Does curriculum reform influence perceived preparedness for practice of graduates? A comparison of two cohorts

Abstract

Objectives Using performance standards (PS) set by the General Pharmaceutical Council (GPhC), this study compared the views of two consecutive cohorts of MPharm graduates from one pharmacy school, pre‐ and postcurriculum reform on preparedness for practice (PFP). Methods Preparedness was investigated using the GPhC’s 76 PS, grouped into three domains of practice: professional activity, interpersonal skills and ability to provide an effective pharmaceutical service. Respondents were asked to (dis)agree with how they perceived the MPharm had sufficiently prepared them to meet each of the 76 PS. Differences in mean score between the two cohorts were analysed via the independent‐samples t‐test. Regression analysis was used to determine whether the year of graduation was a predictor of PFP once other variables were controlled for. Key findings A response rate of 30.1 and 42.4% was achieved for the 2014 and 2015 cohort, respectively. Significantly more respondents of the 2015 cohort (postcurricular reform) felt prepared for practice than respondents of the 2014 cohort (precurricular reform), for all domains of preregistration performance standards. Multiple regression analysis demonstrated that year of graduation was the independent variable that made the strongest unique contribution to explaining PFP (β = 0.527, P ≤ 0.005). Conclusions Overall findings of this study suggest that increasing adoption of undergraduate active learning opportunities and integrating learning of core subjects may enhance the overall feeling of preparedness for practice.

Preceptor Perceptions of Pharmacy Student Performance Before and After a Curriculum Transformation

“…Our findings build on the emerging evidence of the benefits of curriculum transformation on health professions student performance [20][21][22][23][24][25][26][27][28]52 by adding evidence from observations made by placement preceptors, whose judgments may be considered objective due to their lack of involvement in other parts of the curriculum, and accurate with regard to the competencies required for their practice setting. Although this is the first study to investigate the impact of curriculum transformation on the performance of pharmacy students from placement preceptors' perspective, similar studies have been published in medicine.…”

“…14,[17][18][19] This study represents one part of a larger curriculum evaluation utilizing multiple sources of evidence. Previously, researchers have evaluated health professions curricula in a variety of ways, mainly by comparing student perceptions of learning 20,21 and preparedness for practice, [22][23][24][25] and by interviewing graduates about the effectiveness of their program. 26,27 For example, graduates of reformed, skills-focused medicine and pharmacy curricula had higher selfassessed preparedness for practice than graduates from the previous curricula at the conclusion of the degree 22,23,25 and six years after graduation.…”

Role of social comparison in preparedness for practice as a junior doctor in Singapore: a longitudinal qualitative study

“…Medical graduates' preparedness for practice as new doctors has long been an area of international interest. [1][2][3][4][5][6] 'Under preparedness' for the transition from medical student to postgraduate year 1 is associated with patient safety issues [7][8][9][10] and, at the level of the individual doctor, can lead to stress and burnout. 11 12 To date, most research in health profession education has conceptualised preparedness as 'something possessed by the individual and his/her knowledge and skills rather than having a contextual dimension'.…”

What matters more? What matters less? Changes in the transition to post-secondary between two Toronto high-school cohorts

“…Prior studies comparing student cohorts study a range of factors, from change in the influence of family background on outcomes (Vergolini & Vlach, 2017) to preand post-studies that measure how curriculum change impacts achievement (Parmar et al, 2019). Comparing across two or more cohorts enables insight into cohort effects; that is, social change in terms of how earlier conditions and experiences are associated with later outcomes and patterns (Ryder, 1965).…”