A problem based learning, case study approach to pharmaceutics: Faculty and student perspectives
药剂学中基于问题的学习的案例研究方法：教师与学生的观点
Haworth, Ian SThe two-semester PharmD-level I Pharmaceutics course at the University of Southern California School of Pharmacy has been taught using a student-centered, problem-based learning (PBL) approach for the last five years. The most important element of the course is the assignment of two case studies in each semester, and the performance of these case studies by groups of students. The intention of the course is to emphasize group working, cooperation and collective achievement as being equally important to individual effort and grades. The course involves the participation in lectures and discussion groups of faculty, students and teaching assistants, and of student 'mentors' - students who took the course in the previous year. Over a five-year period instructors have designed and then refined the approach within the constraints created by a class size of about 170 students. Described are experiences to date in the teaching and administration of the course, from a faculty perspective. Provided are a number of suggestions regarding the most effective structure of the course, the appropriate methods of evaluation, the potential pitfalls, and the demands of such a course on both students and faculty. To help the reader understand further the impact of the PBL approach on students, several students, who have both taken the course, and then acted as mentors, provide an independent, student perspective on the teaching approach. Their perspective is presented in the final part of the manuscript.
南加州大学医药学院为期两学期的初级药学博士制药学课程，使用以学生为中心的、基于问题的学习（PBL）教学方法已经五年了。该课程最重要的元素是，每个学期安排的两个研究案例，而且这些案例研究都是通过学生小组来完成的。课程的意图是为了强调小组工作、合作与集体成就，与个人的努力和成就同样重要。该课程涉及到教师、学生和助教以及学生“辅导员”——上一年选修过这门课的学生——的讲座和小组讨论。教师用超过五年的时间进行设计，然后精炼这种因170人大班带来诸多制约的教学方法。从教师的角度描述最近对课程的教学和管理的经验。对给课程最有效结构、适当的评价方法、潜在陷阱以及课程对师生双方的要求，提供多项建议。一些学生在选修该课程后担任辅导员，从而为这种教学方法提供了一个独立的、学生角度，帮助读者进一步理解PBL方法对学生的影响。本文最后部分提供这些学生的观点。
INTRODUCTION
简介
The usual basic pharmaceutics courses, taught in the first professional year, have traditionally been given in the lecture-examination format. This approach has been defended by the idea that there exists, for this subject, a body of information and data to be transmitted to the student and, after this has been presented (the lecture), the attainment of this information can then be tested (the examination). This method may not provide the best way of achieving what is actually desired for the student of any college course, i.e., understanding the concepts involved in the course and the ability to use these concepts. However, student-centered methods used in other fields, and in more clinical areas of the pharmacy curriculum(1), have traditionally not been considered suitable for the basic sciences.
通常的制药学课程，第一年教授专业知识，按惯例采用讲座-考试模式。已有观点很抵触这种方法，对于这个课题，通过展示的方式（讲座）将大量信息和数据传送给学生，之后，为了检测信息的掌握情况而进行测试（考试）。在实现任何大学课程所定下的具体目标——比如理解课程中所涉及的概念，以及使用这些概念的能力——方面，这个方法并不一定就是最好的办法。然而，在其他领域，以及制药学课程的很多临床方面，使用的以学生为中心的方法，传统上认为并不适合基础科学。
The practical implementation of student-oriented, case study-based courses varies widely, but all these teaching approaches are generally labeled as Problem-Based Learning (PBL). The attempts that have been made to extend the teaching of the basic sciences in the case study direction usually retain lectures and exams, but perhaps add cases or essay questions to the testing aspect. Discussions, when included, are most often `demi-lectures' as the students usually do not have their inquisitive-disputative 'center' sufficiently well developed to allow useful discussions. A number of examples of workable models for such courses in Medicinal Chemistry(2,3), Therapeutics(4), Pharmacokinetics(5) and Pharmaceutics(6, 7) have been described, but the comparative advantages of each are still unclear. Some evidence for an improved retention of knowledge obtained through the PBL approach, compared to more didactic approaches, has been presented(8,9), but there is still considerable disagreement over this issue. In 1993, faculty in the Department of Pharmaceutical Sciences of the School of Pharmacy at the University of Southern California were challenged to change to a student-oriented, case-study approach to the teaching of Pharmaceutics to a class of 170 students. The design of the course, and the subsequent modifications that we have made, in response to this challenge, as well as the successes we have achieved and the difficulties we have faced, are described in this paper. An interesting and thoughtful analysis of PBL applied to Pharmaceutics has been presented by Duncan-Hewitt (10) and many similarities emerge between this and our own experiences. In particular, these revolve around the anxiety apparent amongst many students as they try to deal with the PBL approach for the first time, and the difficulty, for such a large class size, of establishing sufficient faculty-student contact to calm these anxieties. Addressing these problems has meant that the course structure has been and is still in some flux, but it has been concretized sufficiently to permit an intelligent presentation of the basic structure and philosophy. More detailed aspects of the course, such as the utilization of computer-based case studies, which is an integral part of the program, have previously been presented in other papers(11,12).
面向学生的实际实施，基于案例研究的课程之间差别非常大，但是所有这些教学方法通常都被称为基于问题的学习（PBL）。试图将案例研究拓展到基础科学教学当中的同时，通常也保留讲座和考试，但有可能在考试中添加案例或论文问题。如果包含讨论，也是最常见的“半讲座”，因为学生通常没有自己的足够适合开展讨论的问题讨论中心。这类课程有大量可行的模式范例，比如医药化学（2，3）、治疗学（4）、药物动力学（5）以及制药学（6，7）都有描述，但是各自的相对优势仍不清楚。有证据（8，9）显示，相比于说教式方法，通过PBL方法，可以改善对获得知识的保存，但在这一问题上还存在着相当大的分歧。1993年，南加州大学的制药学院的制药科学系的教师们，自我挑战，尝试在一个170人的班级采用面向学生的、案例研究的方法教授制药学。课程的设计以及随后的修改我们都已经完成，为了响应挑战，以及我们实现的成功、我们面临的困难，都在本文中有所描述。邓肯-休伊特对于在制药学中应用PBL，做了一个有趣而深入的分析（10），在这向分析结果和我们自己的经验中呈现出许多相似之处。特别是，这些尝试围绕许多学生第一次尝试PBL方法时明显的焦虑而展开，以及面对这么大的班级，要建立足够多的教师与学生之间联系来平息他们的焦虑，而带来的困难。解决这些问题意味着课程结构已经且一直存在某些变化，但它已被具体化到足以允许基本结构与原理的智能表述。该课程更多细节，比如在案例研究——这些研究是整个项目中不可缺少的部分——中对计算机的应用，以前在其他论文中提及过（11，12）。
GOALS AND OBJECTIVES F THE COURSE DESIGN
课程设计的目标
There were three fundamental objectives in our original course design. These were: (i) to promote student-led learning; (ii) to give students experience in group functioning; and (iii) to develop meaningful evaluation methods that are responsive to the nature of the course. Our current thoughts on the successes and failures in each of these areas are summarized below. In understanding these thoughts and the following discussion on the course structure, it is important that the reader recognizes that the class size is approximately 170 students, and, given the demands on faculty time, that this leads to a necessity for compromise between ideal and practical approaches. A fourth area, the development of leadership skills amongst the students and student mentors, has emerged as we have proceeded with the class. This is not dealt with in a specific manner, but should be apparent in the description of the activities of the students and the mentors in this and subsequent parts of the paper.
