Student self-evaluation of professionalism during advanced pharmacy practice experiences
Keywords:Advanced pharmacy practice experience, Nanjing statement, Pharmacy education, Professionalism, Self-evaluation
Objectives: To analyse pharmacy students’ self-evaluation of professionalism criteria during their fourth year in Advanced Pharmacy Practice Experience (APPE) rotations. The authors hypothesised that at least 50% of the evaluation questions will have a self-evaluation rating of ‘exceeds expectations’.
Methods: Towards the end of each APPE rotation, students self-evaluated themselves against ten professionalism criteria using a rubric. The data were aggregated and analysed by rotation type and professionalism criteria.
Results: A total of 8,120 self-evaluations were reviewed. The percentage of evaluations that were rated at ‘exceeds expectations’ are as follows: Ambulatory Patient Care, 51.9%; Community Pharmacy, 63.4%; Inpatient General Medicine, 48.4%; Hospital/Health Systems, 53.9%; and Electives, 57.1%.
Conclusion: The percentage of professionalism self-evaluation ratings for all rotation types, except Inpatient General Medicine, were greater than 50% at the ‘exceeds expectation’ level. This data will be used for accreditation and quality improvement purposes.
Accreditation Council for Pharmacy Education (ACPE). (2015). Accreditation standards and key elements for the professional program in pharmacy leading to the doctor of pharmacy degree: Standards 2016. (Online). Available at: https://www.acpe-accredit.org/pdf/Standards2016FINAL.pdf
Andrade, H.L. (2019). A Critical review of research on student self-assessment. Frontiers in Education, 4:87. https://doi.org/10.3389/feduc.2019.00087
Dubbai, H., Adelstein, B., Taylor, S., & Shulruf, B. (2019). Definition of professionalism and tools for assessing professionalism in pharmacy practice: a systematic review. Journal of Educational Evaluation for Health Professions, 16(22). https://doi.org/10.3352/jeehp.2019.16.22
Dunlosky, J., & Lipko, A. R. (2007). Metacomprehension: a brief history and how to improve its accuracy. Current Directions in Psychological Science, 16(4), 228–232. https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1467-8721.2007.00509.x
Fuller, K.A., Donahue, B., & Kruse, A. (2021a). Examining student self‐awareness of performance on entrustable professional activities given context of preceptor evaluations. Journal of the American College of Clinical Pharmacy, 4(2), 169–175. https://doi.org/10.1002/jac5.1380
International Pharmaceutical Federation (FIP). (2017). Nanjing statements: statements on pharmacy and pharmaceutical sciences education (Online). Available at: https://www.fip.org/files/content/pharmacy-education/fip-education/nanjing-statements.pdf
Medina, M. S., Plaza, C. M., Stowe, C. D., Robinson, E. T., DeLander, G., Beck, D. E., Melchert, R. B., Supernaw, R. B., Roche, V. F., Gleason, B. L., Strong, M. N., Bain, A., Meyer, G. E., Dong, B. J., Rochon, J., & Johnston, P. (2013). Center for the advancement of pharmacy education 2013 educational outcomes. American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, 77(8), 162–162. https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe778162
Tejeiro, R.A., Gomez-Vallecillo, J. L., Romero, A. F., Pelegrina, M., Wallace, A., & Emberley, E. (2012). Summative self-assessment in higher education: implications of its counting towards the final mark. Electronic Journal of Research in Educational Psychology, 10(2), 789–812. https://eric.ed.gov/?id=EJ983265