Many PharmD curricula teach the pharmaceutical sciences as discrete content areas, including calculations, compounding, pharmaceutics, and biopharmaceutics. Thus, students often learn theories and skills in isolation and may be unprepared for the complex synthesis demanded in practice. Compounding cases inherently demand the integration of all content areas.

TBL is designed to allow the application of foundational knowledge to complex problems within a collaborative team environment. This approach helps train practice-ready graduates  

Objective
To present a framework for creating integrated TBL high taxonomy applications that bridge the various Pharmaceutical Sciences using case scenarios. The cases prepare students for complex, integrative skills assessments, using the principled design of human and veterinary compounding formulations.

Implementation Approach

1. Timing & Readiness: The module is deployed within a Pharmaceutics course sequence, following student completion of foundational coursework in Pharmaceutics I & II, Compounding Pharmacy Lab, and Calculations to ensure teams possess the necessary knowledge.
2. Student teams are assigned an integrated application case centered on a human patient and their pet, each requiring a compounded medication, or have a question that needs counseling.
3. The pet species are varied (e.g., cats, dogs, birds), so students must move beyond routine compounding and critically analyze how species-specific physiology affects formulation strategy.
4. To solve the case, each team must research and synthesize knowledge of:
   • Species-Specific Biopharmaceutics: Analyze relevant factors affecting absorption (e.g., GI pH, transit time) and elimination. 
   • Justify excipient and vehicle selection based on drug solubility, stability, and desired release profile. 
   • Practical Compounding Art: formulation to practical constraints such as palatability, dosing volume, and administration route, feasible for the animal and owner.

Conclusion
This TBL module uses human and veterinary cases to help students connect drug science, formulation principles, and hands-on compounding. By solving these integrated problems in teams, students directly build the practice-based decision-making skills they need as pharmacists.

Background
The College of Medicine at Dhofar University (DU) enrolled its first cohort in September 2025 (for the University Requirement Courses), to start the MD program in January 2026. From the outset, the educational strategy was designed around active learning—particularly Team-Based Learning (TBL). Faculty were selected for their enthusiasm for learner-centered methods, and all completed the TBLC Certification Workshop to ensure pedagogical alignment.


Methods
Two key planning challenges emerged: (1) determining the appropriate number of TBL sessions per semester and (2) establishing a transparent process for selecting high-impact “application” exercises. In collaboration with Sultan Qaboos University (SQU), DU, initially, developed a 12-item, weighted framework guided by the 4S principles. Criteria included Clinical/Professional Relevance, Complexity and Integration, Cognitive Challenge, Controversy Potential, Practical Applicability, Team Interdependence, Feasibility, Alignment with Learning Objectives, Authenticity, Inclusivity, Feedback Potential, and Engagement. Each application was rated on a five-point scale.


Results
The framework was subjected to AI-assisted critical appraisal and iterative faculty review. The final version produced quantifiable, comparative scores that enabled prioritization of TBL applications across courses while promoting fairness, transparency, and educational coherence.


Conclusion
This structured, AI-enhanced approach supports systematic selection of TBL applications in a new medical curriculum. It offers a replicable model for other institutions seeking to balance academic rigor, faculty input, and innovation in active-learning design. Further discussion with TBLC members will refine and endorse this framework for wider adoption.

Introduction
The Autonomic Nervous System (ANS) Team-Based Learning (TBL) Session was created for second-year medical students at SUNY Downstate to consolidate autonomic physiology and pharmacology content taught longitudinally across the curriculum. It occurs at the start of the final pre-clinical unit, before dedicated Step 1 study. Variable team scores on the application exercises the year prior suggested that cases were of inappropriate difficulty. Students also reported difficulty engaging with the material due to diminished recall of foundational concepts. This session was revised to address case difficulty and support recall of foundational content.

Methods
A third-year medical student revised the session in collaboration with two faculty members. Updates included new clinical cases aligned with USMLE content and a concise booklet reviewing foundational ANS concepts, provided as pre-reading and used during the session. The iRAT/tRAT and application exercises were delivered via the InteDashboard platform. Students completed pre- and post-session surveys assessing confidence in six learning objectives and four expectation-reality items. Paired t-tests were performed. The post-survey also included an abridged 20-item Team-Based Learning Student Assessment Instrument (TBL-SAI) and a free response section for feedback. 