在我们最初的课程设计当中有三个基本目标。他们是：（一）促进以学生为主导的学习；（二）为学生提供小组工作的体验；以及（三）制定有意义的评价方法，这是为了响应课程的本质而制定的。我们当前对于各方面的成功与失败的想法总结如下。在理解这些想法以及讨论课程结构的过程中，读者认识到在班上有大约170名学生，这一点非常重要，同时，由于教学时间的限制，导致了需要在理想与现实方法之间做出妥协。第四个目标，对学生和学生辅导员的组长技能的开发，在我们开始在这个班级上课的时候出现了。这并不是以某种特定方式处理，很显然应该是在这里以及本文的后继部分介绍学生和辅导员的活动的时候。
Student-Led Learning. To enhance retention of the fundamental concepts involved in pharmaceutics, the main objective was to develop self-motivated learning. While concepts should, and perhaps must, be presented by faculty members who have a clear understanding of the utility of, and reasoning behind, those concepts, it should be the student's responsibility to seek sources of that information that were both understandable and meaningful for him/her. This approach is designed to develop familiarity with a wide spectrum of the pharmaceutical literature and begin the development of the ancillary, but no less essential, skill of evaluating that literature (e.g., `don't believe everything you hear or are told,' 'I never understand what author X writes', etc.).
学生为主导的学习。增强对制药学基本概念的记忆，这个主要目标用来发展学生的主动学习能力。概念应该，也必须由理解这些概念的用途及其用途背后的原理的教师给出。寻找信息来源应该是学生的责任，这对于学生而言应该时刻理解且有意义的。这种方法旨在增进与广泛的医药文献的熟悉程度以及开始必不可少的辅助发展——评价文献的技能（比如，“不要相信任何你听到的或者别人告诉你的”，“我从不相信某某作者写的东西”，等等）。
Our approach to this has been an attempt to foster the idea that there are actually few `right answers' to the application problems faced by the pharmacist, including those examples presented while in school and, to an even greater extent, those to be faced after graduating and beginning practice. There are, of course, `right answers' to specific technical and scientific questions. The students are urged to consider 'correct' applications of their knowledge to be only those that they can logically defend with either literature citation or scientific reasoning. They are encouraged to use information from all current and previous classes for this defense. They are further encouraged to file this information in some retrievable manner for future use.
我们这些方法试图培养起这样一种观念，对于药剂师，在面临具体问题的时候实际上很少有“标准答案”的，包括在学校得到的例子，以及毕业后开始工作时所面对的更广泛的例子。当然，对于具体的技术和科学问题，还是存在“标准答案”的。我们鼓励学生考虑“纠正”对他们知识的应用，但他们只能使用文献引文或者科学道理来进行辩护。我们鼓励学生在这场辩护中使用他们当前或以前班级的所有信息。还进一步鼓励他们为了将来的使用，用某种合适的方式归档他们的信息。
Group Functioning. Both the business and the scientific world function as group efforts, quite in contrast to the lecture/exam, academic world. Group efforts require quite different skills than individual work or study. Although the concepts can be taught in principle, they are best learned by practice. In order to foster group functioning, all recommended reading, homework, and case studies require time far in excess of that available to any one student in the course. Students can only get the work done through group efforts, and, in conjunction, must provide the results of that research effort in a meaningful written and verbal form to the other members of the group.
团队合作。无论是商界还是科学界，团队努力所起到的作用，与学术界的讲座、考试所起到的作用完全相反。与个人工作或学习相比，团队努力需要非常不同的技能。虽然原则上讲，这些概念可以通过教授的方法获得，但最好通过实践学来。为了促进团队工作，所有推荐的阅读材料、家庭作业以及案例研究所需要的时间远超课程中个人所用的时间。学生只需团队努力就能完成工作，当然需要和其他人一起，必须以一种有意义的书面以及口头形式向其他小组成员提供研究结果。
Working as part of a group (and depending, to some extent, on that group's efforts for their grade) has been found to be difficult for many students, whose educational success to this point in their careers has been largely based on their being 'individual' workers and learners. However, students soon learn the benefits of good leadership and `doing their part'. Leaders develop and 'appear' quickly, as do those that can explain what they have read to the group. The group leader is appointed at the start of the academic year and then changed several times over the year, through an internal group decision. In contrast to other PBL approaches(10), we have largely resisted the temptation to interfere with the workings of each group. At the beginning of the year we provide some basic written instructions (see Appendix A) on the role of the group leader and on group functioning, and additional material on the student-mentor relationship, and on the case study method. This material is supplemented by faculty-led discussions on the same issues in the early part of the year.
发现很多学生很难在团队中工作（同时其成绩又在某些方面依赖于团队的努力），他们生命中所谓的教育成功在很大程度上斗基于他们作为一个“独立的”工作者或学习者的。然而，学生很快就会知道良好组长才能和“尽职尽责”带来的好处。组长很快发展并显现出来，并可以解释他们在团队中所见到的。 在学年开始，团队组长是指定的，在这一年中会通过内部决定变更好几次。与其他PBL方法（10）相比，我们已经在很大程度上抵制住了各个小组工作之间的干 扰。年初我们就团队组长的任务和小组工作，提供一些基本的书面指导（参见附录一），以及一些额外的关于如何处理学生与辅导员关系的材料，还有关于案例研究 方法的材料。这些材料由这一年早期，教师们对于相同问题展开的讨论构成。
Meaningful Evaluation. The most difficult goal to accomplish has been to develop meaningful methods of evaluation for the individual efforts of each student. The essential problem is that, while instructors want to encourage group working and cooperative effort for the benefit of all, the same instructors are still faced with the necessity of assigning grades on an individual basis. This leads to a contradiction which has been difficult to resolve.
