- Email: [email protected]
Student perception of a wiki in a pharmacy elective course
Available online at www.sciencedirect.com
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78 http://www.pharmacyteaching.com
Student perception of a wiki in a pharmacy elective course Sean M. Mirk, PharmDa,*, Jill S. Burkiewicz, PharmD, BCPSb, Kathy E. Komperda, PharmD, BCPSb b
a Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Albany, NY Midwestern University Chicago College of Pharmacy, Downers Grove, IL
Abstract Objective: Third professional year pharmacy students enrolled in an elective on landmark trials were surveyed to describe student and course facilitator experiences with using a wiki, student satisfaction with wiki collaboration, and to evaluate whether level of involvement on a wiki was associated with student-reported performance or satisfaction. Course facilitators were also surveyed. Method: Pre- and post-surveys were used to evaluate experiences and satisfaction with wiki collaboration. Level of involvement was compared with student-reported course performance and wiki satisfaction. An e-mail survey with open-ended questions was sent to course facilitators asking them to describe their experience with a wiki. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and use of the Kruskal-Wallis test (a priori ␣ ⬍ 0.05). Results: Based on responses from the pre-survey, 50% (14/28) of the students had previously accessed a wiki; none reported previously collaborating in a wiki. On the post-survey, the overall satisfaction with collaborating on the course wiki was neutral. A majority of students (63%) highly recommended or recommended using a wiki in future landmark trial classes. No difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade (p ⫽ 0.5) or level of satisfaction (p ⫽ 0.2) were noted. Course facilitators favored using a wiki because it accommodated an increase in class size and provided another way to engage students. Conclusion: Students that collaborated in the course wiki, and course facilitators, had positive attitudes toward the use of a wiki. Students also felt that the course wiki provided further clarification and knowledge about course content. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Wiki; Collaboration; Web 2.0; Millennial generation; Pharmacy education
Introduction Members of the millennial generation have been entering pharmacy programs since 2000 and now represent the predominant generation in US colleges of pharmacy. More than 80 million individuals in the United States belong to this generation and by 2016 the millennial generation is
At the time of this investigation, Dr. Mirk was a PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident and Visiting Instructor at Midwestern University Chicago College of Pharmacy. * Corresponding author: Sean M. Mirk, PharmD, Assistant Professor, Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 106 New Scotland Avenue, Albany, NY 12180. E-mail address: [email protected].
projected to account for about 75% of all college-bound students.1,2 These students have vastly different characteristics than previous generations. A typical student from the millennial generation enjoys being engaged in multiple activities simultaneously, is task oriented, and in general has a positive attitude. Compared with their predecessors, members of this generation prefer to collaborate with other individuals, are strong believers in teamwork, and prefer experiential activities.3,4 The millennial generation considers constantly being connected by technology to friends, family, and information a priority. They have a collective sense of community both online and in the real world and naturally gravitate toward technology.3,4 The ubiquitous use of technology among students in the millennial generation has created a “gap” between students
1877-1297/10/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2010.01.002
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
and educators; many students cannot remember a time without a computer, whereas some educators are still struggling to use them. Many college-age students (79%) indicate that the internet has had a positive impact on their college experience.3 However, many students indicate that the use of technology by educators is uninspiring.4 Previous research has demonstrated that a wiki may provide an easy-to-use forum for both students and educators to incorporate technology into the educational experience.5 A wiki may help to close the technology “gap” between educators and students. A wiki functions like a collaborative word processing document but is viewed like a web page. Multiple users are able to contribute to the formation of one dynamic document, at different times and in different geographic locations. One of the benefits of a wiki is that the educator is able to monitor group progress and track who has contributed to a group collaborative effort. These features provide instructors with the ability to provide separate individual grades on group assignments. The use of a wiki across all educational settings is growing as a way to discuss and analyze classroom topics, share information between peers, and as a method to collaborate on group projects.6 – 8 In general, a wiki does not require a high level of technical skill from students, has low resource demands from faculty or the institution, and has been well-accepted by students.7,8 Also, using a wiki has the potential to make learning more student-centered, self-directed, and less instructor-centered.6,7 In the classroom, a wiki has been used in primary, secondary, and graduate-level education. Limited information is available on the use of a wiki in health professions coursework. In a graduate nursing education program, a wiki was introduced to help students meet competencies in community health.9 Overall, the graduate students viewed the use of a wiki favorably and considered it a valuable tool for collaboration and communication among peers. The use of a wiki has also been incorporated into online courses in health professions education.10 Harris and Zeng incorporated a wiki into their online health information management course within a baccalaureate program. In this course, students and faculty used a wiki to exchange thoughts related to a group project presentation. Students built the materials needed for their final projects on the platform, whereas faculty distributed announcements and provided prompt feedback to comments posted. The faculty also provided comments on group progress and provided minor edits to student work as needed. Students felt that the use of a wiki helped them learn, interact, and reflect in the online class; and it helped with collaboration and communication with group members and faculty. Although the results of this study are overall positive, it is important to note that this cohort of students may find the use of a wiki more helpful because of the nature of the course focusing on information management. Although the use of a wiki has been used successfully in higher education, little is known about its use in pharmacy
73
