Loading…
Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great
Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on a...
Saved in:
Published in: | American journal of pharmaceutical education 2023-04, Vol.87 (3), p.ajpe9004-312, Article ajpe9004 |
---|---|
Main Authors: | , , , , , , , |
Format: | Article |
Language: | English |
Subjects: | |
Citations: | Items that this one cites |
Online Access: | Get full text |
Tags: |
Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
|
cited_by | |
---|---|
cites | cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c472t-6d7748766392a6dcf911cd05ace83869194b22dffe0e0e617b89ee56f00fe27a3 |
container_end_page | 312 |
container_issue | 3 |
container_start_page | ajpe9004 |
container_title | American journal of pharmaceutical education |
container_volume | 87 |
creator | Meny, Lisa Maerten-Rivera, Jaime Gettig, Jacob P. Goliak, Kristen L. Schwartz, Amy H. Higginbotham, Mary Shenoy, Vinayak Chen, Aleda M.H. |
description | Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on action plans. Because the CQS surveys are standardized, they can allow for greater comparison among institutions, yet interpretation of the items can vary considerably. Programs have flexibility in determining samples for administration and timing of administration (ie, number of years), but some participants (such as preceptors) can suffer from survey overload if multiple institutions administer in the same year. Determining thresholds for action and providing feedback to stakeholders on improvements made based on data triangulations can be daunting. These are a few of the elements that programs must consider when determining their own approach to the AACP CQS. Thus, the purpose of this Commentary is to describe good practices for using the AACP CQS, discuss challenges associated with the surveys, and recommend how to move the utilization of the surveys from good to great. |
doi_str_mv | 10.5688/ajpe9004 |
format | article |
fullrecord | <record><control><sourceid>gale_pubme</sourceid><recordid>TN_cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10159533</recordid><sourceformat>XML</sourceformat><sourcesystem>PC</sourcesystem><galeid>A746821055</galeid><els_id>S0002945923005788</els_id><sourcerecordid>A746821055</sourcerecordid><originalsourceid>FETCH-LOGICAL-c472t-6d7748766392a6dcf911cd05ace83869194b22dffe0e0e617b89ee56f00fe27a3</originalsourceid><addsrcrecordid>eNptkV2PEyEUhonRuLWa-AvMJN540_XAMDBcadNoNVnj9zWhzKHSzAxdGJr038tmu42r5lyQwMML5zyEPKdw2Yi2fW12e1QA_AGZ0aapF4IL-ZDMAIAtFG_UBXmS0g6A8oazx-SiFjVVIOmMvP0UDn7cVsvl6ku1yjF6m_s8VF-z6f10rL7neMBj9Q1T7qdUuRiGah1CV02hWkc001PyyJk-4bPTOic_37_7sfqwuPq8_rhaXi0sl2xaiE5K3kohasWM6KxTlNoOGmOxrVuhqOIbxjrnEEoJKjetQmyEA3DIpKnn5M1t7j5vBuwsjlM0vd5HP5h41MF4ff9k9L_0Nhw0Bdqopq5LwqtTQgzXGdOkB58s9r0ZMeSkmawpZ0IwVtCXf6G7kONY-tOsBQatgDLCM7U1PWo_ulAetjeheim5aBmFImNOLv9Dlepw8DaM6HzZv3fh9E8bQ0oR3blJCvpGt77TXdAXfw7lDN75LQC7BbCoOXiMOlmPo8XOR7ST7oL_N_U3kkG0hg</addsrcrecordid><sourcetype>Open Access Repository</sourcetype><iscdi>true</iscdi><recordtype>article</recordtype><pqid>2802086036</pqid></control><display><type>article</type><title>Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great</title><source>PubMed (Medline)</source><source>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</source><source>Education Collection</source><creator>Meny, Lisa ; Maerten-Rivera, Jaime ; Gettig, Jacob P. ; Goliak, Kristen L. ; Schwartz, Amy H. ; Higginbotham, Mary ; Shenoy, Vinayak ; Chen, Aleda M.H.</creator><creatorcontrib>Meny, Lisa ; Maerten-Rivera, Jaime ; Gettig, Jacob P. ; Goliak, Kristen L. ; Schwartz, Amy H. ; Higginbotham, Mary ; Shenoy, Vinayak ; Chen, Aleda M.H.</creatorcontrib><description>Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on action plans. Because the CQS surveys are standardized, they can allow for greater comparison among institutions, yet interpretation of the items can vary considerably. Programs have flexibility in determining samples for administration and timing of administration (ie, number of years), but some participants (such as preceptors) can suffer from survey overload if multiple institutions administer in the same year. Determining thresholds for action and providing feedback to stakeholders on improvements made based on data triangulations can be daunting. These are a few of the elements that programs must consider when determining their own approach to the AACP CQS. Thus, the purpose of this Commentary is to describe good practices for using the AACP CQS, discuss challenges associated with the surveys, and recommend how to move the utilization of the surveys from good to great.