Advancing Pharmacist Scholarship and Research Within Academic Pharmacy

An appropriate balance between teaching, scholarship, and service is important for a faculty member to have a satisfying and successful career. The relative emphasis on each area normally changes during the course of a career. Although some level of scholarly output is an ongoing and fundamental expectation of all faculty members, this activity is too often given low priority, particularly among faculty members in practice areas who may have a minimal background in research and large demands on their time for teaching and clinical service. Addressing this issue requires establishing a shared commitment between administrators and faculty members, as well as identifying or developing education programs that will ensure research competence for practice faculty members. This paper provides insights into the role that scholarship and research should have for all pharmacy faculty members and provides suggestions for how to better advance this critical component within academic pharmacy.     

Barriers to scholarship in dentistry, medicine, nursing, and pharmacy practice faculty

There has been an increased emphasis on scholarly activities by health sciences faculty members given the importance of the promotion of public health over the last 50 years. Consequently, faculty members are required to place greater emphasis on scholarly activities while maintaining their teaching and service responsibilities. This increasing requirement of scholarly activities has placed great demands on clinical practice faculty members and it has made their management of clinical practice, teaching responsibilities, and expectations for promotion and tenure a difficult task. This retrospective literature review identifies barriers to the scholarship activities of clinical faculty members in dentistry, medicine, nursing, and pharmacy and discusses strategies for enabling faculty members to pursue scholarly activities in the current health science academic environment. The review indicates commonalities of barriers across these 4 disciplines and suggests strategies that could be implemented by all of these disciplines to enable clinical practice faculty members to pursue scholarly activities.     

Quantifying Published Scholarly Works of Experiential Education Directors

Objective. To determine the amount and potential impact of scholarly works that directors of experiential education in US colleges and schools of pharmacy have published since 2001.Methods. A search in Web of Science was used to identify publications and citations for the years 2001-2011 by experiential education directors as identified by the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Roster of Faculty and Professional Staff in 2011. Publication productivity was analyzed by position title, faculty rank, and type of institution (public vs private, research vs nonresearch-intensive). Types of published works were characterized, related citations were identified, and a reported h-index was collected for each person who published during this period.Results. Ninety-seven of 226 (43%) experiential education directors published 344 scholarly works which had received 1841 citations, for an average of 1 publication every 3 years and an average citation rate of 5.3 per publication. Directors at publicly funded and research-intensive institutions published slightly more than did their counterparts at private and nonresearch-intensive schools. Publications were concentrated in 6 journals with a weighted mean publication impact factor of 1.5.Conclusion. Many experiential education directors have published scholarly works even though their titles and ranks vary widely. While the quantity of such works may not be large, the impact is similar to that of other pharmacy practice faculty members. These results could be used to characterize the scholarly performance of experiential education directors in recent years as well as to establish a culture of scholarship in this emerging career track within pharmacy education.     

Development of a center for teaching excellence

This article describes the development, implementation, and assessment of a Center for Teaching Excellence at Midwestern University Chicago College of Pharmacy. The purpose of the Center was to create a systematic framework to promote, enhance, and assess the scholarship of teaching and learning. Assessment of the Center's activities suggests a positive impact on the teaching abilities of faculty. This report is intended to offer other schools or colleges of pharmacy considerations for center development.     

New Indices in Scholarship Assessment

Faculty members'' contributions to research and scholarship are measured by a variety of indices. Assessment also has become an integral part of the Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education''s accreditation process for professional programs. This review describes some of the newer indices available for faculty scholarship assessment. Recently described metrics include the h-index, m-quotient, g-index, h(2) index, a-index, m-index, r-index, ar index, and the creativity index. Of the newer scholarship metrics available, the h-index and m-quotient will likely have the most widespread application in the near future. However, there is no substitute for thoughtful peer review by experienced academicians as the primary method of research and scholarship assessment.     

Curriculum Reform in Finnish Pharmacy Education

Objective

To improve pharmacy education through integrating theory and practice, coherent constructively aligned course entities, and enhanced deep-level learning.

Design

The reform was conducted collaboratively with faculty and staff members, students, and stakeholders in pharmacy. The curriculum, syllabus, and teaching methods were assessed through evaluations and research, conducting core content analyses, and measuring the workload of pharmacy education courses. The new curriculum, launched in August 2005, consists of 6 strands, comprised of different courses which run through the entire program.

Assessment

Three years after the introduction of the reformed curriculum, the results of the reform are being evaluated. Ongoing assessments of teaching and learning will reveal how the education at the faculty level has developed since the reform. These assessment procedures are an integral part of the faculty''s quality assurance program.

Conclusion

The integration of practical training and theoretical studies was improved with personal study plans introduced to enhance students’ learning.     

