Paper Menu >>

Journal Menu >>

Creative Education
2010. Vol.1, No.3, 135-137
Copyright © 2010 SciRes. DOI:10.4236/ce.2010.13021
Using Integrating Method to Teach Biochemical Pharmacy
Technology
Chunchao Han
School of Pharmacy, Shandong University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, Jinan, P.R China.
Email: [email protected]
Received December 20th, 2009; revised February 7th, 2010; accepted September 16th, 2010.
An integrating method to teach Biochemical Pharmacy Technology was developed to help students understand
the technology to produce biochemical pharmacy well in this paper. By the integrating method, students can
compare the main content of the biochemical pharmacy and the technology to produce them. Students were en-
couraged to demonstrate the connection and difference of the various biochemical pharmacies. The results
showed that the performance of students with integrating method is significantly better than that of students
without integrating method (p < 0.05). In conclusion, integrating method can enhance students’ performance on
Biochemical Pharmacy Technology.
Keywords: Curricular Innovations, BPT, BP, Integrating Method
Intr od uc t ion
Biochemical Pharmacy Technology (BP T) is the major cur-
riculum at the School of Pharmacy, Shandong University of
Traditional Chinese Medicine in the fourth -professional year of
pharmacy students. At this stage of their education, students
typically have difficulty grasping all kinds of Biochemical
Pharmaceutics (BP). Many students have learned to rely on rote
memorization about course material. However, the performance
of them is very poor. Approaches reported to facilitate student
learning include intermeshing different teaching modes/strate-
gies, changing the pace of lectures and active learning, all of
which are intended to stimulate student thinking and reflection
on the subject matter (Matthews, 1997; Ruhl, Hughes, &
Schloss, 1987). Active learning can be approached in numerous
ways and, classically, is thought to involve student discussions
in small groups (McKeachie, 1999). New method is interac-
tive-learning techniques, such as WebCT quizzes (D uska , 2004).
However, none of these methods is about how to learn BPT
wel l.
Integrating method (IM) was selected as a learning process at
the School of Pharmacy, Shandong University of Traditional
Chinese Medicine si nce 2004. It involves students in meaning-
ful learning because the process engages possible affiliation of
all kinds of Biochemical Pharmaceutics (BP) to students. The
learning tends to be long lasting because the new knowledge is
related to and integrated within a person’s existing knowledge.
According to the cognitive learning theory, the brain learns
most effectively by relating new experiences and knowledge to
prior knowledge, and that meaningful learning requires delibe-
rate effort to link new knowledge with higher-order, more in-
clusive concepts in a person’s cognitive structure (Roth &
Roychoudhury, 1993). The interactive compensatory model for
learning (ICML) also suggests that prior knowledge is the most
important component when predicting whether new learning
will be successful. There is widespread agreement that prior
knowledge is the largest factor in successful new learning
(Shapiro, 2004).
Design
Learning Objectives
Biochemical Pharmacy Technology (BPT) is designed to
provide a preparation and analysis of the Biochemical Pharma-
ceutics (BP) with an emphasis on the methods to manufacture
them.
With the approval of the School of Pharmacy, Shandong
University of Traditional Chinese Medicine, a primary objec-
tive of the IM was first set. It was to help students acquire and
retain a sound biochemical pharmaceutical knowledge base, to
learn to use indexing and pharmacy literature resources, to
know how to prepare the BP and how to control the quality of
them.
Integrating Method (IM) Steps
The students had learned organic chemistry, biochemistry
and pharmacology in the former thre e -professional years. It was
the prior knowledge to the students. Also, the BP grasped by
the students was the prior knowledge, the BP will be learnt is
the new experiences. One BP by one BP，all the BPS will be
grasped by the students eventually (Figure 1).
The main Biochemical Pharmaceutics (BP ) may be included
in the Table 1. Firstly, from the Table 1, the students can grasp
the main BP according to their chara ct eristic.
Secondly, the affiliation and diffe r ence of different Bio-
chemical Pharmaceutics (BP) were set up. The affiliation be-
tween BPT and the former three subjects was also set up. Fig-
ure 2 was the example of Polypeptides.
From 2004, the integrating metho d was used in teaching of
Biochemical Pharmacy Technology. It was taught by one in-
s truc tor. I compared the performance of students taught using
an integrating method or a traditional lecture format on tradi-
tional exams.
C. C. HAN
136
Organic Chemistry
In the first-professional year
Biochemistry
In the second-professional year
Pharmacology
In the third-professional year
Biochemical Pharmacy Technology
As Prior Knowledge
The BP grasped
The BP will be learnt.
As Prior Knowledge
Figure 1.