Results
Student confidence significantly increased for all six learning objectives following the session (p < 0.001). Expectation-reality alignment improved across all items, though not statistically significant. TBL-SAI results demonstrated satisfaction and a positive preference for TBL. Qualitative feedback was strongly positive, with students describing the module as effective, noting the quality of the pre-session material. Suggested improvements included adjusting case timing and briefly reviewing foundational concepts at the start of the session. 

Conclusions
Targeted pre-session review materials and updated cases improved learner confidence, engagement, and satisfaction. This student–faculty collaborative approach offers a scalable strategy for reinforcing foundational content and enhancing application of core concepts. A follow-up study comparing performance with the subsequent cohort will further assess the impact of these changes.

Cognitive Load Theory (CLT) provides a robust framework for instructional design by distinguishing among intrinsic load, arising from the inherent complexity of a task; extraneous load, generated by unnecessary or poorly designed instructional elements; and germane load, which supports schema construction and meaningful learning. Learning is optimized when intrinsic load is appropriately managed, extraneous load is minimized, and germane load is intentionally fostered. Team-Based Learning (TBL), is particularly well-suited for intentional application of CLT principles given its standardized structure, emphasis on preparation, and reliance on collaborative problem solving. When intentionally designed and skillfully facilitated, TBL may reduce unnecessary cognitive burden while promoting deeper processing, collaboration, and durable learning.


This presentation synthesizes evidence from the CLT and TBL literature to identify practical, theory-informed strategies that instructors can apply when designing and implementing TBL. Rather than reporting empirical outcomes, this work focuses on translating theory into practice by illustrating how CLT principles can be operationalized within core phases/components TBL. Specific attention is given to instructional design choices that influence cognitive load, including the design of preparatory materials, task sequencing, and application activities, as well as the role of psychological safety in supporting productive collaboration.


Collectively, these strategies are intended to support educators in designing TBL experiences that balance cognitive challenge with appropriate instructional support. By reducing extraneous demands associated with complex course structures, excessive preparatory requirements, or poorly aligned tasks, instructors can more effectively direct learners’ cognitive resources toward higher-order thinking and application. Aligning the inherent structure of TBL with CLT-informed design principles provides a practical framework for creating high-impact learning experiences that appropriately challenge students while minimizing cognitive overload and supporting sustained learning.

Background
Skills-based PharmD courses require students to consistently translate knowledge into observable performance (e.g., counseling, device technique, triage, documentation). Team-Based Learning (TBL) offers a structured, scalable approach—advance preparation, readiness assurance (iRAT/tRAT), and 4S application exercises—that can be intentionally aligned to skills assessment rubrics (OSCEs, simulations, check-offs, or EPAs).  

Objective
To describe a program-agnostic, stepwise method to design and implement TBL in PharmD skills courses so that team learning activities directly prepare learners for skills assessments, using OSCE counseling stations as a transferable example. 

Implementation Approach
Grounded in established TBL guidance, we developed a reproducible build process that any program can adapt to its local skills assessments and staffing.  

Assessment Blueprinting
Start with the skills rubric/checklist (OSCE or equivalent) and map it to 3–6 measurable performance objectives (accuracy, safety screening, organization, patient-centered communication, teach-back, follow-up). 

Targeted pre-work (time-capped): Create a concise preparation packet (micro-lecture + job aid + exemplar script/steps) that mirrors rubric language. 

Readiness assurance for “critical errors”: Build iRAT/tRAT items around high-stakes omissions (e.g., red flags, contraindicated counseling points, technique errors) and use immediate feedback plus an appeals process.  

4S applications that mirror performance: Design team application exercises requiring specific choices aligned to the rubric (what to prioritize, what to say, what to do next), with simultaneous reporting and rapid facilitation.  

Rubric-linked coaching and debrief: Use standardized facilitator prompts tied to performance domains; include brief modeling of “gold-standard” behaviors (e.g., teach-back phrasing). 

Fidelity + logistics checklist: Provide a session run-sheet (timing, roles, materials, peer evaluation cadence) to ensure consistent delivery across instructors and sites. 

