading

teaching and learning theories. Overall there was an increase in the use of social

constructivism and humanism. Connectivism was the predominant learning theory of

the six questions. It is noteworthy that the two traditional approaches that were

predominant in the current academics’ perspectives on their current practice have a

minimal support from the academics when asked about their desired teaching

approach.

The enactment of new styles of curricula might be difficult to bring into

classrooms (Austin, Simpson, & Reynen, 2005). This is partly because the design

and implementation of different learning theories and teaching approaches takes

time. The time spent preparing for a class versus the time spent in class can

sometimes be unfruitful and challenging for academics. And partly because students

can be reticent to change, to more contemporary styles which may seem strange or

unfamiliar to them. Changes in formal curricula can be troublesome and can be

hindered by academic disengagement in higher education (Francis, 2012; Hartley,

2012; Macfarlane, 2005). However, our sample received a 53% participation rate

among the academics in the activity and the comparison of their perspectives on

current and desired approaches revealed willingness to embrace change. The results

of this study suggest that academics may not be developing their practice; they may

just be imitating and repeating the approaches that they know (Oleson & Hora,

2014).

The disconnection between what academics report they are currently doing in

their practice and what they desire to be doing may also be emphasised by the fact


that academics do not know about other learning theories and even when they know

of them, they are not always aware of how to apply them. Pharmacy academics are

experts in their fields but that does not imply that necessarily they have a background

in education because they were trained to be pharmacists (Reddy et al., 2016; World

Health Organization, 2013). The literature has identified this lack of knowledge

(Kember, 1997) in academics, which becomes obvious in the way that academics

refer to other learning theories using terminology like “reticent to change”/

“reluctant to change” in their open answers from the survey (Bradshaw, 2016).

Although the academics say they desire to be teaching with more contemporary

approaches the reality is that they are still using traditional approaches such as

cognitivism as their predominant teaching approach. This implies that although

academics can innovate and adapt towards more student-centred theories of learning,

challenges they experience such as the lack of guidance and conformity with more

familiar styles can be complicated to implement.

5.2 Pedagogical differences observed in the teaching approaches

instruction and delivery of a traditional and a contemporary

curriculum within the same pharmacy discipline

In the transition from the traditional curriculum to the contemporary

curriculum the lectures in the formal curriculum were replaced by workshops. The

findings from the observational research indicated that the delivery of traditional

lectures and contemporary workshops differed in terms of learning theories. Lectures

remained based on traditional theories of learning, while results indicated that they

were gradually adapting to more contemporary trends. This indicated that the

lectures overall are focused on the delivery of knowledge which aligns with

traditional approaches (behaviourism and cognitivism) to education. The field notes

support the data obtained from lectures where most of the teaching was based on the

use of slides and the step-by-step attainment of information. Descriptive analysis

indicated that traditional and contemporary lectures differed in terms of the theories

of learning they used for teaching.

The utilisation of workshops for the delivery of the contemporary curriculum

enabled the students to have a closer relationship with the content, contributing to the

shift from a teacher-centred approach (more proximate with the traditional

approaches), to a more student-centred approach. Student-centred approaches, as


previously mentioned, are more aligned with new pedagogical trends and for this

reason belong to a more contemporary curriculum (Hodge, 2010; Schunk, 2008).

Notwithstanding the fact that academics continue to use traditional approaches in the

workshop lessons, the increment of other learning theories was remarkable.

The change of instruction from lectures to workshops was implemented in the

formal curricula to turn the focus from a teacher-centred into a student-centred

approach. And as the results indicate there was evidence of a transition towards more

contemporary approaches in workshops. This highlights that the academics are

transitioning to other ways of delivering the curriculum. The results evidence a shift

in the learning theories academics use for the instruction of the pharmacy curricula

(McLaughlin et al., 2013). The results obtained in Figure 12 are aligned with the field

notes obtained from Academic 3 where the academic based the class on the slides

and the repetition of information, while Academics 2 and 7 focused on peer and

collaborative activities for the acquisition of knowledge.

The transition from traditional towards more up to date learning theories

requires time to identify whether academics can and want to adapt to contemporary

approaches for delivering the lectures. As the results of the observations suggest,

academics have started to shift to more contemporary trends and ways of delivering

the curriculum indicating that the renewal and development of the written curriculum

can aid the enacted curriculum. However, there is not a learning theory in the

contemporary curriculum that stands out as much as cognitivism for the traditional

approaches. The shift was noticeable as the humanist approach increased, although it

was the least observed paradigm.

The practicals experienced a shift from traditional towards more contemporary

teaching approaches. The theories of learning for the instruction of traditional

practicals were grounded exclusively on teacher-centred approaches (excluding the

design of the content and strategies that had a more humanist approach (Figure 13,

Q3 & Q4). In contrast, contemporary practical had a student-centred approach with a

wide variety of learning theories for the instruction. The decrease in the

predominance of behaviourism and cognitivism in the practicals gave way in some

cases to an increase in other theories of learning. It often meant the incorporation of

more contemporary learning theories for the delivery of the class such as

connectivism and humanism. Even though connectivism in the practicals was not as


predominant as the traditional approaches, the increase in connectivism in the

contemporary curriculum evidences the transition to incorporate more contemporary

paradigms.

Tutorials, when compared to lectures and practicals, have not experienced a

great shift from traditional to the contemporary curriculum as the goal of the tutorial

has always been student-centred focus, but the observation and increment of more

contemporary learning theories indicates that tutorials have room for improvement

and can still incorporate more student-centred teaching techniques and strategies. For

example, the observations also showed an increase in humanism even though this

theory of learning was never a predominant approach to teaching, except in Figure

14, Q5 where there is an increment of humanism and field notes support the

“creation of a positive environment and positive role models for the students’

learning”. The adoption of more humanism shows the implementation of more

contemporary approaches.

The results of this study suggest that academics are shifting the delivery of the

current pharmacy courses from traditional towards contemporary approaches. It

highlights that, although there has been an implementation of a contemporary

curriculum that moves towards teaching approaches more focused on contemporary

theories of learning, academics sometimes still employ the same traditional

approaches for the delivery of content and may not be transitioning alongside the

curriculum as intended.

The implementation of a new formal (contemporary) curriculum has impacted

upon the transition of the teaching approaches as demonstrated by the outcomes of

the checklists and field notes. This highlights that academics can shift their teaching

approaches and can be ready to adopt and implement more student-centred

approaches, shifting away from teacher-centred approaches to the curriculum, when

they are introduced to a variety of learning theories that align to contemporary

pharmacy curricula (McCabe & O'Connor, 2014). This is supported by previous

experiences reported in the literature where there were “numerous calls for reform

drawing attention to the need to transform the curricula and better prepare

students” (McLaughlin et al., 2013). However, there is no theory of learning in the

contemporary curriculum that stands out as much as cognitivism for the traditional

approaches. The shift was, therefore, noticeable for the contemporary curriculum


observing the increased presence of social constructivism, connectivism and

humanist approaches.

These findings imply that the academics have adapted to the changes expected

in their teaching approaches and transitioned to a contemporary curriculum.

Identifying the balance of pedagogical theories in current and desired teaching

approaches is important to ensure a pragmatic approach into the transition to

contemporary curricula. However, when reviewing curriculum, there is a need to

ensure that changes can be enacted by the academic team (Pearson & Hubball, 2012).

5.3 Implications of the findings: from undergraduate teaching to Health

careers

This section aims to discuss recommendations for a successful transition of

academics towards contemporary curricula while identifying the implications of this

transition for professional practice.

The research has been carried out in an Australian institution. The results from

the investigation can relate to other domestic teaching approaches utilised by

academics to deliver the pharmacy curriculum, or other disciplines, at national and

international universities. The increase in the investigation and development of

contemporary curricula in pharmacy institutions worldwide and the upsurge of

interest for learning theories can help academics to better equip and strengthen

pharmacy graduates skills and abilities. However, although this investigation has

focused the pharmacy discipline of an Australian institution, it may be readily

extrapolated to other disciplines and degrees. The teaching and learning theories

have many points in common for disciplines across tertiary degrees.

5.3.1 Implications for academics

The shift in the requirements demanded from health professionals needs not

only to focus on the learning of the students but also on the teaching approaches in

the delivery of the content. The transition for an academic from “teacher” to

“facilitator” may not be just the learning theory but a more complex matter. The

academic may transition to a facilitator if the classes and the curriculum are designed

to make it possible.


For example, the comparison between lectures and workshop was performed,

because the lectures from the traditional curriculum were transformed to workshops

on the contemporary curriculum. Similar content was explained in the lessons but the

teaching strategies, resources, techniques and methods used for the delivery of the

content varied.

In the current technological environment, where the content is uploaded onto

the internet, the role of academics in providing guidance to students is becoming

increasingly important (Baia & Strang, 2016). The participating academics were

prepared to consider changes in their practice but they reported concerns about the

challenges inherent in shifting to contemporary approaches. This suggests the

academics understand and recognise the importance of the changes in better

preparing students to adapt to the demands of the market, and to equip them with the

relevant skills “before entering the workforce” (Ertmer & Newby, 2013; Kay, 2010).

As changes in higher education continue academics and universities can encourage

and facilitate this transition with the use of peer observations and self-assessment to

help the academics learn and reflect on their practice. A framework to assess

teaching practice provides opportunity to engage academics in conversations about

theories of learning and to reflect on their own practices.

