yaelago
commented
2 years ago Hi @carolineson! Great to have you here - looking forward to working together!
Open carolineson opened 2 years ago
yaelago
commented
2 years ago Hi @carolineson! Great to have you here - looking forward to working together!
SerriMat
commented
2 years ago Looking forward to working with you! Wishing for international travel to open so I can visit the states!!
polekim
commented
2 years ago Hi Caroline, looking forward to working together :)
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Survey Queue: https://redcap.sydney.edu.au/surveys/?sq=9j9BZPoGXi
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Medicine: Dexamethasone
I couldn't seem to recall any super recent/relevant discussions of medications in the media, so I chose one of the resources that the site said that the database wanted to be reviewed. Interestingly enough, one of the links was for the medication I had chosen. The article regarding dexamethasone fell under the category of "Repurposing known medicines for new uses."
Dexamethasone is a glucocorticoid medication that relieves inflammation in various parts of the body and is used to treat conditions such as arthritis, blood/hormone disorders, allergic reactions, asthma, brain swelling, obstructive lung disease, and more. Basically, this fairly accessible and affordable (at most if not all pharmacies with a prescription!) medication has been found to decrease inflammation and pressure in the lungs, which has decreased the number of deaths for people needing ventilators to breathe with COVID-19. This did logically make sense to me as the medication was said to help with obstructive lung disease and asthma—both having to do with difficulty breathing.
I don’t know how else to describe my emotions other than pure joy reading this article. Though this isn’t recent news (studies regarding this medication’s effects in conjunction with COVID were being released as early as mid-last year) I think especially being in lockdown right now and constantly hearing about more cases, hospitalisations, and death, it felt really uplifting to hear that there are even more studies constantly being done and new ways that we are discovering to fight against this pandemic. It’s incredible the number of lives that this medication has the potential to save, though more clinical trials must be done. The article also mentioned that it specifically was most beneficial for people who were on ventilators, so much more so than people who just had difficulty breathing, or people who had no difficulty breathing at all (all with COVID).
I hope that they continue with these trials and make it greatly accessible—both the medication and the knowledge—as I believe it is something that really helps so many people.
Dexamethasone did have a price hike last year—which is understandable because it was around the same time that COVID-19 hit. Many people heard about and wanted access to this medication after former US President Trump’s medical team confirmed he had taken dexamethasone and he recovered from COVID. Yet even though there was a price hike of about 137%, I am glad that the original price was already very affordable, that the price hike should not hinder many from accessing the medication. Of course, this is subjective though, as no one should be worrying about whether they can afford a medication should they need it. I only hope that the price hikes do not continue as they should not be happening when more people need access to such important medication. The US FDA has already listed the medication on its shortage list, so we can only hope that the people that need the medication will be able to access it with ease.
The accessibility did also slightly worry me because though the study did have beneficial effects for people with difficulty breathing, it mostly helped the people specifically on ventilators, which worries me about a possible massive shortage of dexamethasone in the future which could potentially be taking away medication from people who really have a life or death matter on their hands. It seems that this medication should be made a great priority especially at this time as it is crucial to the current pandemic.
Unfortunately, I could not find much information about Dexamethasone. This could be due to the fact that it was patented by a company the following year that it was synthesised, which was only in 1958. I kept trying to refine my search and reading through articles and timelines, but it seems there has not been a very strict record kept on the company’s development through time. This led me to think about the importance of having access to information like this, especially when it comes to something as crucial as medication. What E$$ENTIAL MEDICINE$ is truly incredible, because it not only has an incredible focus of trying to make actual essential medicines accessible, available, affordable, and of assured quality, but they are also gathering important information that is open source so that everyone can have access to necessary information. I hope that in the future we can continue to find out about important medication and making sure that this information is available to everyone as easily as possible.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Medicine: Diazepam
For Diazepam I read an article about a woman who unknowingly became addicted to Diazepam because it was prescribed to her by her doctor. As it was suggested by her doctor after her divorce, her body continued to adjust to the medication until she was taking up to 7 pills (35 milligrams!) a night (https://www.abc.net.au/news/2021-04-13/prescription-medication-monitoring-scheme-failing-some-victorian/100040568). This fell under the category “Side effects of using medicines.”
