Presbyterian College School of Pharmacy

Presbyterian College School of Pharmacy

Program Assessment Plan

2012-2013 AY Review

Purpose of the PCSP Doctor of Pharmacy Program

The PCSP offers the Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) professional degree, and its curriculum is designed to develop a graduate pharmacist who is prepared to: 1) render exemplary pharmaceutical care; 2) succeed in a post-graduate training or degree program; 3) pursue life-long learning; and 4) advance the practice and profession of pharmacy. To achieve these goals, the program provides students with an opportunity to learn the requisite knowledge, skills, and abilities listed in the professional competency statements outlined in two key documents: the ACPE 2007 Appendix D guidelines and the AACP Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Outcomes. These competency statements are discussed in detail below.

Assessment Defined

Assessment is the systematic review and use of data and information to improve the functioning of programs and people within an organization.

Guiding Principles of Assessment

1.The assessment plan will reflect the mission of the college and the PCSP.

2.The primary purposes of assessment will be the ongoing review and measurement of programs, services, processes, and outcomes with the intent of improving them over time and promoting positive programmatic change.

3.Assessment will be a collaborative effort involving all stakeholders to include faculty, staff, students, preceptors, administrators, alumni, and the general public.

4.The assessment plan will include the collection and review of qualitative, longitudinal, quantitative, direct, indirect, formative, and summative data, as appropriate for the item being measured.

5.All programs and courses will be defined and guided by clearly stated and measurable outcomes.

6.Assessment will establish the extent to which students achieve the level of proficiency expected for the given learning outcomes, faculty improve their expertise, and administrators enhance their leadership skills and will be the basis for making changes that will enhance future teaching and student learning.

7.Assessment data and results will be available to all stakeholders as needed and appropriate.

8.The assessment plan itself will be assessed.

Purpose of PCSP Assessment Plan

The purpose of assessment at PCSP is three-fold:

1.To assure consistent review for improving the organization, the academic program, and student learning

2.To meet ACPE and SACS accreditation requirements.

3.To meet ongoing Presbyterian College requirements for programmatic assessment.

PCSP Assessment Committee

The PCSP Assessment Committee serves to facilitate and enhance assessment consistent with the expectations of the President and Dean as well as the accreditation requirements of ACPE and SACS. Committee charges are provided annually by the Dean, and the committee chair is elected each year from among the members of the committee. Provision is included for a variety of special emphasis subcommittees as determined by the full committee on an as-needed basis. A simple majority of the full committee will constitute a quorum of the committee.

Reporting of Assessment Data

Assessment data, where appropriate and permissible, will be provided to students, faculty, staff, alumni, college administration, and accreditation boards, upon request. An annual report will bepublished by the school and mailed to alumni and friends of the school. This report will include assessment data for information purposes. Data will be provided to appropriate school committees for programmatic decisions.

Assessment Protocol for PCSP

Outcomes for the PCSP are divided into four major categories, program, students, faculty, and institutional. The assessment of these areas provides a quality assurance for the School of Pharmacy and provides direction for development of strategic plans that will assure the school’s mission.

1. Program

1.1.Program /Curricular Outcomes

1.1.1.At least 95% of graduates will pass the North American Pharmacist Licensure Examination (NAPLEX) and the Multistate Pharmacy Jurisprudence Examination (MPJE) on the first attempt.

Responsible Person: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Measurement: Annual review of NAPLEX and MJPE scores and pass rates
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Academic Affairs Council to determine areas of possible improvement of curriculum program.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-begin 2014-2015 academic year

1.1.2.At least 95% of students successfully complete the curriculum within four years.

Responsible Person: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs
Measurement: Annual review of student progression and GPA trends by the Academic Standards Committee
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Academic Affairs Council to assess the progression, admissions, and academic assistance policies.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-begin 2014-2015 academic year

1.1.3.At least 95% of APPE preceptors surveyed annually are satisfied with the preparation of students.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; Assessment Committee; Assistant Dean for Experiential Education; Chair, Pharmacy Practice
Measurement 1: Annual review of AACP preceptor survey
Measurement 2: Periodic focus groups
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Curriculum Committee to determine the success of the academic curriculum program.
2012-2013 Assessment: Measurement 1-See Appendix 1-2013 AACPPreceptor Survey and Appendix 1A-2013 AACP Preceptor Survey Peer Institution Comparison Report, Measurement 2- begin 2013-2014 academic year

1.1.4.At least 95% of alumni are satisfied with their preparation for practice as provided by PCSP.

Responsible Persons: Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs; Assessment Committee
Measurement: Administration of the AACP alumni survey every 3 years to graduates who have been out of the program for a minimum of 1 year and a maximum of 3 years
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment and Curriculum Committees to assure a quality student educational experience at PCSP.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-begin 2014-2015 academic year

1.1.5.At least 95% of employers or post-graduate training program directors are satisfied with the preparation of PCSP graduates for practice.

