Published: 2017-01-02

A questionnaire based study of prevailing teaching methods in pharmacology and its efficacy /evaluation by second professional M.B.B.S students

Muzaffar Ahmad Pukhta, Mohammad Younis Bhat, Zorawar Singh


Background: Pharmacology is the subject which has got scientific obligation and feedback from the students facilitates a change in preconceived notion about teaching. The study was under taken to elicit the perception and feedback regarding the prevailing system of teaching methods in pharmacology and requirement of    any consequent changes.

Methods: A questionnaire was designed and given to second years medical students on internationally accepted Likert  scale which they were supposed to fill after giving due instructions. Analysis was done on percentage wise distribution of various parameters used in the questionnaire.

Results: Out of the total of 150 enrolled students, 130 filled and returned questionnaire with students vouching for various changes with 125 (96%) agreeing that black board teaching as best method of teaching in contrast to 31 (23.8%) for PPT and 87 (66.9%) for combination of both. 109 (83.8%) wanted distribution of handouts giving outline of topic before lecture classes.

Conclusions: There is a need of various reforms for improvement of prevailing teaching methods in pharmacology like microteaching and group discussions and involving MCQs in pattern of evaluation as opined by the students.


Pharmacology, Questionnaire, Likert scale, Perception, Feedback, Microteaching

Full Text:



Vasundara K, Kanchan P, Pundarikaksha HP, Girish K, Prassana S, Jyothi R. An imperative need to change pharmacology curriculum: A pilot study. Indian J Pharmacol. 2010; 42(6): 420.

Jaykaran, Chavda N, Yadav P, Kantharia ND. Intern doctors feedback on teaching methodologies in pharmacology. J Pharmacol Pharmacother. 2010;1(2):114-6.

Ruth N. Communicating student evaluation of teaching results: rating interpretation guides (RIGs). Assess Evaluation Higher Edu. 2000;25:121-34.

Victoroff KZ, Hogan S. Students perception of effective learning experiences in dental school: a qualitative study using a critical incident technique. J Dental Edu. 2006;70:124-32.

Sudha J, Graduate training programmes in pharmacology in India. Health Administrator Vol XIX; 1: 88-91.

Desai M. Changing face of pharmacology practicals for medical undergraduates. Indian J Pharmacol. 2009;41:151-2.

Natu MV, Singh T. Objective structure practical examination (OSPE) on pharmacology-students point of view. Indian J Pharmacol. 1994;26:188-9.

Rao SG, Karanth S, Kumar V, Udapa AL, BairyKI, Devi A. A scheme of practical examination in pharmacology for evaluating skils involved in problem solving. Indian J Pharmacol. 1992;24:145-6.

Garg A, Rataboli PV, Mulchand K. Students opinion on the prevailing teaching methods in pharmacology and changes recommended. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 2004;36(3):155-8.

Rao SP, Di Carlo SE. Active learning of respiratory physiology improves performances on respiratory physiology examinations. Adv Physiol Edu. 2001;25:127-33.

Assessment in Medical Education Trends and Tools K.L. Wig Centre for Medical Education and Technology. 1995.

Kaufman M, Mann V. Achievement of students in a conventional and problem based learning (PBL) curriculum. Adv Health Sci Educ Theory Pract 1994;4:245-60.

Gitanjali B. New wine in new bottle. Indian J Pharmacol 2004;36:63-4.

Bhavsar VH, Vaipayee SK, Joshi NJ, Mistry SD, Kantharia ND Sharam AK , et al. Training during practical pharmacology sessions for undergraduate medical students: An experience with a modified teaching programme. Indian Journal of Pharmacology. 1993;31:176-86.

Bhowmick K, Mukhopadhyay M, Chakraborty S, Sen PK, Chakraborty I. Assessment of perception of first professional MBBS students in India about a teaching learning activity in Biochemistry. South East Asian Journal of Medical Education. 2009;3(2).

Kuruvilla A, Ramalingam S, Bose AC, Shastri GV, Bhuvaneswari K, Amudha G. Use of computer assisted learning as an adjuvant to practical pharmacology teaching: Advantages and limitations. Indian J Pharmacol. 2001;33:272-5.

Arredondo MA, Busch E, Harold O, Douglass, Nicholas J. Petrelli. The use of videotaped lectures in surgical oncology. Journal of Cancer Education. 1994;9(2):86-9.

McIntosh N. Why do we lecture? JHPIEGO strategy paper#? JHPIEGO Corporation: Baltimore, Maryland.

Munson LS. How to conduct training seminars: a complete reference guide for training managers and professionals. McGraw-Hill: New York.

Edlich RF. My last lecture. Journal of Emergency Medicine. 1993;11(6):771-4.

Price DA, Mitchell CA. A model for clinical teaching and learning. Medical Education. 1993;27(1):62-8.

Sharma R, Verma U, Bhuvaneswar Kapoor, Chopra VS. Novel teaching approaches in pharmacology. JK Science. 2004;6(3):172-3.

IPuto JE. Facilitating the integrated small group tutorial in a medical programme – the university of Transkei (unitra) experience. South African Medical Journal. 2005;95(12):959-62.

Ananthkrishnan N. Microteaching as a vehicle of teacher training: an appraisal, In: Ananthkrishnan N., Sethuraman K.R. and Kumar S. (eds.) Medical Education: Principles and Practice, 2nd ed. Pondicherry: JIPMER. 93-7.

Advani UP, Bhojani KG, Gada VP. VMGMC students view on the prevailing teaching methods in pharmacology and changes recommended. Solapur Medical Journal. 2006;2:1-8.

McLennan MW, Isaacs G. The role of handouts, note-taking and overhead transparencies in veterinary science lectures. Australian Veterinary Journal. 2002;80(10):626-29.