有意义的评价。为每个学生的个人努力开发有意义的评价方法，这是最困难的目标。根本问题是，在教师为了处于所有人的利益而鼓励团队工作和协同努力的同时，教师还一直面临着必须为每一个学生打分。这就导致了一个一直难以解决的矛盾。
The first efforts included no comprehensive, individual evaluations at all. All student grading was based on the group case study reports (one grade for all group members) modified for each student based on evaluations of their participation by their peers in the group. This proved to be more valuable in concept than in practice. Students were very reluctant to grade their group members; but were quick to complain about those that did not do their share. To address the issue of individual participation in the group effort in completing the case studies and other assigned work, we have since tried to incorporate some faculty evaluation of this part of the course. However, this was felt to be feasible only when done in small groups and, in a large class, insufficient contact with some students or groups made meaningful evaluations extremely difficult.
最初的结果甚至都没有包括全面的、针对个体的评价。所有学生评分都是基于小组案例研究报告（小组所有成员同一个分数），并在此基础上由小组同伴对他们的参与情况的评价进行调整。这样评价显示了概念比实践更有价值。学生们非常不愿意评价他们的小组成员，但又很快抱怨他们没有做出应有的贡献。为了解决在完成案例研究和其他功课的团队努力中，个人参与的问题，我们一直努力尝试具体化课程这部分的某些教师评价。然而，这被认为只有当团队规模很小的时候才可行，在一个很大的班级中，不能充分接触学生或小组，要做出有意义的评价非常困难。
After trying several different approaches, the following has been found to be an effective, if not ideal, compromise between stressing group effort over individual gain, while still recognizing outstanding students and providing sufficient incentive to contribute fully to the group effort. The breakdown of grading over the semester is summarized in Table I, and is explained as follows: There are two case studies assigned during each semester and about four weeks allowed for their completion; these are group efforts and are quite sophisticated. A number of these cases have been described previously(11) and a typical case study is shown in Appendix B. A final `mini-case' is also required, to be done individually and in the final examination room, where conceptual understanding and ability to use these concepts is evaluated. Each case study is worth 30 percent of the course grade in each semester, and the examination is worth 40 percent.
经过几种不同的尝试以后，发现下面这种即使不够理想也是最有效的，就强调团队努力与个人进步做出妥协，同时仍然认可成绩出众的学生，并为全力投入到团队努力中而提供足够的动力。在表一总结了对整个学期的评分细则，并解释如下：每个学期分配两个研究案例，让他们在大约四周内完成；这是团队努力的结果，也非常完善。这些案例当中有一部分以前已经描述过（11），在附录二中展示了一个典型的案例研究。最后的“微型案例”也是必不可少的，需要单独在考场中完成，在这里评估对概念的理解和对概念的运用能力。在学期课程评分中，每个案例研究都有三十分，考试占到四十分。
Each group is graded jointly on their case report and the same grade is received by all group members for this part of their grade, which represents about 53 percent of the case grade (and 16 percent of the final class grade) for each case.
每个小组都根据他们的案例报告共同评分，所有小组成员这部分分数都是一样的，这大约占到每个案例分数的53%（以及最后一个案例分数的16%）。
Each group member is graded by the faculty (who see the group several times during each case study in formal discussion sessions, with rotation of faculty amongst the groups), the group's mentor (a Level II student, who also meets with the group at least once each week - see below), and by each of the other members of the group (the peer grade, with the grade for each student being determined as an average of all the grades from their group peers). The basis for these grades are attendance, participation, effort, contribution to group discussions and the ability to function within the group. The faculty, mentor and peer grades are, of themselves, only a small percentage of the overall grade (each is 10 percent of the case study grade), but collectively they provide a general, albeit limited and not always entirely accurate, picture of the efforts of each student. We stress that, while this approach is used as part of the determination of the final letter grade, it also provides us with a means of identifying students who may be having some problems in the course. This is particularly important, given that the course is offered to Level I students, and that the absence of the 'traditional' mid-term examination gives us no other means of assessing student progress. Group interviews by a faculty member are held immediately after the reports are completed. Evaluation of each student's contribution to the case report and their understanding of the other parts of the group's report has been found to be quite straightforward using this procedure. This grade accounts for about 17 percent of each case study grade.
每个小组成员的分数由教师（在每个案例研究的正式讨论环节，教师在小组之间巡视，对每一个小组都观察多次）、学生辅导员（中级学生，他每周至少和小组碰面一次，见下）和小组内其他成员（相互评分，每个学生的分数被定为他的小组同伴所给分数的平均数）共同打分。这些评分依据的是出勤、参与、努力、对小组讨论的贡献以及小组工作的才能。教师、辅导员和小组互评只占到总成绩很小的一个比例（每个案例研究的10%），但总的来说，他们为每个学生的努力提供了一个虽然有限，甚至并不总是完全正确，但至少是总体上的写照。我们之所以强调，虽然是因为这种方法作为最后书面评分的一部分，也是因为它为我们提供了一种手段，弄清楚哪个学生有可能在课程中出现问题。这一点尤其重要，因为这门课程是给初级生开设的，并且因为缺乏传统的期中考试，使得我们没有其他评估学生进度的方法。案例报告完成之后立即举行教师主持的小组面谈。使用这套程序可以很容易评价每一位学生对报告的贡献，并发现他们对小组报告其他部分的理解程度。这项评分占到每个案例研究分数的17%。
COURSE STRUCTURE
课程结构
The course is structured in the following manner. The traditional transfer of information through the lecture addressed to the whole class is largely replaced by concept presentations which are still in a lecture-format, although with a somewhat different purpose and by discussions with faculty and with mentors. Attendance is required at the presentations and discussions. Overlaying this structure is the assignment of case studies, which provide a basis for the full integration of the presented concepts. Two such cases are given in each semester. Because group operation is required, both for the case studies and in the discussion sections, the student groups also meet informally several times each week to distribute work assignments, collect results and discuss problems. The frequency, places and times for these are worked out by the students themselves and implementation is the responsibility of the student group leader (see below). Appendix C shows a typical schedule for the year. The development of the course structure is described in detail in the following sections.
这门课的结构如下。针对整个班级的讲座这种传统的信息传递方式基本上被概念演示这种方法所取代，这仍然具有讲座形式，但目的有些不一样，并且可以与教师和辅导员展开讨论。必须出席演示讲座和讨论。附在这种结构之上的是案例研究的功课，这为完全整合前面所提供的概念打下了基础。每个学期提供两个案例。因为必须采用团队运作，不光用于案例研究和讨论环节，学生小组每周也要非正式碰头好几次，来分配功课任务、整合结果以及讨论问题。次数、地点、时间都是由学生自己决定，而具体实施则是小组组长的责任（见下文）。附录三展示了一份典型的本年度的时间安排表。这门课程结构的开发在下面几节有更详细的叙述。
Weekly Course Structure. We have experimented with two different course structures. Initially, we devoted each week to a different concept. On the first meeting day of the week, the concept was presented by a faculty member to the whole class. This presentation is, in actuality, a lecture, but its structure and purpose is quite different from the usual course lecture. The concept presentation is intended not so much to teach, develop, or derive the concept for the week, as it is to introduce that topic and define the scope the students are intended to cover in their readings. The reading assignments, key objectives and several illuminating questions for each concept are all in the student's hands from the beginning of the semester. These reading assignments include papers, chapters and/or whole sections of texts. On the next meeting day the students meet with their mentor to discuss the questions and assign reading based on the suggested sources. The mentor serves to clarify and discuss the concepts introduced that week. On the third day the group meet with their faculty discussion leader for a further discussion of the concepts of the week. In these meetings it is assumed that the key questions are answered (a group answer for this is required) and that the reading has been done, so the discussion begins from that standpoint. The discussion is intended to develop understanding of the meaning and the use of each concept in pharmaceutical situations.