Basically, it seems that though Diazepam is a very essential and beneficial medicine to those who need it, there should be cautionary procedures to prevent unnecessary addiction and possible dependence. Towards the end, even the woman in the story agreed that the medication was having adverse effects, rather than helping her. I think this underlines the importance of having access to the necessary information so that each individual is able to make an informed decision regarding what they are putting into their body. Of course, we have incredibly knowledgeable and helpful medical professionals and we shouldn’t replace that, but it’s about receiving “Adequate Information”—one of E$$ENTIAL MEDICINE$ goals. I feel like it is something we should (and clearly are!) put a lot of focus on.
Interestingly, the article was actually mainly focused on addiction specifically in regards to SafeScript, a real-time prescription monitoring system implemented in Victoria, rather than just Diazepam. The article was saying that the program was not very effective in achieving its goals of guiding practitioners to prevent the potential long-term harms when using specific medications. Reading this, I mostly just thought about how easily our body can become dependent on something—especially with medication that is helping solve very valid and real issues with or diseases in our body. I found myself actually separately researching more about SafeScript and trying to develop my own opinion about this service, rather than just take what the article said at face value. I do think it has an incredibly important and noble cause, but at least at the moment, it doesn’t seem like it is implemented very effectively. I’d love to see how they continue to develop and the impact it can have.
Diazepam is a medicine that is commonly used to treat many conditions such as anxiety, alcohol withdrawal, seizures, insomnia, etc. As drugs.com states, “It is believed that Diazepam works by enhancing the activity of certain neurotransmitters in the brain.” It often causes drowsiness, muscle weakness, fatigue, and loss of control of body movements.
The last quantitative evidence of a price hike from a reputable source I could find was from 2019, but there were many other sites with qualitative data starting the there have been price hikes during COVID-19. IHS Markit, a London-based information provider, claims that “prices of essential COVID-19 medicines have increased 4% globally since February.” I couldn’t seem to see specific reasons for price hikes in both 2019 or 2020. Though, the price hike did not seem as drastic (though it was more than the inflation rate), which could explain why there was not much research or reasoning, other than companies charging more.
I wondered if the 2020 increase had anything to do with COVID. For example, if maybe more people were feeling more anxious with lockdown and the pandemic? Or possibly that there was less demand as some people were not exposed to the same types of stress, therefore why the price increased to make up for the lack of demand. Ultimately, I thought that to increase the price of necessary medication, like with all of the medicines we’re researching, without a valid reason seems incredibly unethical and wrong. I’m not quite sure what the solution would be, as just trying to eradicate privatised sectors in the health field may be accidentally removing lots of extraordinary research and productive innovation. But, I think this is definitely something that should be worked on addressing.
I specifically chose to focus my circle of life on Valium, a very well-known brand of diazepam. It turns out that Hoffmann-La Roche, the company that currently owns Valium, was one of the first companies to own a license for Diazepam, meaning they have been leading the industry basically since it was synthesised in 1959. There was not a lot of information regarding Valium or the company, as it seems to have had a pretty straightforward relationship with the public (in regards to Valium sales). I tried searching different keywords, or even broadening my search, but it looks like there has not been much information released to the public, and/or not a lot of public trials done. They have done an incredible job though, as Valium is now a very recognisable and established medicine that are helping millions of people. I had never really thought about it (though obvious), but I am glad that medicines get re-evaluated by federal agencies because it introduces balances and checks—like there should be in any system ESPECIALLY for something as important as medicines.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Medicine: Fluoxetine
The article I read about Fluoxetine was about how a NHS worker was incorrectly prescribed fluoxetine (often used in anti-depressants) instead of her hay fever medication (https://www.dailyrecord.co.uk/news/uk-world-news/nhs-worker-felt-like-zombie-24658362). Though I totally understand that even medical professionals are human and mistakes happen, I was honestly just so shocked because of how scary the experience would be to experience personally. The woman in the article didn’t even realise she was on the wrong medication for 10 weeks because she did not suspect her medication (which she had been taking for years) at all. But, her experience did tell about “Side effects of using medicines.” She said she felt very anxious, constantly drowsy, emotionally numb, and even had shakes. Some symptoms did also overlap with her not having any medication to combat her hay fever (so there is at least one clear confounding variable).
Though not trying to place the blame on her at all, I think this article does help bring awareness to the importance of us knowing about the medication we take. When she first started doubting the medication prescribed to her, she realised it was a different name, but assumed it was the medication but a different brand and didn’t question it. I hope that in the future this encourages not only information availability, but also to ask questions when we are not sure, ESPECIALLY when it has to do with our health and wellbeing.
