descriptive report of a team-taught elective academic-focused advanced pharmacy practice experience

Available online at www.sciencedirect.com

1877-1297/14/$http://dx.doi.org

* CorrespondiPharmacy, MCPStreet, Worceste

E-mail: anna

Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 6 (2014) 265–276

Short communication

Descriptive report of a team-taught elective academic-focusedadvanced pharmacy practice experience

Anna K. Morin, PharmDa,*, Courtney I. Jarvis, PharmDa,Kimberly A. Pesaturo, PharmD, BCPSa, Valerie Coppenrath, PharmD, BCPSa,

Helen C. Pervanas, PharmDb, Maryann Cooper, PharmD, BCPS, BCOPb,Morgan Comee, PharmDa, Paul P. Belliveau, PharmDa

a School of Pharmacy, MCPHS University, Worcester, MAb School of Pharmacy, MCPHS University, Manchester, NH

Abstract

http://www.pharmacyteaching.com

Objectives: To describe the development of a team-taught academic-focused advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE).Methods: This APPE was developed as a way to expose students to academic pharmacy while accommodating increasingfaculty APPE student teaching loads. The academic-focused APPE integrated weekly live didactic seminars with an onlinelearning component. Using synchronous distance learning technology, the academic-focused APPE was simultaneouslydelivered between two separate education campuses.Results: A total of 13 students and eight faculty participated during the first offering (Fall 2011) of this six-week academic-focused APPE. Surveys were administered to both the students and faculty at the completion of the APPE. Both, students andfaculty rated many of the specific assignments and activities favorably and perceived the rotation favorably overall.Conclusions: The combination of a shared pharmacy practice faculty workload and a positive learning experience for thestudents demonstrates that this team-taught approach is an effective means of offering an academic-focused APPE rotation.r 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserved.

Keywords: Advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE); Academic APPE; Faculty; Pharmacy practice

Introduction/background

The future of the pharmacy profession lies not only in itsability to prepare students to be competent practitioners butalso in its ability to identify, mentor, and recruit strongcandidates to faculty positions. As such, faculty andadministrative personnel in Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD)programs have responsibilities to facilitate teaching com-petence, to provide opportunities for students to integrateconcepts related to teaching and pharmacy practice, and todevelop future pharmacy educators. This is a charge that hasbeen recognized by the American Association of Colleges

– see front matter r 2014 Elsevier Inc. All rights reserv/10.1016/j.cptl.2013.11.009

ng author: Anna K. Morin, PharmD, School ofHS University—Worcester/Manchester, 19 Fosterr, MA [email protected]

of Pharmacy (AACP) and was addressed by a 2005 AACPAcademic Affairs Committee report.1 In response to apharmacy faculty shortage and the expansion of pharmacystudent programs and enrollments, this report explored howAACP and schools of pharmacy could foster interest inacademic careers. A component of this plan includedschools of pharmacy attracting PharmD students to careersin academia by enhancing their preparation for such acareer. Further supporting the need for increased studentexposure to academia was a 2011–2012 AACP survey of116 schools and colleges of pharmacy that reported a totalof 412 vacant and/or lost faculty positions, 53.2% of whichwere in clinical science/pharmacy practice.2 This representsan increase of 9.0% over 2010–2011 faculty vacancy data.As the number of pharmacy schools increases—129 col-leges and schools offered the PharmD as a first professionaldegree and 11 colleges and schools offered the PharmD as a

ed.


http://dx.doi.org/10.1016/j.cptl.2013.11.009





mailto:[email protected]

A.K. Morin et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 6 (2014) 265–276266

post-Bachelor of Science degree in Fall 20133—the need forpharmacy faculty will continue to grow. A number ofinitiatives intended to stimulate student interest in pharmacy-related academia, including the offering of an elective courseor elective academic advanced pharmacy practice experiences(APPEs), have been previously described.4–10 In these reports,elective academic APPEs were precepted by one or twofaculty and typically involved a small number of students (oneor two) per rotation. In addition, these reports suggest thatoffering APPEs in pharmacy academia may encouragestudents to pursue teaching and/or faculty positions.

The APPE described in this report includes a largerstudent cohort, in which course development and teachingwas shared among eight pharmacy practice faculty members.To our knowledge, this is the largest faculty collaborationrecorded for an academic-focused APPE. In addition toincorporating opportunities for students to further developtheir communication, critical thinking, and problem solvingskills, the development of this academic APPE electivesupports the 2011 Accreditation Council for PharmacyEducation (ACPE) Standards and Guidelines that focus onthe development of elective APPEs that allow students “toexpand their understanding of professional opportunities.”11

Our program is a year-round, 34-month, acceleratedPharmD program that represents the final four professionalyears of the traditional six-year PharmD program.12 Theuniversity’s main and satellite campuses are linked usingtechnology that allows for the synchronous sharing of audioand visual information in the classroom. Since the inceptionof our program, the incoming class size has increased fromapproximately 100 students on the main campus in the year2000 to 329 students on two campuses in 2012. As a directresult of this increase in enrollment, the APPE teaching loadfor each faculty member in the Department of PharmacyPractice has increased over time. The development of ateam-taught elective academic-focused APPE described inthis report has helped faculty increase the exposure ofPharmD students to aspects of pharmacy academia whileaccommodating increased APPE student loads.