每周课程结构。我们已经体验了两种不同的课程结构。一开始，我们力求每周一个不同的概念。在每周的第一个聚会日，由老师向全班介绍这个概念。具体来说，就是以讲座的形式介绍，但是其结构和目的与通常的课程讲座颇为不同。在这里介绍概念并不是想在这一周去教授、详述或者推论这个概念，而是为了介绍主题，以及划定好学生将要阅读的范围。阅读任务，每个概念相应的主要目标和一些启发性的问题，在学期一开始就已经发到每一个学生手上。这些阅读任务包括报纸、章节或者大段的文字。到了下一个聚会日，学生和他们的辅导员讨论这些问题，阅读那些推荐的资料。辅导员负责阐明及参与讨论本周介绍的概念。第三天，小组与他们的老师就本周的概念作进一步的讨论。要开展这些讨论，基于这样一个假设，即关键问题（一组必须回答的问题）都已得到回答，阅读也都已完成，这样讨论才能开始。讨论的目的在于增进对药物方面概念的理解和对每个概念的使用。
Although the above schedule worked reasonably well, and the components within it have largely been retained in the new schedule, it was also found that the concepts were learned and retained in a somewhat fragmentary manner. To address this issue, we have now moved to a schedule (see Appendix C) in which six concepts are presented in successive lectures over three weeks, and then six facultyled discussion sessions are held over the next three weeks, in which a more broad-based discussion is possible, and in which the integration of a significant amount of material can occur. This sequence of three weeks of lectures and three weeks of discussions occurs twice through the semester, and four times over the entire year. A further advantage of this approach is that the three weeks of discussion coincide with the period devoted to performance of the case studies, and the due date for each case study is set for the end of the three week discussion period. This has allowed us to much more effectively discuss the case with the students, and to guide them in their problem-solving, thus addressing one of the concerns regarding student anxiety and problem-based learning. In this schedule the mentor sessions retain the same character as that described above, and are still used to explore more specific concepts on a weekly basis, and to discuss assigned weekly questions.
虽然上面的时间安排工作的还不错，并且其大部分组成部分都被保留进了新的时间安排表里，同时发现学过的概念以一种有些零碎的形式保留下来了。为了解决这一问题，我们更换了一套时间安排（见附录三），在三周里一系列讲座中介绍六个概念，在接下来的三周里，会举行六个以教师为主导的讨论会，其中讨论会变得更加广泛，会发生大量素材的融合。三周的讲座，以及三周的讨论，这个学期一共进行两次，一个学年就是四次。这个方法还有一个好处，就是在为期三周的讨论，同时也致力于案例研究，每个案例研究的截止日期设定为三周讨论时期的结束日。这可以让我们能与学生更有效的讨论案例，并在他们解决问题的过程中引导他们，从而解决学生的焦虑和如何基于问题的学习。在这份时间安排中，学生辅导员在讨论中扮演与前述同样的角色，仍然在每周基础上探索更具体的概念，以及讨论分配的每周问题。
Case Studies. Case studies are assigned in approximately the third and eighth week of a 14 week semester, and each group (of six or seven students) is given about four weeks to complete their report. As exemplified in Appendix B, and also in related papers dealing with computer-based case studies in the course(11,12), the case studies are complex problems which require considerable sophistication and background reading in order to arrive at an appropriate answer. Much of the material required for answering the case study has not formally been covered in the lecture presentations, and this forms the basis of the faculty-led discussions during the case study period. This has been found to be particularly effective, because the students then have a reason to engage in these discussions (since they are having to address problems within their case study) and, when the system works most effectively, they are already formulating questions from the background case study reading which might be answered in the discussion periods. For example, the question might arise `How can I know the ionization state of my drug at my formulation pH when I cannot find its pKa anywhere in the literature?', which might be effectively answered by a discussion of the empirical Hammett-Taft approach to pKa calculation(13).
案例研究。在一个为期十四周的学期当中，案例研究安排在大约第三周和第八周，每个小组（大约六七人）有四周的时间来完成他们的报告。正如附录二所示，以及在课程中基于计算机的案例研究当中处理的相关论文当中（11，12），案例研究是一个复杂问题，需要相当老练以及背景阅读，才能得到一个适当的答案。解答案例研究所需要的很多素材并未在讲座中正式提及，而这些构成了案例研究期间以教师为主导的讨论的基础。这一点已经被发现特别有效，因为这样一来学生有理由参与到这些讨论当中（因为他们可以利用他们的案例研究来解决问题），并且，当这套系统工作到最有效的时候，他们已经能够从案例研究的背景阅读当中清楚地描述问题，这样他们就可以在讨论的时候回答问题。比如，问题可能是“当我在文献中找不到药物的离解常数（pKa）时，我该如何利用pH值计算出药物离解程度？”要有效的回答这个题目，需要讨论计算pKa的Hammett-Taft经验公式。
Based on informal conversations with faculty in other pharmacy schools, this version of problem-based learning and of case-study implementation varies somewhat with that used elsewhere. Typically, relatively discrete case studies are given which can be answered in a formal scheduled class period, and cover a relatively specific concept each week. Rather than taking this approach, our case studies are complex, require several weeks of group effort to answer, and involve the understanding and integration of a number of different concepts. For the range of concepts covered over the year, see Appendix C. The complexity of the case studies increases as the year progresses, as each case incorporates material from earlier in the year. This approach has advantages with respect to integration of material, but also places considerable demands on both students and faculty. It probably also requires more extensive faculty-student contact, because the potential for students to go astray in answering the case is considerable.
通过与其他医药学院老师的私下交谈，基于问题的学习和案例研究与其他地方在实施上有些不同。通常情况下，相对于比较分散的案例研究时间，他们的答辩可以安排在正式的课程时间内，并且每周都可以覆盖一个相对具体的概念。我们没有采用这种方法，我们的案例研究更复杂，需要数周时间的团队努力才能回答，涉及到对大量不同的概念的理解和融合。去年一年所涉及的所有概念，见附录三。案例研究的复杂性随着学年的进展而增加，每个案例都包含有这一年早些时候的素材。这种方法在整合素材方面具有优点，但是对学生和教师有较高的要求。这也可能要求更广泛的师生交流，因为在回答案例的时候令学生误入歧途的可能性相当大。
ROLES OF INDIVIDUALS AND GROUPS IN THE COURSE
个人以及团队在课程中的角色
The course is based on the activities of a number of different groups and individuals, in addition to the faculty, as described above.