Responsible Persons: Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs; Assessment Committee and Assistant Dean for Experiential Education
Measurement 1: Administration of PCSP Employer Survey every 3 years to a subset of hospital and residency directors and regional supervisors of chain pharmacies and independent pharmacies in South Carolina, North Carolina, Georgia, and other states in which graduates work within the region
Measurement 2: Annual feedback from PCSP Advisory Board and/or Preceptor Advisory Group
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment and Curriculum Committees to assure the educational process is providing employers with pharmacists prepared to practice in the profession.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-Measurement 1 and 2-begin 2014-2015 academic year

1.1.6.At least 95% of graduating students are satisfied with their experience at the PCSP.

Responsible Persons: Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs; Assessment Committee; PCSP faculty
Measurement: Exit interviews of all graduating students during the Capstone II course using an assessment tool
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment Committee to assure and enhance the student’s quality experience while attending PCSP.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-begin 2013-2014 academic year

1.1.7.Admission pool demographics will indicate a percentage increase in minority and rural South Carolina applicants to the PCSP until the state norm average is achieved.

Responsible Person: Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs
Measurement: Review of admissions applicant data
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Admissions Committee to evaluate and enhance student recruitment of minority and rural students from South Carolina.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 2-Entering Class Statistics andDemographics

1.1.8.Student success and achievement in the professional and academic program will be evaluated based on criteria, policies, and procedures used for admissions.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs
Measurement: Data collected on students for admission correlated to analyze student performance in the academic program
Use of Assessment Findings: Resultant data will be used by the Admissions Committee and PCSP faculty to review and modify admissions criteria.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 3-Admission Data and Student Success in Academic Program

1.1.9.If major changes are made to the curriculum and/or the primary teaching pedagogy of the school is modified more often than every 4 years, an in-depth review will be conducted to determine the impact of the changes.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; Curriculum Committee; Assessment Committee
Measurement: Review of curriculum and analysis of changes in student and course outcomes before and after modifications in curriculum
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Academic Affairs Council to assure the quality, consistency, and continuity of the curriculum.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 4-2012-2013 Curriculum Committee Year End Summary Report

1.1.10.If individual faculty members, including voluntary faculty preceptors, are required to spend more than 5% of their time remediating ineffective learning, the course instructor will be interviewed and course materials will be reviewed for appropriateness.

Responsible Persons: Department chairs and Assistant Dean for Experiential Education
Measurement 1: Annual review of faculty activity reports and workload reports
Measurement 2: Feedback from preceptors and the PCSP Preceptor Advisory Board
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Academic Standards Committee to evaluate the remediation process.
2012-2013 Assessment: no issues reported

2.Students

2.1.Student Competency Outcomes

2.1.1.At least 95% of students in the P3 class will successfully pass the PCSP Third Year Competency Exam (TYCE).

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs;faculty
Measurement: Examination given to all students at the end of the third academic year using a PCSP-developed OSCE assessment to document progress in the acquisition of knowledge, skills, and the Presbyterian Twelve Competencies
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment and Curriculum Committees to evaluate and enhance student learning and curriculum content to assure competencies are met.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 5-Third Year Competency Exam Deficiency Table

2.1.2.All students document in an electronic learning portfolio—a Growth and Assessment Portfolio (GAP)—showing successful completion of professional, course, and curricular objectives appropriate for the level of the curriculum completed.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs; Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs; faculty advisors
Measurement: Review annually of longitudinal, electronic student portfolio that tracks and assesses progress on personal and professional development and PCSP ability-based outcomes
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment Committee to validate student achievement in professional, curriculum, and Presbyterian TwelveCompetencies.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 6-Growth and Assessment Portfolio Deficiency Table

2.1.3.If more than 10% of students fail (D or F) a given course in a single semester, an investigation will be conducted that includes interviews with students, the course instructor(s), and a review of course materials.

Responsible Person: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs and Department chairs
Measurement: Review of course grades and pass/fail rates each semester for each instructor and tracking of any faculty or student interviews/reviews and action plans that occur as a result
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment Committee to determine the issues in the course that led to a high deficiency rate.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-See Appendix 7-PCSP Course Deficiency Table

2.2.Student Attitude Outcomes

2.2.1.At least 95% of the students are satisfied that the PCSP is a harmonious, collegial, and stress-limiting environment in which to learn and work.

