Research Skills in Pharmacology: Enhancing relevant research skills for Pharmacology students

Background and Aims: Undergraduates entering the third year of Pharmacology or related bioscience programmes have the chance to carry out laboratory-based experimental projects, or spend an “extra-mural” year working in an industrial or academic research environment. Increasing class sizes and pressure on university resources have reduced opportunities for practical experience during the first two years of a degree. The use of practical classes as the basis for summatively assessed laboratory reports also encourages the use of formulaic “experiments” with a rigid structure and an expectation that most students will get the “correct” result. Thus the laboratory experience gained by students during the first two years of their degrees bears little resemblance to the nature of scientific research they encounter during research projects. Students also show an overall lack of insight into the scientific method. Our aim was to produce a module for Pharmacology and related bioscience students in the second year of their degrees that would better prepare them to work in a professional research environment.

Summary of work: The 30-credit “Research Skills in Pharmacology” module ran for the first time in academic year 2014-15. Student numbers were capped at sixty, with students split into two groups for session delivery. The module consists of a series of workshops on research-associated topics (e.g. experimental design, critiquing scientific literature, analysing and presenting research data, scientific writing skills) alongside three practical classes and a research “mini-project”. The practical classes covered assessment of chemical toxicity in cultured cells, evaluation of gene expression in isolated tissues by RT-PCR and measurement of local anaesthetic activity in isolated sensory nerves, and introduced students to well-designed experiments and routine handling of data. The mini-projects used isolated rat tissues in organ baths. Students were allocated a hypothesis to test and given a list of available drugs, but had to design their own experiments, which they conducted one day per week for four weeks. At the end of the module, students spent 3 hours in a pharmacology-focused research laboratory, discussing the project with the principle investigator and observing experimental work. Assessment of the module is entirely in-course, through a mixture of tests, abstract and manuscript writing (based on practicals), an oral presentation of data from the mini-project and a newspaper-style lay article about the laboratory visit, with linked outreach activity involving local high school students.

Outcomes: The module organisers welcomed the freedom to create innovative and interactive teaching sessions to address areas not covered anywhere else in the curriculum. Student feedback was overwhelmingly positive. Students appreciated that the skills learnt would be invaluable in subsequent years and several noted that interviewers for industrial placements were keen to discuss the module. Students and module organisers both enjoyed the collaborative nature and opportunity for extensive discussion, though both groups noted that the teaching sessions and preparation of, or provision of extensive feedback on, associated coursework required a significant amount of time.

Discussion and conclusion: Although we cannot yet determine whether completing this module has had a positive effect on the students’ research ability, the positive feedback it generated suggest that it has definitely been a success and other teaching Departments in the School of Bioscience Education at King’s College London are now using this as a framework for similar modules in their disciplines.