如上所述，这门课程建立在若干不同小组和个人的活动之上，当然还包括老师。
Student Groups. Case studies are performed by groups of six or seven students, giving a total of 26 groups (and hence the requirement for the writing of two sets of 26 similar, but substantively different, case studies each semester - see Appendix B for a typical approach). The groups do not change over the whole year, and only in certain circumstances are students allowed to transfer between groups. In insisting upon this, we wanted to stress that the professional environment may not be filled with colleagues whose views always coincide with your own, and that compromise and the development of working relationships is an essential element in any successful professional enterprise. This insistence can lead to conflicts, but we believe that, for certain individuals, it can provide invaluable insights into their personalities which will serve them well in their professional lives.
学生小组。案例研究都是由六到七个学生组成的小组完成的，一共26个小组（因此要求每个学期编写两套二十六份看上去相似实质上不同的案例研究，有一种典型方法，见附录二）。小组保持一整年不变，而且只有在某几种情况下才允许学生换组。我们坚持这一点，是要强调，在工作环境当中，你同事的观点并不永远和你一致的，并且，在任何一个成功的技术企业当中，这种工作关系的妥协和发展是一个基本要素。这种坚持会导致冲突，但我们相信，对于某些个别学生，它可以提供宝贵的机会洞悉自我个性，这些个性在他们的专业生涯中很好的为其服务。
Student Group Discussion Leaders. Each group is requested to select a leader to serve as the guide for research assignments, resulting reports, case work, and meetings. At the beginning of the first semester (as the students are unfamiliar with their cohorts) the leader is selected by the faculty. A different leader is selected after each case is completed; giving four students experience of leadership for each group of six or seven students over the two semesters. Some minimal guidance is provided to these leaders (Appendix A) and their skills improve visibly with each case study.
学生小组讨论组长。每个小组都需要选择一名组长，充当研究功课、汇总报告、案例工作以及会议工作的引导人工作。在第一个学期一开始（学生还不熟悉他们的同伴），组长由教师选出。每完成一个案例就另选一名组长。在两个学期内，对于每一个六到七人构成的小组，要让四个学生具有领导力经验。为这些组长提供一些最起码的指导（附录一），在每一次案例研究中他们的技能得到明显提高。
Mentors. As problem-based learning is foreign to nearly all of our entering students and as few grades are provided to inform them on their course progress, 'engineered' contacts with members of the previous year's class (referred to as mentors) help to increase student comfort and performance level. These mentors are selected by the course faculty based on their performance in the class, their communications skills and their willingness to act in the mentor capacity. They are paid a small stipend and are described in their transcripts as having received a `Leadership Fellowship'. The function of the mentors is not to lecture, not to answer key questions and not to help directly in the preparation of the case reports. Their role is to provide advice as `big brothers or sisters', and they have proved to be particularly influential and are an essential element in the course.
辅导员。由于我们几乎所有选修的学生都不适应基于问题的学习，并且在告知他们的课程分数时只有少数几个等级，“事先设计好的”与上一年度的班级成员（被称为辅导员）的接触，可以让学生得到更好的安慰和表现。这些辅导员由课程教师选择，前提是他们在班上的表现、他们的沟通技能，并且他们自愿担任辅导员职务。向他们支付一小笔薪水，并且在他们的成绩单上会得到“组长力奖学金”的批语。辅导员的任务并不是开讲座，不是回答关键问题，也不是在案例报告的准备阶段给予直接帮助。他们的角色是充当学长、提供建议，应经证明他们特别具有影响力，并且是课程当中不可或缺的因素。
Teaching Assistants. Since at the University of Southern California there is an active PhD program. Graduate students (TA's) are used to supplement the faculty activity in discussion sections. Our current feeling is, however, that the level of discussion and interaction preferably requires the participation of more senior graduate students. Even then, this is still a difficult task for TAs who, themselves, have not usually been involved in this type of teaching, and perhaps do not have the requisite pharmaceutical experience. The discussions demand considerable skill and experience, skill both in leading discussions (a very different skill than that required for lecturing or for performing research), as well as in finding suitable applications of the concepts being considered. Nonetheless, many of the TAs that have been involved in the course have responded very well to the challenge, and have enhanced considerably their own teaching abilities.
教学助理。因为在南加州大学有一个活跃的博士生项目。研究生们（助教）通常在讨论的时候分担教师活动。然而，我们目前的感觉是，讨论的层次和学生互动，最好需要更高层次的研究生参与进来。即便如此，这对助教而言仍然是一个艰巨的任务，他们本身通常并没有涉及这一类型的教学，并且可能并不具备必要的制药学经验。讨论需要相当的技巧和经验，包括引导讨论的技巧（一种非常不同于演讲或表演研究所需的技能），以及为考虑中的概念寻找合适的应用的技能。尽管如此，参加到课程当中来的许多助教面对挑战的反应非常好，并且很是增强了他们自身的教学能力。
FACULTY PERSPECTIVE: COMMENTS AND CONCLUSIONS
教师观点：评语与结论
The major problem remains the evaluation of individual performance and contribution. While still difficult, we believe this can be done effectively using the approaches described above. These provide sufficient contacts with each student to allow individual evaluation. While evaluation on the basis of individual interviews (without 'grades') would appear to be ideal, in classes of any size this is not feasible, and numerical grades are still used. Group operations remain difficult for students. Problems, while infrequent, are sometimes rancorous and group leaders must be reminded frequently to bring these to faculty attention, not so much for grading purposes, but for working through those personal difficulties which stand in the way of the student's understanding of the material.
主要问题依然是对个人表现和贡献的评价。虽然仍然有困难，但我们相信利用上面描述的方法仍然能有效的完成。为了方便个人评价，为每一个学生提供了充足的联系。虽然基于个人面谈的评价（没有评分）看上去很美，但对于任何规模的班级都是不可行的，仍然在使用分数评价。小组活动对于学生仍然很困难。问题虽然稀少，而且有时候让人憎恨，而且小组组长必须时常记得让老师注意到这些问题，不仅仅为了评分，也是为了解决阻拦在学生理解材料道路上的个人困难。
From a faculty perspective, the course provides two major demands which are perhaps beyond those typically encountered in the lecture/examination format. First, because students are openly encouraged to ask questions throughout the semester, because there is an open-door policy regarding student-faculty interaction. With 170 students in the class, the effects on faculty time are obvious. Second, students are provided with a case study that has 26 variations and a number of inter-related sections, and that can be answered in a large number of ways, the course demands the faculty to constantly react to and advise on student theories and ideas (some of which are extremely imaginative and interesting). This type of interaction is at the very heart of the course, because it is challenging the students to think for themselves, rather than simply digesting the `accepted wisdom', but it is also demanding of the faculty, and requires a breadth and depth of understanding of many, diverse subjects. This is further emphasized by the material covered in the year, which ranges from basic physical chemistry to cell biology to pharmaceutical formulation and delivery.