Rationale and objectives

The development of this APPE was identified as a way to(1) accommodate an increase in the number of studentsrequiring APPE rotation placement, (2) avoid overly burden-ing faculty and clinical partners, and (3) provide studentswith the opportunity to experience a pharmacy facultyperspective as a way to enhance exposure to academia as apotential future career. The objectives of this report are todescribe the design and assessment of student and facultyexperience for this team-taught academic-focused APPE.

Materials and methods

A team of eight faculty members (six from the maincampus and two from the satellite campus) in the

Department of Pharmacy Practice developed a six-weekacademic-focused APPE to provide a large group ofPharmD students with a broad introduction to academia.While none of the eight faculty members had previouslyparticipated in an academic APPE, this diverse groupincluded one professor, two associate professors, and fiveassistant professors with a range of two–ten years ofexperience in pharmacy academia. Representing a varietyof clinical settings, including ambulatory care and internalmedicine, all faculty members had the equivalent of at leastfive years of clinical experience. Some had completedvarious levels of formal training in pedagogy, but thiswas not required for participation. Three of the facultyinvolved held administrative positions (Pharmacy PracticeDepartment Chair, Pharmacy Practice Department Vice-Chair, and Associate Dean).

The initial course design occurred over a period ofseveral months in which faculty met to discuss and createthe overall course structure and materials (i.e., assignments,grading rubrics, and surveys). Individual faculty membersdivided the work of the course creation. At the conclusionof the course design process, intended learning outcomesfor the APPE included the following:

1.
Discuss current issues related to various academicpedagogies and controversies.
2.
Describe the tripartite mission (teaching, scholarship,and service) of pharmacy faculty members.
3.
Discuss the accreditation process for pharmacy pro-grams and how those standards are functionalized inthe daily operation of a pharmacy school.
4.
Discuss the value and importance of leadership as akey element of a pharmacy faculty career.
5.
Design and execute a teaching module (includingmaterial development, concept delivery, and assess-ment) in a face-to-face classroom setting.
6.
Discuss Boyer’s definition of scholarship.13
7.
Participate in the process of academic or clinicalresearch, as needed.
8.
Create a professional academic portfolio.
Course structure

This APPE took place concurrently on two campuses,with live content transmitted to the satellite campus viasynchronous distance education technology. Each week,students participated in two live three-hour didactic semi-nars and one online module created in our school’s learningmanagement system (Appendix). Selected session topicswere based on their relation to the tripartite mission ofacademia, with teaching as a major focus, and scholarshipand service as minor foci. The combination of live didacticseminars and online modules gave the APPE characteristicsof a hybrid course. The weekly live didactic seminars wereactivity and discussion based, and the weekly onlinemodules included discussion forums, posted readings,

A.K. Morin et al. / Currents in Pharmacy Teaching and Learning 6 (2014) 265–276 267

web-based didactic materials, and space for informalreflective student blogging. Each weekly online modulewas intended to be completed in an asynchronous fashion,and the content paralleled much of the face-to-face coursework. Each individual preceptor also met each week insmall groups with their assigned students to facilitate furtherdiscussion and to provide formative or summative feedbackon rotation activities. Over the six-week period of thisrotation, the participating faculty were involved in thefollowing: facilitating up to two of the live didactic semi-nars, creating and uploading one online module, meetingwith individually assigned rotation student(s) one day perweek, evaluating online reflection assignments once perweek, evaluating eight course-related assignments, andcompleting the final summative overall rotation assessment.This design of this academic APPE was intended tosimulate how faculty work in real life—a combination ofindependent, collaborative, online, and face-to-faceinteractions.

Teaching strategies

Live didactic seminar and online module facilitationresponsibilities were rotated in order to decrease the work-load impact on individual faculty members. In all sessions,a variety of teaching methodologies were used to create anenvironment conducive to active learning and to expose thestudents to different teaching strategies. Specific strategiesutilized in the live didactic seminars included lecture-basedpresentations, modeling of skills, completion of simulationactivities, evaluation of the work of peers, and role-playing.The overarching approach to all live didactic seminars andonline modules was to provide the students with informa-tion and opportunities for application via active learningactivities in order to prepare students for assignments.

Assignments and assessment

Assignments (Table 1) were designed to expose studentsto various aspects of academic pharmacy, as well as toevaluate student learning outcome achievement. Each week,using the information gained in the live didactic seminarsand online modules, students were instructed to independ-ently complete assignments. The assignments included thecreation of a teaching philosophy and leadership statement,development of course learning objectives, development ofassessment questions, abstract creation, and presentationdelivery using visual aids. These assignments would becompiled into a final teaching portfolio at the conclusion ofthe course. Explicit instructions and expectations wereprovided, and each assignment related back to a specificcourse learning outcome.

A schedule of deadlines and assignment-grading rubricsfor formative and summative feedback were made availableto students at the start of the course. These rubrics weredeveloped by the faculty (many from currently utilized

verbal and written communication rubrics used within ourcurriculum) and were intended to increase the objectivityand consistency of assignment assessment between facultymembers, while also detailing domain-based grading criteriafor each assignment. For most written assignments, studentssubmitted a draft version, received rubric-based formativefeedback from their individual faculty preceptor, and thensubmitted a final version to their individual faculty precep-tor for rubric-based summative evaluation. The intent forthe multiple-submission format was to allow for an openand continuous discussion regarding course work betweenthe student and individual faculty member and for thefaculty member to assess improvements in learning andcomprehension between the draft and final assignmentsubmission.