Evaluation Plan
Implementation outcomes (feasibility, acceptability, fidelity) will be tracked with brief faculty logs, student surveys, and a fidelity checklist. Early effectiveness signals will be assessed using skills outcomes appropriate to the program (e.g., OSCE domain scores, critical error frequency, rater comments), consistent with the use of OSCEs in pharmacy education.  

Conclusion
This playbook operationalizes TBL as a skills-preparation system—blueprint → readiness → 4S practice → rubric-linked debrief—adaptable across PharmD programs regardless of the specific skills assessment format (OSCE, simulation, or competency check-off).

Typically, Team-Based Learning has been under-utilised in the physical sciences, especially in larger cohorts. Despite this it has been shown to be an effective active learning strategy for subjects such as chemistry, usually with modifications to the traditional TBL structure, such as deviation from the 4S’s.

In 24/25 academic year, an increase in student numbers accompanied by reduced funding for post-graduate teaching assistants in University of Birmingham chemistry degree necessitated a move to a teaching technique that allowed for active learning with large student: staff ratio. Hence, a fundamental Y1 spectroscopy course for 160 students, spanning both semesters, was converted to TBL for the 24/25 academic year, including using the tRAT for 50% of the course marks. Acknowledging that team assessment can be contentious, peer review was used to moderate the tRAT marks. Alongside this, students were asked to provide peer feedback at various points in the course to facilitate the acquisition of team working skills.


This presentation will outline how TBL was implemented for the teaching and assessment in this course, with focus on peer review and peer feedback. Alongside being asked to rate their team members on their teamwork skills after each workshop, students were also asked to provide two comments; one positive and one focusing on improvements. These comments were analysed thematically to generate five themes: preparation; listening and respect; communication and confidence; teamwork and collaboration; contribution, which aligned with the key aspects of teamwork. Peer review marks were also compared to individual assessment marks for the course to determine correlation.


Overall, with some minor modifications to the traditional TBL model, TBL is an effective strategy for teaching chemistry. Use of peer review coupled with frequent peer feedback allows a fair grade to be awarded for team activities and facilitates the development of key teamworking skills.

Introduction
Team-Based Learning (TBL) is an evidence-based pedagogy that promotes active engagement and skill development as students learn new course content, and its use continues to expand in health professions education. High-fidelity TBL improves student experience and academic achievement. A recent scoping review (Cleland et al., 2025) identified persistent gaps in the TBL literature, including the need for clarification research examining the effect of TBL on social and professional skills in clinical environments. Concurrently, North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) pass rates have declined nationally and within our institution, and evidence-based strategies to support first-attempt success remain limited. 

Methods
TBL will be integrated into longitudinal Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experiences (APPEs) across 3–4 faculty sites. Learners from different clinical settings will be assigned to cross-site teams. Students will complete independent preparation followed by asynchronous iRATs and tRATs with immediate feedback (LMS or scratch cards). Teams will then complete application exercises and participate in faculty-led debrief sessions via Microsoft Teams, using simultaneous reporting through the chat function to preserve TBL structure. Following completion of sessions with all faculty, students will complete NAPLEX review questions (St. John’s library exam) covering all TBL topics. An anonymous Qualtrics survey will then assess perceived NAPLEX readiness and perceived intervention effectiveness using open- and closed-ended items. 

Results
This poster will provide a “how-to” framework for implementing TBL in experiential education and will present preliminary findings. Data collection will occur monthly from February–April, with qualitative and quantitative analyses of three months of outcomes. Practice NAPLEX exam performance for covered topics will be evaluated relative to the national exam pass threshold. 

Conclusions
Conclusions will be based on analyzed results and presented in the final poster. 

General chemistry is considered one of the most difficult courses for first-year undergraduate students. Implementing TBL in this setting presents certain difficulties due to the wide range of students’ background, notably in mathematics. As a result, the pre-work required in TBL can often feel overwhelming for many students. Furthermore, in medium to large TBL classrooms, instructors may find it difficult to identify teams that are struggling or heading in a wrong direction. These teams are often reluctant to participate in the class discussion.


