Hostname: page-component-848d4c4894-4hhp2 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2024-04-30T19:26:42.274Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Applying the Principles of Adult Learning to the Teaching of Psychopharmacology: Audience Response Systems

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  07 November 2014

Extract

Medical presentations can be enhanced by systematically collecting audience feedback. This is readily accomplished with polling systems, called audience response systems. Several systems are now available that are small, inexpensive, and can be readily integrated into standard powerpoint presentations without the need for a technician. Use of audience response systems has several advantages. These include improving attentiveness, increasing learning, polling anonymously, tracking individual and group responses, gauging audience understanding, adding interactivity and fun, and evaluating both participant learning and instructor teaching. Tips for how to write questions for audience response systems are also included.

Type
Trends in Psychopharmacology
Copyright
Copyright © Cambridge University Press 2009

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

References

REFERENCES

1.Stahl, SM, Davis, RL. Applying the principles of adult education to the teaching of psychopharmacology: overview and finding the focus. CNS Spectr. 2009;14:179182CrossRefGoogle Scholar
2.Stahl, SM, Davis, RL. Applying the principles of adult education to the teaching of psychopharmacology: Storyboarding a presentation and the rule of small multiples. CNS Spectr. 2009;14:288294.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
3.Stahl, SM. Davis, RL. BestPractices for Medical Educators. NEI Press; Carlsbad, CA: 2009.Google Scholar
4.Kaleta, R, Joosten, T. Student response systems: a University of Wisconsin study of clickers. Educause Center for Applied Research Bulletin. 2007;10:112.Google Scholar