5.3.2 Implications for universities

The review and implementation of contemporary approaches in teaching

require tertiary education organisations to be proactive in articulating expectations, in

providing staff development and resourcing academics with the necessary tools and

training or education. Participants demanded that universities support their

professional development as academics. Expanding their collaborative practices

could also help the academics interact with each other and learn from their peers

(O’Keefe, Lecouteur, Miller, & McGowan). This support should come from an

organisational level but also from the individual leaders driving the change (Pearson

& Hubball, 2012). The academic is a multidisciplinary professional who has to

perform as a researcher, a lecturer and an administrator. Although other health

academic roles such as research are important, it is intrinsically obvious that lecturers

have as their primary focus the education of graduates. Therefore, professional

development of academics should be embedded in their own workload with a

structured and competency-based approach (Miller, 1990), that could contribute


towards upskilling academic teams in the transition to contemporary curricula

(Delafuente et al., 1998).

This study also highlights that this transition should be carried out in

consultation with students in order to confirm the acceptability of the new teaching

approaches implemented. Helping academics to shift to more contemporary teaching

approaches not only benefits the academics but also can equip graduates with

capabilities and competencies needed in the workplace (Scott, 2016) as this is likely

to have an impact on the students’ outcomes.


5.4 Limitations

In the study a series of limitations and delimitations were observed. Limitations

as suggested by Lunenburg (2008) are considered to be the factors that are not

“under the control of the researcher”, while delimitations are “the self-imposed

boundaries set by the researcher on the purpose and scope of the study”. The types

of limitations identified are methodological and those associated to the researcher,

and the identified delimitation is related to the nature of the academics observed

during phase 2.

In regard the methodological limitations of the research, the sample of

academics who participated in the research was taken from a single university and,

therefore, results may differ and may not be generalizable to all Australian states.

Additionally, the survey was carried out during a school event, and non-present

academics were not able to provide their perspective.

In parallel, when analysing the limitations of the researcher, the “Hawthorne

effect”, or the influence of an observer in the class, could alter the way the academics

taught the content when the main researcher was present in the class taking notes

(Creswell, 2014; O'Leary, 2014). Besides, the ‘observer bias’ concerning the

subjective interpretation of the possible pedagogies by the main researcher has also

to be acknowledged.

The surveys could be adapted to enhance their reliability and validity with a

Likert scale (Allwright, 2014; MacKinnon, 2003; Schmidt et al., 2009; Trigwell &

Prosser, 2004). The survey could also provide more specific open questions about

barriers and facilitators to improve the qualitative information analysis. Observations

can also benefit from the use of a Likert scale providing useful information and

aligning it with the survey (Allwright, 2014; MacKinnon, 2003; Trigwell & Prosser,

2004). Although replication of the qualitative results is difficult, the observational

study of academics brings the opportunity of collecting data from a more holistic

approach (Plano Clark & Creswell, 2008). Another limitation was that the results of

the survey study were from a cohort of academics from Clinical Sciences and the

observational research was conducted only in the School of Pharmacy and therefore

the results are not directly comparable.


The size of sample for this study was small and should be considered as

exploratory or pilot study. Further research will need to be conducted in a larger and

broader community of academics. The observations were carried out for different

lengths of time to adjust for the different duration of the classes investigated. This is

a limitation acknowledged by the study and therefore the study adopted an interval

design approach to identify the theories of leaning during one hour periods. The

planning and delivery of the lessons by the academics was considered as a limitation

of the research, as the academics designed the lessons for different activities and

varied the theories of learning accordingly with the time they had available.

Therefore, all of these factors should be considered as limitations of the research.

5.5 Further research

The research presented in this study may aid in the identification of the

learning theories employed by academics in the delivery of pharmacy lessons. To

begin, the utilisation of the surveys revealed that academics current and desired

perspectives differed. The advice to future researchers is to examine whether

academics’ perspectives change throughout the integration of contemporary

curriculum. Furthermore, it would be interesting to explore the integration of the

learning theories in the classroom over a larger period of time. In addition, it would

be useful to adapt the survey and survey mirrored checklist (SMC) in order to gather

more statistical information about the questions created.

At the moment, this research has investigated the learning theories that are

related to the Pharmacy education. Considering the local scope on pharmacy

education in Australia this could help to better equip pharmacy graduates. In an

international context this findings could lead to the design of a tool to identify the

learning theories employed by academics in the teaching delivery. If the results and

the tools created for the research could be used by others investigators, faculty

academics or peers this could be prepilot for an advance in Pharmacy education.

Although the results cannot be reproduced/ replicated the investigation can study the

learning theories used by academics from different disciplines. Despite its

exploratory nature, this study offers some insight into the learning theories and the

teaching approaches that academics are currently employing for the delivery of the

Pharmacy curriculum. Using the survey and checklists the investigators may


replicate the investigation and produce a study that may help to future academics and

organisations to help and better equip graduates that can adapt to the healthcare and

labour market. The transferability to other professional degrees requires attention.

The survey and SMC focused on the six major aspects of teaching, and it may

be portable for use by researchers considering academics/teaching teams from

different disciplines. For future researchers it would be beneficial having a

pedagogical background and some understanding of learning theories. However, for

those researchers with a limited pedagogical experience the checklist and survey

could support the process, as checklists have explicit information about what the

researcher has to look for to identify the learning theories. The use of checklists for

identifying the theories of learning in higher education could provide a simple and

fast peer-assessment tool for academics. Notwithstanding the relatively limited

sample, this work offers valuable insights into the teaching approaches and strategies

of pharmacy academics. An online survey may improve the reach, a larger sample of

participants (from a larger number of institutions) may be useful to compare with the

findings presented here for one institution (QUT). There is potential for the

validation instruments (survey and SMC) to be used as a self-administered tool or

peer-assessment tool for different levels such as undergraduate and postgraduate. The

tool may be applied to identify the theories of learning utilised in other degrees; to

inform the design and development of flexible and adaptable curricula. Therefore,

future studies should explore a complete validation of the tool in different higher

education environments, include the perspectives of students in this transition to

contemporary teaching approaches and the impact on their learning.


Chapter 6: Conclusion

Several conclusions can be drawn from this research project. Firstly, the

research presented in this thesis confirmed that there is currently a shift from

traditional to more contemporary approaches in the practices of the participant

academics. The study confirmed that academics are not limiting themselves to one

teaching approach during lessons, rather employing various theories of learning to

teach and design the pharmacy curriculum. Despite evidence showing that the

transition has already begun, the transition towards more contemporary approaches

requires continued efforts. The transition from traditional to more student-centred

approaches requires academics to adapt and implement new theories of learning.

Although it may be difficult and requires time, experience and resourcing, it may

improve the pharmacy instruction. Whilst academics are keen to employ

contemporary teaching practices in the future (regardless of the subject they teach

into), they all acknowledge there is room for improvement.

Secondly, academics need effective and supportive strategies when

transitioning into more contemporary approaches of teaching the enacted curriculum.

The transition from traditional teacher-directed learning to theories of learning where

the focus is on student-centred approaches can be challenging. While further studies

should focus on identifying those strategies, it is important to “gauge” that

development to guide the transition. The findings of this study suggest that the

transition and implementation of contemporary approaches for teaching pharmacy

curricula needs not only pedagogical knowledge and efforts on behalf of the

academics but also support from students, peers, leaders, universities and other

stakeholders to implement the changes in instruction.

It is hoped that this research can provide insights and understanding of the

pharmacy academics’ most common teaching approaches (behaviourism,

cognitivism, social constructivism, humanism and connectivism) and confirmation

regarding the current academic perspectives and the strategies academics use to enact

and deliver the curriculum. These findings may aid in the development of a


framework which can help in the exploration of the current teaching approaches to

instruction in the transition of pharmacy curricula.

The methodology followed for this study, in the eyes of the researcher, could

be directly extrapolated to be used on similar research for other disciplines from

other universities or institutions. Additionally, the tools utilised could be readily used

by researchers investigating the learning theories in domestic and international

institutions as it does not have features exclusive to the Australian educational

framework.

Finally, a student centred approach for the education of our future health

professionals is justified and long overdue. Academics tasked with the developing

and delivering a contemporary curriculum will require appropriate time, resourcing,

and a course wide approach. This must be led and supported by the course

coordinators and other key stakeholders to ensure success.


Chapter 7: References

Akker, J. V. D. (2006). Building bridges: How research may improve curriculum

policies and classroom practicesEducational design research (2nd ed., pp.

177-195). New York, NY: Routledge. doi:10.4324/9780203088364

Al-Abri, R. (2007). Managing change in healthcare. Oman Medical Journal, 22(3),

9-10. Retrieved from

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3294155/?tool=pmcentrez

Ali, A. S., Fejzic, J., Grant, G. D., & Nissen, L. M. (2015). Australian pharmacists'

self-perceptions in relation to the 'Advanced pharmacy practice framework'.

Research in Social and Administrative Pharmacy, 12(3), 1-13.

doi:10.1016/j.sapharm.2015.08.007

Aliakbari, F., Parvin, N., Heidari, M., & Haghani, F. (2015). Learning theories

application in nursing education. Journal of Education and Health

Promotion, 4, 2. doi:10.4103/2277-9531.151867

Allwright, D. (2014). Observation in the language classroom (5th ed.). Harlow, UK:

Routledge.