Survey methodology

This overall structure described above represented thefirst iteration of this course offering. At the conclusion ofthe rotation, separate surveys developed by one of thefaculty involved in the development of this APPE wereadministered to both students and faculty to provide anevaluation of course content perceptions and workloadquantification. Our school’s Institutional Review Boardprovided approval to survey the students and faculty. Thesurveys were administered in a fashion similar to a coursesurvey and were intended to evaluate the perceptions of thestudents and faculty involved in this APPE and to identifyareas for improvement. The student survey contained 13items with response scale options and three additional open-response questions that asked about key concepts learned inthe APPE, new facts learned about academia during theAPPE, and comments/suggestions for improvement. Thesurvey was distributed to 13 students. The faculty surveywas structured in a manner similar to the student survey andcontained ten items with response scale options and oneadditional open-response question that solicited suggestionsfor rotation improvement. The survey was distributed to sixfaculty preceptors. The two faculty members who did notparticipate in the survey were involved in the developmentand delivery of this academic APPE but did not preceptstudents during this first offering. Survey data were enteredinto an Excel spreadsheet for evaluation; no statisticalanalysis was performed on the survey data. However, asthe number of students who participate in this APPEincreases, the survey could include academic APPE fac-ulty/students as well as non-academic APPE faculty/stu-dents (to serve as a control group).

Results

This elective was offered for the first time in 2011. Atour institution, students are assigned to APPE rotationsbased on a lottery system. Since this was a new offering, weexpected few students to have ranked it as a first choice for

Table 1Student assignment and type of assessment

Type/description of assignment (% weighting)Typea and time ofassessment

Formative SummativePhilosophy of teaching statement (10%) Week one Week threeTwo to three pages written in first-person containing the following key elements:Description of how you teach (beliefs)Goals and values for you and your studentsPlan of action for your goalsSelf-assessments and student assessmentsPersonal growth plan

Teaching module objectives (10%) Week two Week fourDevelop three to four learning objectives thatDefine exactly what learners will be able to do by the end of your moduleAre learner-centered, measurable, relevant to pharmacy practiceAchievable within the scope of the session

Teaching module assessment questions (10%) Week two Week fourDevelop four to five assessment questions to determine if learners have achieved the learning objectives youset for them. Assessment questions should link directly to learning objectives and instructional strategiesand be free from distracting and confusing flaws and unintended clues to the correct answer. The formatof each assessment question should reflect the instructional strategy and learning objective you utilized.

Abstract (10%) Week three Week fiveFor the purpose of this assignment, we will be using the American Society of Health-System Pharmacists(ASHP) student abstract submission guidelines. The abstracts must adhere to the guidelines set by theASHP and be eligible for submission. The decision to actually submit for presentation at the 2011ASHP Clinical Mid-Year Meeting will be made by the student and faculty preceptor.

Philosophy of leadership statement (10%) – Week fourPrepare a two to three page leadership philosophy/statement assignment which includes threecomponents: (1) personal leadership philosophy/statement, (2) explanation of the elements of thepersonal leadership philosophy/statement, and (3) projected future application of your personalleadership philosophy/statement.

Teaching module visual aids and handouts (10%) – Week sixDevelop presentation materials (visual aids and audience handouts) that will enhance yourpresentation. Visual aids should be clear, concise, and of professional quality. Handouts should beclear, concise, and relevant. Both types of materials should be relevant to your presentation butshould not be a transcription of what you plan to say (i.e., the handout should not be identical to thepresented slides, and the slides should not be used as a teleprompter).

Delivery of teaching module (10%) – Week sixPresent your teaching module to colleagues and preceptors during Week five of the rotation. Each sessionwill be allotted 30 minutes (20 minutes for teaching and 10 minutes for question-and-answer session).Be sure to orient your audience to the topic, present clearly, confidently, and with professional language.Presentations should address the objectives and assessment questions and should engage the audience.

Teaching portfolio (5%) – Week sixDevelop a course portfolio that includes the following components:Cover pageTable of contentsStatement of teaching philosophyStatement of leadership philosophyTeaching module objectivesTeaching module visual aidsTeaching module assessment materials (formative and summative)AbstractOne-page summary of blackboard reflectionsCurriculum vitaeOnline modules (25%) – Weekly � five

weeks

ASHP ¼ American Society of Health-System Pharmacists.

a All formative and summative assessments were completed using assignment-based rubrics.


Table 2Student survey items and responses

Number of responses/total responses (%)

Survey item Agree Disagree

I specifically chose this Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE)rotation as one of my elective APPE rotations

4/13 (30.8) 9/13 (69.2)

I was considering a career in academia before participating in this rotation 4/13 (30.8) 9/13 (69.2)The experiences and activities of this rotation have increased my interest inpursuing a career in academia

8/12 (66.7) 4/12 (33.3)

Too much work Just right Too little workHow would you best describe your workload (time spent preparing andpresenting your teaching module and completing other assignments andactivities) in this course?

