CoChat
Sign Up
Cited by 53Problem and Project Based LearningInnovations in Medical EducationInnovative Teaching Methods

An Online Debate Series for First-Year Pharmacy Students

Open access
Lin, Swu-Jane, Crawford, Stephanie Y.·2007·American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
DOI 10.5688/aj710112PMC PMC1847552
Open this paper in CoChat — free account

Abstract

Objectives This article describes an online debate series that was developed as a new component to an introductory core course for first-professional year pharmacy students. Objectives were to facilitate the group process, introduce controversial issues related to the US healthcare system, improve critical thinking and communication skills, enable students' ability to analyze and evaluate evidence, help develop skills in formulating written arguments, and encourage tolerance of diverse points of view. Design One hundred sixty-two students were assigned to 40 teams (half assigned to argue as "Pros" and half as "Cons") and paired into 20 debating groups. The paired teams posted 3 arguments in an online forum alternatively over a 12-week period. The winning teams were determined by a panel of 3 judges. Assessment Feedback from the judges was posted online and summarized in an in-class discussion. Thematic analysis of qualitative data from students and faculty members demonstrated the effectiveness of the online debate component in helping students work together in a group, learn alternative sides of complex issues, and write persuasive arguments. Conclusion This novel online-debate forum was a feasible teaching and learning strategy, which helped pharmacy students improve their communication skills and critical thinking, expanded their scope of knowledge, and provided a platform for group process.

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.5688/aj710112

Cites

Statistics

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Claims other papers make about this one

Each is checked against this paper’s own text: does it say what the citing paper says it does?

  • Debates have been employed in pharmacy education for active learning and assessment activities in various contexts, including advocacy on ethical and legal issues, controversial policy issues in the US healthcare system, critical thinking and communication skills, evidence-based analysis and evaluation, and pharmacotherapy.

    “Debates, however, have been employed in pharmacy education for active learning and assessment activities in various contexts (e.g.advocacy on ethical and legal issues, controversial policy issues in the US healthcare system, critical thinking and communication skills, evidence-based analysis and evaluation, and pharmacotherapy) (Lin & Crawford, 2007;”

    From Students’ performance and perceptions of mock trials as a teaching and assessment activity over three years at two institutions (2024) · cites this paper as Lin & Crawford, 2007

    Split into 2 atoms — 1 confirmed, 1 partially supported, 0 disputed, 0 misattributed, 0 unverifiable. Expand the claim to see per-atom verdicts.

    Experimental — accuracy not yet measured

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Cites

No references could be resolved yet.