Austin, Z., & Ensom, M. H. (2008). Education of pharmacists in Canada. American

Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(6), 1-11. Retrieved from

http://search.proquest.com/docview/211220513?accountid=13380

Austin, Z., Simpson, S., & Reynen, E. (2005). The fault lies not in our students, but

in ourselves': Academic honesty and moral development in health professions

education - Results of a pilot study in Canadian pharmacy. Teaching in

Higher Education, 10(2), 143-156. doi:10.1080/1356251042000337918

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3294155/?tool=pmcentrez

http://search.proquest.com/docview/211220513?accountid=13380


Australian Commission on Safety and Quality in Health Care. (2012). National

safety and quality Health service standards. Retrieved from Sydney,

Australia: https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/wp-

content/uploads/2011/09/NSQHS-Standards-Sept-2012.pdf

Australian Government. (2017a). Curriculum. Canberra, Australia. Retrieved from

http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/education-and-

training/curriculum

Australian Government. (2017b). Engagement with professional bodies. Retrieved

from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/regulatory-approach/engagement-with-

professional-bodies

Australian Pharmacy Council. (2012). Accreditation standards for pharmacy

programs in Australia and New Zealand. Australian Pharmacy Council Ltd.

Retrieved November 14, 2016 from

https://www.pharmacycouncil.org.au/media/1032/accreditation-standards-

pharmacy-programs-aunz-2014.pdf

Australian Pharmacy Council. (2017). About APC. Retrieved November 24, 2017

from https://www.pharmacycouncil.org.au/about-apc/

Australian Qualifications Framework. (2007). Implementation handbook. Retrieved

April 16, 2018 from

https://www.google.com.au/url?sa=t&rct=j&q=&esrc=s&source=web&cd=6&ved

=0ahUKEwiY4Lzdo8TaAhWEJpQKHWipDF0QFghTMAU&url=https%3A%2F%2

Fwww.aqf.edu.au%2Fsites%2Faqf%2Ffiles%2Faqf-implementation-handbook-

fourth-edition-2007.pdf&usg=AOvVaw1rcN8b59FJTVvaKBYw95Qi

Australian Teaching and Learning Council. (2011). Resources to assist discipline

communities to define threshold learning outcomes (TLOs). An outcome of

the ALTC’s learning and teaching academic standards (LTAS) Project.

https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/NSQHS-Standards-Sept-2012.pdf

https://www.safetyandquality.gov.au/wp-content/uploads/2011/09/NSQHS-Standards-Sept-2012.pdf

http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/education-and-training/curriculum

http://www.australia.gov.au/information-and-services/education-and-training/curriculum

http://www.teqsa.gov.au/regulatory-approach/engagement-with-professional-bodies

http://www.teqsa.gov.au/regulatory-approach/engagement-with-professional-bodies

https://www.pharmacycouncil.org.au/media/1032/accreditation-standards-pharmacy-programs-aunz-2014.pdf

https://www.pharmacycouncil.org.au/media/1032/accreditation-standards-pharmacy-programs-aunz-2014.pdf

https://www.pharmacycouncil.org.au/about-apc/


Retrieved from Australia: http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-resources-assist-

discipline-communities-define-tlos-2011

Baia, P., & Strang, A. F. (2016). Pharmacy educator motives to pursue pedagogical

knowledge. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 80(8), 132.

Retrieved from https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5116784/

Bandura, A. (1986). Social foundations of thought and action: A social cognitive

theory. Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall.

Barnett, R., Parry, G., & Coate, K. (2001). Conceptualising curriculum change.

Teaching in Higher Education, 6(4), 435-449.

doi:10.1080/13562510120078009

Benrimoj, S. I., & Frommer, M. S. (2004). Community pharmacy in Australia.

Australian Health Review, 28(2), 238-246.

Biggs, J. (1999). What the student does: Teaching for enhanced learning. Higher

Education Research & Development, 18(1), 57-75.

Blackmore, P., & Kandiko, C. B. (2012a). Strategic curriculum change in

universities: global trends. In P. Blackmore & C. B. Kandiko (Eds.), (pp.

129-135). London, UK: Routledge. doi:10.4135/9781412996891.n20

Blackmore, P., & Kandiko, C. B. (2012b). Strategic curriculum change: global

trends in universities. In P. Blackmore & C. B. Kandiko (Eds.), (pp. 145-

179). London, UK: Routledge. doi:10.4135/9781412996891.n20

Blouin, R., Joyner, P., & Pollack, G. (2008). Preparing for a renaissance in pharmacy

education: the need, opportunity, and capacity for change. American Journal

of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(2), 1-3. doi:10.5688/aj720242

http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-resources-assist-discipline-communities-define-tlos-2011

http://www.olt.gov.au/resource-resources-assist-discipline-communities-define-tlos-2011

https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC5116784/


Blouin, R. A., Riffee, W. H., Robinson, E. T., Beck, D. E., Green, C., Joyner, P. U., .

. . Pollack, G. M. (2009). Roles of innovation in education delivery. American

Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(8), 154. doi:10.5688/aj7308154

Blumberg, P. (2009). Developing learner-centered teaching: A practical guide for

faculty. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Bobbitt, J. F. (1918). The curriculum. Boston, MA: Houghton Mifflin.

Bowling, A. (2002). Research Methods in Health. Investigating health and health

services, 1-29. Retrieved from

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ivan_Nyklicek3/publication/232531967

_Research_Methods_in_Health/links/54229f8a0cf26120b7a2130a/Research-

Methods-in-Health.pdf

Bradley, F., Steven, A., & Ashcroft, D. M. (2011). The role of hidden curriculum in

teaching pharmacy students about patient safety. American Journal of

Pharmaceutical Education, 75(7), 1-7. doi:10.5688/ajpe757143

Braun, V., & Clarke, V. (2006). Using thematic analysis in psychology. Qualitative

Research in Psychology, 3(2), 77-101. doi:10.1191/1478088706qp063oa

Briggs, C., Patston, P. A., Brown, B., Jurgens-Toepke, P., Strotman, M. D., Haley,

C., . . . Doubleday, A. F. (2015). Social constructivism and case-writing for

an integrated curriculum. Interdisciplinary Journal of Problem-Based

Learning, 9(1), 1-16. doi:10.7771/1541-5015.1502

Brinkerhoff, J., & Glazewski, K. (2004). Support of expert and novice teachers

within a technology enhanced problem-based learning unit: A case study.

International Journal of Learning Technology, 1(2), 219-230.

Brown, S. T., Kirkpatrick, M. K., Mangum, D., & Avery, J. (2008). A review of

narrative pedagogy strategies to transform traditional nursing education.

https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Ivan_Nyklicek3/publication/232531967_Research_Methods_in_Health/links/54229f8a0cf26120b7a2130a/Research-Methods-in-Health.pdf




Journal of Nursing Education, 47(6), 283-286. doi:10.3928/01484834-

20080601-01

Bruner, J. S. (1966). Toward a theory of instruction. Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Bruner, J. S. (1977). The process of education (2nd ed.). Cambridge, MA: Harvard

University Press.

Bryman, A. (2015). Social research methods. Oxford, UK: Oxford University Press.

Caffarella, R. S. (1993). Self-directed learning. New Directions for Adult and

Continuing Education, 1993(57), 25-35. doi:10.1002/ace.36719935705

Cline, R. R., Mott, D. A., & Schommer, J. C. (1999). Relationship between attitudes,

demographics and application decisions among pre-pharmacy students: an

exploratory investigation. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education,

63(4), 394-401.

Cooke, M., Irby, D. M., Sullivan, W., & Ludmerer, K. M. (2006). American medical

education 100 years after the Flexner report. New England Journal of

Medicine, 355(13), 1339-1344. doi:10.1056/NEJMra055445

Creswell, J. W. (2013). Research design: qualitative, quantitative, and mixed method

approaches (4th ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W. (2014). A concise introduction to mixed methods research. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Creswell, J. W., & Plano Clark, V. L. (2011). Choosing a mixed methods design.

Designing and conducting mixed methods research, 53-106.

Creswell, J. W., Plano Clark, V. L., Gutmann, M. L., & Hanson, W. E. (2003).

Advanced mixed methods research designs. . In A. Tashakkori and C. Teddlie


(Ed.), Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp.

209-240). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications

Dawson, C. (2009). Introduction to research methods: a practical guide for anyone

undertaking a research project (4th ed.). Oxford, UK: How To Books.

Del Moral, M. E., Cernea, A., & Villalustre, L. (2013). Connectivist learning objects

and learning styles. Interdisciplinary Journal of E-Learning and Learning

Objects, 9, 105-124. Retrieved from

http://www.ijello.org/Volume9/IJELLOv9p105-124Moral0830.pdf

Delafuente, J. C., Araujo, O. E., & Legg, S. M. (1998). Traditional lecture format

compared to computer-assisted instruction in pharmacy calculations.

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 62(1), 62. Retrieved from

https://search-proquest-

com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/211167473?pq-origsite=summon#

Dewey, J. (1997). Experience and education. New York, NY: Simon and Schuster.

(Original work published 1938).

Dewey, J. (2008). The child and the curriculum. New York, NY: Coismo. (Original

work published 1959).

DeZure, D. (2010). Interdisciplinary pedagogies in higher education. In R. Frodeman

(Ed.), The Oxford handbook of interdisciplinarity (pp. 372-386). Oxford, UK:

Oxford University Press.

Diekelmann, N. L. (2003). Teaching the practitioners of care: New pedagogies for

the health professions (Vol. 2). Madison, WI: University of Wisconsin Press.

