Program for the 2011 GPSC Student Showcase.

Program for the 2012 GPSC Student Showcase.

Program for the 2013 GPSC Student Showcase.

Program for the 2014 GPSC Student Showcase.

Objective. To conduct a systematic review of reports of pharmacy student research programs that describes the programs and resulting publications or presentations. Methods. To be eligible for the review, reports had to be in English and indicate that students were required to collect, analyze data, and report or present findings. The outcome variables were extramural posters/presentations and publications. Results. Database searches resulted in identification of 13 reports for 12 programs. Two-thirds were reports of projects required for a course or for graduation, and the remaining third were elective (participation was optional). Extramural posters resulted from 75% of the programs and publications from 67%. Conclusion. Although reporting on the outcomes of student research programs is limited, three-quarters of the programs indicated that extramural presentations, publications, or both resulted from student research. Additional research is needed to identify relevant outcomes of student research programs in pharmacy.

This exploratory mixed methods study addressed the types of gains students made when engaged in one of two forms of inquiry. Gains were measured on three levels: conceptual understanding, the process of scientific investigation, and use of practical reasoning skills. One hundred-thirty 8th grade students from a rural public school in East Texas participated in this study. Classes of students were randomly assigned to one of two treatment groups: guided inquiry or authentic student research learning. Non parametric statistical analysis and constant comparative qualitative analysis were used to triangulate pre-tests and post-tests, student journals, and student drawings to address the research questions. Findings support greater gains in conceptual understanding of domain specific content in a highly scaffolded guided inquiry. Further authentic scientific research learning was more effective for developing understanding of scientific investigation as a process and application of knowledge through practical reasoning skills.

Im Sommersemester 2023 haben sich 18 Architekturstudierende im Rahmen des ARCH4HEALTH Student Research Lab an der Professur für Sozial- und Gesundheitsbauten der TU Dresden mit dem Thema Psyche & Raum beschäftigt. In Kooperation mit dem Referat für psychiatrische Versorgung und Suchtfragen des Sächsischen Staatsministerium für Soziales und Gesellschaftlichen Zusammenhalt wurde der Fokus auf psychiatrische Einrichtungen gerichtet. Dabei wurden klinische Einrichtungen mit Einheiten wie der Akutpsychiatrie, der Gerontopsychiatrie und der forensischen Psychiatrie betrachtet, wie auch psychiatrische Wohnstätten. Im Rahmen von eigenen Forschungsprojekten wurde aktuellen Fragestellungen zu Nutzerbedürfnissen, planerischen und gestalterischen Anforderungen nachgegangen. Aus den Forschungserkenntnissen wurden erste Ideen und Konzepte erarbeitet. In diesem Buch werden die Ergebnisse der studentischen Forschungsprojekte der Module AD 610, AD 951 und AD 651 präsentiert.:1. Vorwort 2. Einleitung 3. Forschungsartikel 4. Poster 5. Stegreifentwürfe 6. Rückblick & Ausblick

Das ARCH4HEALTH Student Research Lab wurde im Wintersemester 2021/22 erstmalig durchgeführt. Es stellt den Auftakt einer regelmäßigen Serie von Lehrveranstaltungen an der Professur für Sozial- und Gesundheitsbauten dar, in der aktuelle Fragestellungen im Rahmen von studentischen Forschungsprojekten bearbeitet werden. / Lehrkonzept und Ablauf Das ARCH4HEALTH Student Research Lab verfolgt den Ansatz des forschenden Lernens. Innerhalb eines vorgegeben Oberthemas bearbeiten die Studierenden eigene Forschungsprojekte und durchlaufen den gesamten Forschungsprozess. Sie entwickeln eigene Forschungsfragen, arbeiten ein entsprechendes Forschungsdesign aus und führen schließlich eine Datenerhebung und -auswertung durch. Die Ergebnisse werden anschließend visualisiert und grafisch aufgearbeitet. Durch das forschende Lernen tauchen die Studierenden tief in ein Themenfeld ein und erarbeiten sich selbstständig und selbstbestimmt die Inhalte. Somit lernen sie Entwurfsentscheidungen auf einer wissenschaftlich belastbaren Grundlage zu treffen und der Perspektivwechsel sowie das Einfühlen in die Gebäudenutzer:innen helfen ihnen eine reflektierte Haltung im Entwurfsprozess einzunehmen. Des Weiteren generieren sie durch ihre Forschung neues Wissen, das Impulse in der Praxis setzen und Innovationen befördern kann. Daher stellt eine Abschlussveranstaltung mit Gästen aus der Praxis einen wichtigen Baustein des ARCH4HEALTH Student Research Lab dar, um den Austausch zwischen Studierenden und Architekt:innen, Klinikbetreitber:innen sowie medizinischem und pflegerischem Personal zu fördern. Durch die Veröffentlichung der Ergebnisse im Rahmen dieses Sammelbandes werden die Forschungsprojekte zudem für ein breites Publikum sichtbar gemacht.

