Making progress: A national study on the development and use of progression assessments in United States pharmacy curricula.

BACKGROUND: The objective was to determine the utilization, frequency, characteristics, and standard-setting methods of progression assessments in pharmacy education. METHODS: A survey was sent to 139 United States schools/colleges of pharmacy having an identifiable assessment lead and students enrolled in the doctor of pharmacy program. The survey examined programs' use, frequency, and characteristics of progression assessments within their curriculum. Respondents also reported any changes made due to the COVID-19 pandemic and which, if any, would be maintained in future years. Analysis consisted of descriptive statistics and thematic coding. This research was deemed exempt by the university's institutional review board. RESULTS: Seventy-eight programs responded to the survey (response rate = 56%). Sixty-seven percent of programs administered at least one progression assessment in 2019-2020. There was some variability in assessment practice, including professional year(s) administered, course(s) involved, and content. Approximately 75% of programs used assessments to ensure student competency in the programs' learning outcomes and to identify individual student learning deficiencies. Diversity was seen in validity and reliability practices, and most programs used pre-determined cut scores without formal standard setting. Because of the pandemic, 75% of programs changed the assessment delivery mode and 20 programs planned to maintain at least one pandemic-related change in future iterations. CONCLUSIONS: Most pharmacy programs utilize some type of progression assessment within their curriculum. While many schools administer progression assessments, there is little agreement on their purpose, development, and use. The pandemic changed the mode of delivery, which numerous programs will continue with in the future.

Comparison of student pharmacists' performance on in-person vs. virtual OSCEs in a pre-APPE capstone course.

INTRODUCTION: Objective structured clinical examinations (OSCEs,) provided in-person or virtually, assess student pharmacist readiness for advanced pharmacy practice experiences (APPEs). During the COVID-19 pandemic in 2020, it was necessary for many educators to design and implement virtual OSCEs (vOSCEs). Impact on student performance utilizing in-person vs. vOSCE has not been well evaluated. The objective of this study was to determine if a difference existed in student performance when comparing in-person vs. vOSCE in a third year (P3) pharmacy pre-APPE capstone course. METHODS: In winter 2019, four in-person OSCE stations were designed and implemented in a pre-APPE P3 capstone course. In winter 2021, the same four stations were transitioned into vOSCE stations. Assessment (summative) data from similar student cohorts from OSCE 2019 were compared vOSCE 2021 stations using Mann-Whitney U test. RESULTS: There was no meaningful difference found when comparing student performance on in-person OSCE vs. vOSCE. There was no significant difference for the number of students offered remediation. For most stations, performance improved from formative to summative assessments. CONCLUSIONS: Providing vOSCEs to assess students' skills in a pre-APPE P3 capstone course is a reasonable alternative to in-person OSCEs.