The integration of Team-Based Learning (TBL) and Experiential Learning (EL) modalities offers an innovative instructional framework that fosters student engagement, enhances learning outcomes, and creates meaningful opportunities to address critical community needs. This presentation highlights the implementation of TBL and EL within a Bachelor of Social Work curriculum that was designed to train students in substance misuse prevention while simultaneously generating measurable impacts in local communities. A mixed-methods study involving 61 students over three semesters demonstrated the effectiveness of this pedagogical approach in achieving both academic and community-centered objectives. Within a simulated Drug Free Communities coalition framework, students collaborated on TBL activities and participated in hands-on EL projects, such as Naloxone distribution, social marketing campaigns, and drug take-back events. These efforts yielded notable community outcomes, including saving a life with Naloxone, collecting 7.6 tons of trash, and disseminating public health messaging to over 7,000 individuals. Academically, students achieved a cumulative average of 97%, while “engaged” students produced an 80% pass rate on the International Certification and Reciprocity Consortium’s Prevention Specialist Certification Exam. This model highlights the potential of combining TBL and EL to effectively educate students while also delivering significant benefits to communities. Implications for TBL practitioners will be discussed.

Medical students frequently rely on study strategies developed in prior educational contexts, which may not be well-suited for the intensity and complexity of medical education. Despite extensive research in learning science, many medical education programs lack practical, scalable approaches for teaching students how to adopt evidence-based strategies to enhance their comprehension, retention, and application of content. This multi-institutional project bridges these gaps by embedding learning science principles within a team-based learning (TBL) module, equipping students with tools to foster academic success.

A TBL module on learning science strategies was developed and implemented at one medical school during orientation week for entering medical students, then adapted and implemented at another medical school, allowing for cross-institutional insights and advancements. The modules were co-developed and implemented by faculty and medical education learning specialists to emphasize collaborative support systems available to students throughout their program. Through individual preparation, individual and team readiness assurance tests, and 4S application activities, students were able to define “Six Strategies for Effective Learning,” identify effective and ineffective study plans, and create personalized study plans to be immediately utilized. At one institution, a pretest-posttest design was used to measure confidence to create evidence-based learning plans, knowledge of learning-science strategies, and the value of effective teamwork in medical school. At the other institution, module effectiveness was evaluated with a follow-up survey.

Through the presentation of this innovative example of active, inclusive teaching and learning, attendees will 1) recognize essential learning science principles that support effective study strategies, 2) describe a framework for designing and adapting TBL modules that apply evidence-based study strategies, and 3) identify contextual factors that influence implementation and their impact on student learning strategies. While this example comes from medical education, attendees will be able to adapt this approach to learning science instruction in their own curricula.

The decision to assign grades to applied exercises has been a topic of debate among TBL users for some time. While it is often true that instructors will assign grades to the readiness assessment process, the approach to grading an applied exercise portion of a TBL module can vary widely. At the University of Minnesota College of Pharmacy, we have had a history of TBL use for more than 10 years with a wide variation in approaches to grading the AE including no points, points for effort/completion only, & points for accuracy. As we merged our curriculum and our TBL Fidelity standards across all TBL instructors, we needed to develop a solution to the multiple grading viewpoints on applied exercises. This oral presentation will display an innovative approach to enhance skills growth through failure for our pharmacy students. We developed a mock hospital event reporting form that teams must fill out and submit after a TBL if they do not get the correct answer and/or correct rationale for their choice. Students receive full credit as long as the team completes the event report on time and are not penalized for accuracy. Our hope is that this system fosters critical thinking, learning from errors, and growth over the anxiety that performance for grades tends to generate.

Introduction
In a National Health Service (NHS) musculoskeletal outpatients’ service in the UK, a pain science education programme for patients with chronic pain was transitioned from didactic delivery to Team-based Learning (TBL). As TBL was likely to be unfamiliar, this study sought to consult patients who were the first to have participated to find out the acceptability of the approach and the extent to which they felt they had benefited or otherwise.

Methods
This was a qualitative usability testing study of patients with chronic low back pain (n=10) over the age of 18 participating in a 5-week TBL pain science education course between April and June 2024 in Somerset, England. After the course patients were invited to discuss their views and experiences in a focus group discussion. A topic guide was used to guide questioning and promote debate and elaboration on initial responses. Patients could also have a one-to-one online/telephone discussion should there be anything they would prefer to discuss privately. All discussions were conducted and recorded by a post-doctoral researcher for thematic analysis. Institutional ethical approval was obtained prior to commencement (Bournemouth University Ethics ID 56258, 11th March 2024).

Results
Seven patients participated in the focus group discussion and the remaining three consented to one-one online/telephone discussion. Results were consistently positive. A particularly impactful comment was, “Everyone was made to feel welcome and not only included but heard. Those of us living with chronic pain do not often feel heard and it was a refreshing change.” Negative comments appeared related to pain being an ongoing problem rather than the delivery of the course itself.

Conclusion
Patients with chronic pain were favorable towards TBL pain science education. Next steps are to evaluate the impact of the TBL approach on patient-reported outcomes such as pain, disability and quality of life.