</description><identifier>ISSN: 0002-9459</identifier><identifier>EISSN: 1553-6467</identifier><identifier>DOI: 10.5688/ajpe9004</identifier><identifier>PMID: 36319071</identifier><language>eng</language><publisher>United States: Elsevier Inc</publisher><subject>Academic Standards ; Accreditation ; Accreditation (Institutions) ; Benchmarking ; continuous quality improvement ; Curricula ; Curriculum ; Curriculum evaluation ; Curriculum Quality Survey ; Education, Pharmacy - methods ; Feedback ; Feedback (Response) ; Guidelines ; Humans ; Management Systems ; Medical education ; Meta Analysis ; Methods ; Pharmaceutical Education ; Pharmaceutical sciences ; Pharmacists ; Pharmacy ; Polls & surveys ; Program Evaluation ; programmatic assessment ; Quality management ; Response rates ; Response Rates (Questionnaires) ; Sampling ; Sampling techniques ; School Schedules ; Schools, Pharmacy ; Student Personnel Services ; Student Surveys ; Surveys ; Surveys and Questionnaires ; Total Quality Management ; United States</subject><ispartof>American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2023-04, Vol.87 (3), p.ajpe9004-312, Article ajpe9004</ispartof><rights>2023 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy</rights><rights>2023 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy.</rights><rights>COPYRIGHT 2023 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy</rights><rights>Copyright American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy 2023</rights><rights>2023 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy 2023</rights><lds50>peer_reviewed</lds50><oa>free_for_read</oa><woscitedreferencessubscribed>false</woscitedreferencessubscribed><cites>FETCH-LOGICAL-c472t-6d7748766392a6dcf911cd05ace83869194b22dffe0e0e617b89ee56f00fe27a3</cites></display><links><openurl>$$Topenurl_article</openurl><openurlfulltext>$$Topenurlfull_article</openurlfulltext><thumbnail>$$Tsyndetics_thumb_exl</thumbnail><linktopdf>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2802086036/fulltextPDF?pq-origsite=primo$$EPDF$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktopdf><linktohtml>$$Uhttps://www.proquest.com/docview/2802086036?pq-origsite=primo$$EHTML$$P50$$Gproquest$$H</linktohtml><link.rule.ids>230,314,727,780,784,885,21378,21394,27924,27925,33611,33612,33877,33878,43733,43880,53791,53793,74221,74397</link.rule.ids><backlink>$$Uhttps://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/36319071$$D View this record in MEDLINE/PubMed$$Hfree_for_read</backlink></links><search><creatorcontrib>Meny, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maerten-Rivera, Jaime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gettig, Jacob P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goliak, Kristen L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Amy H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higginbotham, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shenoy, Vinayak</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Aleda M.H.</creatorcontrib><title>Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great</title><title>American journal of pharmaceutical education</title><addtitle>Am J Pharm Educ</addtitle><description>Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on action plans. Because the CQS surveys are standardized, they can allow for greater comparison among institutions, yet interpretation of the items can vary considerably. Programs have flexibility in determining samples for administration and timing of administration (ie, number of years), but some participants (such as preceptors) can suffer from survey overload if multiple institutions administer in the same year. Determining thresholds for action and providing feedback to stakeholders on improvements made based on data triangulations can be daunting. These are a few of the elements that programs must consider when determining their own approach to the AACP CQS. Thus, the purpose of this Commentary is to describe good practices for using the AACP CQS, discuss challenges associated with the surveys, and recommend how to move the utilization of the surveys from good to great.