Dillman, D. A., & Redline, C. D. (2004). Testing paper self-administered

questionnaires: Cognitive interview and field test comparisons.Methods for

http://www.ijello.org/Volume9/IJELLOv9p105-124Moral0830.pdf

https://search-proquest-com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/211167473?pq-origsite=summon

https://search-proquest-com.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/docview/211167473?pq-origsite=summon


Testing and Evaluating Survey Questionnaires (pp. 299-317): John Wiley &

Sons, Inc. doi:10.1002/0471654728.ch15

Downes, S. (2008). Places to go: connectivism & connective knowledge. Innovate:

Journal of Online Education, 5(1). Retrieved from

http://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol5/iss1/6

Driscoll, D. L. (2011). Introduction to primary research: observations, surveys, and

interviews. In Charles Lowe & Pavel Zemliansky (Eds.), Writing Spaces:

Readings on Writing (Vol. 2, pp. 153-174). Anderson, SC: Parlor Press.

Duke, B., Harper, G., & Johnston, M. (2013). Connectivism as a digital age learning

theory. The International Higher Education Teaching and Learning

Association (HETL), 2013 (Special Issue), 4-13. Retrieved from

https://www.hetl.org/wp-

content/uploads/2013/09/HETLReview2013SpecialIssueArticle1.pdf

Dunn, L. (2002). Theories of learning. Learning and teaching briefing papers series.

Retrieved from http://cmapspublic.ihmc.us/rid=1J4FF136Q-1L5Y11C-

1HZ/learning_theories.pdf

Ellis, A. K. (2004). Exemplars of curriculum theory. Larchmont, NY: Routledge.

Emerson, R. M. (1981). Observational field work. Annual Review of Sociology, 7,

351-378. Retrieved from http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946034

Englund, C., Olofsson, A. D., & Price, L. (2017). Teaching with technology in higher

education: understanding conceptual change and development in practice.

Higher Education Research & Development, 36(1), 73-87.

doi:10.1080/07294360.2016.1171300

http://nsuworks.nova.edu/innovate/vol5/iss1/6

https://www.hetl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/HETLReview2013SpecialIssueArticle1.pdf

https://www.hetl.org/wp-content/uploads/2013/09/HETLReview2013SpecialIssueArticle1.pdf

http://cmapspublic.ihmc.us/rid=1J4FF136Q-1L5Y11C-1HZ/learning_theories.pdf

http://cmapspublic.ihmc.us/rid=1J4FF136Q-1L5Y11C-1HZ/learning_theories.pdf

http://www.jstor.org/stable/2946034


Erickson, L., & Pinnegar, S. (2010). Experienced curriculum. In Kridel (Ed.),

Encyclopedia of curriculum studies. Retrieved November 14, 2016 from

http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/curriculumstudies

Ertmer, P. A., & Newby, T. J. (2013). Behaviorism, cognitivism, constructivism:

comparing critical features from an instructional design perspective.

Performance Improvement Quarterly, 26(2), 43-71. doi:10.1002/piq.21143

Davis, S. F., & Buskist, W. F. (2008). 21st century psychology: A reference

handbook (1st ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Estai, M., & Bunt, S. (2016). Best teaching practices in anatomy education: A critical

review. Annals of Anatomy. Anatomischer Anzeiger, 208, 151-157.

doi:http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2016.02.010

Etikan, I., Musa, S. A., & Alkassim, R. S. (2016). Comparison of convenience

sampling and purposive sampling. American Journal of Theoretical and

Applied Statistics, 5, 1-4. doi:10.11648/j.ajtas.20160501.11

Fink, A. (2003). The survey kit: How to assess and interpret survey psychometrics

(2nd ed., Vol. 8). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Flexner, A., Pritchet, H., & Henry, S. (1972). Medical education in the United States

and Canada bulletin number four (The Flexner Report). New York, NY.

(Original work published 1910).

Fortune, T. (2000). Immersion teaching strategies observation checklist. ACIE

Newsletter, 4(1), 1-4.

Fowler, F. J. (2014). Survey research methods (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Fox, R. (2001). Constructivism examined. Oxford Review of Education, 27(1), 23-35.

doi:10.1080/03054980125310

http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/curriculumstudies

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.aanat.2016.02.010


Francis, L. A. (2012). Teacher leadership for the 21st century: Teacher leaders'

experiences in supporting the pedagogical practice of academic rigor.

(Dissertation/Thesis Ed.D.), ProQuest Dissertations Publishing, Ann Arbor,

MI. Retrieved from http://search.proquest.com/docview/1095703735

Frenk, J., Chen, L., Bhutta, Z. A., Cohen, J., Crisp, N., Evans, T., . . . Zurayk, H.

(2010). Health professionals for a new century: transforming education to

strengthen health systems in an interdependent world. The Lancet, 376(9756),

1923-1958. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)61854-5

Gehrke, N. J. (1998). A look at curriculum integration from the bridge. The

Curriculum Journal, 9(2), 247-260. doi:10.1080/0958517970090209

Glasow, P. A. (2005). Fundamentals of survey research methodology (pp. 5-27).

Retrieved from

http://www.uky.edu/~kdbrad2/EPE619/Handouts/SurveyResearchReading.pd

f

Glatthorn, A. A., Boschee, F., & Whitehead, B. M. (2009). Curriculum leadership:

Strategies for development and implementation: Sage Publications.

Goodlad, J. I. (1994). Educational renewal: Better teachers, better schools: ERIC.

Grant, M. J., & Booth, A. (2009). A typology of reviews: an analysis of 14 review

types and associated methodologies. Health Information & Libraries Journal,

26(2), 91-108.

Greene, J. C., Caracelli, V. J., & Graham, W. F. (1989). Toward a conceptual

framework for mixed-method evaluation designs. Educational Evaluation

and Policy Analysis, 11(3), 255-274. doi:10.2307/1163620

http://search.proquest.com/docview/1095703735

http://www.uky.edu/~kdbrad2/EPE619/Handouts/SurveyResearchReading.pdf

http://www.uky.edu/~kdbrad2/EPE619/Handouts/SurveyResearchReading.pdf


Greene, S. M., Tuzzio, L., & Cherkin, D. (2012). A framework for making patient-

centered care front and center. The Permanente Journal, 16(3), 49-53.

Retrieved from http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3442762/

Greenfield, D., Debono, D., Hogden, A., Hinchcliff, R., Mumford, V., Pawsey, M., .

. . Braithwaite, J. (2015). Examining challenges to reliability of health service

accreditation during a period of healthcare reform in Australia. Journal of

Health Organization and Management, 29(7), 912-924. doi:10.1108/JHOM-

02-2015-0034

Group of Eight Australia. (2012). The Australian higher education system. Canberra,

Australia. Retrieved from http://www.teqsa.gov.au/national-register

Groves, R. M. (2009). Survey methodology (2nd ed.). Hoboken, NJ: John Wiley &

Sons.

Gubbins, P. O. (2014). The scholarship of teaching and learning: an opportunity for

clinical faculty members in academic pharmacy and other health professions

to develop a program of scholarship. International Journal for the

Scholarship of Teaching and Learning, 8(1), 3.

Gurpinar, E., Musal, B., Aksakoglu, G., & Ucku, R. (2005). Comparison of

knowledge scores of medical students in problem-based learning and

traditional curriculum on public health topics. BMC Medical Education, 5(1),

7. doi:10.1186/1472-6920-5-7

Hafferty, F. W. (1998). Beyond curriculum reform: confronting medicine's hidden

curriculum. Academic Medicine: Journal of the Association of American

Medical Colleges, 73(4), 403-407. doi:10.1097/00001888-199804000-00013

http://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC3442762/

http://www.teqsa.gov.au/national-register


Hagemeier, N. E., & Holly, L. (2011). Student pharmacists' perceptions of testing

and study strategies. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 75(2).

Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe75235

Harden, R. M. (2000). The integration ladder: a tool for curriculum planning and

evaluation. Medical education, 34(7), 551-557. doi:10.1046/j.1365-

2923.2000.00697.x

Hartley, M. (2012). Engagement for democracy. In D. W. Harward (Ed.), (pp. 51-

53). Washington, D.C.: Civic Provocations.

Hattingh, L., Low, J. S., & Forrester, K. (2013). Australian pharmacy law and

practice: Elsevier Health Sciences.

Hodge, S. (2010). Student-centered learning in higher education and adult education.

https://goo.gl/XIPBCG

Holley, K. (2017). Interdisciplinary Curriculum and Learning in Higher Education.

In Oxford Research Encyclopedia of Education (Ed.). Retrieved November

25, 2017 from

http://education.oxfordre.com/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/ac

refore-9780190264093-e-138

Horton, R. (2010). A new epoch for health professionals' education. The Lancet,

376(9756), 1875-1877. doi:10.1016/S0140-6736(10)62008-9

Hubball, H., & Burt, H. (2004). An integrated approach to developing and

implementing learning-centred curricula. International Journal for Academic

Development, 9(1), 51-65. doi:10.1080/1360144042000296053

Hunt, L., & Chalmers, D. (2012). University teaching in focus: a learning-centred

approach. Camberwell, Australia: ACER Press.

https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe75235

https://goo.gl/XIPBCG

http://education.oxfordre.com/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-138

http://education.oxfordre.com/10.1093/acrefore/9780190264093.001.0001/acrefore-9780190264093-e-138


Hussain, A., Malik, M., & Abdullah, S. (2017). Review of evolving trends in clinical

pharmacy curriculum around the globe. American Journal of

Pharmacological Sciences, 5(1), 1-7. Retrieved from

http://pubs.sciepub.com/ajps/5/1/1

International Pharmaceutical Federation. (2008). Vision, mission and strategic plan.