Responsible Person: Assistant Dean for Professional and Student Affairs, Assessment Committee
Measurement: Focus group interview of students developed by the Assessment Committee
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be usedby the Assessment Committee to validate and correct areas of student concern regarding their learning environment.
2012-2013 Assessment: See Appendix 8-2012-2013 Student Focus Group Responses

3.Faculty

3.1.Faculty Teaching Outcomes

3.1.1. Each course and instructor is evaluated by students at least once each year. In each case, the review is either at a satisfactory level, or documentation is made of ongoing efforts to improve teaching skills.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs;department chairs
Measurement: Annual review of student evaluations of course instructors
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by department chairs to enhance the quality of teaching and faculty development programming.
2012-2013 Assessment: Faculty were evaluated by students in the course(s) they taught. Feedback from the evaluations was provided to the faculty by the department chairs at the end of each semester. All evaluations on file in Office for Academic Affairs.

3.1.2 Each instructor who teaches in a didactic course and is still in the promotion and tenure process receives a formative peer review of teaching at least once per year. Each instructor who teaches in a didactic course and has completed the promotion and tenure process receives a formative peer review at least once every two years. In each case, the review is either at a satisfactory level, or documentation is made of ongoing efforts to improve teaching skills.

Responsible Persons: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs;department chairs
Measurement 1: Annual review of course/instructor evaluations and completion rates of evaluations
Measurement 2: Review of peer-teaching evaluations
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by department chairs to enhance the quality of teaching and faculty development programming. Policies at the school level will assist in faculty development plan.

2012-2013 Assessment: Course evaluations were completed by students and the results were provided to each faculty member per course by the department chair. Peer evaluations were completed on each junior faculty member. Results were discussed with the faculty member by the reviewer and department chairs. All evaluations on file in Office for Academic Affairs

3.2.Faculty Research and Service Outcomes

3.2.1. All faculty members are regularly assessed by their department chair and/or the Dean in the areas of teaching, service, and scholarship and to identify professional development needs.

Responsible Persons: Dean; department chairs
Measurement: Annual faculty performance evaluation and review of annual activity report, including discussion of faculty progress towards promotion and tenure requirements
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by department chairs and Dean to determine salary and merit salary increase and tenure and promotion.
2012-2013 Assessment: In-progress
Annual faculty activity reports were completed by each faculty member by August 1, 2013. Department chairs are currently meeting with each faculty member for an annual review discussing the faculty member's annual activity report, goals and objectives, and progress towards promotion and tenure. Following each faculty member's annual review, the Dean will be informed of the faculty member's progress, and a letter from the department chair will be generated indicating his/herperformance and progress towards promotion and tenure. All reviews will be completed by October 2013.

3.2.2.All faculty members are performing at or above expectations of their department chair in the areas of teaching, service, and scholarship.

Responsible Persons: Department chairs;faculty
Measurement: Development and annual review of goal plan statement (GPS) for each faculty member at performance evaluation, including discussion of faculty progress towards promotion and tenure requirements including scholarship and service
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by department chairs to assess activity and create strategies to ensure quality faculty research and scholarship.
2012-2013 Assessment: In-progress
Annual faculty activity reports were completed by each faculty member by August 1, 2013. Department chairs are currently meeting with each faculty member for an annual review discussing the faculty member's annual activity report, goals and objectives, and progress towards promotion and tenure. Following each faculty member's annual review, the Dean will be informed of the faculty member’s progress, and a letter from the department chair will be generated indicating his/herperformance and progress towards promotion and tenure. All reviewswill be completed by October 2013.

3.2.3.All faculty members contribute appropriately to the work of the PCSP.

Responsible Persons: Dean; department chairs
Measurement: Review of annual faculty workload
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by department chairs to assure equitable faculty workloads.
2012-2013 Assessment: Workload analyses completed by department chairs for 2012-2013 academic yearwere reported to the Dean. Ongoing analysis will be completed in 2013-2014.

3.3.Faculty Attitude Outcomes

3.3.1.At least 95% of the faculty are satisfied that the PCSP is a harmonious, collegial, and stress-limiting environment in which to work.

Responsible Person: Associate Dean for Academic Affairs, Faculty Welfare Committee
Measurement: Annual focus groups created and by the Faculty Welfare Committee.
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Assessment Committee to validate and correct areas of faculty concern regarding their work environment.
2012-2013 Assessment: No report-Faculty Welfare did not conduct a focus group evaluation during 2013-2013 but should during 2013-2014.

4.Institutional

4.1.Administrative Review

4.1.1.Organizational structure and function will be maximized for effectiveness.

Responsible Persons: Dean; Executive Committee
Measurement 1: Three year interval, tracking and review of administrator-to-faculty ratios; administrative roles and responsibilities; comparison to other pharmacy schools for best practices
Measurement 2: Review of annual reports from all PCSP committees and task forces
Use of Assessment Findings: Data will be used by the Executive Council to evaluate organizational structure and effectiveness of the school.
2012-2013 Assessment: Measurement 1 will begin in the 2013-2014 academic year. Committee reports were reviewed and archived per Measurement 2.

4.1.2PCSP Administrators will be assessed yearly.