education. In this case-based study, the use of a wiki within a pharmacy elective course was examined. Objectives Wikis have been used in classroom settings; however, the use of a wiki in pharmacy education has been relatively unexplored. The objectives of this study were to (1) describe student and course facilitator experiences with using a wiki, (2) describe student satisfaction with collaborating on a wiki, and (3) evaluate whether level of involvement on a wiki was associated with student-reported performance or satisfaction. Methods Classroom implementation Elective course. A wiki was implemented in an elective course entitled “Landmark Trials in Primary Care.” This elective course was established in 2004 as a two-hour credit course and is open to third professional year pharmacy students. The course is designed to develop students’ ability to understand, interpret, evaluate, and apply evidence from landmark trials to support therapeutic recommendations and clinical applicability. The course meets weekly for two hours over 10 weeks. Pairs of students present a landmark trial for each class period; two trials are covered during each class. Students are required to present a 10- to 15-minute overview of the landmark trial. Students must also create a handout that highlights the clinical pearls of the landmark trial. A course Blackboard site was maintained to provide announcements to students. The course was facilitated by four faculty members. Each week a faculty member was designated as the main facilitator for that class period. The role of the main facilitator was to lead and facilitate student discussion regarding clinical applicability, and interpretation and evaluation of literature. In-class participation points were awarded to students who contributed to the discussion. Since the course was first offered, class size has grown substantially from approximately 10 students (course cap 20 students) to a new cap of 32 students based on growing demand. This growth has created a significant challenge, as it is difficult for each student to meaningfully participate during each class period. Indirectly, this has created an assessment system in which participation points are awarded to students more liberally than in previous offerings of this course and has created competition among students to have their opinion heard. To combat this issue, a wiki was incorporated during the Fall 2007 course offering, in part, to provide an alternative means for assessment of participation and collaboration. Wiki incorporation. The purpose of using a wiki in this course was to allow students to collaborate and share in-
74
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
Table 1 Grading rubric to score wiki collaboration Scale
Level of contribution
Example
5
Significant contribution
3
Modest contribution
1
Limited contribution
● ● ● ● ● ●
Addition of unique and relevant student-derived information Consistently led/facilitated wiki discussion Addition of snippets of unique and relevant student-derived information Limited involvement in leading/facilitating discussions Addition of limited unique and relevant student-derived information Answering questions or posting comments with contributions limited to agree/disagree with others
formation related to landmark trials in primary care. Wetpaint.com was selected as the course wiki. It is an open-source program that is separate from the classroom’s Blackboard site. Within this program, students and course facilitators were able to create and modify wiki pages. To incorporate a wiki into the elective course, the following changes were implemented: student handouts were uploaded to the course wiki at the end of the class period by the course coordinator; the uploaded handout compilation served as a wiki page for further editing/discussion by the students; students were allowed to freely edit the information; and students could earn wiki collaboration points to supplement in-class participation points. On the final exam, the wiki pages were printed for students and served as a reference on the final exam. Although facilitators could have contributed to the course wiki to foster student contributions, it was decided that the course wiki would be solely student-derived information. On the first day of class, the course wiki was introduced and a guide was provided. The wiki guide provided information on the purpose of the course wiki, how to create a user profile for Wetpaint.com, how to become a writer for the course wiki, and how wiki collaboration was graded. For wiki collaboration points to count towards the student’s overall participation points, the following must have occurred: wiki collaboration must have occurred between the end of class on Friday and the start of class on the following Friday; and wiki collaboration must have directly involved the landmark trial currently discussed in class or concepts related to literature evaluation. Table 1 outlines a 5-3-1 grading rubric developed to score wiki collaboration. Only one individual (the lead author of this manuscript) was involved in the scoring so as to maintain as much consistency in grading wiki collaboration as possible. Students could earn participation points via in-class participation, wiki participation, or a combination of the two. Total participation points each week represented the sum of in-class participation points and wiki collaboration points, not to exceed the maximum number of points (5) allowed for each class period. Total class participation points accounted for 22.5% of the total course grade. Survey Pre- and post-course surveys were developed by the study investigators and were shared at a faculty forum for
feedback and refinement before administration. Pre- and post-course surveys were then administered to all students enrolled in the course on the first and last day of class, respectively. Survey responses were anonymous and confidential. To maintain confidentiality, a codeword pairing system was used. Students were instructed to create a codeword and to write this codeword on the pre-course survey. For survey pairing, the students were instructed to write the same codeword on the post-course survey. It was recommended to the students that they avoid using an identifiable codeword such as a social security number or student identification number. Students not present on the first day of class were excluded from the pre-course survey. The survey study was submitted and granted exempt status by the Institutional Review Board at the university where the study was conducted. The pre-course survey contained 13 questions. The questions were developed (1) to evaluate a student’s previous knowledge about wikis; (2) to evaluate whether students had collaborated in a wiki before the course; and (3) to evaluate students’ perceptions and barriers to collaborating with others on projects. Students were asked if they knew “what a wiki was” and to correctly identify a wiki. If a student had used a wiki in the past, they were asked to describe how useful they found wikis and their attitudes toward wikis (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). The students were also asked to describe in what way(s) they had used a wiki, as well as if they had collaborated in a wiki before the course. If the student had collaborated in a wiki before the course, they were asked to describe their previous degree of involvement (scale: 1 ⫽ not very active; 2 ⫽ not active; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ active; 5 ⫽ very active) and level of satisfaction with wiki collaboration (scale: 1 ⫽ not very satisfied; 2 ⫽ not satisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ very satisfied). To evaluate student perception related to collaboration with others on projects, three survey items were developed. First, students were asked whether they do not prefer to collaborate or work with others on projects (scale: 1 ⫽ strongly disagree; 2 ⫽ disagree; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ agree; 5 ⫽ strongly agree). Students were then asked for reason(s) they do not prefer to collaborate or work with others. Finally, students were asked to rate their overall satisfaction on the work produced when collaborating or working with
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78 Table 2 Pre-survey responses to students who have used a wiki in the past Question Reported knowing what a wiki was, % (n) Reported using a wiki in past, % (n) Usefulness of a wiki, median Attitudes toward a wiki, median Reported using a wiki in the following capacities, % (n) As a way to search for information As a collaborator on a wiki As a way to communicate/discuss ideas with others In another capacity not listed (explain)
Responses 43 (12/28) 50 (14/28) 4* 4†
100 (14/14) 0 (0/14) 0 (0/14) 0 (0/14)
* Scale 1–5: 5 ⫽ very useful; 1 ⫽ not very useful. † Scale 1–5: 5 ⫽ very positive; 1 ⫽ very negative.
