Assessment of Full-time Faculty Preceptors By Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy in the United States and Puerto Rico

Abstract

Objective. To identify the manner in which colleges and schools of pharmacy in the United States and Puerto Rico assess full-time faculty preceptors. Methods. Directors of pharmacy practice (or equivalent title) were invited to complete an online, selfadministered questionnaire. Results. Seventy of the 75 respondents (93.3%) confirmed that their college or school assessed fulltime pharmacy faculty members based on activities related to precepting students at a practice site. The most commonly reported assessment components were summative student evaluations (98.5%), type of professional service provided (92.3%), scholarly accomplishments (86.2%), and community service (72.3%). Approximately 42% of respondents indicated that a letter of evaluation provided by a sitebased supervisor was included in their assessment process. Some colleges and schools also conducted onsite assessment of faculty members. Conclusions. Most colleges and schools of pharmacy assess full-time faculty-member preceptors via summative student assessments, although other strategies are used. Given the important role of preceptors in ensuring students are prepared for pharmacy practice, colleges and schools of pharmacy should review their assessment strategies for full-time faculty preceptors, keeping in mind the methodologies used by other institutions.

Assessment of Volunteer Preceptors at Colleges and Schools of Pharmacy in the United States

“…Scholarship of volunteer preceptors was reported to be assessed less frequently than what was noted in the study of full-time faculty preceptors (26.0% versus 80.6%). 6 This is not surprising given that the overall expectations for fulltime faculty generally include some level of scholarly activity.…”

“…2 This also was the most common method found when assessing full-time faculty preceptors. 6 Importantly, student evaluations have been reported to be influenced by multiple factors and therefore may not be the best measure of preceptor ability. [13][14][15][16] Perhaps this is one reason why C/SOP use multiple strategies for volunteer preceptor assessment.…”

“…This assessment method was more frequently reported than in the study evaluating assessment practices for full-time faculty preceptors. 6 Fewer programs reported using other assessment methods. For example, evaluating professional service was much less commonly reported for volunteer preceptors than for full-time faculty preceptors (12.9% versus 92.3%).…”

“…5 While Kirschenbaum and Zerilli studied the way in which colleges and schools of pharmacy (C/SOP) assess full-time faculty preceptors, no literature was identified to document the manner in which volunteer preceptors are assessed. 6 The role of volunteer preceptors is critical in the education of pharmacy students, yet, in general, volunteers enter the role of preceptorship with limited knowledge, experience, or formal education in precepting. As a result, and as required by the accreditation standards, C/SOP dedicate significant effort and time to the development of volunteer preceptors into effective teachers, mentors, and role models.…”

Pharmacy practice faculty and preceptor development

“…Performance assessment is essential for ongoing preceptor development. Summative preceptor evaluations completed by students are the most common method used to assess preceptor performance 18,19 . However, these evaluations correlate strongly with student grade expectations and thus may not accurately represent performance 20 .…”