ArticleAmerican journal of pharmaceutical education2014
A reflective teaching challenge to motivate educational innovation.
Article in American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2014. The graph could read no effect estimate from its abstract, so it casts no vote on the map. Cited by 6 papers.
What it found
Each row is one number read from the abstract, on the scale the paper reported it, with its interval. Left of the dashed line favours the treatment, right favours the comparator. Under each row is the sentence it came from. New to these charts? A ten-minute tutorial.
The abstract states no effect estimate the extractor could read, or names no intervention and outcome on the map, so this paper lights no cell and moves no belief. It is still indexed, cited and linked below.
The trial behind it
Trials whose registry record cites this paper, or whose number appears in the abstract. A trial that started after this paper was published is citing it as background, not reporting it.
Neither the registry nor the abstract names a trial number. If this is a trial report, that itself is worth knowing.
Who cites it
6 citing papers in PubMed.
- College English teachers' metacognitive awareness and creative teaching: mediation by teaching reflection and moderation by creative thinking.BMC psychology · 2026Article
- Editorial: Innovations in teaching and learning for Health Professions Educators.Frontiers in medicine · 2025Article
- A Scoping Review of Educator Proficiency Interventions in Pharmacy Education Illustrated by an Interdisciplinary Model Integrating Pedagogical Theories into Practice.Pharmacy (Basel, Switzerland) · 2023Article
- Leader strategies for motivating innovation in individuals: a systematic review.Journal of innovation and entrepreneurship · 2020Review
- Self-Help for the Pharmacy Educator.American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2018Review
- Faculty development: who, what, why, where, when, and how?American journal of pharmaceutical education · 2014Article
Corrections and comments
PubMed lists nothing against this paper. Absence here is not a guarantee, only a check that was made.
Authors and funding
6 authors.
Funding
No grant is acknowledged in the PubMed record.
Abstract
objectiveTo describe a teaching challenge intended to increase faculty use of evidence-based and student-centered instructional strategies in the demanding school of pharmacy context with technology-savvy students.
designA teaching challenge was created that required faculty members to incorporate a "new-to-you" innovative teaching method in a class, course, or experiential activity. The method was linked to at least 1 of 7 evidence-based principles for effective teaching. Faculty members were exposed to colleagues' teaching strategies via brief voluntary presentations at department meetings. ASSESSMENT: A post-challenge survey provided assessment data about the challenge. Responses to a baseline survey provided additional information about what faculty members were already doing (52% response rate). Eighty-one percent of faculty respondents completed the challenge. A wide array of new strategies (13 categories such as flipped classrooms and social media) was implemented and 75% included the use of technology. Nearly all respondents (96%) thought that participation in the challenge was worth the effort and planned to participate again the following year. All faculty members intended to continue using their new strategy and 56% planned additional modifications with future implementations. The challenge demonstrated how multiple goals of curricular improvement, faculty development, and student-centered instruction could be achieved together.
conclusionThe teaching challenge motivated most of the faculty members to try something new to them. Links between evidence-based principles and day-to-day activities were strengthened. The new-to-you design placed the challenge within reach of faculty members regardless of their background, subject, or experience.
Indexed as
Identifiers
What OpenQuestion holds
Registered trials
Read under generation 80e0d062 · epoch 390. Bibliography from PubMed, PubMed Central and OpenAlex; grants from NIH RePORTER; trial links from ClinicalTrials.gov; estimates, votes and beliefs from the OpenQuestion graph.