Developing an international concept-based curriculum for pharmacology education: core concepts and concept inventories

Le résumé fourni par la source

Many science and health profession graduates lack fundamental pharmacology knowledge and the ability to apply pharmacology concepts in practice. This article reviews the current challenges faced by pharmacology educators, including the exponential growth in discipline knowledge and competition for curricular time. We then argue that pharmacology education should focus on essential concepts that enable students to develop beyond ‘know’ towards ‘know how to’. A concept-based approach will help educators prioritise and benchmark their pharmacology curriculum, facilitate integration of pharmacology with other disciplines in the curriculum, create alignment between universities, and improve the application of pharmacology knowledge to professional contexts such as safe prescribing practices. To achieve this, core concepts first need to be identified, unpacked, and methods for teaching and assessment using concept inventories developed. The International Society for Basic and Clinical Pharmacology Education Section (IUPHAR-Ed) Core Concepts in Pharmacology (CCP) initiative involves over 300 educators from the global pharmacology community. CCP has identified and defined the core concepts of pharmacology, together with key underpinning sub-concepts. To realise these benefits, pharmacology educators must identify, unpack, and develop methods to teach and assess core concepts. Work to develop a concept inventories is ongoing, including the identification of student misconceptions of the core concepts and the creation of a bank of multiple-choice questions to assess student understanding. Future work aims to develop and validate materials and methods to help educators embed core concepts within curricula. Potential strategies that educators can use to overcome factors that inhibit adoption of core concepts are presented.

Ce résumé expose les affirmations des auteurs. BNTIC ne l’interprète pas comme une validation indépendante des résultats.