Michael J Rudolph1, Kelly C Lee2, Mitra Assemi3, Brenda S Bray4, Kimberly K Daugherty5, Samuel C Karpen6, Jaime L Maerten-Rivera7, Nina Pavuluri8, Julie M Sease9, Rosalyn Padiyara Vellurattil10, Margaret A Weck11. 1. Marshall University School of Pharmacy, One John Marshall Dr., Huntington, WV 25755, United States. Electronic address: rudolph@uky.edu. 2. University of California San Diego Skaggs School of Pharmacy & Pharmaceutical Sciences, 9500 Gilman Dr., La Jolla, CA 92093, United States. Electronic address: kellylee@ucsd.edu. 3. University of California San Francisco School of Pharmacy, UCSF Fresno Campus, 155 N. Fresno St. Rm 224, Fresno, CA 93701, United States. Electronic address: mitra.assemi@ucsf.edu. 4. Washington State University Elson S. Floyd College of Medicine, Health Sciences Building, Office 215D, 205 E. Spokane Falls Blvd, P.O. Box 1495, Spokane, WA 99210, United States. Electronic address: bbray@wsu.edu. 5. Sullivan University College of Pharmacy and Health Sciences, 2100 Gardner Ln, Louisville, KY 40205, United States. Electronic address: kdaugherty@sullivan.edu. 6. East Tennessee State University Gatton College of Pharmacy, Maple Avenue Bldg. 7, PO Box 70414, Johnson City, TN 37614, United States. Electronic address: karpen@etsu.edu. 7. University of Buffalo School of Pharmacy and Pharmaceutical Sciences, 280 Kapoor (John) Hall, Buffalo, NY 14214, United States. Electronic address: jmaerten@buffalo.edu. 8. Lake Erie College of Osteopathic Medicine School of Pharmacy, 5000 Lakewood Ranch Boulevard, Bradenton, FL 34211, United States. Electronic address: npavuluri@lecom.edu. 9. Presbyterian College School of Pharmacy, 307 N. Broad Street, Clinton, SC 29325, United States. Electronic address: jmsease@presby.edu. 10. University of Illinois at Chicago College of Pharmacy, 833 S. Wood Street (874), 184E, (M/C 874), Chicago, IL 60612, United States. Electronic address: rosalyn@uic.edu. 11. St. Louis College of Pharmacy, 4588 Parkview Place, St. Louis, MO 63110, United States. Electronic address: Margaret.Weck@stlcop.edu.
Abstract
INTRODUCTION: Expectations for assessment in higher education have increased in recent decades, prompting institutions to invest additional resources in this area. This study aimed to determine the resources, structure, and perception of assessment resources in United States schools and colleges of pharmacy (S/COPs). METHODS: Assessment personnel in S/COPs were surveyed electronically. Information collected included S/COP demographics, composition of assessment positions, experience and training of assessment personnel, and structure and responsibilities of committees engaged in assessment. Respondents' perception of their S/COPs having sufficient assessment personnel, recent changes in assessment, and the factors that prompted assessment changes were also surveyed. RESULTS: Respondents included individuals from 113 S/COPs (84% response rate). Most S/COPs had 1-2 assessment positions and 1-2 assessment-related committees. The most common assessment position titles were assistant/associate dean, director, coordinator/specialist, and administrative assistant. Dean-level administrators typically had worked in assessment the longest, whereas directors were more likely to have formal assessment training. Most respondents (75%) agreed they had sufficient assessment personnel to meet the 2007 Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education Standards. Nearly two-thirds of respondents agreed they had sufficient personnel to meet the 2016 Standards and support their current assessment plan/process. Most S/COPs had a formal assessment committee (93%) and an average of two committees overseeing assessment. CONCLUSION: Most S/COPs reported having sufficient resources to support assessment activities. Although there were some consistent themes, there does not appear to be a single model for structuring assessment resources or committees. Effectiveness of various assessment structures represents an area for future research.
INTRODUCTION: Expectations for assessment in higher education have increased in recent decades, prompting institutions to invest additional resources in this area. This study aimed to determine the resources, structure, and perception of assessment resources in United States schools and colleges of pharmacy (S/COPs). METHODS: Assessment personnel in S/COPs were surveyed electronically. Information collected included S/COP demographics, composition of assessment positions, experience and training of assessment personnel, and structure and responsibilities of committees engaged in assessment. Respondents' perception of their S/COPs having sufficient assessment personnel, recent changes in assessment, and the factors that prompted assessment changes were also surveyed. RESULTS: Respondents included individuals from 113 S/COPs (84% response rate). Most S/COPs had 1-2 assessment positions and 1-2 assessment-related committees. The most common assessment position titles were assistant/associate dean, director, coordinator/specialist, and administrative assistant. Dean-level administrators typically had worked in assessment the longest, whereas directors were more likely to have formal assessment training. Most respondents (75%) agreed they had sufficient assessment personnel to meet the 2007 Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education Standards. Nearly two-thirds of respondents agreed they had sufficient personnel to meet the 2016 Standards and support their current assessment plan/process. Most S/COPs had a formal assessment committee (93%) and an average of two committees overseeing assessment. CONCLUSION: Most S/COPs reported having sufficient resources to support assessment activities. Although there were some consistent themes, there does not appear to be a single model for structuring assessment resources or committees. Effectiveness of various assessment structures represents an area for future research.
Authors: Michael J Rudolph; Kimberly K Daugherty; Mary Elizabeth Ray; Veronica P Shuford; Lisa Lebovitz; Margarita V DiVall Journal: Am J Pharm Educ Date: 2019-09 Impact factor: 2.047