It was also interesting to think about how placebo plays into the effectiveness of medicine. I always wondered how big of an impact our own mental attitude towards a topic could affect our physical health. But, I realised that this was going slightly off track. I found that whenever I start researching a topic, I start to find other aspects/information that really pique my interest and I begin to find out more about that. Though this does mean I get to learn a lot, I think it might spread me a little thing and not as focused on the topic I was originally researching. I would like to make sure that I focus my attention and research onto the topics I set out to discover, then branch out from there.
Fluoxetine did have a price hike not too recently, but in 2019 right before the pandemic hit. According to Becker Hospital review, the companies claimed “new production costs,” but then increased the price between 568%-879% (differing by company and times throughout the year). I thought that this was completely outrageous. The fact that they were able to completely raise prices by that much because of production costs, a claim that I personally found difficult to substantiate with any research, seems incredibly unethical and I can’t imagine the effect that this had and is continuing to have on individuals who rely on this medication.
Throughout my research, I found that there were hundreds of other price hikes for thousands of medicines around the same time with the median price increase of many essential medicines about 25.8% in 2019, which was well above the inflation rate (https://www.nature.com/articles/nrd1821). The common industry practice is to keep price increases below 10% annually, which obviously isn’t the case. It really upset me to see this and made me really want to work harder on my research for E$$ENTIAL MEDICINE$ because of all the essential work they are doing. I hope that in the future companies will at least provide some sort of evidence that helps confirm their reasons for their price increases because though I understand that medicine is important, it can’t be free.
I began this challenge researching the company Eli Lilly and Co who manufactures Prozac. It turned out that this company first synthesised prozac, and has been a leader in the field since. When it first was sold in the market, it was greatly advertised as it had much milder symptoms and was a much safer medicine compared to Pamelor, the popular anti-depressant at the time. Because of this, they did not seem to have many mergers, acquisitions, or name changes. I decided to find some information on a newer company Alvogen Group Holdings 3 LLC who manufactures Fluoxetine Hydrochloride. They had multiple acquisitions, though they only received FDA approval for Fluoxetine Hydrochloride in 2011. Their most recent acquisition was just in 2020!
I thought it was amazing that Prozac (as well as Valium mentioned above) and many other brand-recognisable medications have been around for so long. I guess since it is so essential, they have continued to develop and tweak their medication to best serve the public. I did wonder if there was a significant economic advantage with a barrier to entry though. While I do know that the pharmaceutical industry is very dependent on information and resources, seeing that a lot of companies that started earlier/synthesised the medicine themselves are often the name brand that most people would recognise, even more than the name of the medicine itself. I wonder if this means that there is an unfair advantage that is potentially hindering certain companies that could help improve and innovate should there be more of an emphasis on collaboration rather than competition. I would love to see more developments made through collaboration to truly improve essential medicines.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Medicine: Ivermectin
I saw a Channel 9 news article about how Australia recently had an increase of imports of Ivermectin and health officials warning against using it as a treatment for COVID-19 as neither Australia nor any Organisation for Economic Co-operation and Development (OECD) country has approved it as such (https://www.9news.com.au/national/coronavirus-national-updates-ivermectin-shipments-to-australia-increase-tga-warning/56b8aff4-5a93-4f5e-9f25-5bcdf9a3268e). I chose the category “Repurposing known medicines for new uses” because even though it is not being repurposed by medical professionals, it is why many people are importing the medicine in and could cause shortages or price hikes in the future similar to Hydroxychloroquine in the States. While I completely understand the stress, panic, and even desperation that many people have been feeling for the past year and a half since COVID-19 emerged, but I thought that it was a little dangerous and maybe even selfish to be importing a medicine that has been said multiple times by many different health professionals that it is not helpful in treating COVID. It seems silly to incorrectly self-diagnose a treatment because it could potentially be taking it away from someone who needs it. I think that working to reduce misinformation and listening to healthcare professionals is the only way to get through the pandemic and to make sure that essential medicines are available to everyone that needs them when they need them at affordable prices.
Used to manage and treat parasite infestation, Ivermectin can be used to treat both humans and animals. For humans, this ranges from anything from head lice to babies to lymphatic filariasis (a parasitic disease caused by microscopic thread-like worms). In veterinary medicine, Ivermectin can be used as a heartworm preventative, treating parasites, and more. Some common side effects are anxiety, insomnia, and nausea.
There have been multiple price hikes at different times, as well as in different places—especially since COVID-19. Ivermectin was yet another drug that sustained a price hike in the US around the same time as Hydroxychloroquine in the US as people were desperate to find a treatment for the incredibly infectious COVID-19. Yet, I struggled to find specific statistics for just Ivermectin in the States as it seemed there were multiple drugs that were incorrectly rumoured to be COVID treatments that all underwent price hikes.