Research works printed but not linked: 21

  1. [1]1. Keller T, Whittaker J, Burke T. Student debates in policy courses: promoting police practice skills and knowledge through active learning. J Educ Soc Work. 2001;37:343-55.
  2. [4]4. Candela L, Michael SR, Mitchell S. Ethical debates: enhancing critical thinking in nursing students. Nurse Educ. 2003;28:37-9.
  3. [5]5. Scannapieco FA. Formal debate: an active learning strategy. J Dent Educ. 1997;61:955-61.
  4. [6]6. Lieberman SA, Trumble JM, Smith ER. The impact of structured student debates on critical thinking and informatics skills of second-year medical students. Acad Med. 2000;75:S84-6.
  5. [7]7. Crone J. Using panel debates to increase student involvement in the introductory sociology class. Teach Sociol. 1997;25:214-8.
  6. [8]8. Combs H, Bourne S. The renaissance of educational debate: results of a five-year study of the use of debate in business education. J Excell Coll Teach. 1994;5:57-67.
  7. [10]10. Poirier S. Active involvement of students in the American Health Care System. Am J Pharm Educ. 1997;61:91-7.
  8. [11]11. Erstad B, Murphy J. Developing critical interaction skills in students: debating clinical pharmacokinetic controversies. Am J Pharm Educ. 1994;58:440-5.
  9. [12]12. Erstad BL. Honing your debate skills - dealing with other health professionals. ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting. 2002;37:30
  10. [13]13. Krikorian SA. Use of the debate process to teach critical appraisal: students' perspectives. ASHP Midyear Clinical Meeting. 1996;31:223E.
  11. [14]14. Conole G, Hall M, Smith S. An evaluation of an online course for medical practitioners. Educ Technol Soc. 2002;5:66-75.
  12. [15]15. Pilkington R, Walker S. Facilitating debate in networked learning: reflecting on online synchronous discussion in higher education. Instr Sci. 2003;31:41-63.
  13. [16]16. Klemm W. What's wrong with online discussions and how to fix it. Presented at the WebNet 2000 World Conference on the WWW and Internet Proceedings, San Antonio, TX, Oct 30-Nov 4, 2000. Available at: http://www.eric.ed.gov/ERICDocs/data/ericdocs2/ content\_storage\_01/0000000b/80/24/56/2b.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2006.
  14. [17]17. Joung S, Keller J. The effects of high-structure cooperative versus low-structure collaborative design of decision change, critical thinking, and interaction pattern during online debates. Paper presented at the 27th Association for Educational Communications and Technology conference, Chicago, IL, Oct 19-23, 2004. Available at: http://eric.ed.gov/ERICWebPortal/Home.portal?\_nfpb 5 true&\_pageLabel 5 RecordDetails&ERICExtSearch\_SearchValue\_0 - 5 ED485151&ERICExtSearch\_SearchType\_0 5 eric\_accno& objectId 5 0900000b80249ec8. Accessed May 4, 2006.
  15. [19]19. Jeong A. The effects of communication style and message function in triggering responses and critical discussion in computer-supported collaborative argumentation. Paper presented at the 27th Association for Educational Communications and Technology Conference, Chicago, Ill, Oct 19-23, 2004. Available at: http://scholar.google.com/ - scholar?hl 5 en&lr 5 &q 5 cache:WyZuAmdf23QJ:dev2244801.sp01.fsu.edu/Research/CommunicationStyles/ - CommStyles\_AllanJeong\_AECT2004Proceedings.pdf 1 Jeong 1 online 1 debates. Accessed May 4, 2006.
  16. [20]20. Cook J, Leathwood C, Oriogun P. Online conferencing with multimedia students: monitoring gender participation and promoting critical debate. Second Annual LTSN-ICS Conference, London; 2001. Available at: http://www.ics.ltsn.ac.uk/pub/conf2001/papers/ Cook%20paper.pdf. Accessed May 4, 2006.
  17. [22]22. McNaught C, Kennedy D, Majoor J. Designing online learning sites to cater for learning needs. Proceedings of the International Conference on Computers in Education. Available at: http:// ieeexplore.ieee.org/iel5/8445/26602/ - 01185999.pdf?arnumber 5 1185999. Accessed May 4, 2006.
  18. [24]24. Daniel DL. Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Health and Society. Guilford, Conn: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2003.
  19. [25]25. Goldberg R. Taking Sides: Clashing Views on Controversial Issues in Drugs and Society. Guilford, Conn: McGraw-Hill/Dushkin, 2004.
  20. [26]26. Leo J. Attention Deficit Disorder: Good science or good marketing? Skeptic. 2000;8:63-9.
  21. [30]30. Omelicheva MY. Global politics on trial: using educational debate for teaching controversies in world affairs. Int Stud Perspect. 2006;7:172-86.

Cited by

Sorted by citations

Authors
Lin, S.-J., & Crawford, S. Y.
Affiliations
University of Illinois Chicago (US)
Corresponding author
Lin, Swu-Jane
ORCID
Venue
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2007-09
Volume
71
Issue
1
Pages
12
ISSN
  • 0002-9459 (ISSN-L)
  • 1553-6467
DOI
10.5688/aj710112
PMC
PMC1847552
OpenAlex
W2072717223
Cited by
53
References
0
Citations by year
2026: 2 · 2024: 3 · 2023: 5 · 2022: 2 · 2021: 4 · 2020: 3 · 2019: 3 · 2018: 9 · 2017: 6 · 2016: 1 · 2015: 2 · 2014: 1 · 2013: 5 · 2012: 2
FWCI
2.94
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
Locations
  • American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed Central (publishedVersion)
  • PubMed (publishedVersion)
Topics
  • Social Sciences › Education › Problem and Project Based Learning
  • Health Sciences › Medicine › Public Health, Environmental and Occupational Health › Innovations in Medical Education
  • Social Sciences › Education › Innovative Teaching Methods
Keywords
online debate, first-year pharmacy students, pharmacy education, critical thinking, communication skills, argumentative writing, online forums, group work, argumentation, United States health care system
MeSH terms
Communication, Computer-Assisted Instruction, Group Processes, Humans, Students, Pharmacy, Teaching, Internet

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review