从教师的角度而言，课程提供了两个主要要求，或许能超越那些通常在讲座/练习形式的课程当中遭遇的问题。首先，因为整个学期都公开鼓励学生提问题，因为关于师生互动一直执行开放政策。面对一个170人的班级，老师的时间能起多大作用可想而知。其次，为学生提供的研究案例有二十六个变量和许多相关章节，并且能够以大量途径回答问题，课程要求教师不断与学生互动、给学生做出理论和思路上的建议（其中有一些是非常富有想象力和趣味性的）。这种类型的互动是课程的核心，因为它挑战学生的独立思考，而非简单的消化“可接受的知识”，但是它也给教师提出了要求，而且对各种不同课题的理解都要有足够的深度和广度。这是这一年的素材都非常强调的，从基础物理化学到细胞生物学到制药学公式与形式。
After five years of experience, it is our belief that this approach, while demanding to administer, is effective in meeting the objectives outlined above. We are unable to provide quantitative information to support this, because of the relatively short time since the course was first designed, and so we base this belief mainly on the reactions of students to the course. Given the considerable change in the approaches taken, compared to those most students are familiar with, we believe that the generally positive comments we have received are encouraging. The following section of the manuscripts reflects these opinions, and was independently written by several students who have been closely involved in the course over a two year period, first as students and then as mentors.
经过五年的尝试，我们相信这种方法，虽然对行政人员提出了要求，但是可以有效的达成前面预定的目标。我们无法提供定量信息来支持这个观点，因为从第一次设计这个课程到现在的时间相对比较短，并且我们这种信任是以学生的课程的反应作为基础。与大多数学生熟悉的方法相比，尽管在实施这个方法的过程中有相当多的变数，我们相信，我们得到普遍的正面评论实在令人振奋。本文下一节反映了这些意见，并且是由几位学生独立撰写，这几位学生在这门课程中亲密合作超过两年时间，一开始时作为学生，后来是作为辅导员。
A STUDENT PERSPECTIVE
学生的角度
The Pharmaceutics course at the University of Southern California School of Pharmacy has been taught using a student-oriented, case study approach for the last five years. The course from a faculty perspective has been described above. As former students and then mentors of this course, we draw on our experiences to evaluate the case study method and discuss, from the students' perspective, characteristics which are imperative for success of the course. Much of what is written reflects the authors' experience in discussing issues with other students over a two-year period as students, and then as mentors, and is not necessarily the opinion of the authors specifically. To the student, a class has been successful if two things are accomplished. First, at this level of education, the student is interested in obtaining the largest knowledge base possible within the constraints of a semester. And secondly, the student strives to retain as much of this newfound knowledge as possible. All too often, students struggle through courses spending endless hours studying and memorizing only to forget almost everything merely weeks, if not days, after the exams. Such courses are not classified as 'successful' to the student. On the other hand, the Pharmaceutics course, which is organized in an unconventional manner, leaves the student not only with the very broad knowledge base, but more importantly with the ability to draw from this knowledge long after the course ends.
南加州大学医药学院制药学课程，采用以学生为主导的案例研究方法，已经有五年了。前面都是从教师的角度描述这门课程。作为这门课以前的学生和随后的辅导员，我们利用自己的经验，评估案例研究方法，并从学生的角度来讨论，该课程成功所必需的特性。多数文字反映的是笔者在两年时间内以学生以及后来的辅导员身份，与其他学生讨论问题时积累的经验，并不代表笔者具体看法。对于一名学生，如果有两件事情能够完成就表示班级成功了。首先，在这个层次的教育当中，学生有意在一个学期的限制下，获取一个尽可能大的知识库。其次，学生努力记住尽可能多的新知识。而且很多时候，学生在课堂上辛苦，花费无数时间学习和记住知识，在考试之后，只需要短短几周甚至几天时间就几乎全忘光了。这样的课程对于学生而言并不能算作“成功”的课程。另一方面，制药学课程，是以一种非常规的形式组织起来的，不仅让学生接触到广泛的基础知识，而且更重要的是让学生具有课程结束很久以后依然掌握知识的能力。
Initially, the course seems radically different from any other basic science course. The conventional series of lectures interspersed with two or three exams is replaced by fewer lectures and many more discussions, group interactions, research and brainstorming for logical conclusions to posed pharmaceutical questions. Needless to say, confusion and frustration are initially widespread. However, as the routine becomes more familiar, frustration is replaced by acceptance and eventually appreciation. Looking back at the experiences of completing the course as students and then helping to lead the course as mentors, there are many areas of the course which are integral to the learning experience that can be discussed. The following is a discussion of these areas with suggestions to maximize the learning experience for the students.
一开始，这门课程似乎与其他基础科学课程从根本上不同。为了给教师提出的制药学问题得出一个符合逻辑的结论，穿插有两三次考试的传统实行讲座，被更少的讲座、更多的讨论、小组互动、研究以及头脑风暴所取代。不用说，混乱和挫折感在一开始都很普遍。然而，随着对这套程序的不断熟悉，挫折感被认可所取代，并最终变成赞赏。回顾作为学生完成这门课程的经验，以及后来作为辅导员引导课程的经验，这门课程有许多地方都是学习体验，都值得讨论。下面就是对在这些领域充分拓展学生的学习体验的建议的讨论。
Group Dynamics. One of the most fundamental aspects of this course is the experience gained in group dynamics. As future members of health care delivery teams, our ability to function in groups will be essential. Unfortunately, group friction is bound to arise in any situation where individuals must work long hours together to obtain a goal. In the context of the course, problems usually develop due to lack of experience in working with others and adjusting to the idea of depending on other students. For instance, students depend on each other to share the workload of acquiring the information necessary to answer the case study questions. This ultimately leads to the same case study grade for all members in the group. At the time, students find this to be frustrating, because it requires group meetings (time spent outside of scheduled classes) and a dependence on other students to learn the material. Later, however, students look back to appreciate the experience as it simulates a `real world' work environment where depending on others and working together is necessary to achieve a final goal. To minimize group friction and help nurture smooth group functioning, group leaders need to utilize the guidelines provided in the course syllabus and actively take on the duties of the leader. Group members, on the other hand, must learn to follow the direction of the leader. Students quickly learn that group cooperation is essential for individual success, and most agree that it is best if faculty intervention is discouraged in order to train students to work together in often stressful situations. With time, students learn how to work out internal disputes and carry on with group business. To facilitate progress in this respect, complete guidelines describing group leader and member responsibilities that students can refer to might be provided. This is analogous to a job description used in the real work environment. However, it should be emphasized that faculty intervention in group disputes is strongly discouraged.