Yet more recently in June 2021, Ivermectin had a price increase of double the government-set prices for both the generic and name brand in Jakarta. Apparently, this price hike came from the low supply after a public official claimed that Ivermectin could treat COVID, though it has been refuted by medical experts and the World Health Organisation (https://www.thejakartapost.com/life/2020/10/06/american-universities-dominate-the-science-nobels.html). It is also possible there is another factor: though not Indonesia-specific, there has been a decline in the exports of Active Pharmaceutical Ingredient’s from China since COVID-19, which can lead to even shorter supplies in domestic and international markets. It was very disheartening to hear that a public official would make such a statement when there has been plenty of evidence to the contrary. I am hoping that this did not cause an unnecessary barrier for people who desperately need access to medicine.
Though I was trying to find more research on the effects on specific demographics or backgrounds, there seemed to be no information. While initially the inner problem-solver in me panicked and led me down a bit of a research rabbit hole, I realised that no information is also very important information. It is how we are able to see where there is not enough data and work to remedy that. I think it is really important to follow up on the negative effects that such drastic price hikes can have, especially in regards to different groups of people. I think is something many different countries should look to fund more research in.
I chose to focus on the brand Stromectol manufactured by Merck Sharp and Dohme Corp. It turns out this company is a very large pharmaceutical company that had acquired many other companies throughout time, which is why I ended up submitting multiple “Circle of Life” challenges for Ivermectin. Unfortunately, I still don’t think I was able to capture all of Merck’s acquisitions as no site seemed to contain all the information necessary. Even with the details of the acquisitions that were publically available, I struggled to find the price of the acquisition. I found this quite frustrating as I think it would be important to see a company’s progress, history, and what companies/specialities they’re involved with. I’d also be worried if a company is starting to look like they have a monopoly on multiple essential medicines as there would be no checks and balances. I’d like to see companies that will advertise their own acquisitions and mergers as it shows good faith through transparency.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Medicine: Levonorgestrel
An article discussed Phase 1 clinical trials results from a company called Inflammasone Therapeutics that have developed a combination HIV/birth control implant. This fell under “Clinical trial process or results,” as well as new medicines for the treatment of diseases.” Though not technically radically new, I believe that this new combination is a new medicine to the public.
Basically, Inflammasone believed that 2 of the biggest risks to women’s health in developing nations is unwanted pregnancy and HIV infection (https://www.outsourcing-pharma.com/Article/2021/08/23/Inflammasome-develops-combo-HIV-birth-control-implant). Having a single implant that could help prevent both those risks sound also unbelievable because of how helpful and incredible it could be for women’s health. I felt genuinely so moved and happy reading this article as it seems like a company that has incredible goals and are achieving them the way they said they would.
They will continue into clinical trials next year, but recently did some Phase 1 trials, but hopefully they will make more progress soon. I think it is very important to continue to find problems around the world so that we can continue to try and solve them. I am so glad that this company is focusing on women’s health, especially in areas where women may not have the best access, availability, access to information, or even the means.
Levonorgestrel is in a class of medications called progestins (which are synthetic forms of natural human hormone progesterone), and it is a hormonal medication that is often used in birth control methods—especially as emergency contraceptive. Levonorgestrel often causes a change in normal bleeding patterns, nausea, vomiting, tiredness, and headaches.
I was so glad to see no price hike since at least early 2018! As stated above, no information is also information—and in this case, it is very good news. I was genuinely glad to see that Levonorgestrel had not seen a price hike because of the crucial role it plays and the opportunities it opens up for so many women. Personally, I believe that contraception should be free so I wish there had even been a price decrease, but this was not the case and I realise that I need to monitor my own personal bias when doing objective research.
My one concern, though, is that the lack of information could be from lack of research and studies done for Levonorgestrel rather than that there was no specifically bad news, as I did really struggle to find much information at all. I hope that like Inflammasone Therapeutics, people will continue to really study more about women’s health and medicines for us, specifically like Levonorgestrel.