Background
Team-Based Learning (TBL) activities, when well-designed, present significant and specific application exercises that introduce ambiguity and uncertainty, fostering meaningful team decision-making. As healthcare professionals frequently encounter uncertainty in their work, developing a higher comfort with ambiguity is crucial.

Objective
To evaluate changes in second-year pharmacy students' tolerance for ambiguity and uncertainty following participation in TBL sessions across multiple courses.

Methods
Students were invited to complete voluntary pre- and post-surveys, which included the Tolerance for Ambiguity Scale and the Need for Closure Scale (desire for certainty). The surveys were distributed via email before and after students finished eight TBL sessions on a variety of pharmacy practice topics. Data analysis involved descriptive statistics, Spearman’s correlation, Mann-Whitney U, and Wilcoxon signed-rank tests to compare pre- and post-survey responses.

Results
In spring 2024, of 107 second-year pharmacy students, 99 completed the pre-survey, and 60 completed the post-survey. Students who had a lower tolerance for ambiguity also had a higher desire for certainty (p < 0.001; r(97) = -0.7023). From pre- to post-survey, the overall cohort showed a statistically significant increase in Tolerance for Ambiguity (p < 0.0302). While no significant difference was observed in the Need for Closure Scale (desire for certainty) for the overall cohort, a matched pair analysis (N=56) revealed a significant change in scores (p = 0.0247).
​​
Conclusions
The significant increase in Tolerance for Ambiguity and decrease in Need for Closure (desire for certainty) suggests that TBL experiences may help students become more comfortable with ambiguous situations, a crucial skill in healthcare settings. These findings underscore the potential of TBL as an educational strategy to prepare pharmacy students for the complexities and uncertainties inherent in clinical practice. Further research is warranted to explore the impact of TBL on students' tolerance for ambiguity and desire for certainty.

Purpose
Our educational program uses TBL to assess and extend small group Case-Based-Learning (CBL), which is considered the pre-work for TBL. In this intervention, funded in part by TBLC, students were assigned to work with the same “static” group for TBL as for CBL or a “hybrid” group comprised of members from 6-7 different CBL groups. The study aims were (1) compare outcomes and experiences of students on hybrid versus static teams; (2) understand student perspectives on these curricular choices.

Methods
Data were collected over three years. In Years 1 and 3, the intervention ran during two courses. Each group was “static” for one and “hybrid” for the other. IRAT, GRAT, GAE, and exam scores for questions mapped to TBL were compared between conditions using a two-tailed t-test. Pandemic circumstances prohibited intervention in Year 2; those data are analyzed as control. Students completed surveys (n = 96) and focus groups (n = 7) on their experiences. Responses were analyzed thematically.

Results
There were no significant differences in exam scores between static and hybrid groups.
Across all years, in course 1, hybrid groups performed significantly better on IRAT; in course 2, static groups performed significantly better in GAE; the same groups performed significantly better in GRAT regardless of hybrid or static condition. In course 2, hybrid groups scored significantly higher in GRAT in Year 1, and static groups scored significantly higher in GAE in Year 3. Survey respondents rated static better for learning the material, speed of learning, depth of knowledge, additional stress, and preference. Qualitative results demonstrated mixed sentiments.

Conclusions
Multiple peer-based learning groups do not consistently impact academic outcomes. Educators could pursue either condition based on their mission and goals. Educators using hybrid groups should address student concerns regarding increased stressed and negative impacts on perception of learning.

Background
Although a collaborative learning promotes student engagement, knowledge development and social communication skills, it can also be a challenging experience for some learners. This study aimed evaluate experience of neurodivergent postgraduate pharmacy learners with Team-Based Learning (TBL) and to identify how inclusivity of TBL study days can be improved.

Description
An online survey was administered to postgraduate pharmacy learners (n=239) attending a full day online TBL study day. The survey consisted of nine questions. Descriptive statistics were used for data analysis.

Results
The survey response rate was 79% (n=183/239). Ten (5%) identified as neurodivergent or having learning differences, eight (4%) as maybe, and two choose ‘prefer not to say’. Sixteen disclosed conditions including dyslexia (n=5), ADHD (n=7), mental health related difficulties (n=8), autism (n=1). Some (n=7, 35%) found TBL particularly challenging due to learning differences, whereas 13 (65%) did not. Four students (ADHD (n=3), mental health-related difficulties (n=4)), thought that they could use their strengths in collaboration with peers, application exercises, problem-solving or critical thinking activities. Learners with social anxiety found challenging to be a spokesperson for the group. Pre-work was highlighted as the most difficult aspect of TBL by both neurotypical and neurodivergent learners (n=65, 36%), followed by application exercises (n=57, 31%), and readiness assurance test (n=48, 26%). Most responders (90%, n=152) thought that no adjustments were needed to improve inclusivity. The suggested adjustments by neurodivergent and non-neurodivergent learners (n=17, 10%) included accessibility of teaching material and resources used in class before the session, visual timers for sessions, use of more visual aids, and slower pace of talk.

Conclusions
The results indicate that the TBL could be an accessible way of teaching for learners with neurodivergent traits. Some adjustments such as accessibility of resources before the session and use of visual aids could improve the inclusivity further.