– 10/13 (76.9) 3/13 (23.1)

Too difficult Just right Too easyHow would you best describe the level of difficulty of this APPE rotation? – 12/13 (92.3) 1/13 (7.7)Rate the following rotation activities/assignments:

Very valuable tostudent learning

Somewhat valuable tostudent learning

Not valuable tostudent learning

Philosophy of teaching 8/13 (61.5) 3/13 (23.1) 2/13 (15.4)Philosophy of leadership 5/13 (38.5) 7/13 (53.8) 1/13 (7.7)Teaching module 10/13 (76.9) 1/13 (7.7) 2/13 (15.4)Online modules 6/13 (46.2) 5/13 (38.5) 2/13 (15.4)Abstract 8/13 (61.5) 1/13 (7.7) 4/13 (30.7)Mock self-study 5/13 (38.5) 7/13 (53.8) 1/13 (7.7)Ethics cases 9/13 (69.2) 3/13 (23.1) 1/13 (7.7)Teaching portfolio 9/13 (69.2) 3/13 (23.1) 1/13 (7.7)

Agree DisagreeFacilitators of individual seminars clearly communicated expectationsof students

13/13 (100) –

Facilitators of individual seminars were responsive to student questions 13/13 (100) –

Facilitators of individual seminars effectively communicated theirknowledge of seminar topics

13/13 (100) –

Facilitators of individual seminars demonstrated enthusiasm forseminar topics

12/13 (92.3) 1/13 (7.7)

Facilitators of individual seminars provided opportunities foractive learning

13/13 (100) –

The structure of this APPE rotation helped me learn the material 13/13 (100) –

I would recommend this APPE rotation to another student 11/12 (91.6) 1/12 (8.3)

APPE ¼ advanced pharmacy practice experience.


an APPE elective. We offered 18 slots and 13 students wereassigned by the lottery system—11 on the main campus andtwo on the satellite campus.

Student and faculty survey items and results are shownin Tables 2 and 3. Most students (76.9%) and faculty(83.3%) indicated that the workload was appropriate forthe APPE. The students and faculty members who did notagree that the workload was appropriate for an APPEexpressed that more responsibility and course work wereneeded. The majority of students (92.3%) and all facultyrespondents stated that the level of difficulty was justright. Student responses regarding facilitator performanceand behavior were favorable, and all student respondentsagreed that the structure of the APPE helped them learnthe material. Although only four of the 13 students whoparticipated had originally ranked this APPE as a first

choice for an elective, almost all of the student respond-ents would recommend the rotation to a fellow student.While only approximately one-third of students wereconsidering a career in academia before participating inthe APPE, a majority of students (66.7%) reported that thisexperience increased their interest in academic-relatedcareers.

When asked to rate the value of graded assignments, amajority of students reported that the teaching module(61.5%), teaching portfolio (69.2%), abstract (61.5%), andphilosophy of teaching statement (61.5%) were “veryvaluable” to student learning. When asked about the valueof student activities, a majority of students (69.2%) reportedthat the class discussion of ethical cases was also “veryvaluable” to student learning. While most students eval-uated as “valuable” or “somewhat valuable” the philosophy

Table 3Faculty Survey Items and Responses

Survey item Number of responses/total responses (%)

Too much work Just right Too little workHow would you best describe student workload (time spentpreparing and presenting teaching module and completing otherassignments and activities) in this course?

– 5/6 (83.3) 1/6 (16.7)

Too difficult Just right Too easyHow would you best describe the students’ level of difficulty ofthis course?

– 6/6 (100) –

Average time per facultymember, hours (range)

Cumulative time allrespondents, hours

How many hours did you spend preparing material for face-to-face seminars and/or online modules for the large group?

8.3 (3–15) 50

How many hours did you spend facilitating or participating inseminars throughout the six-week Advanced Pharmacy PracticeExperience (APPE)?

14.5 (10–18) 87

How many hours did you spend meeting with your individualAPPE students throughout the six-week APPE?

9.3 (6–15) 56

Rate the following rotation activities/assignments according to thescale provided:

Very valuable tostudent learning

Somewhat valuable tostudent learning

Not valuable tostudent learning

Philosophy of teaching 5/6 (83.3) 1/6 (16.7) –

Philosophy of leadership 4/6 (66.7) 2/6 (33.3) –

Teaching module 6/6 (100) – –

Online modules 4/6 (66.7) 2/6 (33.3) –

Abstract 6/6 (100) – –

Mock self-study 3/6 (50) 3/6 (50) –

Ethics cases 6/6 (100) – –

Teaching portfolio 3/6 (50) 3/6 (50) –

Too much emphasis Just enough emphasis Too little emphasisRate the sufficiency to which the area of teaching was addressed – 6/6 (100) –

Rate the sufficiency to which the area of scholarship wasaddressed

– 6/6 (100) –

Rate the sufficiency to which the area of service was addressed – 4/6 (66.7) 2/6 (33.3)Very dissatisfied Dissatisfied Satisfied Very satisfied

Rate your satisfaction with yourparticipation in this APPE

– – 2/6 (33.3) 4/6 (66.7)

APPE ¼ advanced pharmacy practice experience.


of leadership statement (61.5% and 23.1%, respectively),online modules (46.2% and 38.5%, respectively) and themock accreditation self-survey (38.5% and 53.8%, respec-tively), their perceptions were admittedly mixed. Studentswere able to express newfound knowledge related toacademia in written responses to the open-response surveyquestions.