Once again, I had a little trouble finding a very reliable sources about the business decisions (acquisitions, mergers, name changes, etc) for Foundation Consumer Healthcare Inc, the manufacturer of Plan B One Step. Though birth control has been around since the late 1900’s, the specific brand Plan B One Step was only FDA approved in 2009, but under a different company: Teva (https://www.fda.gov/drugs/postmarket-drug-safety-information-patients-and-providers/plan-b-075mg-levonorgestrel-and-plan-b-one-step-15-mg-levonorgestrel-tablets-information). Foundation Consumer Healthcare Inc only accrued Plan B One Step contraception from Teva in 2017. It turns out that Foundation Consumer Healthcare Inc is a massive company with 32 brands under their parent company. I spent quite some time reading through their business decisions and trying to find all the acquisitions, but I struggled to find all of them. Once again, it seems that not all the information is readily available and it felt like I had a jigsaw puzzle with a timeline trying to find pieces. Though I liked doing the research, I did feel like this sort of information (as stated before) should be something that is easily accessible to anyone who need to. I really felt a lack of transparency from a lot of big corporations, which is especially troubling in the medicine/health industry.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Final Thoughts: Ultimately, I really enjoyed being able to pick a medicine and research about it on my own because that meant I was able to find out more about medicines that had an interest in or wanted to know more about. And though I know anyone can research any topic, I feel like when I get really involved with a topic I’ll spend that extra hour trying to find any more tidbits I can.
There were some troubling moments that reoccured throughout this Task. Again, I understand this is one of the reasons E$$ENTIAL MEDICINE$ exist and why we were given this specific list, but I was always so frustrated, shocked, and frankly angry every time I found a price hike. It just seems ridiculous that large price hikes without reasoning is legal and it made me really feel for anyone who needs these essentials medicines and are literally dependent on these medicines to survive. I felt that there should definitely be some balances and checks brought into place, especially in the US.
I also felt that there was a huge lack of publicly and easily accessible information. Not just from a lack of transparency from companies themselves (which I would assume should be especially important in an industry that’s making products for people’s livelihood), but also just in terms of specific research being done. For every company history I searched, it was battle to find any sort of succinct list, that wasn’t paid for. There are multiple sites that claimed they had the company’s entire history, but they would lead me down a rabbit hole of signing up for a trial and at every step of the way (one that i signed up someone from their company reached out to have a Zoom meeting with me!). There was also just such a lack of research done in terms of how the price hikes are affecting specific people that need or use the medicines, which I feel like definitely is an important factor to consider when companies announce a price hike.
But, not everything was terrible. I also learnt about a lot of incredible stuff that medical professionals and scientists are working on to continually find more issues that they can solve (including women’s health in impoverished countries!). I can only hope that we can continue to do such incredible things and can focus on helping people, rather than making a profit—especially if it’s at the expense and exploitation of people who are dependent on the medicines.
olwu3220
commented
2 years ago I’m so impressed with the amount of detail you included in all of your posts - I feel like I know so much more about the medicines you chose just by reading your journal!
Something I noticed was a profound theme throughout your journal entries was COVID-19 as a disruptive force to the healthcare system and its secondary effects on the wider market of medicines. I wonder if this is a result of the learning resource that you were assigned (or rather lack of?), which may have resulted in your search results showing more current articles particularly in the news. Although, that might just be my own confirmation bias considering that I had used a learning resource and still had COVID-19 related information for my chosen medicines. I also thought it was particularly interesting how the lack of learning resource maybe made you more engaged with your research as you weren’t having to follow a strict “flowchart” of research items as I found I experienced with the gamification. Although again, I wonder if that’s just a difference in our research personalities than actually reflective of the learning resource - after all, everyone learns in unique ways and it would be difficult to extrapolate any generalisations from our isolated experiences! Nevertheless, despite this difference in our learning experiences, I definitely think a similarity is our shared passion for medicines and ensuring equal accessibility!
Lastly, I definitely resonate with some of your expressed feelings of frustration during the research process when the results seem to be fruitless and it was pretty hard to find information of certain things like the Circle of Life challenge. Given that we chose different medicines but still owned by the same company, I thought that this is indicative of a wider trend of the corporatisation of medicine by the pharmaceutical industry which is pretty disheartening given their lack of transparency. I guess something that made me a bit more hopeful when I was doing my research was that, at least here in Australia we have PBS and a variety of other regulatory measures that can be used as a framework for other countries to change their medicines’ accessibility. Likewise, we have plenty to learn and adapt from other countries so that we can keep ensure there are innovative medicines that are also affordable and accessible.