小组动力。这门课程最根本的方面之一就是在小组动力方面取得的经验。作为保健服务小组将来的成员，我们能在小组中发挥作用是至关重要的。不幸的是，在任何一个为了实现一个目标，需要个体长时间合作的情况下，团队摩擦必然会出现。在课程环境中，出现问题通常是因为缺乏和其他人合作的经验，以及根据其他同学而调整思路的经验。举例来说，学生相互依靠，分担为回答案例研究问题而要获取必要信息的工作量。这最终导致同一小组内所有成员得到相同的案例研究评分。在这一刻，学生们发现这很令人沮丧，因为这需要小组会议（花费超出预定课时以外的时间）和依赖其他同学才能学习素材。然而，以后学生回过头来感谢这些体验，因为它模拟了“真实世界”的工作环境，在这里要实现目标就要依靠其他人，一起工作。要尽量减少小组内的摩擦，促进小组顺利运作，小组组长需要利用课程提纲中提供的指导，并积极承担起组长的职责。另一方面，小组成员，必须学习服从组长的指挥。学生很快就会明白团队合作对于个人成功是必不可少的，而且多数人都同意，为了培养学生在常常没有压力的环境中协同工作，如果教师干预会令人沮丧。随着时间的推移，学生学会如何解决内部纠纷，并继续小组工作。为了促进这方面的进展，课程提纲中的指导完整描述了小组组长和组员的职责，如果有可能的话，学生们可以参考。着类似于真实世界中的职务说明。然而，它也会强调，教师介入小组内部纠纷非常打击士气。
Faculty - Student Interaction. This course is often studentled in the sense that much of the learning occurs during group discussions and individual research rather than in lecture. The obvious advantage to this technique is that students retain more information longer and learn how to obtain information from the most current resources. However this method also demands faculty support. On several occasions during the course, the students are required to develop an understanding of a concept which has not yet been introduced in lectures. It is imperative that the faculty be available to clarify confusing concepts and direct students on the right track. and an open door policy is essential. However, to a certain extent, the faculty should also encourage students to be as self-reliant as possible. It is beneficial for students to get some direction when they hit an obstacle that they cannot overcome on their own. However, students should not need to check in with a faculty member at every step of the process, and a compromise between guidance and `spoon-feeding' should be sought. Mentors. Mentors provide a perspective that can only come from one who has recently completed the course. As time goes on, the mentor evolves from acting as a `big brother' or `big sister' to a source of information and guidance. The mentors are called on to draw from their own experiences as students to help the students in their groups. It is easier, being students themselves, for mentors to see the students' perspective and to work at the students' level to help guide them. We believe that, for a successful mentoring program, consistency between mentors is important. Such consistency would best be obtained by providing mentors with a mandatory training session in being facilitators. The mentors should also be provided with complete responses to the weekly lecture questions so that they may better maintain consistency and accuracy.
师生互动。从某种意义上说，这门课程常常以学生为主导，因为大部分学习活动都是在小组讨论和个别研究，而非讲座当中进行。这种技术最明显的优势就是，学生可以把信息记得更久一些，并且学会如何记住大多数当前资源中的信息。然而这种方法也需要教师的支持。在这门课程当中，有几次学生需要理解一个在讲座中并未介绍的概念。需要教师阐明容易混淆的概念，引导学生到正确轨道上去，这很重要。并且开放政策至关重要。然而，在一定程度上，教师也应该鼓励学生尽可能自力更生。当学生遭遇困难而自己又无法解决的时候，给予学生指导，对学生是有好处的。然而，学生不应该在过程的每一步都向教师求证。应该在纯粹的指导和填鸭式教学当中寻找一条折衷的道路。辅导员。辅导员提供了一种视角，刚刚完成课程的学生的视角。随着时间的推移，辅导员从扮演大哥哥大姐姐的角色发展到作为信息和指导的来源。辅导员被邀请利用自己作为学生的经验，来帮助他所在小组的学生。辅导员他们本身就是学生，所以帮助、指导学生从学生的视角看问题、在学生的水平上工作，这都很容易。我们相信，一个成功的辅导员项目，辅导员之间的一致性非常重要。实现这种一致性最好的办法，就是通过给辅导员提供强制性的帮助着训练班。也应该为辅导员提供每周讲座问题的完整回答，这样他们可以保持更好的一致性和准确性。
Critical Thinking. Critical thinking is an essential skill for any health care professional. Pharmacists are called on daily to draw on their knowledge and experience to make professional decisions. The skill of critical thinking has not been previously developed in most students. Since this course revolves around critical thinking, this presents a challenge to most students. In this course, students are required to look at current pharmaceutical theories, which don't always necessarily agree, and then analyze them and try to put them to use. Since most students don't have too much first-hand experience with the pharmaceutical theories, considerable research, reading and discussions with fellow students, mentors and the faculty are necessary. After this 'gathering' of essential information and opinions, the student must then put all this together and finally come to a conclusion. The faculty emphasis of the importance of supporting ones position rather than searching for a single correct answer is essential, because it encourages critical thinking rather than random search for what one source may support as a probable solution.
批判性思维。批判性思维对于任何保健工作都是一项基本技能。药剂师被要求每天利用他们的知识和经验，做出专业决定。大多数学生之前并未培养批判性思维技能。由于这门课程以批判性思维为主，这就为大多数学生提供了一项挑战。在这门课程当中，学生需要看当前的制药学理论，而且也并不总是赞同这些理论，然后分析这些理论并尝试实践之。由于大多数学生并没有足够多的与制药学理论相关的直接经验，相当多的研究、阅读，与同学、辅导员和教师进行的讨论就很有必要了。经过对重要信息和观点的收集，接下来学生必须将这些聚合起来，并最终得出一个结论。教师强调支持某人的立场重要性，远比找到一个正确答案更重要，因为它鼓励的是批判性思维而非盲目寻找一个可能解决问题的来源。
Resources. The case study method requires that students with different educational and skill levels work closely together. The class is made up of a diverse student pool ranging from students with only two years of undergraduate experience to students with many years of pharmacy experience. Such a variety of skills is desirable as each group is bound to have members with different strengths to provide the group. However, it also means that students are starting at different levels and must be provided with some basic resources that they can be functional in areas which are less familiar to them. A good example is computer technology. While some students can develop programs of their own, others cannot even log on to a computer. To avoid unnecessary confusion and frustration, students should be provided with a primer at the onset of the course. This primer should have detailed information on how to access and utilize basic programs on the computer, and introduce the student to on-line and library resources. Such a primer would prevent confusion dealing with basic logistics and direct students to focused research, study and analysis. Another component of the course, the compounding laboratory, is felt to be very important by most students, because it allows the student hands-on experience with all the basic pharmaceutical techniques, and reinforces concepts discussed in the abstract during discussion sessions (note, the compounding laboratory is now no longer a formal part of the course described in this manuscript). For such laboratories to be successful, it is important that student have access to a comprehensive laboratory manual and adequate laboratory equipment, and that the laboratories are performed by small groups of students.