75
identify their expected course grade and to provide additional written feedback about using the course wiki. A qualitative survey with open ended questions was sent via e-mail to course facilitators who requested feedback on the strengths and limitations of using a wiki in this elective course. Statistical analysis Data were compiled and statistically analyzed with SPSS software (version 15.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Descriptive statistics were used to report survey results. The median was used to describe the measure of central tendency for all ordinal data. A Kruskal-Wallis test (a priori ␣ ⬍ 0.05) was used to compare level of involvement to student-reported course performance and to compare level of involvement to student-reported satisfaction. Results
others (scale: 1 ⫽ not very satisfied; 2 ⫽ not satisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ very satisfied). After completion of the final exam, the post-course survey was administered. The post-course survey contained 14 questions. These questions were developed to describe the student’s experience and satisfaction with a wiki and were different than the questions in the pre-survey. Students also reported their expected course grade and provided feedback and recommendations for using a wiki. Students that reported collaborating in the course wiki were asked a series of further questions to evaluate their extent of collaboration (scale: 1 ⫽ not very active; 2 ⫽ not active; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ active; 5 ⫽ very active), level of satisfaction (scale: 1 ⫽ highly dissatisfied; 2 ⫽ dissatisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ highly satisfied), and the ability of the course wiki to help the student meet course objectives (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). To assess time commitment, students were also asked to report frequency of wiki collaboration (weekly, every other week, 2–3 times, only once) and reported number of hours per week they spent collaborating on the course wiki (self-reported hours/ week). All students were asked whether they would recommend a wiki for future offerings of this course, other elective courses, and required courses. Students were asked to rate the likelihood of collaborating in other school and nonschool-related wikis (scale: 1 ⫽ very unlikely; 2 ⫽ unlikely; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ likely; 5 ⫽ very unlikely) and their attitudes toward (scale: 1 ⫽ very negative; 2 ⫽ negative; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ positive; 5 ⫽ very positive) and usefulness of printing wiki pages for the final exam (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). As an overall assessment, students were also asked to identify whether wiki collaboration should be a required part of this elective course. Finally, students were invited to
Pre-survey results Twenty-eight (28) students completed the pre-survey. Of the 28 that completed the pre-survey, 43% (12/28) reported knowing what a wiki was; 50% (14/28) reported previously accessing a wiki; none of the respondents reported previously collaborating on a wiki. The median overall response for how useful a wiki is and attitudes toward a wiki was 4 (Table 2). All students reported using a wiki to search for information. Fifty-four percent (15/28) of all responses correctly identified an example of a wiki. Overall, the median response for whether students do not like to collaborate with others on projects was 3 and overall satisfaction with work produced when collaborating with others was 4. Table 3 includes reported reasons students do not like to collaborate with others. Post-survey Thirty (30) students completed the post-survey. Of those who completed the post-survey, 77% (23/30) reported collaborating on the course wiki. The median overall extent of collaboration on the course wiki was 3. There was a wide variety in reported frequencies and the majority of students spent ⱕ30 minutes per week collaborating on the course wiki (Table 4). Table 3 Pre-survey responses to reasons students do not prefer to collaborate with others (n ⫽ 28) Reasons
Response, n (%)
Coordination of schedules makes it challenging Individuals do not contribute equally Time-consuming I like to work independently I like working in groups
19 (68) 16 (57) 14 (50) 13 (46) 3 (11)
76
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
Table 4 Student-reported frequency and hours per week spent on the course wiki Question Frequency of participating/collaborating Weekly Every other week Only 2–3 times Only once Hours spent per week participating/collaborating ⱕ0.5 hours/week ⬎0.5 hours/week
Responses, % (n)* 35 (8) 13 (3) 30 (7) 22 (5) 65 (15) 35 (8)
* n ⫽ 23
The median overall satisfaction with collaborating on the wiki was 3. Table 5 outlines the student-perceived utility of the course wiki in aiding their ability to meet course objectives. Table 6 assesses how likely students would be to recommend use of a wiki in future landmark trials courses, other elective courses, and required courses. The overall attitude toward printing wiki pages for final exam use, regardless of student level of collaboration, was very positive (median ⫽ 5). Students felt the wiki pages were very useful on the final exam (median ⫽ 5). A majority of students (83%, 25/30) felt that wiki collaboration should remain an optional part of the elective course. The median likelihood a student would collaborate in a schoolrelated wiki was 3 and a nonschool-related wiki was 2. There was no statistical difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade (p ⫽ 0.5) or level of involvement and student-reported level of satisfaction (p ⫽ 0.2). Student and facilitator feedback Qualitative feedback gathered from students and faculty using open-ended questions was positive. Students provided comments such as: a great alternative to earn participation points; the wiki provided clarification and further knowledge about the area of study; collaboration in the wiki provided an additional way to communicate with peers. The faculty felt the wiki provided a continuation of in-class discussion, accommodated an increase in class size, pro-
vided another mechanism to engage students, and provided a means of participation for students who may not prefer to speak in class. Discussion The use of a wiki may serve as an innovative method to meet the challenges of class participation with larger class sizes. In this course, a wiki was used, not to redesign the elective, but rather to augment current course structure and offer an alternative means of assessment. Overall, students had a positive perception of the use of a wiki in the course. Just as in the classroom, students were able to lead discussions, facilitate conversations, and examine, synthesize and manipulate the information. A wiki provided an environment for those who do not like to speak in front of large groups to contribute and share their insight. They also create an area where student-directed learning can be fostered through collaboration and sharing of one’s knowledge with others, in a format where students from the millennial generation are comfortable. Research demonstrates that students want more technology to help them learn.4 The millennial generation is comfortable with environments that are rich in visual and audio imagery and they prefer to be actively engaged in activities.3,4,11 This generation sees their peer groups as valuable resources and interacts with each other face to face and through other forms of information communication technology (e.g., e-mail, instant messaging, texting).3,4,11 These changes in how the millennial generation experiences the world has caused a shift in their learning needs. In this elective course, the use of a wiki allowed students to use technology and become actively engaged in course material, communicate with their peers, articulate their thoughts, and provide alternative methods for explaining concepts. The use of a wiki provides a key advantage to other forms of group collaboration. It afforded students the ability to work with one another without regard to time or location. This is a benefit because many of today’s students may not live in close proximity to one another or the university, they may work, and/or they may have families to attend to. Students reported that difficulty coordinating schedules is a key reason students may not prefer to collaborate with each
Table 5 Student perceptions of the usefulness of the course wiki in aiding ability to meet course objectives Objective
Median*
To evaluate trial results for clinical applicability in patient care To review recommendations for patient care based on clinical evidence for each of the following disease states: hypertension, heart failure, atrial fibrillation/anticoagulation, diabetes, dyslipidemia To apply evidence from landmark trials to support therapeutic recommendations To critically evaluate primary literature, including clinical trial design To perform basic statistical calculations and interpret these calculations
4
* Scale 1-5: 5 ⫽ very useful; 1 ⫽ not very useful.
