Why get involved? A cross-sectional survey of factors that influence student pharmacist membership in professional organizations.

INTRODUCTION: Understanding factors that motivate and deter student pharmacists from joining professional pharmacy organizations may assist schools and organizations in determining ways to recruit, engage, and support the next generation of pharmacy professionals. The objective is to identify motivating and hindering factors related to student pharmacist membership in professional pharmacy organizations. METHODS: A cross-sectional survey was sent to the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy Student Services Personnel community members for distribution to student pharmacists at their respective schools. The survey collected demographic data, determined the extent of student membership and leadership involvement within professional organizations, and assessed factors that motivate and deter student pharmacist membership in organizations. RESULTS: 467 students completed the survey. Seventy percent indicated they are currently involved in one or more pharmacy organizations. Final-year students were less likely to join organizations than other professional years (p < 0.001). Women (p = 0.001) were more likely to join and hold leadership positions, as were younger-aged students (p = 0.001) and those living on or near campus (p = 0.049). Opportunities for professional development was the highest-ranked factor motivating students to join a professional organization, and the time required for participation was the highest-ranked hindering factor. CONCLUSION: Numerous factors affect student pharmacists' decisions to join professional pharmacy organizations. This information may assist in determining ways to recruit and engage students starting early in their pharmacy education. It may be prudent to redefine student engagement within professional organizations, especially in the context of new generations of students.

Opportunities for Pipeline Programming and Co-curriculum Learning Experiences--A Perspective Commentary.

Given the variability in compounding education provided by Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) programs, incorporation of compounding-focused learning experiences within pipeline programs and co-curricular education may provide students with important exposure, networking opportunities, and skill development. Compounding education can be incorporated into areas outside of the core curriculum, including pipeline programming for pre-pharmacy students and the co-curriculum for current pharmacy students. This article, which is a perspective commentary, will discuss suggestions for designing and implementing these types of learning opportunities, including considerations for faculty and budgets and related benefits for learners. These ideas will be discussed in the context of examples provided by a college of pharmacy who has implemented these learning experiences. To ensure well-trained pharmacists continue to pursue compounding careers, it is vital that pharmacy programs provide ample opportunities for student exposure and training in this area. Pharmacy programs are encouraged to incorporate compounding- focused learning experiences within pipeline programming and the co-curriculum. Future research is needed to investigate the impact of such experiences on students' compounding knowledge and skills and their pursuit of compounding careers.

Impact of recorded, asynchronous admissions interviews on holistic and academic interview scores.

INTRODUCTION: Applications across colleges of pharmacy have decreased significantly over the last few years. Many applicants turn down an in-person interview due to the cost of travel or time restraints. Offering asynchronous virtual interviews may increase the number of applicants interviewed; however, they may also affect the candidate's interview score. The purpose of this study is to compare the interview scores of candidates who interviewed in the virtual asynchronous platform vs. candidates who interviewed in person on campus. METHODS: Admission candidates participated in either an in-person interview or a virtual asynchronous interview. Virtual interviews were conducted asynchronously through audiovisual capture of interview responses. All interview questions were rated on a scale of one to four. The individual question scores were averaged with applicants receiving an overall academic and an overall holistic interview score. RESULTS: One hundred and twenty-one interviews were included in the analysis. Of these interviews, 32 (26%) were conducted virtually and 89 (74%) were conducted in person. Students participating in virtual interviews scored significantly lower than their in-person peers for both academic (U = 782 [2.8 vs. 3.3], P < .01) and holistic interviews (U = 1040 [3 vs. 3.3], P = .02). CONCLUSIONS: Asynchronous virtual interviews could be a convenient method to offer interviews to candidates who may not be able to interview in person due to travel costs or other contributing barriers. Although this method may be more convenient for the interviewer, it may result in a lower interview score compared to an in-person interview.