</description><subject>Academic Standards</subject><subject>Accreditation</subject><subject>Accreditation (Institutions)</subject><subject>Benchmarking</subject><subject>continuous quality improvement</subject><subject>Curricula</subject><subject>Curriculum</subject><subject>Curriculum evaluation</subject><subject>Curriculum Quality Survey</subject><subject>Education, Pharmacy - methods</subject><subject>Feedback</subject><subject>Feedback (Response)</subject><subject>Guidelines</subject><subject>Humans</subject><subject>Management Systems</subject><subject>Medical education</subject><subject>Meta Analysis</subject><subject>Methods</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical Education</subject><subject>Pharmaceutical sciences</subject><subject>Pharmacists</subject><subject>Pharmacy</subject><subject>Polls & surveys</subject><subject>Program Evaluation</subject><subject>programmatic assessment</subject><subject>Quality management</subject><subject>Response rates</subject><subject>Response Rates (Questionnaires)</subject><subject>Sampling</subject><subject>Sampling techniques</subject><subject>School Schedules</subject><subject>Schools, Pharmacy</subject><subject>Student Personnel Services</subject><subject>Student Surveys</subject><subject>Surveys</subject><subject>Surveys and Questionnaires</subject><subject>Total Quality Management</subject><subject>United States</subject><issn>0002-9459</issn><issn>1553-6467</issn><fulltext>true</fulltext><rsrctype>article</rsrctype><creationdate>2023</creationdate><recordtype>article</recordtype><sourceid>ALSLI</sourceid><sourceid>CJNVE</sourceid><sourceid>M0P</sourceid><recordid>eNptkV2PEyEUhonRuLWa-AvMJN540_XAMDBcadNoNVnj9zWhzKHSzAxdGJr038tmu42r5lyQwMML5zyEPKdw2Yi2fW12e1QA_AGZ0aapF4IL-ZDMAIAtFG_UBXmS0g6A8oazx-SiFjVVIOmMvP0UDn7cVsvl6ku1yjF6m_s8VF-z6f10rL7neMBj9Q1T7qdUuRiGah1CV02hWkc001PyyJk-4bPTOic_37_7sfqwuPq8_rhaXi0sl2xaiE5K3kohasWM6KxTlNoOGmOxrVuhqOIbxjrnEEoJKjetQmyEA3DIpKnn5M1t7j5vBuwsjlM0vd5HP5h41MF4ff9k9L_0Nhw0Bdqopq5LwqtTQgzXGdOkB58s9r0ZMeSkmawpZ0IwVtCXf6G7kONY-tOsBQatgDLCM7U1PWo_ulAetjeheim5aBmFImNOLv9Dlepw8DaM6HzZv3fh9E8bQ0oR3blJCvpGt77TXdAXfw7lDN75LQC7BbCoOXiMOlmPo8XOR7ST7oL_N_U3kkG0hg</recordid><startdate>20230401</startdate><enddate>20230401</enddate><creator>Meny, Lisa</creator><creator>Maerten-Rivera, Jaime</creator><creator>Gettig, Jacob P.</creator><creator>Goliak, Kristen L.</creator><creator>Schwartz, Amy H.</creator><creator>Higginbotham, Mary</creator><creator>Shenoy, Vinayak</creator><creator>Chen, Aleda M.H.</creator><general>Elsevier Inc</general><general>American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy</general><general>Elsevier Limited</general><general>American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education</general><scope>CGR</scope><scope>CUY</scope><scope>CVF</scope><scope>ECM</scope><scope>EIF</scope><scope>NPM</scope><scope>AAYXX</scope><scope>CITATION</scope><scope>0-V</scope><scope>3V.</scope><scope>4T-</scope><scope>4U-</scope><scope>7RQ</scope><scope>7RV</scope><scope>7X7</scope><scope>7XB</scope><scope>88B</scope><scope>88E</scope><scope>8AO</scope><scope>8FI</scope><scope>8FJ</scope><scope>8FK</scope><scope>8G5</scope><scope>ABUWG</scope><scope>AFKRA</scope><scope>ALSLI</scope><scope>AZQEC</scope><scope>BENPR</scope><scope>CCPQU</scope><scope>CJNVE</scope><scope>DWQXO</scope><scope>FYUFA</scope><scope>GHDGH</scope><scope>GNUQQ</scope><scope>GUQSH</scope><scope>K9.</scope><scope>KB0</scope><scope>M0P</scope><scope>M0S</scope><scope>M1P</scope><scope>M2O</scope><scope>MBDVC</scope><scope>NAPCQ</scope><scope>PQEDU</scope><scope>PQEST</scope><scope>PQQKQ</scope><scope>PQUKI</scope><scope>PRINS</scope><scope>Q9U</scope><scope>S0X</scope><scope>U9A</scope><scope>7X8</scope><scope>5PM</scope></search><sort><creationdate>20230401</creationdate><title>Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great</title><author>Meny, Lisa ; Maerten-Rivera, Jaime ; Gettig, Jacob P. ; Goliak, Kristen L. ; Schwartz, Amy H. ; Higginbotham, Mary ; Shenoy, Vinayak ; Chen, Aleda M.H.