资源。该课程研究方法需要不同教育水平技能水平的学生紧密合作。这个班级由各式学生集中而成，从只有两年本科经验的学生到有许多年制药学经验的学生，班上都有。每个小组都有这么多技能可以使用，必然会有成员为小组提供不一样的优势。不过这也意味着，学生的开始水平不一样，必须提供一些基本的资源，这样他们可以在他们不熟悉的领域有事可做。一个好的例子就是计算机技术。一些学生可以独立开发程序的同时，其他一些学生甚至不能登录进计算机。为了避免不必要的狼狈和挫折，在课程一开始应该为学生提供入门读物。该入门读物应该有详细信息，关于如何获取和使用计算机上的基本程序，为学生介绍在线资源和图书库资源。这样的入门读物可以利用简单逻辑来避免混乱，并引导学生关注研究、学习和分析。该课程的另一组成部分，复合实验室，大多数学生都认为非常重要，因为它令学生亲身体验所有的基本制药学技术，进而在讨论会期间加强了对概念的抽象概括（注意，在现在这一稿手册的描述中，复合实验室现在不再是这门课程的正式组成部分）。要使这类实验室成功运作，给学生一份全面的实验手册和充足的试验设备很重要，并且实验室要由一小组学生进行操作。
Relevance of Coursework. As a final evaluative measure, a discussion of the outcome of this course is necessary. The authors believe that the case study method helps put physical chemistry into a clinical context. By doing research and searching for solutions to pharmaceutical cases, students are placed in a unique position to determine the relevance of physical chemistry to the pharmacist. While the course is considered difficult by many students, most generally agree that the challenge is worthwhile as it develops a knowledge base that is important for any pharmacist to have. As a discipline, Pharmaceutics is a demanding course introducing concepts which are new to most students. As a class, group and student-oriented teaching are also foreign to most students. Thus, as may be expected, confusion and frustration are initially widespread. The suggestions previously made should minimize confusion and help direct students. The outcome is that the student obtains, for himself or herself, a knowledge base which can be accessed again and again for years to come.
课程作业的相关性。作为最后的评估措施，对课程的最后作品作一番讨论是很有必要的。作者相信案例研究方法有助于将物理化学应用到临床当中。通过为制药学案例研究和寻找解决方案，学生被置于一个特殊的位置上——确定物理化学和制药学的相关性。虽然这门课程也考虑到对大多数学生有些困难，但大多数学生都认同这是一项值得去做的挑战，因为在它这里构建起来的知识库，对于任何药剂师都很重要。作为一门学科，制药学是一门艰巨的课程，特别是在给大多数学生介绍新概念的时候。在一个班级中，小组和面向学生的教学跟大多数学生都没有关系。因此，可以预见到，混乱和挫折一开始就会大量存在。事先给出的建议可以最大程度上减少混乱、引导学生。结果是，学生为自己得到了一个知识库，一个在今后岁月里取之不尽的知识库。
Acknowledgment
致谢
The authors want to acknowledge the excellent contributions of Drs. John A. Biles, Michael B. Bolger, Curtis T. Okamoto and Vincent H.L. Lee to the teaching and administration of the course over a period of years.
作者要感谢做出杰出贡献的Drs. John A. Biles, Michael B. Bolger, Curtis T. Okamoto and Vincent H.L. Lee，为他们在这些年教授和管理这门课程。
References
参考文献
(1) Raisch, D. W., Holdsworth, M.T. , Mann, PL. and Kabat, H.E, "Incorporating problem-based student-centered learning into pharmacy externship rotations," Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 59, 265272(1995).
(2) Roche, VE, "The use of case-studies in medicinal chemistry
instruction," ibid., 57, 436-439(1993).
(3) Currie, B.L., Chapman, R.L., Christoff, and Sikorski, L., "Patientrelated case-studies in medicinal chemistry," ibid., 58, 446450(1994).
(4) Hartzema, A.G., "Teaching therapeutic reasoning through the casestudy approach: Adding the probabilistic dimension," ibid., 58, 436440(1994).
(5) Sims, PJ., "Utilizing the peer group method with case-studies to teach pharmacokinetics," ibid., 58, 73-77(1994). (6) Duncan-Hewitt, W.C., "Formulation problem-solving as an alternative to traditional pharmaceutics," ibid., 56, 242-251(1992).
(7) Sims, PJ. `Utilizing the peer group method with case-studies to teach pharmaceutics," ibid., 58, 78-81(1994). (8) Kabat, H.E, `Innovation in education : Problem-based learning,'
Tomorrow's Pharmacist, 18, 3-5(1996).
(9) Hmelo, C.E., Gotterer, G.S. and Bransford, J., "A theory-driven approach to assessing the cognitive effects of PBL," Instructional
Sci., 25, 387-408(1997).
(10) Duncan-Hewitt, W.C., "A focus on process improves problembased learning outcomes in large classes," Am. J. Pharm. Educ., 60, 408-416(1996).
(11) Haworth, I.S., Bolger, M.B., Eriksen, S.P, "The use of computerbased case studies in a problem-solving curriculum," ibid., 61, 97102(1997).
(12) Bolger, M.B., Haworth, I.S., "PharmLabTM: A computer program for the calculation and visualization of drug degradation pH rate profiles," ibid., 61, 281-287(1997).
(13) Perrin, D.D., Dempsey, B. and Serjeant, E.P, pKa Prediction for Organic Acids and Bases, 1st ed., Chapman and Hall, London (1981), and references therein.
lan S. Haworth , Stuart P. Eriksen, Susan Hikmat Chmait, Laurie S. Matsuda, Peggy A. McMillan, Emily A. King, Jacqueline Letourneau-Wagner and Karen Shapiro
School of Pharmacy, University of Southern California, 1985 Zonal Avenue, Los Angeles, CA 90033-1086
加州，洛杉矶，Zonal Avenue 185号，南加州大学，制药学院。
1 Corresponding author.
Copyright American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Winter 1998
Provided by ProQuest Information and Learning Company. All rights Reserved
由ProQuest 信息与学习公司提供。保留所有权利。
http://findarticles.com/p/articles/mi_qa3833/is_199801/ai_n8786459/print