[pt] O estudo realizado entre 2013 e 2017 objetivou investigar se há, nas escolas públicas municipais, colégio de aplicação e colégio privado, participantes da empiria, todos da cidade do Rio de Janeiro, espaço para a construção autoral dos estudantes em seus trabalhos de pesquisa. Por meio de entrevistas semiestruturadas com 28 alunos do sexto ao nono ano, 15 professores de disciplinas diversas, além de 5 profissionais setorizados - 3 bibliotecários, 1 professor de informática e 1 agente de sala de leitura - buscou-se conhecer como a pesquisa escolar é compreendida, proposta, encaminhada e executada. Isso visando a perceber se os estudantes encontram espaço para serem autores de seus trabalhos de pesquisa. Ancorados nas ideias do pensamento crítico, nas noções de pesquisa de Pedro Demo e na relação dialógica proposta por Mikhail Bakhtin, analisamos as declarações dos entrevistados que apontaram que nas escolas investigadas: a) trabalhos criativos e que atendem aos interesses dos alunos têm sido construídos, sob modelos diversos; b) a autoria tem sido exercida; c) há preocupação dos professores com o fomento autoral e o combate ao plágio; d) professores declaram não terem recebido na universidade preparação para o ensino de pesquisa; e) o texto científico tem sido pouco trabalhado; f) há conflito entre o que os estudantes apontam como dúvidas e o que os professores explicam; g) a pesquisa escolar é vista como um modelo padronizado a ser seguido, sendo, ainda, tímida a ação de ensinar a pesquisar, selecionar fontes e utilizá-las de modo coerente. Assim, entendemos que, ainda que haja expressão autoral e criativa do pensamento nas atividades de pesquisa, falta espaço para o ensino pormenorizado e criterioso desta atividade nas escolas participantes, bem como falta uma prática mais efetiva do trabalho com o gênero textual científico. Ressaltamos que há necessidade de debate mais pormenorizado nos cursos de formação de professores sobre como se ensinar pesquisa na escola de modo coeso e ético, promovendo autorias e combatendo o plágio. / [en] The study, conducted between 2013 and 2017, aimed to find if there is room for the construction of authorship in research conducted by students from public, university or private schools in Rio de Janeiro, Brazil. We conducted semi-structured interviews with 28 students from 6th to 9th grade, 15 teachers of different subjects, and 5 school professionals - 3 librarians, 1 computer teacher and 1 reading-room agent. Our aim was to understand how student research is understood, proposed, and conducted, in order to verify if students find room to be authors in their own school research. Based on critical thinking, Pedro Demo s writings on school research, and on Mikhail Bakhtin s dialogic theory of learning, we have analyzed the answers to the interviews and found that: a) yes, there is room for creative work directed to students interests; b) authorship is happening; c) there is concern by the teachers with investing in authorship and fighting plagiarism; d) teachers claim that their academic education did not prepare them to teach students on how to do research; e) scientific texts are seldom worked with; f) there is a conflict between what students see as their questions and what teachers actually want them to talk about; g) student research is seen as a necessary training, even though schools are still shy in teaching how to do research, to select sources and to use them in a cohesive manner. In sum, we understand that, even though there is authorship and creative thinking in student school research, there is little room for a more detailed and critical work with such skill. Also, there is little work with the scientific text genre. We would like to emphasize the need for a deep debate in academic teacher training on how to do research in school in such a way that it is cohesive, ethical, and that it promotes authorship and defeats plagiarism.

Abstract available thorugh the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.