Skip to content

A comparison of pharmacy student attainment, progression, and perceptions using team- and problem-based learning: experiences from Wolverhampton School of Pharmacy, UK

Research output: Contribution to journalArticlepeer-review

Objective - To compare pharmacy student attainment, progression, and perception of team-based (TBL) and problem-based learning (PBL) in comparison to more traditional didactic teaching methods.

Design - Student attainment and progression were established through comparison of examination data before and after TBL implementation and for the three teaching methodologies. Student perceptions of TBL and PBL were sought via a questionnaire and focus group.

Assessment - Summative examination performance was used to assess the effect of TBL implementation. Student attainment and progression increased after TBL implementation (attainment grade score: pre-TBL 7.7 vs. 11.19 post-TBL; p = 0.01 and progression: 89% vs. 92%; p = 0.574). Summative examination performance was also used to assess the effect of three teaching methodologies in the same cohort. Student attainment was higher with TBL compared with PBL (grade score: 11.19 vs. 8.73; p ≤ 0.001) and slightly but not significantly worse than those seen with traditional didactic teaching (grade score: 11.19 vs. 11.83; p = 0.355). Student progression was the highest with traditional teaching, then TBL, and finally PBL (96% vs. 92% vs. 88%; p = 0.224). Student perceptions favored TBL compared with PBL but traditional teaching methods were favored over both TBL and PBL.

Conclusion - The study shows that student attainment and progression were better using TBL compared with PBL, although traditional approaches to teaching saw comparable attainment and progression to TBL. Student perceptions favored traditional teaching more than TBL, which was more liked than PBL.
Original languageEnglish
Pages (from-to)884-891
JournalCurrents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning
Volume7
Issue number6
DOIs
Publication statusPublished - 1 Nov 2015
Externally publishedYes

Related information

Relations Get citation (various referencing formats)

ID: 11983057