Your reflective journal was so insightful, especially since we had a pretty diverse range of similar and different learning experiences, so I’m looking forward to a more in depth discussion on this next meeting!
ddsi7192
commented
2 years ago I think I had a similar experience particularly in trying to research dexamethasone for the Circle of Life Challenge. I was using the infographic to help me, which did provide some useful thinking questions and resources, however for dexamethasone and my other medicines, I did end up having to scour the internet for reliable information regarding company changes in general. I completely agree that this and the difficulties we had in finding some specific prices/stats for the price hike challenge also made me realise the importance of company and manufacturer transparancy and brought my awareness to the limited access to information on these important topics. Also, in terms of maybe learning processes, I like that for both of us, it seemed that the News Flash challenge provided some kind of basis curiosity, for medicines we weren't familiar with, and a sort of will to want to learn about the topics involved in the next few challenges. The layout of the challenges in this way has probably been really helpful in this way. The infographic I used had 'Science Inquiry Skill' sections for each challenge which just gave some interesting points and questions to think about while researching. Reading your reflective journal, it seems that you have thought a lot about these despite not using the infographic! I now wonder if that section is really useful or not so much...
dzheng918
commented
2 years ago First of all, the amount of detail in your journal 👏👏👏 Your journal was the first one I turned to because we were in the same stream with no resources. I was super interested to see how you took on your research, and also if you suffered trying to find information for the Circle of Life challenge like I did. I really appreciate the clear structure of your reflections, especially the little blurbs on each article that you put at the beginning of each reflection — it helped me understand the background information to the articles you read!
I find that our experiences doing the Price Hikes challenge was quite similar. I also came across some sources saying that “prices of essential COVID-19 medicines have increased 4% globally since February” several times during my research on price hikes. It seems as though a large majority of the price hikes in the last two years can be attributed to Covid-19 pandemic or is at least is an indirect consequence of it. It was more the earlier price hikes that had causes relating to economic factors like market powers and supply shocks. I was also shocked to see that the price of fluoxetine was hiked by almost 700% in 2019 simply justified on the basis of increased production costs. Like you, I shared similar thoughts about the unethical pricing of medicine. It seems as though the market monopoly of private firms is the root cause of many price hikes, and this exploitation has impinged on the accessibility of essential medicines.
Likewise, I totally understand your frustration when it comes to finding holistic sources for the Circle of Life challenge. As you said, it was really like finding the pieces to a jigsaw puzzle — you’d find a bit of information here and another bit over there (sometimes the sources would even give contradictory information), making it super difficult to get a whole picture of a medicine’s history. On the topic of a lack of transparency that you mentioned, I found that especially evident when researching for the value of acquisitions or the reason behind a change in branding.
Overall, I definitely feel like my experience and thought process was similar to yours — probably because we both did it without supplementary resources and that made the research process more experimental. Had a great time reading your journal :)
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Resource 1: How do College Students Best Learn Science? An assessment of popular teaching styles and their effectiveness https://www-proquest-com.ezproxy.library.sydney.edu.au/docview/200328295/fulltextPDF/969E8BEEE33F4616PQ/2?accountid=14757
While this article did not delve into researching/searching as a learning process itself and its effectiveness, it did approach students our age specifically learning science and how to most successfully and effectively learn. It focuses on the idea of "active learning" and how this is the best way that students engage with the material, and more importantly, can digest the information with the least attrition. It mentions "interactive lecture, interactive group learning, or experiential learning setting" can be the best environments for effective student learning. It definitely relates to specific approaches we have used in our Task 1 and can help better form how learning challenges and ideas are set up.
carolineson
commented
2 years ago Resource 2: Towards searching as a learning process: A review of current perspectives and future directions https://www.researchgate.net/publication/290509187_Towards_searching_as_a_learning_process_A_review_of_current_perspectives_and_future_directions
This report does specifically delve into the association between researching/searching and learning. The report discusses the difference between "learning to search" and "searching to learn", which is ultimately described as some of the most important foundations for human learning. The authors write, "developing expertise in accessing, evaluating, and using information is in fact the authentic learning that modern education seeks to promote." Then they specifically delve into searching as a learning process: the implications, benefits, and certain models of possible measurements of using searching as a learning process. They look at motivation, change in expertise over time, and even how specific user interfaces can hinder or better support using searching as a process to learn. It really gives better insight into searching as a learning process, its importance, how it can be most effective, and what in the future can be done to further improve our skills.
Hi, my name is Caroline Son and I am a part of the SCDL1991 2021 S2 cohort! I am currently a second-year at USYD studying Computer Science and Finance, and moved here from the States! I can't wait to learn more and grow with this incredible project :)