2020 vision FIP’s. Retrieved from

http://www.fip.org/files/fip/strategic%20plan%20no%20annexes.pdf

International Pharmaceutical Federation. (2017). Nanjing statements. Statements on

Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences education. Retrieved from The

Hague, Netherlands:

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/PharmacyEducation/Global_Conference_docs/N

anjing_Statements.pdf

Izadnegahdar, R., Correia, S., Ohata, B., Kittler, A., Ter Kuile, S., Vaillancourt, S., . .

. Brewer, T. F. (2008). Global health in Canadian medical education: current

practices and opportunities. Academic Medicine, 83(2), 192-198.

doi:10.1097/ACM.0b013e31816095cd

Jain, L. C., & Tedman, D. K. (2007). Evolution of teaching and learning paradigms

in intelligent environment. Berlin, Heidelberg: Springer Berlin Heidelberg.

Johnson, B., & Christensen, L. (2008). Educational research: Quantitative,

qualitative, and mixed approaches (pp. 439-461). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage

Publications.

Johnson, B., & Turner, L. A. (2003). Data collection strategies in mixed methods

research Handbook of mixed methods in social and behavioral research (pp.

297-319). Thousand Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

http://pubs.sciepub.com/ajps/5/1/1

http://www.fip.org/files/fip/strategic%20plan%20no%20annexes.pdf

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/PharmacyEducation/Global_Conference_docs/Nanjing_Statements.pdf

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/PharmacyEducation/Global_Conference_docs/Nanjing_Statements.pdf


Jungnickel, P. W., Kelley, K. W., Hammer, D. P., Haines, S. T., & Marlowe, K. F.

(2009). Addressing competencies for the future in the professional

curriculum. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(8), 1-15.

Kaartinen-Koutaniemi, M., & Katajavuori, N. (2006). Enhancing the development of

pharmacy education by changing pharmacy teaching. Pharmacy Education,

6(3), 197-208. doi:10.1080/15602210600952258

Katajavuori, N., Hakkarainen, K., Kuosa, T., Airaksinen, M., Hirvonen, J., & Holm,

Y. (2009). Curriculum reform in finnish pharmacy education. American

Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 73(8), 1-7. doi:10.5688/aj7308151

Kay, D., & Kibble, J. (2016). Learning theories 101: application to everyday

teaching and scholarship. Advances in physiology education, 40(1), 17-25.

Kay, K. (2010). 21st century skills: Why they matter, what they are, and how we get

there. Bloomington, IN: Solution Tree Press.

Kelly, A. V. (2004). The curriculum: theory and practice (5th ed.). Thousand Oaks,

CA: Sage Publications.

Kember, D. (1997). A reconceptualisation of the research into university academics'

conceptions of teaching. Learning and Instruction, 7(3), 255-275.

doi:10.1016/S0959-4752(96)00028-X

Kember, D., & Ginns, P. (2012). Evaluating teaching and learning: a practical

handbook for colleges, universities and the scholarship of teaching. New

York, NY: Routledge.

Kember, D., & Kwan, K. P. (2000). Lecturers’ approaches to teaching and their

relationship to conceptions of good teaching. Instructional Science, 28(5),

469-490.


Kilpatrick, J. (2003). Standards’ based school mathematics curricula: What are

they? What do students learn? Mahwah, NJ: National Council of Teachers of

Mathematics.

Kirkwood, A., & Price, L. (2012). The influence upon design of differing

conceptions of teaching and learning with technology. Informed design of

educational technologies in higher education: Enhanced learning and

teaching, 1-20.

Klein, J. T. (2005). Integrative learning and interdisciplinary studies. Peer Review,

7(4), 8-10. Retrieved from

https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/4363696/klein-

interdisciplinary_studies.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53U

L3A&Expires=1511926233&Signature=%2BkeNB5gV%2FKlXRJKFwRV2

QVdscp0%3D&response-content-

disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DIntegrative_learning_and_interdisci

plina.pdf

Knehans, M. M. (2005). The archaeology and history of pharmacy in Victoria.

Australasian Historical Archaeology, 23(2005), 41-46. doi:10.2561/1322-

9214.23.1198

Knowles, M. S. (1990). The adult learner: a neglected species (Vol. 4). Houston:

Gulf Publishing Company.

Langendyk, V., Mason, G., & Wang, S. (2016). How do medical educators design a

curriculum that facilitates student learning about professionalism?

International Journal of Medical Education, 7, 32-43.

doi:10.5116/ijme.5683.c2e0

https://s3.amazonaws.com/academia.edu.documents/4363696/klein-interdisciplinary_studies.pdf?AWSAccessKeyId=AKIAIWOWYYGZ2Y53UL3A&Expires=1511926233&Signature=%2BkeNB5gV%2FKlXRJKFwRV2QVdscp0%3D&response-content-disposition=inline%3B%20filename%3DIntegrative_learning_and_interdisciplina.pdf







Laurillard, D. (2008). Technology enhanced learning as a tool for pedagogical

innovation. Journal of Philosophy of Education, 42(3-4), 521-533.

doi:10.1111/j.1467-9752.2008.00658.x

Learning Theory. (2006). In Gale Encyclopedia of Nursing and Allied Health (Ed.).

Retrieved October 29, 2017 from

http://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-

and-maps/learning-theory

Lee, A., & Danby, S. (2012). Reshaping doctoral education: international

approaches and pedagogies. Milton Park, Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Leong, F. T. L., & Austin, J. T. (2006). The psychology research handbook: a guide

for graduate students and research assistants (2nd ed.). Thousand Oaks, CA:

Sage Publications.

Lie, D., Carter-Pokras, O., Braun, B., & Coleman, C. (2012). What do health literacy

and cultural competence have in common? Calling for a collaborative

pedagogy. Journal of health communication, 17(3), 13-22.

doi:10.1080/10810730.2012.712625

Lillard, Stoll (2005). Montessori: The science behind the genius. New York/Oxford:

Oxford University Press.

Lindblom-Ylänne, S., Trigwell, K., Nevgi, A., & Ashwin, P. (2006). How

approaches to teaching are affected by discipline and teaching context.

Studies in Higher Education, 31(3), 285-298.

doi:10.1080/03075070600680539

Low, J., Hattingh, L., & Forrester, K. (2009). Australian pharmacy law and practice.

Chatswood, N.S.W: Elsevier Australia.

http://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/learning-theory

http://www.encyclopedia.com/medicine/encyclopedias-almanacs-transcripts-and-maps/learning-theory


Luna Scott, C. (2015). The Futures of Learning 3: What kind of pedagogies for the

21st century? UNESCO Education Research and Foresight, Paris. [ERF

Working Papers Series, No. 15].

Macfarlane, B. (2005). The disengaged academic: the retreat from citizenship.

Higher Education Quarterly, 59(4), 296-312. doi:10.1111/j.1468-

2273.2005.00299.x

MacKinnon, G. E. (2003). An investigation of pharmacy faculty attitudes toward

faculty development. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 67(1),

11. doi:10.5688/aj670111

Marriott, J. L., Nation, R. L., Roller, L., Costelloe, M., Galbraith, K., Stewart, P., &

Charman, W. N. (2008). Pharmacy education in the context of Australian

practice. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 72(6), 131.

doi:10.5688/aj7206131

Marsh, C. J. (2004). Key concepts for understanding curriculum (Vol. 3). New York,

NY: Routledge Falmer.

Martimianakis, M. A., & Hafferty, F. W. (2016). Exploring the interstitial space

between the ideal and the practised: Humanism and the hidden curriculum of

system reform. Medical education, 50(3), 278-280.

Maslow, A. H. (1943). A theory of human motivation. Psychological Review, 50(4),

370-396. doi:10.1037/h0054346

Maslow, A. H., Frager, R., Fadiman, J., McReynolds, C., & Cox, R. (1970).

Motivation and personality (3rd ed. Vol. 2). New York, NY: Harper & Row.

McCabe, A., & O'Connor, U. (2014). Student-centred learning: the role and

responsibility of the lecturer. Teaching in Higher Education, 19(4), 350-359.

Retrieved from


http://srhe.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13562517.2013.860111?needAcc

ess=true

McCombs, B. L., & Whisler, J. S. (1997). The learner-centered classroom and

school: strategies for increasing student motivation and achievement. San

Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass.

McLaughlin, J. E., Bush, A. A., Rodgers, P. T., Scott, M. A., Zomorodi, M., Pinelli,

N. R., & Roth, M. T. (2017). Exploring the requisite skills and competencies

of pharmacists needed for success in an evolving health care environment.

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 81(6), 116.

doi:10.5688/ajpe816116

McLaughlin, J. E., Dean, M. J., Mumper, R. J., Blouin, R. A., & Roth, M. T. (2013).

A roadmap for educational research in pharmacy. American Journal of

Pharmaceutical Education, 77(10), 218. doi:10.5688/ajpe7710218

McLaughlin, J. E., Roth, M. T., Glatt, D. M., Gharkholonarehe, N., Davidson, C. A.,

Griffin, L. M., . . . Mumper, R. J. (2014). The flipped classroom: a course

redesign to foster learning and engagement in a health professions school.