All faculty respondents indicated that the teachingmodule, abstract, and ethics cases were “very valuable” tostudent learning. Most faculty rated the philosophy ofteaching statement (83.3%), philosophy of leadership state-ment (66.7%), and online modules (66.7%) as “veryvaluable” to student learning. The remaining faculty per-ceived these assignments as “somewhat valuable” to studentlearning. Perceptions were mixed regarding the mock

accreditation self-study and teaching portfolio with half ofthe faculty respondents rating each activity as “veryvaluable,” while the remaining half rated these activitiesas “somewhat valuable” to student learning. All facultyreported that teaching and scholarship were covered withjust enough emphasis; however, one-third of faculty partic-ipants reported that service was covered with too littleemphasis. Faculty workload, the primary resource utilizedto develop and implement this elective academic-focusedAPPE, was also quantified via the survey. The averagenumber of hours spent preparing seminars and onlinemodules and facilitating or participating in seminars islisted in Table 3. Finally, all faculty respondents wereeither “satisfied” or “very satisfied” with their participationin the APPE.


Discussion/conclusions

Through this team-taught approach, students wereexposed to the perspectives of multiple pharmacy practicefaculty, three of whom also hold administrative appoint-ments at the school. Service and administrative roles arean integral component of an academic career, and havingadministrative faculty involved in this APPE offered aunique perspective that allowed for students to get toknow and better understand the role that these facultymembers play in pharmacy academia. Additionally, thefrequent use of formative feedback for most assignmentsprovided for a collegial environment and allowed studentsto improve their work prior to the submission of their finalassignments.

The concept of this academic-focused APPE is practical,workable, and could be transferable to any professionalprogram. A mixture of faculty who have a range of teachingand clinical experience, different practice sites, administra-tive positions, experience working with community andprofessional organizations, and who have an interest inexposing students to pharmacy academia would be desirablefor the development of a successful academic APPE elective.In schools of pharmacy, this team-taught approach to anacademic-focused APPE offers the benefit of accommodat-ing increasing student enrollments and allowing faculty tobalance clinical rotation offerings with their school’s APPErotation needs. With subsequent demands on faculty toaccommodate more experiential students, there is a needfor additional rotation sites. However, the availability ofclinical sites is not growing at the same rate as studentenrollments. Therefore, the development of non-clinicalAPPEs that continue to promote the growth of the studentand advanced pharmacy education is essential. This campus-based experiential course fulfills the purpose of providingstudents with a rotation that increases exposure to academicpharmacy while allowing pharmacy practice faculty toaccommodate more APPE students per year, withoutincreasing the burden on clinical practice sites.

Workload management is often a common concern offaculty, as is the ability to accommodate changing orincreasing responsibilities. The delivery of this academicAPPE elective was an addition, not a replacement, to thefaculty members’ required clinical APPE student load. Whilethere was time required for planning and delivery of thisAPPE, we believe it was less than would be required toprecept an additional block of students on a clinical APPE.While the structure of this APPE did reduce the amount offace-to-face time individual faculty members were required tospend with their students assigned to this academic-focusedAPPE, those involved felt that there was sufficient overalltime spent on rotation activities to offset the reduced facetime. This is supported by the student and faculty surveyresponses related to student workload and degree of difficulty.

Opportunities for improvement were identified fromstudent and faculty survey results and faculty debriefing

discussions at the completion of the APPE. The first changefor future offerings of this course is related to the abstractassignment. Over one-third of students rated the abstractassignment as being of moderate to no value. This assign-ment was tied to the teaching module topic. However, inlight of this feedback, we will consider using this as a stand-alone assignment in order to provide students with a morepractical experience of producing scholarly work throughabstract creation and optional poster presentation at anational meeting. Another required change that was appa-rent from the perspective of the faculty was the order ofstudent activities. In the first offering of this course, studentsexecuted their teaching modules during week six. Thistiming proved to put a heavy workload on the faculty since,during week six of each APPE rotation, faculty at theirclinical sites must often grade student final projects,presentations, and conduct final evaluations. The proposedsolution is to switch the order of the academic APPE’s weekfive activities with week six activities. This change wouldallow for a better distribution of faculty workload andwould create opportunity for incorporation of student self-assessment of their teaching modules. Based on the fact that23% of the students felt that the workload was “too little”and no students felt that the workload was “too much,”additional student activities that will be considered forfuture offerings include the following: (1) written reflectionsrelated to the weekly content to further improve the studentself-assessment aspect of the APPE, (2) opportunities topeer review and provide experience in evaluation andproviding constructive feedback, (3) participation in com-munity service projects to help enhance the concept ofservice as part of the tripartite mission of academia, (4)incorporation of two additional live seminars per week (i.e.,one to be conducted as a book club and one to focus onfaculty development topics), and (5) student attendance to afaculty meeting (i.e., Curriculum Committee, AssessmentCommittee, or Departmental Meeting).

Summary and conclusions

This team-taught elective academic-focused APPE pro-vided benefits to both students and faculty. This uniqueexperience allowed students to learn more about careers inacademia while practicing skills that were transferable toother rotations and pharmacy practice. It also allowed thefaculty involved to meet the requirements of an increasednumber of APPE rotation students without overtaxing thefaculty member or their clinical sites. The versatile designof this course allowed for multiple forms of interaction andlearning opportunities for the students and resulted in lessoverall work for faculty than that required by other APPEs.Students rated many of the specific assignments andactivities favorably and perceived the rotation positivelyoverall. Due to the flexibility of this academic APPE design,its structure could be adapted to other environments orprograms that involve teaching, scholarship, and service.