The learning assistant program has proven to be successful in a wide variety of classroom and institutional settings. Learning assistants (LAs) are senior peer undergraduate students who assist the instructor in the classroom by facilitating discussions between groups of students, encouraging active participation. LAs must take a pedagogy course and meet weekly with the instructor to prepare for the upcoming module. In this work, strategies to enhance the TBL experience in general chemistry through the effective integration of LAs are presented. Notably, LAs can support students outside of class during their office hours by providing guidance to complete the pre-work and by providing strategies to adjust to the TBL format. LAs can support the instructor during class by serving as relays between the teams and instructor to better focus the class discussion. LAs can also provide initial guidance to the teams who are struggling, therefore encouraging these teams to participate in the class discussion.

Team-Based Learning (TBL) is, by its nature, highly engaging compared to traditional learning modalities. Over recent years, many programs have transitioned to distance education, introducing new challenges to maintaining the same level of engagement while also creating opportunities for innovation. We conducted a pilot study comparing virtual reality (VR) and Zoom in an online elective course to evaluate community building, engagement, and immersion.


The study was conducted in an established elective course taught using TBL, that had previously been held online on Zoom for several years. Course content and activities including pre-class material, readiness assessment tests (RATs), and application exercises remained consistent with previous years. Participants completed surveys at the beginning of the course, after four weeks of Zoom classes, and again at the conclusion of the course, following four weeks of VR instruction.


By the final survey, most participants reported enjoying class more in VR, compared to fewer than half who initially preferred online classes. The preferred modality for socializing also shifted from in-person at the start of the study to online by the end. More students felt present in the same room with instructors and peers and were more likely to forget about their real-world surroundings in VR compared to Zoom. Open-ended responses highlighted that VR made learning more enjoyable, facilitated active learning and stronger peer/instructor interaction, and was generally less distracting than Zoom. Limitations included short battery life, potential technical issues, and motion sickness with VR.


While larger studies are needed to validate these findings, integrating VR into online TBL courses, particularly for simultaneous reporting and application discussion, may enhance online TBL classes and foster closer connections between students and instructors.

This poster presents the design of an authentic Team-Based Learning (TBL) board simulation developed to support complex and judgement-based learning in sustainability reporting and corporate governance education. While traditional coursework can assess critical reading, it often underrepresents the collaborative and decision-oriented nature of professional governance practice. This assessment redesign responds by leveraging core TBL principles to create a high-fidelity application experience centred on collective reasoning, accountability, and ethical judgement.


The assessment follows a structured TBL-aligned sequence:


First, students engage in preparation using a case study and targeted academic and professional materials. At this stage, bounded and responsible use of AI is incorporated to support readiness. AI tools may be used for information-intensive tasks such as regulatory scanning, benchmarking, and media analysis, enabling students to build shared factual foundations efficiently. Clear boundaries are imposed on the purpose of AI use, ensuring that AI supports preparation rather than replacing individual accountability or evaluative judgement.


Second, students participate in an in-class team application phase, acting as boards of directors with defined roles and responsibilities. No electronic devices are permitted during this phase, foregrounding peer instruction, deliberation, and collective judgement.


Third, teams synthesise their decisions into a concise poster and deliver a short board-style presentation, followed by questioning from peers and instructors acting as stakeholders.


Finally, students complete an individual reflective report evaluating their learning, team dynamics, and the effectiveness and limitations of their AI use.


The poster highlights how AI integration can be aligned with TBL design logic, reinforcing readiness while preserving the integrity of team-based application and accountability. It concludes by distilling transferable design principles and lessons learned for educators seeking to design authentic and AI-aware TBL assessments in complex disciplinary contexts.

Background
Team-Based Learning (TBL) depends on effective pre-class preparation, yet many implementations rely on passive readings. We evaluated students’ perceptions of an active-learning enhanced preparatory package (short instructor videos, interactive workbook activities, practice questions, flashcards, and curated clinical cases) created for a cardiovascular physiology TBL session on Introduction to Valvular Disorders and Murmurs.

Methods
We conducted a retrospective mixed-methods study at Ross University School of Medicine (Barbados) using de-identified, routinely collected post-TBL evaluation data from four consecutive cohorts (Spring 2023, Summer 2023, Fall 2023, Spring 2024). Likert-type items examined: (1) perceived quality of preparatory materials relative to learning objectives, (2) resources used for preparation, and (3) perceived relevance of Readiness Assurance Test (RAT) questions and application exercises to preparatory materials and learning objectives. Open-ended responses were analyzed thematically to identify perceived strengths and areas for refinement.