4 3–4 3–4 3
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
77
Table 6 Extent to which students would recommend the use of a wiki in other courses (n ⫽ 30) Course
Highly recommend n (%)
Recommend n (%)
Neutral n (%)
Not recommend n (%)
Future landmark trial courses Other elective courses Required courses
8 (27) 5 (17) 4 (13)
11 (37) 9 (30) 8 (27)
10 (33) 14 (47) 2 (40)
1 (3) 2 (7) 6 (20)
other. The use of a wiki eliminates coordination of schedules as a potential barrier to group work. The survey also showed that students may not like to collaborate because individuals do not contribute equally. Using a wiki provides a solution to these issues as well. All wiki programs provide an activity report. The activity report provides a full accounting for all changes, additions, and comments made by each individual. This activity report can be used to objectively evaluate a student’s level of participation and hold each student accountable for the amount of effort they contributed to a project. Results from the pre-survey showed students were neutral about collaboration. By using a wiki, educators may be able to eliminate potential barriers (coordination of schedules and equal individual contributions) that students identify related to collaboration with others. Studies have shown that stressing social elements of learning (cooperation and collaboration) fosters critical thinking and group development skills.4,11 These elements are key skills in the development of students as lifelong learners. Although the overall student and course facilitator perception of using a wiki in this elective was positive, faculty considering incorporation of a wiki into their courses should address logistics before implementation. In our experiences, use of a wiki was a time-intensive process. Each week, students’ handouts had to be uploaded onto the course wiki. Student’s wiki collaboration points had to be awarded, which required examining weekly activity reports to determine a student’s total participation points. At the beginning of the course, this process was fairly time consuming. It took time to learn how to view and understand the activity reports and objectively award wiki participation points. After a few weeks, this process became easier and more streamlined. It was of note that Blackboard, the course management software system used at our institution, is planning on incorporating wiki technology into its program. With a single platform to access, it is likely that this would streamline the process and reduce time expenditure. Based on our experiences, we recommend for those faculty considering the use of a wiki that it be first used in a small elective to gain experience before being implemented in large, required courses. Course facilitators have discussed using a wiki in future classes. One idea proposed was to have pairs of students develop their presentation handouts while using a wiki. This would target potential barriers to collaboration previously mentioned and would decrease facilitator time because the
handouts would not have to be uploaded. By using a wiki to develop student presentations, this would expose students who had not previously used the wiki to this technology. As students become familiar and comfortable with the wiki environment in preparation of their group project, the students may later be more likely to contribute throughout the course. Another suggested change was to have students load their handouts onto a wiki. Because a wiki is studentdirected, this fits with the philosophy and decreases instructor workload related to using a wiki. Furthermore, a private wiki where outside users cannot view the content should be used to decrease student anxiety and promote wiki contributions. A number of limitations to this study should be noted. First, this study was not designed to evaluate whether wiki collaboration impacted a student’s ability to learn, but instead provided a general assessment of student opinions regarding the use of a wiki in the elective course. In addition, results may be limited by a small sample size and lack of power to detect a difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade and level of satisfaction. The biggest limitation of this study is the self-reporting aspect of the survey. To maintain confidentiality, students’ grades and level of involvement were self-reported. Each student may have over- or underestimated the actual grade received or actual level of involvement, further skewing the ability to detect a difference. Although this study used a wiki in a relatively small elective course, future studies in pharmacy education might consider examination of the usefulness of a wiki in larger electives or required courses. For example, in a pharmacotherapeutics course, a case study could be posted by the faculty facilitator and groups of students would be required to work on the case before the workshop. This may allow the facilitator to identify and correct any “problem areas” before class and discuss the pharmacotherapeutic topic more in depth during class. Colleges of pharmacy would need to further investigate whether this larger scale approach to using a wiki would benefit students in such a way that would maximize their learning. Conclusions A plethora of technology options in the traditional classroom setting is outpacing educators’ abilities to understand
78
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
how to use them effectively. A clear purpose is required before technology can be incorporated into the classroom. That specified purpose should focus on using technology to enhance a student’s ability to comprehend and synthesize course material and should focus on maximizing a student’s development as a lifelong learner. The technology that was incorporated into the elective course described provided a trial in incorporating a new technology to meet growing demands for the class and to target a different way of learning. Although no statistically significant difference was found between student level of involvement and studentreported final grade or level of student-reported satisfaction, we learned that students who collaborated in the course wiki had positive attitudes toward the use of a wiki as an additional way to earn participation points, and students felt that collaboration in the course wiki provided clarification and further knowledge about course content.
3.
4.
5.
6. 7. 8. 9.
References 10. 1. Junco R, Mastrodicasa J. Connecting to the Net Generation: What Higher Education Professionals Need to Know About Today’s Students. Waldorf, MD: NASPA, 2007. 2. Hussar WJ, Bailey TM. Projections of Education Statistics to 2017 (NCES 2008-078). National Center for Education Statis-
11.
tics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Oblinger D. Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials: Understanding the New Students. Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE, 2003, pp 36 – 47. Roberts GR. Technology and learning expectations of the net generation. In: Oblinger DG, Oblinger JL, editors. Educating the Net Generation. Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE, 2005, pp 3.1–3.7. Kamel Boulos MN, Maramba I, Wheeler S. Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Med Educ 2006;6:41. Achterman D. Beyond Wikipedia. Teacher Librarian 2006;34: 19 –22. Bold M. Use of wikis on graduate course work. J Interact Grad Course Work 2006;12:5–14. Parker KR, Choa JT. Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisc J Knowl Learn Objects 2007;3:57–72. Ciesielka D. Using a wiki to meet graduate nursing education competencies in collaboration and community health. J Nurs Educ 2008;47:473– 476. Harris ST, Zeng X. Using wiki in an online record documentation systems course. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2008; 5:1–16. Nevgi A, Virtanen P, Niemi H. Supporting students to develop collaborative learning skills in technology-based environments. Br J Educ Technol 2006;37:937–947.
Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78 http://www.pharmacyteaching.com
Student perception of a wiki in a pharmacy elective course Sean M. Mirk, PharmDa,*, Jill S. Burkiewicz, PharmD, BCPSb, Kathy E. Komperda, PharmD, BCPSb b
a Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, Albany, NY Midwestern University Chicago College of Pharmacy, Downers Grove, IL
Abstract Objective: Third professional year pharmacy students enrolled in an elective on landmark trials were surveyed to describe student and course facilitator experiences with using a wiki, student satisfaction with wiki collaboration, and to evaluate whether level of involvement on a wiki was associated with student-reported performance or satisfaction. Course facilitators were also surveyed. Method: Pre- and post-surveys were used to evaluate experiences and satisfaction with wiki collaboration. Level of involvement was compared with student-reported course performance and wiki satisfaction. An e-mail survey with open-ended questions was sent to course facilitators asking them to describe their experience with a wiki. Statistical analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and use of the Kruskal-Wallis test (a priori ␣ ⬍ 0.05). Results: Based on responses from the pre-survey, 50% (14/28) of the students had previously accessed a wiki; none reported previously collaborating in a wiki. On the post-survey, the overall satisfaction with collaborating on the course wiki was neutral. A majority of students (63%) highly recommended or recommended using a wiki in future landmark trial classes. No difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade (p ⫽ 0.5) or level of satisfaction (p ⫽ 0.2) were noted. Course facilitators favored using a wiki because it accommodated an increase in class size and provided another way to engage students. Conclusion: Students that collaborated in the course wiki, and course facilitators, had positive attitudes toward the use of a wiki. Students also felt that the course wiki provided further clarification and knowledge about course content. © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. Keywords: Wiki; Collaboration; Web 2.0; Millennial generation; Pharmacy education
Introduction Members of the millennial generation have been entering pharmacy programs since 2000 and now represent the predominant generation in US colleges of pharmacy. More than 80 million individuals in the United States belong to this generation and by 2016 the millennial generation is
At the time of this investigation, Dr. Mirk was a PGY1 Pharmacy Practice Resident and Visiting Instructor at Midwestern University Chicago College of Pharmacy. * Corresponding author: Sean M. Mirk, PharmD, Assistant Professor, Albany College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 106 New Scotland Avenue, Albany, NY 12180. E-mail address: [email protected].
projected to account for about 75% of all college-bound students.1,2 These students have vastly different characteristics than previous generations. A typical student from the millennial generation enjoys being engaged in multiple activities simultaneously, is task oriented, and in general has a positive attitude. Compared with their predecessors, members of this generation prefer to collaborate with other individuals, are strong believers in teamwork, and prefer experiential activities.3,4 The millennial generation considers constantly being connected by technology to friends, family, and information a priority. They have a collective sense of community both online and in the real world and naturally gravitate toward technology.3,4 The ubiquitous use of technology among students in the millennial generation has created a “gap” between students
1877-1297/10/$ – see front matter © 2010 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved. doi:10.1016/j.cptl.2010.01.002
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
and educators; many students cannot remember a time without a computer, whereas some educators are still struggling to use them. Many college-age students (79%) indicate that the internet has had a positive impact on their college experience.3 However, many students indicate that the use of technology by educators is uninspiring.4 Previous research has demonstrated that a wiki may provide an easy-to-use forum for both students and educators to incorporate technology into the educational experience.5 A wiki may help to close the technology “gap” between educators and students. A wiki functions like a collaborative word processing document but is viewed like a web page. Multiple users are able to contribute to the formation of one dynamic document, at different times and in different geographic locations. One of the benefits of a wiki is that the educator is able to monitor group progress and track who has contributed to a group collaborative effort. These features provide instructors with the ability to provide separate individual grades on group assignments. The use of a wiki across all educational settings is growing as a way to discuss and analyze classroom topics, share information between peers, and as a method to collaborate on group projects.6 – 8 In general, a wiki does not require a high level of technical skill from students, has low resource demands from faculty or the institution, and has been well-accepted by students.7,8 Also, using a wiki has the potential to make learning more student-centered, self-directed, and less instructor-centered.6,7 In the classroom, a wiki has been used in primary, secondary, and graduate-level education. Limited information is available on the use of a wiki in health professions coursework. In a graduate nursing education program, a wiki was introduced to help students meet competencies in community health.9 Overall, the graduate students viewed the use of a wiki favorably and considered it a valuable tool for collaboration and communication among peers. The use of a wiki has also been incorporated into online courses in health professions education.10 Harris and Zeng incorporated a wiki into their online health information management course within a baccalaureate program. In this course, students and faculty used a wiki to exchange thoughts related to a group project presentation. Students built the materials needed for their final projects on the platform, whereas faculty distributed announcements and provided prompt feedback to comments posted. The faculty also provided comments on group progress and provided minor edits to student work as needed. Students felt that the use of a wiki helped them learn, interact, and reflect in the online class; and it helped with collaboration and communication with group members and faculty. Although the results of this study are overall positive, it is important to note that this cohort of students may find the use of a wiki more helpful because of the nature of the course focusing on information management. Although the use of a wiki has been used successfully in higher education, little is known about its use in pharmacy
73