An Analysis of Community Pharmacy Shared Faculty Members’ Contributions to Teaching,Service, and Scholarship

Objective. To identify community pharmacy shared faculty members across the United States and to describe their roles and responsibilities in terms of teaching, service, and scholarship.Methods. This study was a mixed-methods analysis using surveys and key informant interviews.Results. Twenty-two faculty members completed the survey; nine were interviewed. Their major roles and responsibilities included teaching in community-based and experiential learning courses, precepting students and/or residents, being actively involved in professional organizations, providing patient care while leading innovation, and disseminating findings through scholarship.Conclusion. Community pharmacy shared faculty members contribute to their academic institutions and community pharmacy organizations by educating learners, providing direct patient care, and advancing community practice through innovation and service to the profession. Findings of this study can be used as a guide for academic institutions and community pharmacy organizations interested in partnering to develop a community pharmacy shared faculty position.     

Establishment of a multi-state experiential pharmacy program consortium

In 2002, a regional consortium was created for schools and colleges of pharmacy in Georgia and Alabama to assist experiential education faculty and staff members in streamlining administrative processes, providing required preceptor development, establishing a professional network, and conducting scholarly endeavors. Five schools and colleges of pharmacy with many shared experiential practice sites formed a consortium to help experiential faculty and staff members identify, discuss, and solve common experience program issues and challenges. During its 5 years in existence, the Southeastern Pharmacy Experiential Education Consortium has coordinated experiential schedules, developed and implemented uniform evaluation tools, coordinated site and preceptor development activities, established a work group for educational research and scholarship, and provided opportunities for networking and professional development. Several consortium members have received national recognition for their individual experiential education accomplishments. Through the activities of a regional consortium, members have successfully developed programs and initiatives that have streamlined administrative processes and have the potential to improve overall quality of experiential education programs. Professionally, consortium activities have resulted in 5 national presentations.     

Comparing team-based and mixed active-learning methods in an ambulatory care elective course

Objectives

To assess students'' performance and perceptions of team-based and mixed active-learning methods in 2 ambulatory care elective courses, and to describe faculty members'' perceptions of team-based learning.

Methods

Using the 2 teaching methods, students'' grades were compared. Students'' perceptions were assessed through 2 anonymous course evaluation instruments. Faculty members who taught courses using the team-based learning method were surveyed regarding their impressions of team-based learning.

Results

The ambulatory care course was offered to 64 students using team-based learning (n = 37) and mixed active learning (n = 27) formats. The mean quality points earned were 3.7 (team-based learning) and 3.3 (mixed active learning), p < 0.001. Course evaluations for both courses were favorable. All faculty members who used the team-based learning method reported that they would consider using team-based learning in another course.

Conclusions

Students were satisfied with both teaching methods; however, student grades were significantly higher in the team-based learning course. Faculty members recognized team-based learning as an effective teaching strategy for small-group active learning.     

Part-time and Job-Share Careers Among Pharmacy Practice Faculty Members

Part-time and job-share policies may allow pharmacy practice faculty members to achieve work/life balance while pursuing their professional goals. Precedent for alternative work schedules within the health professions community can be found throughout the literature; however, little is known about part-time roles in academic pharmacy. The design and implementation of 3 different alternative faculty appointments are described and department chair and faculty perspectives are shared. Teaching, service, and scholarship responsibilities, as well as outcomes before and after changes in appointment, are described. Advantages and disadvantages, including advice for other colleges of pharmacy, are presented. Alternate appointments may be a key factor in retaining highly qualified faculty members who continue to bring their expertise to teaching, precepting, and scholarship within a college or school of pharmacy.     

Health Promotion Integrated Into a Thai PharmD Curriculum to Improve Pharmacy Practice Skills

Objective

To implement and evaluate 5 integrated teaching modules in the fifth-year doctor of pharmacy (PharmD) curriculum to increase students'' ability to promote patients'' health as part of their pharmacy practice.

Design

Activity-based learning was added to each module: (1) a practice experience in which students provided health information and counseling to the public; (2) academic debates on current issues in pharmacy (3) journal clubs on articles from the pharmacy literature; and (4) research projects relating to ongoing faculty research on diabetes. Students on 12-week practice experiences had visits to patients in inpatient wards, outpatient clinics, and either primary care units or community pharmacies.

Assessment

Practice examinations at the end of the first semester, the average student score was above 80% as determined by preceptors in experience sites and from faculty members. Group interviews found that students were positive about the benefits of integrated teaching.

Conclusion

The integration of the teaching between modules in the same semester is possible and greatly benefits student learning.     

A critical appraisal of and recommendations for faculty development

The 2009-2010 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Council of Faculties Faculty Affairs Committee reviewed published literature assessing the scope and outcomes of faculty development for tenure and promotion. Relevant articles were identified via a PubMed search, review of pharmacy education journals, and identification of position papers from major healthcare professions academic organizations. While programs intended to enhance faculty development were described by some healthcare professions, relatively little specific to pharmacy has been published and none of the healthcare professions have adequately evaluated the impact of various faculty-development programs on associated outcomes.The paucity of published information strongly suggests a lack of outcomes-oriented faculty-development programs in colleges and schools of pharmacy. Substantial steps are required toward the development and scholarly evaluation of faculty-development programs. As these programs are developed and assessed, evaluations must encompass all faculty subgroups, including tenure- and nontenure track faculty members, volunteer faculty members, women, and underrepresented minorities. This paper proposes AACP, college and school, and department-level recommendations intended to ensure faculty success in achieving tenure and promotion.     