Academic Medicine, 89(2), 236-243. doi:10.1097/ACM.0000000000000086

Mergel, B. (1998). Instructional design and learning theory. Retrieved November 24,

2016 from http://etad.usask.ca/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm

Merriam, S. B., & Tisdell, E. J. (2015). Qualitative research: A guide to design and

implementation. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

Merriam, S. B., & Bierema, L. L. (2013). Adult learning: Linking theory and

practice. San Francisco, CA: John Wiley & Sons.

http://srhe.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13562517.2013.860111?needAccess=true

http://srhe.tandfonline.com/doi/pdf/10.1080/13562517.2013.860111?needAccess=true

http://etad.usask.ca/802papers/mergel/brenda.htm


Miller, G. E. (1990). The assessment of clinical skills/competence/performance.

Academic Medicine, 65(9), S63-S67. doi:10.1097/00001888-199009000-

00045

Moles, R. J., & Stehlik, P. (2015). Pharmacy practice in Australia. The Canadian

Journal of Hospital Pharmacy, 68(5), 418-426. Retrieved from


Morse, J. M. (1991). Approaches to qualitative-quantitative methodological

triangulation. Nursing research, 40(2), 120-123.

Mossop, L., Dennick, R., Hammond, R., & Robbé, I. (2013). Analysing the hidden

curriculum: use of a cultural web. Medical education, 47(2), 134-143.

doi:10.1111/medu.12072

Ng, W. (2015). New digital technology in education: Conceptualizing professional

learning for educators. Cham, Switzerland: Springer International

Publishing.

Nieminen, J., Lindblom-Yläne, S., & Lonka, K. (2004). The development of study

orientations and study success in students of pharmacy. Instructional Science,

32(5), 387-417. doi:10.1023/B:TRUC.0000044642.35553.e5

O'Cathain, A., & Thomas, K. J. (2004). "Any other comments?" Open questions on

questionnaires–a bane or a bonus to research? BMC medical research

methodology, 4(1), 25. Retrieved from

https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-

4-25

O'Leary, M. (2014). Classroom observation: a guide to the effective observation of

teaching and learning. New York, NY: Routledge.


https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-4-25

https://bmcmedresmethodol.biomedcentral.com/articles/10.1186/1471-2288-4-25


O’Keefe, M., Lecouteur, A., Miller, J., & McGowan, U. (2009). The colleague

development program: a multidisciplinary program of peer observation

partnerships. Medical Teacher, 31(12), 1060-1065.

doi:10.3109/01421590903154424

Oelschlaeger, P. (2017). Change in self-assessed comfort level of first-year pharmacy

students as an alternative approach to measure teaching effectiveness and

learning outcomes. Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning, 9(3), 383-

390. Retrieved from http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2017.01.005

Oleson, A., & Hora, M. T. (2014). Teaching the way they were taught? Revisiting

the sources of teaching knowledge and the role of prior experience in shaping

faculty teaching practices. Higher Education, 68(1), 29-45.

doi:10.1007/s10734-013-9678-9

Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development. (2005). Definition and

selection of key competencies: executive summary. Retrieved from Paris,

France: http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf

Parker, J. (2003). Reconceptualising the curriculum: from commodification to

transformation. Teaching in Higher Education, 8(4), 529-543.

doi:10.1080/1356251032000117616

Pearson, M. L., & Hubball, H. T. (2012). Curricular integration in pharmacy

education. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 76(10), 1-9.

doi:10.5688/ajpe7610204

Peel, E. A. (2017). Pedagogy. In Encyclopædia Britannica (Ed.), Britannica.

Retrieved May 17, 2017 from https://www.britannica.com/science/pedagogy

http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2017.01.005

http://www.oecd.org/dataoecd/47/61/35070367.pdf

https://www.britannica.com/science/pedagogy


Petit, P., Foriers, A., & Rombaut, B. (2008). The introduction of new teaching

methods in pharmacy education-II. The starting point. Pharmacy Education,

8(1), 19-28. doi:10.1080/15602210701880101

Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. (2017a). The Australian scene. Short

introduction to history of pharmacy. Retrieved November 4, 2017 from

https://www.psa.org.au/content/history/short-intro/chapter-7-the-australian-

scene

Pharmaceutical Society of Australia. (2017b). Pharmacy careers guide. Retrieved

from Australia: https://www.psa.org.au/download/nitp/pharmacy-careers-

guide.pdf

Plano Clark, V. L., & Creswell, J. W. (2008). The mixed methods reader. Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications.

Plaza, C. M., Draugalis, J. R., Slack, M. K., Skrepnek, G. H., & Sauer, K. A. (2007).

Curriculum mapping in program assessment and evaluation. American

Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 71(2), 20. Retrieved from


Porter, A. C. (2002). Measuring the content of instruction: Uses in research and

practice. Educational Researcher, 31(7), 3-14.

doi:10.3102/0013189X031007003

Postareff, L., Lindblom-Ylänne, S., & Nevgi, A. (2007). The effect of pedagogical

training on teaching in higher education. Teaching and Teacher Education,

23(5), 557-571. doi:10.1016/j.tate.2006.11.013

Prideaux, D. (2003). ABC of learning and teaching in medicine: Curriculum design.

British Medical Journal, 326(7383), 268-270. doi:10.1136/bmj.326.7383.268

https://www.psa.org.au/content/history/short-intro/chapter-7-the-australian-scene

https://www.psa.org.au/content/history/short-intro/chapter-7-the-australian-scene

https://www.psa.org.au/download/nitp/pharmacy-careers-guide.pdf

https://www.psa.org.au/download/nitp/pharmacy-careers-guide.pdf



Prosser, M., & Trigwell, K. (1999). Understanding learning and teaching: The

experience in higher education. Buckingham, UK: McGraw-Hill Education.

Putnam, R. T., & Borko, H. (1997). Teacher learning: Implications of new views of

cognition. International handbook of teachers and teaching (Vol. 2, pp.

1223-1296). Dordrecht, The Netherlands: Kluwer.

Queensland Health. (2007). Surveys/questionnaires. Queensland ‘Stay On Your

Feet®´. Community Good Practice Toolkit- Phase 1 materials:

Surveys/questionnaires. Retrieved October 25, 2017 from

https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0031/425929/33345.pdf

Queensland University of Technology. (2011). Manual of Policies and Procedures.

C/4.2. Retrieved November 1, 2017 from

http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_04_01.jsp

Queensland University of Technology. (2017a). Course. Retrieved November 25,

2017 from https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/a-d

Queensland University of Technology. (2017b). Curriculum. Retrieved November

25, 2017 from http://www.mopp.qut.edu.au/C/C_04_01.jsp

Queensland University of Technology. (2017c). Lecture. Retrieved October 25, 2017

from https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/i-m

Queensland University of Technology. (2017d). Practicum. Retrieved October 25,

2017 from https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/n-q#h2-2

Queensland University of Technology. (2017e). Tutorial. Retrieved October 25, 2017

from https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/r-v

Queensland University of Technology. (2017f). Unit. Retrieved October 25, 2017

from https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/r-v#h2-3

https://www.health.qld.gov.au/__data/assets/pdf_file/0031/425929/33345.pdf


https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/a-d


https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/i-m

https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/n-q#h2-2

https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/r-v

https://www.qut.edu.au/about/glossary/r-v#h2-3


Reddy, S., Searle, R. L., Shawa, L. B., & Teferra, D. (2016). A balancing act:

facilitating a university education induction programme for (early career)

academics. Studies in Higher Education, 41(10), 1820-1815.

doi:10.1080/03075079.2016.1221658

Refai, D., Klapper, R. G., & Thompson, J. (2015). A holistic social constructionist

perspective to enterprise education. International Journal of Entrepreneurial

Behavior & Research, 21(3), 316-337. doi:10.1108/IJEBR-01-2014-0006

Richard, J. (2002). Students’ changing expectations of higher education and the

consequences of mismatches with reality Responding to student expectations.

(pp. 70-85). Paris, France: Organisation for Economic Co-operation and

Development Publications

Rilling, M. (2000). How the challenge of explaining learning influenced the origins

and development of John B. Watson's behaviorism. The American Journal of

Psychology, 113(2), 275-301. doi:10.2307/1423731

Robins, S., Symons, J., & Calvo, P. (2009). The routledge companion to philosophy

of psychology. Retrieved from https://ebookcentral.proquest.com

Rogers, C. R. (1969). Freedom to learn. Columbus, OH: Charles E. Merrill.

Saavedra, A. and Opfer, V. 2012. Teaching and Learning 21stCentury Skills:

Lessons from the Learning Sciences. A Global Cities Education Network

Report. Retrieved from http://asiasociety.org/files/rand-0512report.pdf

Salkind, N. J. (2010). In Encyclopedia of research design (Ed.), (pp. 254-255).

Retrieved September 14, 2017 from

http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/researchdesign

Saylor, J. G., & Alexander, W. M. (1966). Curriculum planning: For modern schools.

New York, NY: Holt, Rinehart and Winston.

https://ebookcentral.proquest.com/

http://sk.sagepub.com/reference/researchdesign


Scott, G. (2016). Transforming graduate capabilities and achievement standards for a

sustainable future. Retrieved October 14, 2016 from

http://flipcurric.edu.au/sites/flipcurric/media/107.pdf

Schmidt, D. A., Baran, E., Thompson, A. D., Mishra, P., Koehler, M. J., & Shin, T.