education. In this case-based study, the use of a wiki within a pharmacy elective course was examined. Objectives Wikis have been used in classroom settings; however, the use of a wiki in pharmacy education has been relatively unexplored. The objectives of this study were to (1) describe student and course facilitator experiences with using a wiki, (2) describe student satisfaction with collaborating on a wiki, and (3) evaluate whether level of involvement on a wiki was associated with student-reported performance or satisfaction. Methods Classroom implementation Elective course. A wiki was implemented in an elective course entitled “Landmark Trials in Primary Care.” This elective course was established in 2004 as a two-hour credit course and is open to third professional year pharmacy students. The course is designed to develop students’ ability to understand, interpret, evaluate, and apply evidence from landmark trials to support therapeutic recommendations and clinical applicability. The course meets weekly for two hours over 10 weeks. Pairs of students present a landmark trial for each class period; two trials are covered during each class. Students are required to present a 10- to 15-minute overview of the landmark trial. Students must also create a handout that highlights the clinical pearls of the landmark trial. A course Blackboard site was maintained to provide announcements to students. The course was facilitated by four faculty members. Each week a faculty member was designated as the main facilitator for that class period. The role of the main facilitator was to lead and facilitate student discussion regarding clinical applicability, and interpretation and evaluation of literature. In-class participation points were awarded to students who contributed to the discussion. Since the course was first offered, class size has grown substantially from approximately 10 students (course cap 20 students) to a new cap of 32 students based on growing demand. This growth has created a significant challenge, as it is difficult for each student to meaningfully participate during each class period. Indirectly, this has created an assessment system in which participation points are awarded to students more liberally than in previous offerings of this course and has created competition among students to have their opinion heard. To combat this issue, a wiki was incorporated during the Fall 2007 course offering, in part, to provide an alternative means for assessment of participation and collaboration. Wiki incorporation. The purpose of using a wiki in this course was to allow students to collaborate and share in-
74
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
Table 1 Grading rubric to score wiki collaboration Scale
Level of contribution
Example
5
Significant contribution
3
Modest contribution
1
Limited contribution
● ● ● ● ● ●
Addition of unique and relevant student-derived information Consistently led/facilitated wiki discussion Addition of snippets of unique and relevant student-derived information Limited involvement in leading/facilitating discussions Addition of limited unique and relevant student-derived information Answering questions or posting comments with contributions limited to agree/disagree with others
formation related to landmark trials in primary care. Wetpaint.com was selected as the course wiki. It is an open-source program that is separate from the classroom’s Blackboard site. Within this program, students and course facilitators were able to create and modify wiki pages. To incorporate a wiki into the elective course, the following changes were implemented: student handouts were uploaded to the course wiki at the end of the class period by the course coordinator; the uploaded handout compilation served as a wiki page for further editing/discussion by the students; students were allowed to freely edit the information; and students could earn wiki collaboration points to supplement in-class participation points. On the final exam, the wiki pages were printed for students and served as a reference on the final exam. Although facilitators could have contributed to the course wiki to foster student contributions, it was decided that the course wiki would be solely student-derived information. On the first day of class, the course wiki was introduced and a guide was provided. The wiki guide provided information on the purpose of the course wiki, how to create a user profile for Wetpaint.com, how to become a writer for the course wiki, and how wiki collaboration was graded. For wiki collaboration points to count towards the student’s overall participation points, the following must have occurred: wiki collaboration must have occurred between the end of class on Friday and the start of class on the following Friday; and wiki collaboration must have directly involved the landmark trial currently discussed in class or concepts related to literature evaluation. Table 1 outlines a 5-3-1 grading rubric developed to score wiki collaboration. Only one individual (the lead author of this manuscript) was involved in the scoring so as to maintain as much consistency in grading wiki collaboration as possible. Students could earn participation points via in-class participation, wiki participation, or a combination of the two. Total participation points each week represented the sum of in-class participation points and wiki collaboration points, not to exceed the maximum number of points (5) allowed for each class period. Total class participation points accounted for 22.5% of the total course grade. Survey Pre- and post-course surveys were developed by the study investigators and were shared at a faculty forum for
feedback and refinement before administration. Pre- and post-course surveys were then administered to all students enrolled in the course on the first and last day of class, respectively. Survey responses were anonymous and confidential. To maintain confidentiality, a codeword pairing system was used. Students were instructed to create a codeword and to write this codeword on the pre-course survey. For survey pairing, the students were instructed to write the same codeword on the post-course survey. It was recommended to the students that they avoid using an identifiable codeword such as a social security number or student identification number. Students not present on the first day of class were excluded from the pre-course survey. The survey study was submitted and granted exempt status by the Institutional Review Board at the university where the study was conducted. The pre-course survey contained 13 questions. The questions were developed (1) to evaluate a student’s previous knowledge about wikis; (2) to evaluate whether students had collaborated in a wiki before the course; and (3) to evaluate students’ perceptions and barriers to collaborating with others on projects. Students were asked if they knew “what a wiki was” and to correctly identify a wiki. If a student had used a wiki in the past, they were asked to describe how useful they found wikis and their attitudes toward wikis (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). The students were also asked to describe in what way(s) they had used a wiki, as well as if they had collaborated in a wiki before the course. If the student had collaborated in a wiki before the course, they were asked to describe their previous degree of involvement (scale: 1 ⫽ not very active; 2 ⫽ not active; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ active; 5 ⫽ very active) and level of satisfaction with wiki collaboration (scale: 1 ⫽ not very satisfied; 2 ⫽ not satisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ very satisfied). To evaluate student perception related to collaboration with others on projects, three survey items were developed. First, students were asked whether they do not prefer to collaborate or work with others on projects (scale: 1 ⫽ strongly disagree; 2 ⫽ disagree; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ agree; 5 ⫽ strongly agree). Students were then asked for reason(s) they do not prefer to collaborate or work with others. Finally, students were asked to rate their overall satisfaction on the work produced when collaborating or working with
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78 Table 2 Pre-survey responses to students who have used a wiki in the past Question Reported knowing what a wiki was, % (n) Reported using a wiki in past, % (n) Usefulness of a wiki, median Attitudes toward a wiki, median Reported using a wiki in the following capacities, % (n) As a way to search for information As a collaborator on a wiki As a way to communicate/discuss ideas with others In another capacity not listed (explain)
Responses 43 (12/28) 50 (14/28) 4* 4†
100 (14/14) 0 (0/14) 0 (0/14) 0 (0/14)
* Scale 1–5: 5 ⫽ very useful; 1 ⫽ not very useful. † Scale 1–5: 5 ⫽ very positive; 1 ⫽ very negative.
