PMCC PMCC

Search tips
Search criteria

Advanced
Results 1-2 (2)
 

Clipboard (0)
None

Select a Filter Below

Journals
Authors
Year of Publication
Document Types
1.  Faculty Awards at US Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy 
Objectives
To determine recognition given for outstanding teaching, service, and scholarship at US colleges and schools of pharmacy, the types of awards given, and the process used to select the recipients.
Methods
A self-administered questionnaire was made available online in 2006 to deans at 89 colleges and schools of pharmacy.
Results
Sixty-four usable responses (72%) were obtained. An award to acknowledge teaching excellence was most commonly reported (92%), followed by an award for adjunct/volunteer faculty/preceptors (79%). The majority of the institutions (31 out of 58) reported offering 1 teaching award annually. The 2 most common methods for selecting the recipient of the teaching award were by student vote and by college/school committee vote following nominations. Twenty-four of the 63 respondents indicated that their institution provided an award for research/scholarship and 18 offered an award for outstanding service.
Conclusions
Teaching excellence was recognized and rewarded at most US colleges and schools of pharmacy; however, research/scholarship and service were formally recognized less frequently.
PMCID: PMC2576424  PMID: 19009732
faculty awards; faculty retention; preceptor awards; awards
2.  Programmatic Curricular Outcomes Assessment at Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy in the United States and Puerto Rico 
Objectives
To categorize the manner in which programmatic curricular outcomes assessment is accomplished, identify the types of assessment methodologies used, and identify the persons or groups responsible for assessment.
Methods
A self-administered questionnaire was mailed to 89 institutions throughout the United States and Puerto Rico.
Results
Sixty-eight of 89 surveys (76%) were returned. Forty-one respondents (60%) had a written and approved plan for programmatic curricular outcomes assessment, 18% assessed the entire curriculum, and 57% had partial activities in place. Various standardized and institution-specific assessment instruments were employed. Institutions differed as to whether an individual or a committee had overall responsibility for assessment.
Conclusion
To move the assessment process forward, each college and school should identify a person or group to lead the effort. Additional validated assessment instruments might aid programmatic assessment. Future studies should identify the reasons for selecting certain assessment instruments and should attempt to identify the most useful ones.
PMCID: PMC1636886  PMID: 17136151
assessment; curricular assessment; programmatic assessment

Results 1-2 (2)