Perceived Barriers to Scholarship and Research Among Pharmacy Practice Faculty: Survey Report from the AACP Scholarship/Research Faculty Development Task Force

Objectives

To identify problems that pharmacy practice faculty members face in pursuing scholarship and to develop and recommend solutions.

Methods

Department chairs were asked to forward a Web-based survey instrument to their faculty members. Global responses and responses stratified by demographics were summarized and analyzed.

Results

Between 312 and 340 faculty members answered questions that identified barriers to scholarship and recommended corrective strategies to these barriers. The most common barrier was insufficient time (57%), and the most common recommendation was for help to “identify a research question and how to answer it.” Sixty percent reported that scholarship was required for advancement but only 32% thought scholarship should be required. Forty-one percent reported that the importance of scholarship is overemphasized.

Conclusions

These survey results provide guidance to improve the quantity and quality of scholarship for faculty members who wish to pursue scholarship, although many of the survey respondents indicated they did not regard scholarship as a priority.     

Impact of a faculty orientation and development committee

This paper describes the faculty enrichment activities and outcomes of a faculty orientation and development committee at a college of pharmacy. The committee used a continuous quality improvement (CQI) framework that included needs assessment, planning and implementation of programs and workshops, assessment of activities, and evaluation of feedback to improve future programming. Some of the programs established by the committee include a 3-month orientation process for new hires and development workshops on a broad range of topics including scholarship (eg, research methods), teaching (eg, test-item writing), and general development (mentorship). Evidence of the committee's success is reflected by high levels of faculty attendance at workshops, positive feedback on workshop evaluations, and overall high levels of satisfaction with activities. The committee has served as a role model for improving faculty orientation and retention.     

Incorporating Pharmacy Scholarship to Management Responsibilities

Practice advancement demands innovation. Amidst professional change, pharmacy leaders have the opportunity to collaborate with colleagues to develop transformational ideas, implement these solutions, and share those successes with professionals around the state, country, and world. Scholarship, defined as contributing to the literature through publications, presentations, and other writings, is an ideal way to advance innovation within the profession. It is critical for pharmacy leaders to build scholarship into their professional workflow. Ensuring that successful projects are published or presented may translate into shared best practices. Many pharmacy leaders may find it difficult to participate in scholarship activities because of their busy schedules. This column serves to outline recommendations on how to effectively incorporate writing for publications, making presentations, and other scholarly work into the role of pharmacy leaders and managers. To reduce the barriers to scholarship, pharmacy leaders role can apply project management principles to their work and identify projects that otherwise would not be published and support their development.Traditionally rooted in academia, scholarship can be defined as “the creation, advancement, or transformation of knowledge that is distributed from an individual or group to the scientific community.” ¹ Another widely used definition of scholarship was introduced by Boyer, who discussed 4 distinct categories of scholarship: (1) scholarship of discovery, (2) scholarship of integration, (3) scholarship of application, and (4) scholarship of teaching.² As the types of academically acceptable areas of scholarship continue to grow, the opportunities for departments of pharmacy to support “scholarly” activity expand in kind. The literature contains a variety of principles and purported “rules” of scholarship. Glassick and colleagues³ outlined 6 standards for all forms of scholarship:

• Clear goals. Research project aims must be clear and add value to the profession.
• Adequate preparation. The scholar should understand the current nature of the field and be adequately skilled to complete the project.
• Appropriate methods. Proper procedures should be used to complete the project, including sound methods, correct application of methods, and continual modification of methods when necessary.
• Significant results. A project should be sufficiently innovative and contribute to the overall professional body of knowledge in some tangible way.
• Effective communication. Communicating the results of a project is essential, as the ultimate impact of a research project is incumbent on the clarity of its presentation and how well it is disseminated.
• Reflective critique. Areas in which to learn and improve should be identified and discussed. This will ensure the next scholarly work benefits from previous endeavors.

It is critical for pharmacy leaders to build scholarship activities into their professional workflow, ensuring that successful projects are translated into shared best practices. Due to the busy schedules of most pharmacy leaders, they may find it difficult to participate in scholarship activities. This article outlines recommendations on how to effectively incorporate publications, presentations, and other scholarly activities into the role of pharmacy leaders and managers.     

A curriculum development simulation in a graduate program

Objective. To implement and evaluate a curriculum development seminar in which graduate students experienced circumstances that occur when faculty members develop and attempt to secure colleague approval for a curriculum.Design. Learning activities for the graduate seminar included classroom lectures, active learning, and a group project in which simulated faculty committees created new curriculums for the pharmacy practice department''s 3 research areas.Assessment. Responses on pre- and post-seminar surveys indicated that graduate students’ self-confidence in their ability to conduct key curriculum development activities increased (p < 0.05). In a post-seminar focus group, graduate students stated that they valued participating in the faculty simulation, learning about curriculum development and research programs other than their own, and collaborating with their peers.Conclusion. A curriculum development faculty simulation was an effective tool for preparing graduate students for curriculum development responsibilities and generated valuable documents that the department could use in the revision of the 3 pharmacy practice graduate school curricula.