75
identify their expected course grade and to provide additional written feedback about using the course wiki. A qualitative survey with open ended questions was sent via e-mail to course facilitators who requested feedback on the strengths and limitations of using a wiki in this elective course. Statistical analysis Data were compiled and statistically analyzed with SPSS software (version 15.0, SPSS Inc., Chicago, IL). Descriptive statistics were used to report survey results. The median was used to describe the measure of central tendency for all ordinal data. A Kruskal-Wallis test (a priori ␣ ⬍ 0.05) was used to compare level of involvement to student-reported course performance and to compare level of involvement to student-reported satisfaction. Results
others (scale: 1 ⫽ not very satisfied; 2 ⫽ not satisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ very satisfied). After completion of the final exam, the post-course survey was administered. The post-course survey contained 14 questions. These questions were developed to describe the student’s experience and satisfaction with a wiki and were different than the questions in the pre-survey. Students also reported their expected course grade and provided feedback and recommendations for using a wiki. Students that reported collaborating in the course wiki were asked a series of further questions to evaluate their extent of collaboration (scale: 1 ⫽ not very active; 2 ⫽ not active; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ active; 5 ⫽ very active), level of satisfaction (scale: 1 ⫽ highly dissatisfied; 2 ⫽ dissatisfied; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ satisfied; 5 ⫽ highly satisfied), and the ability of the course wiki to help the student meet course objectives (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). To assess time commitment, students were also asked to report frequency of wiki collaboration (weekly, every other week, 2–3 times, only once) and reported number of hours per week they spent collaborating on the course wiki (self-reported hours/ week). All students were asked whether they would recommend a wiki for future offerings of this course, other elective courses, and required courses. Students were asked to rate the likelihood of collaborating in other school and nonschool-related wikis (scale: 1 ⫽ very unlikely; 2 ⫽ unlikely; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ likely; 5 ⫽ very unlikely) and their attitudes toward (scale: 1 ⫽ very negative; 2 ⫽ negative; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ positive; 5 ⫽ very positive) and usefulness of printing wiki pages for the final exam (scale: 1 ⫽ not very useful; 2 ⫽ not useful; 3 ⫽ neutral; 4 ⫽ useful; 5 ⫽ very useful). As an overall assessment, students were also asked to identify whether wiki collaboration should be a required part of this elective course. Finally, students were invited to
Pre-survey results Twenty-eight (28) students completed the pre-survey. Of the 28 that completed the pre-survey, 43% (12/28) reported knowing what a wiki was; 50% (14/28) reported previously accessing a wiki; none of the respondents reported previously collaborating on a wiki. The median overall response for how useful a wiki is and attitudes toward a wiki was 4 (Table 2). All students reported using a wiki to search for information. Fifty-four percent (15/28) of all responses correctly identified an example of a wiki. Overall, the median response for whether students do not like to collaborate with others on projects was 3 and overall satisfaction with work produced when collaborating with others was 4. Table 3 includes reported reasons students do not like to collaborate with others. Post-survey Thirty (30) students completed the post-survey. Of those who completed the post-survey, 77% (23/30) reported collaborating on the course wiki. The median overall extent of collaboration on the course wiki was 3. There was a wide variety in reported frequencies and the majority of students spent ⱕ30 minutes per week collaborating on the course wiki (Table 4). Table 3 Pre-survey responses to reasons students do not prefer to collaborate with others (n ⫽ 28) Reasons
Response, n (%)
Coordination of schedules makes it challenging Individuals do not contribute equally Time-consuming I like to work independently I like working in groups
19 (68) 16 (57) 14 (50) 13 (46) 3 (11)
76
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
Table 4 Student-reported frequency and hours per week spent on the course wiki Question Frequency of participating/collaborating Weekly Every other week Only 2–3 times Only once Hours spent per week participating/collaborating ⱕ0.5 hours/week ⬎0.5 hours/week
Responses, % (n)* 35 (8) 13 (3) 30 (7) 22 (5) 65 (15) 35 (8)
* n ⫽ 23
The median overall satisfaction with collaborating on the wiki was 3. Table 5 outlines the student-perceived utility of the course wiki in aiding their ability to meet course objectives. Table 6 assesses how likely students would be to recommend use of a wiki in future landmark trials courses, other elective courses, and required courses. The overall attitude toward printing wiki pages for final exam use, regardless of student level of collaboration, was very positive (median ⫽ 5). Students felt the wiki pages were very useful on the final exam (median ⫽ 5). A majority of students (83%, 25/30) felt that wiki collaboration should remain an optional part of the elective course. The median likelihood a student would collaborate in a schoolrelated wiki was 3 and a nonschool-related wiki was 2. There was no statistical difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade (p ⫽ 0.5) or level of involvement and student-reported level of satisfaction (p ⫽ 0.2). Student and facilitator feedback Qualitative feedback gathered from students and faculty using open-ended questions was positive. Students provided comments such as: a great alternative to earn participation points; the wiki provided clarification and further knowledge about the area of study; collaboration in the wiki provided an additional way to communicate with peers. The faculty felt the wiki provided a continuation of in-class discussion, accommodated an increase in class size, pro-
vided another mechanism to engage students, and provided a means of participation for students who may not prefer to speak in class. Discussion The use of a wiki may serve as an innovative method to meet the challenges of class participation with larger class sizes. In this course, a wiki was used, not to redesign the elective, but rather to augment current course structure and offer an alternative means of assessment. Overall, students had a positive perception of the use of a wiki in the course. Just as in the classroom, students were able to lead discussions, facilitate conversations, and examine, synthesize and manipulate the information. A wiki provided an environment for those who do not like to speak in front of large groups to contribute and share their insight. They also create an area where student-directed learning can be fostered through collaboration and sharing of one’s knowledge with others, in a format where students from the millennial generation are comfortable. Research demonstrates that students want more technology to help them learn.4 The millennial generation is comfortable with environments that are rich in visual and audio imagery and they prefer to be actively engaged in activities.3,4,11 This generation sees their peer groups as valuable resources and interacts with each other face to face and through other forms of information communication technology (e.g., e-mail, instant messaging, texting).3,4,11 These changes in how the millennial generation experiences the world has caused a shift in their learning needs. In this elective course, the use of a wiki allowed students to use technology and become actively engaged in course material, communicate with their peers, articulate their thoughts, and provide alternative methods for explaining concepts. The use of a wiki provides a key advantage to other forms of group collaboration. It afforded students the ability to work with one another without regard to time or location. This is a benefit because many of today’s students may not live in close proximity to one another or the university, they may work, and/or they may have families to attend to. Students reported that difficulty coordinating schedules is a key reason students may not prefer to collaborate with each
Table 5 Student perceptions of the usefulness of the course wiki in aiding ability to meet course objectives Objective
Median*
To evaluate trial results for clinical applicability in patient care To review recommendations for patient care based on clinical evidence for each of the following disease states: hypertension, heart failure, atrial fibrillation/anticoagulation, diabetes, dyslipidemia To apply evidence from landmark trials to support therapeutic recommendations To critically evaluate primary literature, including clinical trial design To perform basic statistical calculations and interpret these calculations
4
* Scale 1-5: 5 ⫽ very useful; 1 ⫽ not very useful.