</author></sort><facets><frbrtype>5</frbrtype><frbrgroupid>cdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c472t-6d7748766392a6dcf911cd05ace83869194b22dffe0e0e617b89ee56f00fe27a3</frbrgroupid><rsrctype>articles</rsrctype><prefilter>articles</prefilter><language>eng</language><creationdate>2023</creationdate><topic>Academic Standards</topic><topic>Accreditation</topic><topic>Accreditation (Institutions)</topic><topic>Benchmarking</topic><topic>continuous quality improvement</topic><topic>Curricula</topic><topic>Curriculum</topic><topic>Curriculum evaluation</topic><topic>Curriculum Quality Survey</topic><topic>Education, Pharmacy - methods</topic><topic>Feedback</topic><topic>Feedback (Response)</topic><topic>Guidelines</topic><topic>Humans</topic><topic>Management Systems</topic><topic>Medical education</topic><topic>Meta Analysis</topic><topic>Methods</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical Education</topic><topic>Pharmaceutical sciences</topic><topic>Pharmacists</topic><topic>Pharmacy</topic><topic>Polls & surveys</topic><topic>Program Evaluation</topic><topic>programmatic assessment</topic><topic>Quality management</topic><topic>Response rates</topic><topic>Response Rates (Questionnaires)</topic><topic>Sampling</topic><topic>Sampling techniques</topic><topic>School Schedules</topic><topic>Schools, Pharmacy</topic><topic>Student Personnel Services</topic><topic>Student Surveys</topic><topic>Surveys</topic><topic>Surveys and Questionnaires</topic><topic>Total Quality Management</topic><topic>United States</topic><toplevel>peer_reviewed</toplevel><toplevel>online_resources</toplevel><creatorcontrib>Meny, Lisa</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Maerten-Rivera, Jaime</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Gettig, Jacob P.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Goliak, Kristen L.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Schwartz, Amy H.</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Higginbotham, Mary</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Shenoy, Vinayak</creatorcontrib><creatorcontrib>Chen, Aleda M.H.</creatorcontrib><collection>Medline</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE (Ovid)</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>MEDLINE</collection><collection>PubMed</collection><collection>CrossRef</collection><collection>ProQuest Social Sciences Premium Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Corporate)</collection><collection>Docstoc</collection><collection>University Readers</collection><collection>Career and Technical Education (ProQuest Database)</collection><collection>ProQuest Nursing and Allied Health Journals</collection><collection>ProQuest Health and Medical</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Education Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Pharma Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection</collection><collection>Hospital Premium Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni) (purchase pre-March 2016)</collection><collection>Research Library (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central UK/Ireland</collection><collection>Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Essentials</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>ProQuest One Community College</collection><collection>Education Collection</collection><collection>ProQuest Central</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection</collection><collection>Health Research Premium Collection (Alumni)</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Student</collection><collection>Research Library Prep</collection><collection>ProQuest Health & Medical Complete (Alumni)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Database (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>ProQuest Education Journals</collection><collection>Health & Medical Collection (Alumni Edition)</collection><collection>Medical Database</collection><collection>ProQuest Research Library</collection><collection>Research Library (Corporate)</collection><collection>Nursing & Allied Health Premium</collection><collection>ProQuest One Education</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic Eastern Edition (DO NOT USE)</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic</collection><collection>ProQuest One Academic UKI Edition</collection><collection>ProQuest Central China</collection><collection>ProQuest Central Basic</collection><collection>SIRS Editorial</collection><collection>MEDLINE - Academic</collection><collection>PubMed Central (Full Participant titles)</collection><jtitle>American journal of pharmaceutical education</jtitle></facets><delivery><delcategory>Remote Search Resource</delcategory><fulltext>fulltext</fulltext></delivery><addata><au>Meny, Lisa</au><au>Maerten-Rivera, Jaime</au><au>Gettig, Jacob P.