Appendix

AppendixAcademic advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) structure

Week 1: History and theoryLive seminars:

1) Orientation to the advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) and Introduction to careers in academic pharmacy� Goals of the session

○ Review the syllabus, assignments, expectations, structure of the APPE○ Introduce students to careers in academic pharmacy

� Provide an overview of academic pharmacy� Describe types of faculty appointments� Discuss what faculty have in common and how faculty differ

� Method of content and delivery○ Seminar presentation, examples, discussion

� What this session added to the course○ Laid the foundation for topics that would be discussed throughout the course

� Assessment method: not applicable2) Evolution of the pharmacy curriculum

� Goals of the session○ Describe the role of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE) and the American Association of Colleges of

Pharmacy in the development and assessment of the pharmacy curriculum○ Discuss how pharmacy education shaped by the work of the Janus Commission○ Identify how changes in the health care have continued to shape pharmacy practice and pharmacy education in the 21st century○ Generate student discussion regarding making postgraduate pharmacy residency training a pre-requisite for direct patient care

� Method of content and delivery○ Readings○ Thought questions○ Class discussion

� What this session added to the course: provided students with a better understanding of the evolution of the pharmacy curriculum andallowed for self-reflection as to how their role as health care professionals may continue to shape both pharmacy education andpractice.

� Assessment method: not applicable

Philosophy of teaching� Goals for the session

○ Discuss the elements of a philosophy of teaching statement○ Create a philosophy of teaching statement

� Method of content delivery○ Readings○ Seminar presentation and examples

� What this session added to the course○ Allowed students to reflect on teaching and learning beliefs and create a plan of action for their teaching module (e.g., a philosophy

of teaching statement)� Assessment method

○ Philosophy of teaching rubric○ Teaching module proposal performance criteria

Online modulea: Teaching and learning theoryLearning theory

� Read: Wankat PC, Oreovicz FS. Learning Theories. In: Teaching Engineering. https://engineering.purdue.edu/ChE/AboutUs/Publications/TeachingEng/index.html (Chapter 15)

� Determine your learning style using the weblink: http://www.engr.ncsu.edu/learningstyles/ilsweb.html� Post a thoughtful response to one of the following discussion points. Please limit your response to 100 words.

○ Teachers should determine the learning style of the class and adapt their teaching strategy accordingly.○ Students should understand their learning style and adapt their study habits accordingly.

Bloom’s and Fink’s taxonomies of learning� Read: Fink DL. A taxonomy of significant learning. In: Creating Significant Learning Experiences. San Francisco, CA: Jossey-Bass;

2003:27.

http://www.aacp.org/governance/COMMITTEES/academicaffairs/Documents/2004-05_AcadAffairs_FinalReport.pdf

AppendixContinued

� Read: Forehand M. Bloom’s Taxonomy. http://projects.coe.uga.edu/epltt/index.php?title=Bloom%27 s_Taxonomy� Post a thoughtful response on the discussion board titled “Bloom and Fink” to the following points. Please limit your response to 200

words.○ Compare and contrast the learning taxonomies proposed by Fink and Bloom.○ How can these theories of learning help you develop educational objectives for a learning session?

Teaching theory� Read: Eshach H, Bitterman H. From case-based reasoning to problem-based learning. Acad Med. 2003;78:491.� Read: Sylvia L. Active learning—why all the buzz? Pharmacy Teacher. 2003;1(4):122.� Post a thoughtful response on the discussion board titled “Teaching Theory” to the following questions. Please limit your response to 200

words.○ What is active learning?○ Why is active learning an effective teaching strategy?○ What strategies are available to facilitate an active learning environment?

Week 2: Instruction designLive seminars:Instructional design (2 sessions)

� Goals for the session○ Develop learning objectives for a teaching module

▪ Students worked with their faculty preceptor to develop a topic that was relevant to pharmacy practice and specific enough to becompletely taught in 20 minutes.

○ Develop assessment questions that link to learning objectives○ Create effective visual aids

� Method of content delivery○ Didactic○ Active learning

� What this session added to the course○ Allowed students to become more proficient in writing objectives, assessment questions, and creating a successful presentation

� Assessment methods○ Written objectives evaluation rubric○ Assessment questions evaluation rubric

Online modulea: Effective presenting and lecturing skills� Watch: http://www.youtube.com/view_play_list?p=240A9CB42552316A (Be sure to watch all 13 components of the video.)� Post a thoughtful response on the discussion board titled “Presentation and Lecturing Skills” to the following discussion points. Please

limit your response to each item to 100 words.○ What are 3 common challenges that new faculty often face in regards to presenting and lecturing? What is one basic solution for each

challenge?○ The video discusses various teaching media (the use of the blackboard, overheads and props). What are two other types of teaching

media available? For each type:� What did you like about this media? What did you dislike?� In which type of teaching venue (large classroom, small group discussion, etc.) would this media be most effective?

○ There are various teaching styles and you have witnessed several different types in your academic career.� What types of teaching styles have you found the most effective? Why?� You are teaching in a few weeks. Which teaching styles would you like to incorporate into your teaching repertoire?

○ Questions from the audience can often be an intimidating portion of the lecture segment for a new faculty member. Describe somestrategies that could help a new faculty member tackle this component of the lecture.

