Development of an Instructor-Provided Highlighting with Structured Question Prompts Tool for Article-Based Pharmacology Learning: A Design Study
Article Sidebar
Main Article Content
Abstract
Objective: To develop a prototype Instructor-Provided Highlighting with Structured Question Prompts (IHSQP) tool for article-based pharmacology learning as a reading scaffold that integrates instructor-marked evidence locations within an article with a progressive set of structured question prompts, and to systematically describe the tool structure, development process, and internal quality assurance. Methods: This study was Phase 1 of a two-phase design study. Phase 1 focused on developing and specifying the prototype tool before its evaluation with learners in Phase 2. The design was informed by Cognitive Load Theory, signaling principles, structured instructional scaffolding, and outcome-based education. The development process consisted of seven steps: context and learning-outcome analysis, specification of activity-level learning outcomes, selection of a source article, construction of a question blueprint, development of a master evidence workbook, preparation of IHSQP tool documents, and internal quality assurance. Results: The development process resulted in a prototype IHSQP tool for the pharmacology of antiglaucoma medications. The tool consisted of student-facing and instructor-facing documents. It included five progressive task blocks with four questions per set, comprising 20 structured question prompts, sequenced from foundational understanding to clinical reasoning related to treatment decisions. The highlighted article contained 58 evidence units. The source of each unit was identified as either evidence from the source article or author-created visual scaffolds. Internal quality assurance confirmed that all evidence units were traceable to their original sources and that every question was supported by sufficient evidence for answering. Conclusion: IHSQP is a prototype reading scaffold that systematically links questions, evidence, and pharmacological reasoning. Its design rationale and development process are transparent and traceable, providing a foundation for subsequent evaluation with students in Phase 2. However, the prototype has undergone only internal quality assurance by the research team and has not yet been evaluated for content validity by external experts.
Article Details
This work is licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution-NonCommercial-NoDerivatives 4.0 International License.
ผลการวิจัยและความคิดเห็นที่ปรากฏในบทความถือเป็นความคิดเห็นและอยู่ในความรับผิดชอบของผู้นิพนธ์ มิใช่ความเห็นหรือความรับผิดชอบของกองบรรณาธิการ หรือคณะเภสัชศาสตร์ มหาวิทยาลัยสงขลานครินทร์ ทั้งนี้ไม่รวมความผิดพลาดอันเกิดจากการพิมพ์ บทความที่ได้รับการเผยแพร่โดยวารสารเภสัชกรรมไทยถือเป็นสิทธิ์ของวารสารฯ
References
Fasinu PS, Wilborn TW. Pharmacology education in the medical curriculum: challenges and opportunities for improvement. Pharmacol Res Perspect 2024; 12: e1178.
White PJ, Guilding C, Angelo T, Kelly JP, Gorman L, Tucker SJ, et al. Identifying the core concepts of pharmacology education: a global initiative. Br J Pharmacol 2023; 180: 1197-209.
Khurshid F, O'Connor E, Thompson R, Hegazi I. Pedagogical interventions and their influences on university-level students learning pharmacology: a realist review. Front Educ 2023; 8: 1190672.
Baram-Tsabari A, Yarden A. Text genre as a factor in the formation of scientific literacy. J Res Sci Teach 2005; 42: 403-28.
Goudsouzian LK, Hsu JL. Reading primary scientific literature: approaches for teaching students in the undergraduate STEM classroom. CBE Life Sci Educ 2023; 22: es3.
Krontiris-Litowitz J. Using primary literature to teach science literacy to introductory biology students. J Microbiol Biol Educ 2013; 14: 66-77.
Yarden A, Norris SP, Phillips LM. Adapted primary literature: the use of authentic scientific texts in secondary schools. Dordrecht: Springer; 2015.
Nithipaichit R, Kittiboonyakun P, Kerdchantuk P, Suttiruksa S, Phumart P. Development of teaching approaches for the course on English skill in pharmacy by using concept mapping. Thai Journal of Pharmacy Practice 2023; 15: 153-66.
Song K, Na B, Kwon HJ. A comprehensive review of research on reading comprehension strategies of learners reading in English-as-an-additional language. Educ Res Rev 2020; 29: 100308.
Seangpakdeejit R, Mungkomsankul CM, Chaisri P, Maneekanon O. A qualitative research: reading strategies in English academic reading. J Humanit Soc Sci Loei Rajabhat Univ 2018; 1: 33-51.
Young JQ, Van Merrienboer J, Durning S, Ten Cate O. Cognitive load theory: implications for medical education: AMEE Guide No. 86. Med Teach 2014; 36: 371-84.
Van Merrienboer JJG, Sweller J. Cognitive load theory in health professional education: design principles and strategies. Med Educ 2010; 44:85-93.
Gurney MK, Buckley K, Karr S. Evaluation of a journal club preparatory session on student confidence for a graded journal club. Curr Pharm Teach Learn 2019; 11: 1221-30.
Almuzaini OK, Wali SM, Harbi MH, Azhari HF. Evaluating the impact of a journal club activity on pharmacy students' learning outcomes and professional skills development. BMC Med Educ 2025; 25: 1101.