Results
Students consistently rated the preparatory materials highly, with “Very high/High” ratings of 77.7% (Spring 2023, n=301), 72.6% (Summer 2023, n=157), 74.1% (Fall 2023, n=139), and 73.3% (Spring 2024, n=15); “Low/Very low” ratings remained <3% across larger cohorts. Most learners reported using the instructor-provided Canvas resources as their primary preparation tool (95.7%, 92.2%, 93.5%, and 80.0%, respectively). Perceived alignment was strong: RAT items were rated “Highly relevant/Relevant” by 89.93%, 88.96%, 89.93%, and 86.67%, and application exercises by 87.25%, 88.31%, 86.33%, and 86.66% across cohorts. Qualitative themes emphasized clarity and organization, multimodal flexibility (video + reading + practice), improved understanding and confidence for iRAT/tRAT, and clinically meaningful integration; a minority noted content density and time burden.

Conclusions
Active-learning–enriched preparatory materials for a complex cardiovascular TBL were perceived as high quality, widely used, and well aligned with in-class assessments and applications. Optimizing the preparation phase may enhance engagement and perceived value of TBL while monitoring workload.

Background
Team-Based Learning (TBL) remains widely used in medical education, but its feasibility and fidelity are increasingly challenged in the post-COVID era as institutions adopt Hybrid-Flexible (HyFlex) delivery. Because TBL depends on stable teams, real-time interaction, and tightly structured processes, HyFlex constraints may amplify barriers to engagement, equity, and learning - especially for remote and struggling learners.

Methods
We conducted a critical narrative synthesis (2013–2025) examining TBL in undergraduate and postgraduate medical education across face-to-face, hybrid, online, and HyFlex modalities. Eligible sources included systematic/integrative/umbrella reviews, experimental and observational studies, and implementation reports. Findings were organized across four domains: (1) educational outcomes, (2) learner experience and equity, (3) logistical/technological feasibility, and (4) comparisons with case-based learning (CBL) and flipped classrooms.

Results
Across modalities, TBL consistently supports short-term learning gains and exam performance. However, evidence for long-term retention and higher-order competencies (e.g., clinical reasoning) is mixed, and postgraduate benefits appear limited without intentional adaptation. HyFlex TBL introduces substantial “friction,” including communication barriers, uneven participation, increased extraneous cognitive load, and difficulty sustaining core TBL design elements (e.g., the 4S principles). These constraints can reduce engagement and narrow content coverage while disproportionately disadvantaging remote learners.  Compared with TBL, CBL may better support integrative reasoning and expert feedback, while flipped classrooms offer greater flexibility with reduced accountability. Emerging blended formats combining readiness assurance with structured case discussion or evidence appraisal may balance benefits without excessive workload.

Conclusion
TBL remains valuable for engagement and accountability, but is not universally optimal in HyFlex contexts. Educators should adopt context-sensitive, blended designs; strengthen facilitation and technology supports; and proactively scaffold learners at risk. Further research is needed on equity impacts, long-term outcomes, and hybrid models across diverse settings.

Introduction
Formative and summative assessment each offer distinct benefits for student motivation and learning. In Team-Based Learning (TBL), readiness assurance tests (RATs) can be implemented in either mode, yet their relative impact remains unclear. This study investigates how assessment mode influences preparation, performance, and student experience within a controlled TBL environment.


Methods
A mixed methods design was used across two MSc cohorts (n=64; n=61). Students in each cohort simultaneously took two TBL-based units: one using summative RATs, the other formative. Quantitative data included iRAT/tRAT scores, learning uplift, and (year 2) pre learning engagement. Two-way ANOVA tested effects of assessment mode and team composition. Fourteen students participated in semi-structured focus groups, analysed via hybrid deductive–inductive thematic analysis.


Results
Summative RATs produced significantly higher iRAT and tRAT scores, though uplift was lower. Engagement with pre learning did not differ statistically between units. Focus groups showed summative assessments increased preparation intensity and feelings of accountability but also heightened stress and reduced willingness to take risks. Formative RATs encouraged experimentation, deeper discussion, and greater psychological safety. Permanent teams outperformed rotating teams and were strongly preferred.