</au><au>Goliak, Kristen L.</au><au>Schwartz, Amy H.</au><au>Higginbotham, Mary</au><au>Shenoy, Vinayak</au><au>Chen, Aleda M.H.</au><format>journal</format><genre>article</genre><ristype>JOUR</ristype><atitle>Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great</atitle><jtitle>American journal of pharmaceutical education</jtitle><addtitle>Am J Pharm Educ</addtitle><date>2023-04-01</date><risdate>2023</risdate><volume>87</volume><issue>3</issue><spage>ajpe9004</spage><epage>312</epage><pages>ajpe9004-312</pages><artnum>ajpe9004</artnum><issn>0002-9459</issn><eissn>1553-6467</eissn><abstract>Although the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy (AACP) Curriculum Quality Surveys (CQS) are required for programs to distribute and utilize as part of accreditation standards, programs face challenges in survey administration and timing, interpreting data and results, and following up on action plans. Because the CQS surveys are standardized, they can allow for greater comparison among institutions, yet interpretation of the items can vary considerably. Programs have flexibility in determining samples for administration and timing of administration (ie, number of years), but some participants (such as preceptors) can suffer from survey overload if multiple institutions administer in the same year. Determining thresholds for action and providing feedback to stakeholders on improvements made based on data triangulations can be daunting. These are a few of the elements that programs must consider when determining their own approach to the AACP CQS. Thus, the purpose of this Commentary is to describe good practices for using the AACP CQS, discuss challenges associated with the surveys, and recommend how to move the utilization of the surveys from good to great.</abstract><cop>United States</cop><pub>Elsevier Inc</pub><pmid>36319071</pmid><doi>10.5688/ajpe9004</doi><tpages>6</tpages><oa>free_for_read</oa></addata></record> |
fulltext | fulltext |
identifier | ISSN: 0002-9459 |
ispartof | American journal of pharmaceutical education, 2023-04, Vol.87 (3), p.ajpe9004-312, Article ajpe9004 |
issn | 0002-9459 1553-6467 |
language | eng |
recordid | cdi_pubmedcentral_primary_oai_pubmedcentral_nih_gov_10159533 |
source | PubMed (Medline); Social Science Premium Collection (Proquest) (PQ_SDU_P3); Education Collection |
subjects | Academic Standards Accreditation Accreditation (Institutions) Benchmarking continuous quality improvement Curricula Curriculum Curriculum evaluation Curriculum Quality Survey Education, Pharmacy - methods Feedback Feedback (Response) Guidelines Humans Management Systems Medical education Meta Analysis Methods Pharmaceutical Education Pharmaceutical sciences Pharmacists Pharmacy Polls & surveys Program Evaluation programmatic assessment Quality management Response rates Response Rates (Questionnaires) Sampling Sampling techniques School Schedules Schools, Pharmacy Student Personnel Services Student Surveys Surveys Surveys and Questionnaires Total Quality Management United States |
title | Moving AACP Curriculum Quality Survey Results from Good to Great |
url | http://sfxeu10.hosted.exlibrisgroup.com/loughborough?ctx_ver=Z39.88-2004&ctx_enc=info:ofi/enc:UTF-8&ctx_tim=2025-01-01T03%3A21%3A54IST&url_ver=Z39.88-2004&url_ctx_fmt=infofi/fmt:kev:mtx:ctx&rfr_id=info:sid/primo.exlibrisgroup.com:primo3-Article-gale_pubme&rft_val_fmt=info:ofi/fmt:kev:mtx:journal&rft.genre=article&rft.atitle=Moving%20AACP%20Curriculum%20Quality%20Survey%20Results%20from%20Good%20to%20Great&rft.jtitle=American%20journal%20of%20pharmaceutical%20education&rft.au=Meny,%20Lisa&rft.date=2023-04-01&rft.volume=87&rft.issue=3&rft.spage=ajpe9004&rft.epage=312&rft.pages=ajpe9004-312&rft.artnum=ajpe9004&rft.issn=0002-9459&rft.eissn=1553-6467&rft_id=info:doi/10.5688/ajpe9004&rft_dat=%3Cgale_pubme%3EA746821055%3C/gale_pubme%3E%3Cgrp_id%3Ecdi_FETCH-LOGICAL-c472t-6d7748766392a6dcf911cd05ace83869194b22dffe0e0e617b89ee56f00fe27a3%3C/grp_id%3E%3Coa%3E%3C/oa%3E%3Curl%3E%3C/url%3E&rft_id=info:oai/&rft_pqid=2802086036&rft_id=info:pmid/36319071&rft_galeid=A746821055&rfr_iscdi=true |