Week 3: Scholarship and serviceLive seminars:

1) Research and scholarship� Goals for the session

○ Describe research vs. scholarship○ Describe Boyer’s definitions of scholarship○ Compare and contrast methods of scholarship for pharmacy faculty○ Discuss required resources and barriers to scholarship○ Brainstorming/writing workshop for abstract development


http://www.aacp.org/resources/research/institutionalresearch/Pages/InstitutionalResearchBriefs.aspx

http://www.aacp.org/about/pages/vitalstats.aspx

AppendixContinued

� Method of content delivery○ Seminar presentation, examples, writing workshop

� What this session added to the course○ Introduced scholarship, an area of academia with which students are less familiar○ Identified avenues for pharmacists/academicians to produce scholarship○ Provided students an opportunity to write and produce scholarly work

� Assessment method○ Abstract performance criteria

2) Assessment� Goal for the session

○ Discuss and review methods and measures of student success in the classroom, including formative and summative assessment� Method of content delivery

○ Seminar presentation, group and individual sample assessment activities� What the session added to the course

○ Provided the last step in course design, following previous exposure to essential questions, objective writing, content creation anddelivery


Online modulea: Service: Professional, community, and college� Listen to the audio lecture on service.� Service learning in the pharmacy curriculum

○ Please read: Kearney KR. Students’ self-assessment of learning through service-learning. Am J Pharm Educ. 2004; 68, Article 29, 1–13.

○ Post a thoughtful response for the following 2 questions on the discussion board titled “Service Learning in the PharmacyCurriculum.” Please limit your response to 300 words.� What do students learn from a Service-Learning course and how does it differ from community service? Limit 200 words.� Discuss a past service learning experience or a community service event that you have participated in. Describe the service

experience and how it impacted you and also how it impacted the people/organization that benefited from your volunteer efforts.Limit of 200 words.

� Choose one of the following community service projects listed below and forward the completed assignment to your preceptor.○ Create a powerpoint presentation on the dangers of prescription drugs in teens. The goal(s) of this presentation is provide information

on prescription drug abuse, include how to recognize the signs of abuse and how parents can make their homes safe. Target audience:parents of high school students.

○ Create a powerpoint presentation on how to use your community pharmacy. The goal(s) of this presentation will be to instruct patientson how to effectively use their pharmacy and provide answers to some common questions. Key elements to include; explanation of aprior authorization, prescription formularies, getting refills/zero refills and expiration dates. Target audience: pharmacy customers.

○ Create a powerpoint presentation on medication safety. The goal of this presentation is to provide pharmacists with information onhow to resolve and avoid medication errors. Key elements to include: why and how medication errors occur, medication errordisclosure, resolving errors and prevention strategies. Target audience: pharmacists

○ Create a powerpoint presentation on the safe disposal of medications. The goal(s) of this presentation will be to instruct patients onthe dangers associated with improper disposal of medications and how to properly dispose of medications. Key elements to include;environmental/safety concerns with improper disposal, proper disposal techniques and information about the Drug EnforcementAdministration’s National Take Back Event. Target audience: general public.

Week 4: ProfessionalismLive seminars:

1) Ethics/professionalism� Goal for the session

○ Identify relevant behaviors that correspond to attributes of professionalism from the point of view of a pharmacy student, facultymember, and practicing pharmacist

� Method of content delivery○ Seminar presentation and role-playing using cases that reflect ethical and/or professional issues that pharmacy faculty have encountered

� What the session added to the course○ Provided an opportunity for students to self-reflect on behaviors that promote and/or serve as barriers to professionalism○ Provided an opportunity for students to hear faculty perspectives on ethics and professionalism in academia


2) Leadership� Goals for the session


AppendixContinued

○ Compare/contrast traits of a leader/manager○ Describe characteristics of good leaders○ Describe importance of leadership on pharmacy○ Reflect on a personal leadership philosophy and how this can help with becoming agents of change

� Method of content delivery○ Seminar presentation, examples, pre-readings

� What the session added to the course○ Increased understanding of leadership obligation, the responsibility of pharmacists and faculty as leaders, and that leadership

involves incremental “baby steps”� Assessment method

○ Rubric for leadership philosophy statement

Online modulesa:Student perceptions of incivility

� Read: Paik C, Broedel-Zaugg K. Pharmacy students’ opinions on civility and preferences regarding professors. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70(4): Article 88.

� Post a thoughtful response on the discussion board titled “Student Perceptions of Incivility” to both of the following discussion points.Please limit your response to 100 words each.○ How is civility related to pharmacists as professionals?○ Compare and contrast the perceptions related to uncivil behaviors of the students’ in the article with the perceptions of your class.

Contributors and Solutions� Read: Berger BA. Incivility. Am J Pharm Educ. 2000; 64:445–450.� Think about a time during your course work at the university when you observed or participated in an incidence of faculty–student

incivility. This could be something you observed in person or through some other medium such as Facebook or Student Doctor Network.� Post a thoughtful response on the discussion board titled “Contributors and Solutions” to both of the following discussion points. Please

limit your response to 200 words each.○ Without using names, describe the incidence of civility. Discuss at least 3 beliefs, behaviors, and attitudes on the part of the faculty

member and student(s) that may have contributed to this incident.○ Was that incivility active or passive? How was it addressed? How could the situation be better handled in the future? How could it

have been prevented?

