University of Montana, Skaggs School of Pharmacy, Missoula, Montana.
University of Oklahoma College of Pharmacy, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
Am J Pharm Educ. 2022 Oct;86(7):8745. doi: 10.5688/ajpe8745. Epub 2021 Nov 23.
To assess how curriculum committees at US schools and colleges of pharmacy have evolved since 2011 regarding their responsibilities, structures, functions, charges, and activities. A total of 133 fully accredited schools and colleges of pharmacy were included in the survey. Data collection occurred between March and September 2020, and survey questions pertained to academic year 2019-2020. Data were collected on committee membership, leadership, functions, and charges. New questions explored ties to assessments and Standards 2016. Analysis included descriptive statistics and comparisons to the 2011 survey results. The response rate was 80%; one partial response was excluded from analysis. Most schools and colleges (93%) rely on a curriculum committee to provide curriculum oversight. Faculty and students remain the most frequent types of members, but increases have occurred in the number of committees with members from other areas, including experiential programs, staff, directors, librarians, and pharmacy residents. Committee charges have increased beyond the traditional activities of curriculum planning, mapping, and review to include newer tasks. In one-third of the institutions, the primary responsibility for various assessment activities is shared by both committees. Curriculum committees remain a key part of pharmacy education but continue to evolve to meet their responsibilities related to new and increasing numbers of charges and to find ways to communicate and share duties with their assessment counterparts. Based on these findings, recommendations include having clear guidance for curriculum committees and reducing the frequency of their scheduled work to ensure they will be able to address new challenges as they emerge.
评估自 2011 年以来美国药学院校的课程委员会在其职责、结构、职能、职责和活动方面的演变情况。共有 133 所完全认可的药学院校和学院参加了这项调查。数据收集于 2020 年 3 月至 9 月之间，调查问题涉及 2019-2020 学年。收集了委员会成员、领导、职能和职责的数据。新问题探讨了与评估和 2016 年标准的联系。分析包括描述性统计和与 2011 年调查结果的比较。回复率为 80%；一份不完整的回复被排除在分析之外。大多数学校和学院（93%）依靠课程委员会来提供课程监督。教师和学生仍然是最常见的成员类型，但来自其他领域的成员（包括实习计划、工作人员、主任、图书馆员和药剂师住院医师）的委员会数量有所增加。委员会的职责已经超出了课程规划、映射和审查等传统活动，增加了新的任务。在三分之一的机构中，各种评估活动的主要责任由委员会共同承担。课程委员会仍然是药学教育的重要组成部分，但仍在不断发展，以履行其与新的和不断增加的职责相关的职责，并寻找与评估对应方沟通和分担职责的方法。根据这些发现，建议包括为课程委员会提供明确的指导，并减少其计划工作的频率，以确保他们能够在出现新挑战时解决这些问题。