S. (2009). Technological Pedagogical Content Knowledge (TPACK) the

development and validation of an assessment instrument for preservice

teachers. Journal of Research on Technology in Education, 42(2), 123-149.

doi:10.1080/15391523.2009.10782544

Schmidt, H. G., Machiels-Bongaerts, M., Hermans, H., ten Cate, T. J., Venekamp,

R., & Boshuizen, H. P. (1996). The development of diagnostic competence:

comparison of a problem-based, an integrated, and a conventional medical

curriculum. Academic Medicine, 71(6), 658-664 Retrieved from

http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/1996/06000/The_develop

ment_of_diagnostic_competence_.21.aspx

Schon, D. (1983). The reflective practitioner: How professionals think in action.

New York, NY: Basic Books.

Schunk, D. H. (2008). Learning theories: an educational perspective (6th ed.). Upper

Saddle River, NJ: Pearson Merrill Prentice Hall.

Sharma, R., Verma, U., Kapoor, B., & Chopra, V. (2004). Novel teaching

approaches in Pharmacology. JK Science, 6(3), 172-173 Retrieved from

http://jkscience.org/archive/volume63/novel.pdf

Sharp A. (2012) Humanistic Approaches to Learning. In: Seel N.M. (eds)

Encyclopedia of the Sciences of Learning. Springer, Boston, MA

Siemens, G. (2005). Connectivism: A learning theory for the digital age. Retrieved

November 2, 2015 from http://www.elearnspace.org

http://flipcurric.edu.au/sites/flipcurric/media/107.pdf

http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/1996/06000/The_development_of_diagnostic_competence_.21.aspx

http://journals.lww.com/academicmedicine/Fulltext/1996/06000/The_development_of_diagnostic_competence_.21.aspx

http://jkscience.org/archive/volume63/novel.pdf

http://www.elearnspace.org/


Siemens, G. (2006). Connectivism: Learning theory or pastime of the self-amused.

Learning Technologies Centre.

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm

Siemens, G. (2008). Learning and knowing in networks: Changing roles for

educators and designers. ITFORUM for discussion. Retrieved October 15,

2017 from

http://www.ingedewaard.net/papers/connectivism/2008_siemens_Learning_K

nowing_in_Networks_changingRolesForEducatorsAndDesigners.pdf

Simandan, D. (2013). Introduction: Learning as a geographical process. The

Professional Geographer, 65(3), 363-368.

doi:10.1080/00330124.2012.693872

Simpson, V., & Richards, E. (2015). Flipping the classroom to teach population

health: Increasing the relevance. Nurse education in practice, 15(3), 162-167.

doi:10.1016/j.nepr.2014.12.001

Singleton, J. A., & Nissen, L. M. (2014). Teaching Pharmacy students how to

manage effectively in a highly competitive environment. Pharmacy

Education, 14(1), 21-25.

Smesny, A. L., Williams, J. S., Brazeau, G. A., Weber, R. J., Matthews, H. W., &

Das, S. K. (2007). Barriers to scholarship in dentistry, medicine, nursing, and

pharmacy practice faculty. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education,

71(5), 91. Retrieved from http://www.ajpe.org/doi/abs/10.5688/aj710591

Smith, F. (1997). Health services research methods in pharmacy: Survey

research:Survey instruments, reliability and validity. International Journal of

Pharmacy Practice, 5(4), 216-226.

http://www.elearnspace.org/Articles/connectivism_self-amused.htm

http://www.ingedewaard.net/papers/connectivism/2008_siemens_Learning_Knowing_in_Networks_changingRolesForEducatorsAndDesigners.pdf

http://www.ingedewaard.net/papers/connectivism/2008_siemens_Learning_Knowing_in_Networks_changingRolesForEducatorsAndDesigners.pdf

http://www.ajpe.org/doi/abs/10.5688/aj710591


Smith, L., Saini, B., Krass, I., Chen, T., Bosnic-Anticevich, S., & Sainsbury, E.

(2007). Pharmacy students' approaches to learning in an australian university,

71(6). Retrieved from https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7106120

Speedie, M. K., Baldwin, J. N., Carter, R. A., Raehl, C. L., Yanchick, V. A., &

Maine, L. L. (2012). Cultivating ‘habits of mind’in the scholarly pharmacy

clinician: report of the 2011-12 Argus Commission, 76(6), 8.

Stupans, I., Hughes, J., March, G., Krass, I. W., Jim , & Clifford, R. (2013).

Australian pharmacy network: Learning outcomes for pharmacy curriculum.

Retrieved November 9, 2017 from http://www.olt.gov.au/project-discipline-

networkaustralian-pharmacy-network-learning-outcomes-pharmacy-

curriculum-2011

Tadesse, T., & Gillies, R. M. (2015). Nurturing cooperative Learning pedagogies in

higher education classrooms: evidence of instructional reform and potential

challenges. Current Issues in Education, 18(2), 1-18. Retrieved from

https://goo.gl/jdcKJ7

Tangney, S. (2014). Student-centred learning: a humanist perspective. Teaching in

Higher Education, 19(3), 266-275. doi:10.1080/13562517.2013.860099

Tarr, J. E., Chávez, Ó., Reys, R. E., & Reys, B. J. (2006). From the written to the

enacted curricula: The intermediary role of middle school mathematics

teachers in shaping students' opportunity to learn. School Science and

Mathematics, 106(4), 191-201. doi:10.1111/j.1949-8594.2006.tb18075.x

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (1998). Mixed methodology: Combining qualitative

and quantitative approaches (Vol. 46, pp. 40-59): Sage Publications.

Tashakkori, A., & Teddlie, C. (2010). Sage handbook of mixed methods in social &

behavioral research (2nd ed.). Los Angeles, CA: Sage Publications.

https://doi.org/10.5688/aj7106120

http://www.olt.gov.au/project-discipline-networkaustralian-pharmacy-network-learning-outcomes-pharmacy-curriculum-2011



https://goo.gl/jdcKJ7


Taylor, S. J., Bogdan, R., & Devault, M. L. (2016). Introduction to qualitative

esearch methods: A guidebook and resource (4th ed.). US: John Wiley &

Sons Inc.

Teddlie, C., & Yu, F. (2007). Mixed methods sampling: A typology with examples.

Journal of Mixed Methods Research, 1(1), 77-100.

doi:10.1177/2345678906292430

Thibault, G. E. (2013). Reforming health professions education will require culture

change and closer ties between classroom and practice. Health Affairs,

32(11), 1928-1932. doi:10.1377/hlthaff.2013.0827

Thomas, P. A. (2015). Curriculum development for medical education: a six-step

approach. JHU Press.

Tietjen-Smith, T. (2016). Issues and trends in higher education Health. Quest, 68(3),

324-336. doi:10.1080/00336297.2016.1190284

Trigwell, K., & Prosser, M. (2004). Development and use of the approaches to

teaching inventory. Educational Psychology Review, 16(4), 409-424.

doi:10.1007/s10648-004-0007-9

Tyler, R. W. (2013). Basic principles of curriculum and instruction. Chicago, IL:

University of Chicago Press. (Original work published 1949).

University of South Australia. (2014). In Glossary of university terms. Retrieved

November 24, 2017 from http://unisa.edu.au/Student-Life/Support-

services/Student-administration/Glossary-of-University-Terms/#W

Veugelers, W. (2011). Education and humanism; linking autonomy and humanity. In

W. Veugelers (Ed.), (pp. 9-34). Boston, MA: Sense Publishers.

doi:10.1007/978-94-6091-577-2

http://unisa.edu.au/Student-Life/Support-services/Student-administration/Glossary-of-University-Terms/#W

http://unisa.edu.au/Student-Life/Support-services/Student-administration/Glossary-of-University-Terms/#W


Vygotsky, L. (1978). Interaction between learning and development. Readings on the

development of children, 23(3), 34-41.

Wajnryb, R. (1992). Classroom observation tasks: a resource book for language

teachers and trainers. Cambridge, UK: Cambridge University Press.

Walker, A. (2015). Essential readings in problem-based learning: exploring and

extending the legacy of Howard S. Barrows. West Lafayette, IN: Purdue

University Press.

Walker, A., Yong, M., Pang, L., Fullarton, C., Costa, B., & Dunning, A. M. T.

(2013). Work readiness of graduate health professionals. Nurse Education

Today, 33(2), 116-122. doi:10.1016/j.nedt.2012.01.007

Walker, D. F. (1971). A naturalistic model for curriculum development. The school

review, 80(1), 51-65.

Waterfield, J. (2011). Two approaches to vocational education and training. A view

from pharmacy education. Journal of Vocational Education & Training,

63(2), 235-246. doi:10.1080/13636820.2011.567337

Wells, B. M. (2010). Encyclopedia of research design (pp. 886-890). Thousand

Oaks, CA: Sage Publications. doi:10.4135/9781412961288

Westbrook, J., Durrani, N., Brown, R., Orr, D., Pryor, J., Boddy, J., & Salvi, F.

(2013). Pedagogy, curriculum, teaching practices and teacher education in

developing countries. Education rigorous literature review. London, UK:

Department for International Development (DFID). Retrieved from

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/fil

e/305154/Pedagogy-curriculum-teaching-practices-education.pdf

Wiedenmayer, K., Summers, R., Mackie, C., Gous, A., & Everard, M. ( 2006).

Developing pharmacy practice: a focus on patient care. International

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/305154/Pedagogy-curriculum-teaching-practices-education.pdf

https://www.gov.uk/government/uploads/system/uploads/attachment_data/file/305154/Pedagogy-curriculum-teaching-practices-education.pdf


Pharmaceutical Federation. Retrieved October 15, 2017 from

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/publications/DevelopingPharmacyPractice/Deve

lopingPharmacyPracticeEN.pdf

World Health Organization. (2013). Transforming and scaling up Health

professionals' education and training: World Health Organization guidelines

2013. Retrieved from Geneva, SW: https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-

gov.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/books/NBK298953/

Wragg, E. C. (2012). An introduction to classroom observation. Milton Park,

Abingdon, Oxon: Routledge.