Week 5: Curriculum assessmentLive sessions:Curricular standards and ACPE (2 sessions)

� Goals for the sessions○ Review the ACPE curricular standards 9–15○ Discuss the components of a ACPE curricular standards self-study○ Familiarize the student with the accreditation process for pharmacy education

� Method of content delivery○ Review of actual documentation and data the school uses to assess curricular outcomes○ Students were assigned an ACPE curricular standard (with associated data) and asked to perform a “mock” self-study

� What this session added to the course○ Provided students with an insight into the design of the school’s curriculum and the data necessary for curricular and programmatic

assessment


Online modulea: Programmatic self-assessment� Please review the university’s PharmD student learning outcomes (SLOs) and post a thoughtful response on the discussion board to the

following questions. Please limit the response to each question to 200 words.○ Which of these SLOs (if any) do you feel you that you have mastered (or are well on your way to mastering)? And what experiences

(within the curriculum or other pharmacy experiences) have helped you master these SLOs?○ Which of these SLOs (if any) do you feel that you are lacking? How could the curriculum be changed or improved to better support

these SLOs?○ Which of these SLOs (if any) do you feel cannot be mastered as part of a pharmacy curriculum and may be best mastered by

practicing pharmacy?

Week 6: Student teachingLive sessions:


AppendixContinued

Student delivery of teaching moduleOnline module: no online component

� Goal for the session○ Allow students to practice the art of public speaking and delivery of created teaching content

� Method of content delivery○ 30-minute student presentations, using synchronous distance learning between two campuses○ Audience: faculty and students (currently participating in the academic APPE and participating in a clinical APPE with the academic

APPE faculty preceptor)� What this session added to the course

○ “Real” practice and application of concepts learned in this course� Assessment methods

○ Visual aids and handout evaluation rubric○ Presentation delivery rubric

� Example topics presented○ Management of Clostridium difficile infection (CDI) and the role of fidaxomicin○ Insulin vs. glyburide in women with gestational diabetes mellitus○ Tesamorelin and lipodystrophy in HIV patients○ Prophylactic treatment with hydroxyprogesterone caproate to prevent preterm labor○ Treatment of diabetic peripheral neuropathy

APPE ¼ advanced pharmacy practice experience; ACPE ¼ Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education; SLOs ¼ student learning outcomes.

a Online module responses were evaluated using a rubric that assessed the completion of questions (whether responses were provided for all/some/no reflection

questions), the quality of the response to the questions (the extent to which responses integrated point(s) from the readings and/or discussion, demonstrates

thoughtful/insightful analysis, and provides a definitive conclusion), and grammar and spelling.


References

1. Popovich NG, Davis PJ, Fuhrman LC, et al. Ensuringindividual success in an academic career: Report of the2004–2005 Academic Affairs Committee. Available at: http://www.aacp.org/governance/COMMITTEES/academicaffairs/Documents/2004-05_AcadAffairs_FinalReport.pdf AccessedNovember 22, 2013.

2. American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Vacantbudgeted and lost faculty positions—academic year 2011–12.Available at: http://www.aacp.org/resources/research/institutionalresearch/Pages/InstitutionalResearchBriefs.aspx AccessedNovember 22, 2013.

3. American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Academicpharmacy’s vital statistics. Available at: http://www.aacp.org/about/pages/vitalstats.aspx Accessed November 22, 2013.

4. Selander LK, Bjornson DC. Description of an electivePharmD teaching clerkship. Am J Pharm Educ. 1995;59(2):273–278.

5. Hobson EH, Briceland LL. Integrated pharmacy educationPharmD clerkship: preparing for academic pharmacy practice.Am J Pharm Educ. 1999;63(supplement): (76 S).

6. Hammer DP, Paulsen SM. An innovative clerkship in phar-macy education. Am J Pharm Educ. 2001;65(3):284–293.

7. Sylvia LM. An advanced pharmacy practice experience inacademia. Am J Pharm Educ. 2006;70(5): Article 97.

8. Brooks AD. Considering academic pharmacy as a career:opportunities and resources for students, residents, and fellows.Curr Pharm Teach Learn. 2009;1(1):2–9.

9. Roche VF, Limpach AL. A collaborative and reflectiveacademic advanced pharmacy practice experience. Am J PharmEduc. 2011;75(6): Article 120.

10. Baia P, Strang A. An elective course to promote academicpharmacy as a career. Am J Pharm Educ. 2012;76(2): Article 130.

11. Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education. Accreditationstandards and guidelines for the professional program inpharmacy leading to the Doctor of Pharmacy Degree. Guide-lines 2.0; January 23, 2011. Available at: https://www.acpeaccredit.org/pdf/FinalS2007Guidelines2.0.pdf Accessed Novem-ber 22, 2013.

12. Pharmacy School Admission Requirements. School admissionrequirements. American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.Available at: http://www.aacp.org/resources/student/pharmacyforyou/admissions/Documents/PSAR-1213_narratives.pdfAccessed November 22, 2013.

13. Boyer EL. Scholarship Reconsidered: Priorities of the Profes-sorate. Princeton, NJ: Carnegie Foundation for the Advance-ment of Teaching; 1990.








http://refhub.elsevier.com/S1877-1297(13)00192-5/sbref1


















https://www.acpeaccredit.org/pdf/FinalS2007Guidelines2.0.pdf

https://www.acpeaccredit.org/pdf/FinalS2007Guidelines2.0.pdf

http://www.aacp.org/resources/student/pharmacyforyou/admissions/Documents/PSAR-1213_narratives.pdf

http://www.aacp.org/resources/student/pharmacyforyou/admissions/Documents/PSAR-1213_narratives.pdf