Hoskins SG, Lopatto D, Stevens LM. The C.R.E.A.T.E. approach to primary literature shifts undergraduates' self-assessed ability to read and analyze journal articles, attitudes about science, and epistemological beliefs. CBE Life Sci Educ 2011; 10: 368-78.
Bjorn G. The CERIC method plus social collabo- rative annotation improves critical reading of the primary literature in an interdisciplinary graduate course. Front Educ 2024; 9: 1257747.
Morales E, Kalir JH, Fleerackers A, Alperin JP. Using social annotation to construct knowledge with others: a case study across undergraduate courses. F1000Res 2022; 11: 235.
Kararo M, McCartney M. Annotated primary scientific literature: a pedagogical tool for undergraduate courses. PLoS Biol 2019; 17: e3000103.
Schneider S, Beege M, Nebel S, Rey GD. A meta-analysis of how signaling affects learning with media. Educ Res Rev 2018; 23: 1-24.
Ponce HR, Mayer RE, Mendez EE. Effects of learner-generated highlighting and instructor-provided highlighting on learning from text: a meta-analysis. Educ Psychol Rev 2022; 34: 989-1024.
Tofade T, Elsner J, Haines ST. Best practice strategies for effective use of questions as a teaching tool. Am J Pharm Educ 2013; 77: 155.
Thomann H, Deutscher V. Scaffolding through prompts in digital learning: a systematic review and meta-analysis of effectiveness on learning achieve- ment. Educ Res Rev 2025; 47: 100686.
Sallam M. ChatGPT utility in healthcare education, research, and practice: systematic review on the promising perspectives and valid concerns. Healthcare (Basel) 2023; 11: 887.
Kasneci E, Sessler K, Kuchemann S, Bannert M, Dementieva D, Fischer F, et al. ChatGPT for good? On opportunities and challenges of large language models for education. Learn Individ Differ 2023; 103 : 102274.
Mortlock R, Lucas C. Generative artificial intelligence (Gen-AI) in pharmacy education: utilization and implications for academic integrity: a scoping review. Explor Res Clin Soc Pharm 2024; 15: 100481.
Werawattanachai N, Phattarabenjapol S. Cognitive load and learning-related outcomes in article-based pharmacology learning with an instructor-provided highlighting with structured question prompts tool: a classroom evaluation. Thai Journal of Pharmacy Practice. 2026;18: 647-661.
McKenney S, Reeves TC. Educational design research: portraying, conducting, and enhancing productive scholarship. Med Educ 2021; 55: 82-92.
Hoffmann TC, Glasziou PP, Boutron I, Milne R, Perera R, Moher D, et al. Better reporting of interventions: template for intervention description and replication (TIDieR) checklist and guide. BMJ 2014; 348: g1687.
van de Pol J, Volman M, Beishuizen J. Scaffolding in teacher-student interaction: a decade of research. Educ Psychol Rev 2010; 22: 271-96.
Harden RM. Outcome-based education: the future is today. Med Teach 2007; 29: 625-9.
Morcke AM, Dornan T, Eika B. Outcome (compe- tency) based education: an exploration of its origins, theoretical basis, and empirical evidence. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 2013; 18: 851-63.
Biggs J. Enhancing teaching through constructive alignment. High Educ 1996; 32: 347-64.
Biggs J, Tang C. Teaching for quality learning at university. 4th ed. Maidenhead: Open University Press; 2011.
Faculty of Pharmaceutical Sciences, Ubon Ratchathani University. Doctor of Pharmacy program specification, revised curriculum B.E. 2566 [online]. 2023 [cited Jun 10, 2026]. Available from: phar.ubu. ac.th/main/sub/bachelor
Ubon Ratchathani University. Course specification for 1505200 Principle of Pharmacology, academic year 2025 [online]. 2025 [cited Jun 10, 2026]. Available from: reg2.ubu.ac.th/registrar/tqf34_brows e.asp
Virani S, Rewri P. A narrative review of pharmacotherapy of glaucoma. Future Pharmacol 2024; 4: 395-419.
Anderson LW, Krathwohl DR, editors. A taxonomy for learning, teaching, and assessing: a revision of Bloom's taxonomy of educational objectives. New York: Addison Wesley Longman; 2001.
Ozcelik E, Karakus T, Kursun E, Cagiltay K. An eye-tracking study of how color coding affects multimedia learning. Comput Educ 2009; 53: 445-53.
Skulmowski A. When color coding backfires: a guidance reversal effect when learning with realistic visualizations. Educ Inf Technol 2022; 27: 4621-36.
Pham TD, Karunaratne N, Exintaris B, Liu D, Lay T, Yuriev E, et al. The impact of generative AI on health professional education: a systematic review in the context of student learning. Med Educ 2025; 59: 1280-9.
Kattan L, Moideen S, Abdelrahman A, Khabbaz S, Ibrahim A, Mraiche F. Artificial intelligence in pharmacy education: a scoping review of current integration and global perceptions. Curr Pharm Teach Learn 2026; 18: 102534.