Yousif, M. A., Eldalo, A. S., Abd Allah, M. A., Al-Sawat, M. A., Al-Wahaibi, H. M.,

Al-Osaimi, A. A. S., & Al-Gethami, S. H. (2014). Pharmacy education

instruction: Preference and practices, Saudi students’ perception. Saudi

Pharmaceutical Journal, 22(4), 309-314.

doi:https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2013.06.005

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/publications/DevelopingPharmacyPractice/DevelopingPharmacyPracticeEN.pdf

https://www.fip.org/files/fip/publications/DevelopingPharmacyPractice/DevelopingPharmacyPracticeEN.pdf

https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/books/NBK298953/

https://www-ncbi-nlm-nih-gov.ezp01.library.qut.edu.au/books/NBK298953/

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsps.2013.06.005


Chapter 8: Appendices

Appendix A: Survey questionnaire

Survey questionnaire given for the survey activity to the academics from the

School of Clinical Sciences during the second semester of 2015.







Appendix B: Main Features Checklist

Main Features Checklist (MFC). Data collection proforma for observational study during the second semester 2016.

Main Features Checklist: Checklist with the main features of each of the five learning theories. The candidate employed this checklist as

an aid to identify the learning theories during the classes. It is based on the key features from the book University Teaching in Focus. A

Learning-Centred Approach (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).

Learning theories Classroom

Observations Key features

# seats in the class=

% of occupied=

Behaviourist [Role of teacher in designing

and controlling the learning environment]

15 MIN

30 MIN

45MIN

60MIN

Cognitivist and Constructivist [student-centred,

active learning, and the role of teacher as

facilitator]

15 MIN

30 MIN

45MIN

60MIN

Social Constructivist [Value of social

interaction in expanding understandings and

transferring learning across contexts]

15 MIN

30 MIN

45MIN

60MIN

1A) Practice and repetition 1B) Build on previous learning 1C) Identify what student can already do, and

support learning in the ‘zone of proximal

development’

2A) Emphasis on systematic routine and

organised activities.

2B) Creating space for note-taking and discussion 2C) Emphasis on community formation and

collaborative learning, actively constructing

shared understandings

3A) Emphasis in the teacher specifiying the

structure, content and delivery of learning

activities.

3B) Break teaching sessions into manageable

chunks

3C) Classroom debate to explore and value

alternative viewpoints

4A) Focus on Clear and Assessable learning

objectives and Target outcomes.

4B) Activate prior learning through use of

summaries, reading prompts, questioning &

finding out.

4C) Apply learning to the real world

5A) Instructional design that facilitates step-

by-step attainment of competencies and

increasingly complex competencies and

skills.

5B) Relate new information to existing

information to aid assimilation and memorisation

(note-taking, discussion, questioning)

5C) O pportunities for peripheral forms of

engagement in professional communities

6A) Emphasis feedback to direct learners’

behaviour towards target outcomes.

6B) Present concepts in varied ways to cater for

different cognitive styles

6C) Use of collaborative knowledge building

tools (wikis, discussion boards)

7A) Incentives, rewards, penalties and

disciplining strategies

7B) Explore relationships between concepts (lists,

concept maps, flow diagrams)

7C) Emphasis on role models

8A) Individualised program to allow

studentto work at own pace.

8B) Use of analogies or metaphors to help attach

meaning and assimilate new learning

8C) PBL activities and Problem solving

exercises

9B) Use of novelty, surprise and emotional

engagement to capture attention and help

memorisation


Humanist [Experiential learning, personal

growth and transforming mindsets]

15

MIN

30

MIN

45

MIN

60

MIN

Connectivist [Connected learning]

15

MIN

30

MIN

45

MIN

60

MIN

CLASS DISPO SITIO N

1D) Emphasise attitudes over techniques 1E) Forge links between teacher, student interests,

and opportunities for student to engage socially

with peers and mentors

Beginning

2D) Identify individual learning goals and

effective learning strategies

2E) Empower studentto transition from passive

recipients of discrete knowledge into active and

engaged learners who discover, connect, invent

and produce

3D) Passes responsibility and choice for

learning to student (eg, learning contracts)

3E) student acquire higher-order skills needed to

thrive in today’s world

4D) Emphasis on ST support and integrated

personal development planning in the

curriculum

4E) Knits together three critical contexts for

learning: 1.peer-

supported

2.interest-powered 3.academicall

oriented

5D) Develop skills in meta-cognition,

reflection, self-awareness

5E) Incorporates three core properties:

1.production-centred,

2.shared purpose, and 3.openly

networked

6D) Break down fixed and negative belief

systems

6E) Incorporates four key design principles:

1.everyone can participate

2.learning happens by doing

3.challenge is constant

4.everything is interconnted

End

Indicate: teacher, student, blackboard, tables

7D) Create a positive environment conducive

to self-directed learning

7E) Amplifies opportunities for connected

learning in key arenas:

1.fostering engagement & self-expression

2.Increased accessibility to knowldge & learning

experience

3.social supports for interests

4.increased diversity & building capacity

8D) Positive role models


Appendix C: Survey Mirrored Checklist

Survey Mirrored Checklist (SMC). Data collection proforma for observational study during the second semester 2016.

Survey Mirrored Checklist: It is a modification of the survey, it was designed and employed by the candidate during the observations. It

was designed and transformed into a checklist by the candidate and the research group based on the learning theories from the book

University Teaching in Focus (Hunt & Chalmers, 2012).

15

MIN

30

MIN

45

MIN

60

MIN

FIN

AL

15

MIN

30

MIN

45

MIN

60

MIN

FIN

AL

15

MIN

30

MIN

45

MIN

60

MIN

FIN

AL

1.Teaching approach primarily based on: 2.Delivery of content is achieved through: 3. Design the content of the teaching material:

A. Practice and repetition. A. Routine, organised activities. A. Specify the structure, content and delivery of learning activities.

B. Combining new learning with previous knowledge. B. Creating space for note-taking and discussion, breaking teaching

sessions into manageable chunks.

B. Activate prior learning through the use of summaries, reading prompts,

and questioning.

C. Identifying what the students can already do independently, then

support, and guide their learning to enable students to obtain new

knowledge that they would not have otherwise obtained alone.

C. Collaborative learning, and actively constructing shared understandings. C. Together with students, engage with community of practice where

learning occurs by imitating the behaviours of professional role models.

D. Emphasising motivation and positive attitudes toward learning, over

techniques.

D. Developing skills in meta-cognition (knowing about knowing, and

recognising what we know), reflection and self-awareness.

D. Support and create a positive environment conducive to self-directed

learning. Emphasis is on supporting students and integrating personal

development planning.

E. Empowering students to transition from passive recipients of discrete

knowledge into active and engaged learners who discover, connect, invent

and produce.

E. Combining peer-supported learning (exchanges with peers), interest-

powered learning (personally interesting & relevant), and academically

oriented learning (turn interest into academic studies, and career

opportunities).

E. Place the onus on the student to acquire higher order skills with enquiry-

based-learning, peer-based exchanges and connected learning (e.g.

immediate feedback on progress, tools for planning and reflection).


15 M

IN

30 M

IN

45M

IN

60M

IN

FIN

AL

15 M

IN

30 M

IN

45M

IN

60M

IN

FIN

AL

15 M

IN

30 M

IN

45M

IN

60M

IN

FIN

AL

B. Relating new information to existing information to aid assimilation and

memorisation e.g. present concepts in varied ways to cater for different

cognitive styles, explore relationships between concepts.

B. Use of analogies or metaphors to help attach meaning and assimilate

new learning.

B. The use of novelty, surprise and emotional engagement to capture

attention and help memorisation.

A. Incentives, rewards, penalties and disciplining strategies.

4. The strategies primarily used in designing your teaching 5. Teaching approach is primarily reflected through technique: 6. Your strategy to engage students is primarily through

A. Instructional design that facilitates step-by-step attainment of

competencies and skills.

A. Allowing students to work and engage at their own pace.

E. Everyone can participate, learning happens by doing, challenge is

constant, and everything is interconnected.

E. Forging opportunities for students to engage socially with peers and

mentor and links between academics and students’ interests.

E. Fostering engagement and self-expression, increasing accessibility to

knowledge and learning experiences, expanding social supports for

interests, and expanding diversity of opinions.

C. Applying learning to the real world, and opportunities for peripheral

forms of engagement in professional communities.

C. Classroom debate to explore and value

alternative viewpoints.

C. The use of collaborative knowledge building tools (wikis, discussion

boards).

D. Passing responsibility and choice for learning to student (e.g. learning

contracts), and identifying individual learning goals and effective learning

strategies.

D. Four-stage cycle of experience – reflection – conceptualisation

(integrating observations into theory) –experimentation (using theories to

make decisions and solve problems).

D. Creating a supportive climate and reinforce a positive belief system,

through being aware of the multiple ways learners experience the course

concepts.

EXPLORING TEACHING APPROACHES IN THE TRANSITION TO ... Barajas Alonso Thesis.pdf · ii Exploring teaching approaches in the transition to contemporary curricula in pharmacy KEYWORDS

Documents