Using debates as the primary pedagogy to teach critical care in a PharmD curriculum elective course

Background and purpose: Debate is a pedagogy that incorporates deeper learning and has been used in many areas of healthcare and higher education. Debates have primarily been described within a course, but not as the predominant pedagogy for a course, particularly in pharmacy education or critical care instruction. Educational activity and setting: Debating the Evidence was a two-credit hour course taught by debate-style pedagogy on an extended campus to third year pharmacy students in a four-year curricular program. The class met weekly for two hours over 15 weeks, and students came prepared to debate pre-selected topics. Focus groups for students enrolled over two years were conducted to gauge students' perceptions of this course structure. Findings: The debate-dominant course structure seemed to increase accountability of learning, pre-class preparation, and in-class engagement. Students had difficulty debating with lower quality evidence, but were able to use physiologic reason and adverse effect profiles when robust literature was lacking. All students enrolled over two course offerings consented and participated in the focus groups. Themes identified across both semesters included: 1) efficiency with accessing and evaluating drug literature, 2) increased understanding of an individualized patient-centered approach, and 3) an appreciation for patient care in the acute setting. Summary: An entirely debate-style critical care elective course was perceived to be beneficial to students. Scalability and impact on student learning requires further assessment.