Conclusions
Summative RATs increase preparation and grades, while formative RATs foster richer dialogue, risk-taking, and collaborative learning. Stable teams consistently enhance performance. A hybrid model - summative iRAT followed by formative tRAT – is one possibility for future study.

The rise of generative AI tools such as ChatGPT presents both challenges and opportunities for educators using TBL. While concerns about academic integrity persist, these tools also open new pathways for designing more engaging, reflective, and higher-order learning tasks. This paper presents a set of AI-enhanced Application Exercises that blend the traditional “4S” principles of TBL—Significant problem, Same problem, Specific choice, Simultaneous reporting with creative assignment strategies adapted for an AI-rich environment. 

Drawing on approaches such as prompt competitions, critical revision of AI outputs, visual thinking with mind maps, AI-vs-human comparative tasks and debate-style formats, these exercises engage teams in deeper cognitive and metacognitive work. Each design leverages generative AI not as a shortcut, but as a thinking partner, prompting students to evaluate, critique, and improve machine-generated content while reinforcing discipline-specific reasoning. By reimagining Application Exercises in this way, the paper offers a practical framework for integrating AI into TBL classrooms without compromising pedagogical integrity. Implications for assessment, student engagement, and academic policy are also discussed.

Studying student discourse in a TBL environment is valuable because the ways learners articulate ideas and reasoning, question each other, and negotiate meaning provides insight into how understanding develops. Examining this discourse can contribute to an understanding of collaborative thinking processes and reveals both productive reasoning and misconceptions, which shape learning.

This study focuses on the discourse of chemistry students completing a TBL course in ‘Structure Elucidation of Organic Molecules’, using various spectroscopic techniques.

Chemistry courses in ‘Structure Elucidation’ require students to engage in higher-order learning. They need to extract information from experimental spectra before constructing the molecule then re-analysing to ensure the chemical structure matches the information provided. It is well documented that chemistry students find structure elucidation challenging, as it requires combining information from various sources and they may not have the judgement required to extract information from experimental data using theoretical principles. Hence, gaining insight into the discourse during these TBL workshops is hugely valuable for the instructor. 

The participants of this study were UK Y2 (equivalent to sophomore) chemistry students participating in the TBL course. The discussion during the tRAT and Application Activities for three TBL teams over the duration of a TBL course were audio recorded and transcribed. The discussion was analysed thematically where three themes were emergent: chemistry-related explanation; co-construction of knowledge and productive re-evaluation. The frequency of these themes in relation to the average cohort score for specific questions is also presented.

Introduction
Bigg’s 3P model maps out student learning (product) as a function of learning-focused activities occurred (process) contingent upon students’ factors and teaching context (presage). This study seeks to understand how student learning unfolds with iterations of TBL activities in a synchronous online course. It also explores the influences of team characteristics, along with students’ individual differences, as the presage.


Methods
The study is drawing on the experience of a post-secondary course on management offered in Fall 2024 as a synchronous online class, involving seven TBL cycles spanning 12 weeks. The class sized 39 was divided into 8 teams of 4-5 based largely on students’ gender, country of origin, and full-time work experience as provided in a pre-course survey, with a view to achieving maximum diversity for each team. These student factors, and their indicated online learning experience, are considered in investigating their learning gains through TBL activities by comparing the tRAT against iRAT results. To assess the impact of team factors, team diversity indices calculated based on students’ demographic data and responses to Leadership Style Questionnaire are used, and so are team cohesiveness measures based on the variance in peer evaluations within each team. To explore the resultant student learning beyond academic results (as expressed in assignment and test scores), students’ experiences in teamwork and TBL activities are analyzed with their responses to Teamwork Perception Survey and TBL Student Assessment Instrument (TBL-SAI).


Results
Pending


Conclusions
How team factors at play in TBL is unclear. The study is perhaps the first of its kind in revealing the influences of team factors, particularly team diversity and cohesiveness, on TBL conducted in a synchronous online environment. It shed insights on how student learning unfolds in academic knowledge over iterations of TBL activities, along with teamwork and TBL experiences as a result.