4 3–4 3–4 3
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
77
Table 6 Extent to which students would recommend the use of a wiki in other courses (n ⫽ 30) Course
Highly recommend n (%)
Recommend n (%)
Neutral n (%)
Not recommend n (%)
Future landmark trial courses Other elective courses Required courses
8 (27) 5 (17) 4 (13)
11 (37) 9 (30) 8 (27)
10 (33) 14 (47) 2 (40)
1 (3) 2 (7) 6 (20)
other. The use of a wiki eliminates coordination of schedules as a potential barrier to group work. The survey also showed that students may not like to collaborate because individuals do not contribute equally. Using a wiki provides a solution to these issues as well. All wiki programs provide an activity report. The activity report provides a full accounting for all changes, additions, and comments made by each individual. This activity report can be used to objectively evaluate a student’s level of participation and hold each student accountable for the amount of effort they contributed to a project. Results from the pre-survey showed students were neutral about collaboration. By using a wiki, educators may be able to eliminate potential barriers (coordination of schedules and equal individual contributions) that students identify related to collaboration with others. Studies have shown that stressing social elements of learning (cooperation and collaboration) fosters critical thinking and group development skills.4,11 These elements are key skills in the development of students as lifelong learners. Although the overall student and course facilitator perception of using a wiki in this elective was positive, faculty considering incorporation of a wiki into their courses should address logistics before implementation. In our experiences, use of a wiki was a time-intensive process. Each week, students’ handouts had to be uploaded onto the course wiki. Student’s wiki collaboration points had to be awarded, which required examining weekly activity reports to determine a student’s total participation points. At the beginning of the course, this process was fairly time consuming. It took time to learn how to view and understand the activity reports and objectively award wiki participation points. After a few weeks, this process became easier and more streamlined. It was of note that Blackboard, the course management software system used at our institution, is planning on incorporating wiki technology into its program. With a single platform to access, it is likely that this would streamline the process and reduce time expenditure. Based on our experiences, we recommend for those faculty considering the use of a wiki that it be first used in a small elective to gain experience before being implemented in large, required courses. Course facilitators have discussed using a wiki in future classes. One idea proposed was to have pairs of students develop their presentation handouts while using a wiki. This would target potential barriers to collaboration previously mentioned and would decrease facilitator time because the
handouts would not have to be uploaded. By using a wiki to develop student presentations, this would expose students who had not previously used the wiki to this technology. As students become familiar and comfortable with the wiki environment in preparation of their group project, the students may later be more likely to contribute throughout the course. Another suggested change was to have students load their handouts onto a wiki. Because a wiki is studentdirected, this fits with the philosophy and decreases instructor workload related to using a wiki. Furthermore, a private wiki where outside users cannot view the content should be used to decrease student anxiety and promote wiki contributions. A number of limitations to this study should be noted. First, this study was not designed to evaluate whether wiki collaboration impacted a student’s ability to learn, but instead provided a general assessment of student opinions regarding the use of a wiki in the elective course. In addition, results may be limited by a small sample size and lack of power to detect a difference between student level of involvement and student-reported final grade and level of satisfaction. The biggest limitation of this study is the self-reporting aspect of the survey. To maintain confidentiality, students’ grades and level of involvement were self-reported. Each student may have over- or underestimated the actual grade received or actual level of involvement, further skewing the ability to detect a difference. Although this study used a wiki in a relatively small elective course, future studies in pharmacy education might consider examination of the usefulness of a wiki in larger electives or required courses. For example, in a pharmacotherapeutics course, a case study could be posted by the faculty facilitator and groups of students would be required to work on the case before the workshop. This may allow the facilitator to identify and correct any “problem areas” before class and discuss the pharmacotherapeutic topic more in depth during class. Colleges of pharmacy would need to further investigate whether this larger scale approach to using a wiki would benefit students in such a way that would maximize their learning. Conclusions A plethora of technology options in the traditional classroom setting is outpacing educators’ abilities to understand
78
S.M. Mirk et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 2 (2010) 72–78
how to use them effectively. A clear purpose is required before technology can be incorporated into the classroom. That specified purpose should focus on using technology to enhance a student’s ability to comprehend and synthesize course material and should focus on maximizing a student’s development as a lifelong learner. The technology that was incorporated into the elective course described provided a trial in incorporating a new technology to meet growing demands for the class and to target a different way of learning. Although no statistically significant difference was found between student level of involvement and studentreported final grade or level of student-reported satisfaction, we learned that students who collaborated in the course wiki had positive attitudes toward the use of a wiki as an additional way to earn participation points, and students felt that collaboration in the course wiki provided clarification and further knowledge about course content.
3.
4.
5.
6. 7. 8. 9.
References 10. 1. Junco R, Mastrodicasa J. Connecting to the Net Generation: What Higher Education Professionals Need to Know About Today’s Students. Waldorf, MD: NASPA, 2007. 2. Hussar WJ, Bailey TM. Projections of Education Statistics to 2017 (NCES 2008-078). National Center for Education Statis-
11.
tics, Institute of Education Sciences. Washington, DC: US Department of Education. Oblinger D. Boomers, Gen-Xers, and Millennials: Understanding the New Students. Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE, 2003, pp 36 – 47. Roberts GR. Technology and learning expectations of the net generation. In: Oblinger DG, Oblinger JL, editors. Educating the Net Generation. Washington, DC: EDUCAUSE, 2005, pp 3.1–3.7. Kamel Boulos MN, Maramba I, Wheeler S. Wikis, blogs and podcasts: a new generation of Web-based tools for virtual collaborative clinical practice and education. BMC Med Educ 2006;6:41. Achterman D. Beyond Wikipedia. Teacher Librarian 2006;34: 19 –22. Bold M. Use of wikis on graduate course work. J Interact Grad Course Work 2006;12:5–14. Parker KR, Choa JT. Wiki as a teaching tool. Interdisc J Knowl Learn Objects 2007;3:57–72. Ciesielka D. Using a wiki to meet graduate nursing education competencies in collaboration and community health. J Nurs Educ 2008;47:473– 476. Harris ST, Zeng X. Using wiki in an online record documentation systems course. Perspect Health Inf Manag 2008; 5:1–16. Nevgi A, Virtanen P, Niemi H. Supporting students to develop collaborative learning skills in technology-based environments. Br J Educ Technol 2006;37:937–947.