The organic chemistry, biochemistry and pharmacology were the prior knowledge to the students. Also, the BP grasped by the stu-
dents was the prior knowledge to the BP will be learnt.
Table 1.
The main Biochemical Pharmaceutics (BP) in BPT.
The main category of BP Examples
Amino Acids
Polypeptides
Proteins
Nucleic acid
enzyme
Polysaccharide
Lipide
Cystine
Glutathione
Insulin
Inosine
Superoxide dismutase
Hyaluronic acid
Prostaglandin
Organic Chemistry:
Physical property;
Chemical property
Pharmacology:
Physiological functions;
Clinical application
Amino
Acids
Proteins
Difference:
Methods to
manufacture;
Methods to analyze
Clinical application
Affiliation:
Chains of amino acid;
Peptide bonds
Difference:
Methods to
manufacture;
Methods to analyze
Clinical application
Affiliation:
Primary structure
Secondary structure
Tertiary structure
Quaternary structure
Examples
Polypeptides
Figure 2.
An example of the affiliation between different BP and the former three subjects.
C. C. HAN
137
Table 2.
The compare of the assessment with different teaching modes.
groups Results % (2004) Results % (2005) Results % (2006)
group A
group B
68.7 ± 2.88* (N = 46)
61.5 ± 2.33 (N = 46)
69.6 ± 1.87* (N = 75)
62.5 ± 2.23 (N = 75)
65.6 ± 3.79* (N = 52)
59.5 ± 3.10 (N = 52)
The asterisks indicate a statistical difference (p < 0. 05)
Assessment
Curricular innovations are usually conducted in small test
groups that can be evaluated concurrently with the standing
teaching model. In this study, the students were randomly allo-
cated equally into 2 groups (Table 2). The contents of BPT
were introduced with integrating method in group A. While in
group B, normal teaching modes was used. At the end of term,
both groups were assessed with the same test questions. Statis-
tical analysis of results was conducted using SPSS 11.0 soft-
ware. The data represents means and standard deviations. The
significant level of 5% (p < 0.05) was used as the minimum
acceptable probability for the difference between the means
(Table 2). The results showed that the score of group A with
integrating metho d is significantly different from that of group
B (p < 0.05 ) .
C oncl usi on
The results of this study indicate that an integrating method
helped students improve their knowledge of course material
better than a traditional lecture format.
Within the last 50 years many universities, colleges, and
schools have sought to enhance educational quality through the
establishment of departments or services to support the excel-
l ence of teaching, learning, and assessment. Madeline Hunter
(1994) developed the mastery teaching model, which states that
effective teachers use a methodology when planning and pre-
senting a lesson. It follows the philosophy of “tell them what
you are going to say, say it, then tell them what you said” with
the purpose of providing information within a lesson structure
to encourage students to attain stated outcomes or objectives
deemed relevant for mastery. Cognitive theories of learning
focus on the mind (the mind is a “black box” according to be-
haviorist views), and attempt to model how information is re-
ceived, assimilated, stored, and recalled (Lefrançois, 1988).
According to the cognitive learning theory, the brain learns
most effectively by relating new experiences and knowledge to
prior knowledge, and that meaningful learning requires delibe-
rate effort to link new knowledge with higher -order.
Integrating method involves students in meaningful learning.
The results indicate that the integrating method can help stu-
dents to grasp all kinds of Biochemical Pharmaceutics easi ly.
References
Duska, M. (2004). Promoting learning in a health care systems course
by multiple teaching methods including internet-based quizzes.
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 68, 119-124.
Hunter, M. (1994). Enhancing teaching. New York: Macmillan College
Publishi ng.
Lefra nçois, Guy R. (1988). Psychology for teaching: a bear always
faces the front. Belmont, CA: Wadsworth Publishing Company.
Matt hews, J. C. (1997). Intermeshing passive and active learning strat-
egies in teaching biochemistry. American Journal of Pharmaceut-
ical Education, 61, 388-393.
McKea chie, W. J. (1999). Teaching tips strategies research and theory
for college and university teachers. New York: Houghton Mifflin
Company.
Roth, W., & Roychoudhury, A. (1993).The development of science
process skills in authentic contexts, Journal of Research in Science
Teaching, 30, 127-152. doi:10.1177/088840648701000103
Ruhl, K. L., Hug hes, C. A., & Schloss, P. J. (1987). Using the pause
procedure to enhance lecture recall. Teacher Education and Spe-
cial Education, 10,1 4-18. doi:10.1177/088840648701000103
Shapiro, A. (2004). How including prior knowledge as a subject varia-
ble may change outcomes of learning research. American Educational
Research Journal, 41, 159-189. doi:10.3102/00028312041001159