Introduction
TBL is proven in enhancing student learning, academic and non-academic. This study aims to evaluate the effectiveness of TBL in facilitating content knowledge acquisition and application, and explore student development in teamwork attitude and practice, as adopted in a hybrid learning environment.


Methods
The study is drawing on the experience of a MBA course on marketing offered in Summer 2025 (control; n = 13) and Fall 2025 (TBL; n = 20) in a hybrid fashion, whereby weekly class sessions were held partly online and partly in person over 12 weeks. TBL was adopted in the Fall 2025 session, involving four TBL cycles plus two demo-cycles, with iRAT and tRAT run mostly online whereas application in in-person sessions. Students’ scores on pre-class quizzes (publisher-provided) are used as the measure of preparation effort and quality, whereas scores on summative assignments (i.e., a case study analysis and a client project report) to indicate overall course performance. These scores are compared for the TBL vis-a-vis the control sessions to evaluate the contribution of TBL, in term of course performance and the ways students managed their own learning. On the other hand, development of students’ teamwork attitude in the TBL session is assessed based on pre- and post-course survey results, along with team cohesiveness as informed by peer evaluations conducted as part of the TBL cycle. Students’ experiences in teamwork and TBL are evaluated by Teamwork Perception Survey and TBL Student Assessment Instrument (TBL-SAI) in the post-course survey.


Results
Pending


Conclusions
The contribution of TBL to student learning, academic and non-academic, is demonstrated in a hybrid environment. Students improved in academic performance and learning better informed by ongoing feedback, with the adoption of TBL. Students in the TBL session also developed teamwork attitude through the course, leading to favorable teamwork and TBL-empowered learning experiences.

Background
Team-Based Learning (TBL) is traditionally implemented in didactic classroom settings; however, its application within a student-led research framework is less commonly explored. This project adapted TBL principles to a pharmacy education research initiative, enabling Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE) students to support first-year pharmacy students in improving Objective Structured Clinical Examination (OSCE) performance.


Methods
First-year pharmacy students often have limited opportunities to apply classroom knowledge to realistic pharmacy practice scenarios. A literature review conducted by APPE students identified that while MyDispense—a virtual pharmacy simulation platform—has been widely studied for improving medication dispensing and problem-solving skills, few studies have directly examined its impact on OSCE performance. To address this gap, APPE students developed 17 structured medication-dispensing activities within MyDispense. These activities were designed to simulate real-world pharmacy practice and allowed students to practice patient interviews, counseling, and dispensing skills in a safe, risk-free environment. The activities were integrated into OSCE preparation for first-year pharmacy students.


Results
Using a comparative approach, the academic performance of the first-year cohort—specifically OSCE grades and recheck rates—was evaluated. The analysis demonstrated that structured, goal-oriented practice with MyDispense is a practical and effective method for improving OSCE outcomes in novice students.


Conclusion
Furthermore, this project exemplifies the application of TBL beyond the classroom. By employing TBL to manage their research, the APPE students collaboratively applied didactic knowledge, mirrored real-world clinical and research teamwork, and advanced their own preparedness for future roles as pharmacists. This model highlights the dual benefit of TBL in facilitating both research execution and professional development.

Instructors who use alternative (non-lecture) teaching strategies, like TBL, often face resistance from students, colleagues, and other stakeholders because their teaching methods do not fit the stereotypical model that many consider “teaching.” This resistance and lack of familiarity can lead to questions about teaching effectiveness and, subsequently, negative feedback and compromised annual and promotion reviews. Through the Framework for Assessing Teaching Effectiveness (FATE) we have established a framework, resources, and best practices for telling your teaching story and demonstrating teaching effectiveness. Effective teaching is characterized by a focus on the learner and learning and includes establishing learning outcomes that align and guide course design; utilization of a variety of evidence-based instructional practices and assessments; and engagement in continuous improvement through reflective practice and ongoing professional development. We will present the framework and summarize suggestions for collecting and presenting evidence to successfully and accurately describe your teaching to various stakeholders to encourage valid and reliable assessments of teaching. Accurate and reliable assessments of teaching can provide actionable feedback that can be used to enhance teaching and lead to improved student success.