Stakeholders welcome cross-sector discussion of
pharmacist undergraduate education and pre-registration
training
Over 100 pharmacy stakeholders gathered in
London last month for a lively cross-sector discussion of
pharmacist undergraduate education and pre-registration training in
England, convened by the Modernising Pharmacy Careers (MPC)
programme.
An MPC project team, led by Professor Anthony
Smith, Dean of the School of Pharmacy, University of London and Rob
Darracott, Chief Executive of the Company Chemists Association, has
reviewed current arrangements for pharmacist education and
training. The Institute of Education (IoE) at the University of
London provided additional support for the team through a review of
literature and curricula, engagement with schools of pharmacy and
pharmacy professional and regulatory bodies, and by interviewing
academics, employers, pre-registration students and
pharmacists.
Presentations to stakeholders by Professor
Smith, Rob Darracott and Dr David Guile of the Institute of
Education on the review were complemented by interactive sessions
where groups of delegates considered the strengths and weaknesses
of current arrangements and discussed possible options for
change.
There was a general agreement on the day that
the current education and training process provides registrants
with an excellent scientific knowledge base upon which to build
their professional practice. However, feedback from students,
academics and employers, both in the private sector and NHS
settings, identified areas for improvement including: a lack of
context for theoretical learning; late exposure to pharmacy
practice; the large variation in quality of pre-reg training and
tutors, and a need for greater co-operation between HEIs and
employers.
Dr David Guile presented methods and proposals
for modernising the pharmacy curriculum which were based on three
key principles:
- A continuous period of formation with registration and
graduation at the end of year 5
- Early exposure to practice to support students to make more
informed choices about their future careers in pharmacy
- Close collaboration between HEIs and employers to strengthen
their partnerships to support the initial formation of pharmacist
and to pave the way for their subsequent professional
development
Two approaches were described as starting
points for discussions, both of which would accommodate different
options for implementation, particularly in relation to practice
placements throughout the five years.
Single practice placement
(SPP) is a continuous
five-year period of qualification with academic and practice-based
assessments being undertaken in the fifth year. The single practice
placement, possibly a nine-month block, would be in the final year
followed by a return to university for three months refresher prior
to sitting all remaining examinations in the summer term of the
fifth year.
Dispersed practice placement
(DPP) is a spiral of opportunities to place the theory in
the context of pharmacy practice throughout all five years. The
spiral could take one of several forms including the current
Bradford model.
Both the SPP and DPP would require additional
visits to practice, involvement of patients and simulation of
learning and assessment in the early years together with a
redesigned of the curriculum to allow theoretical and practice
learning to work together more effectively. The DPP approach would
involve a more extensive redesign of the curriculum compared with
SPP to ensure that theoretical and practice-based elements
dovetailed with one another to consolidate the recontextualisation
of knowledge and skill.
Although the DPP approach was identified as a
superior model from an educational perspective, there were concerns
from delegates about the difficulty of implementing such
significant change. Discussion points in relation to implementing
options which accommodate SPP or particularly DPP, included the
logistics of arranging more placements, a risk of clustering of
placements round schools of pharmacy, greater costs associated with
recruitment, accommodation and travel costs, and standardisation of
curricula. Whilst no financial models have been developed,
stakeholders highlighted financial implications for students if
proposals shifted the current balance between fees/debt and
salaried earning, particularly as it could affect the
attractiveness of pharmacy as a professional course of study.
Speaking from an educational perspective,
Professor Anthony Smith said, “The review work so far has
demonstrated to us that change is required if we are to deliver the
vision of the Pharmacy White Paper. I do not underestimate the
complexity of the process and the logistical difficulties but there
is no doubt that we are at the beginning of a long journey and we
need to start the planning now.”
Delegates recognised the need for a different
way of working between HEIs and employers, in particular the
importance of taking co-operation to a different level.
Speaking on behalf of employers Mr Rob
Darracott said, “If change is to be delivered then employers
and universities will need to work very closely together. The MPC
and its Programme Board is an ideal forum to co-ordinate the
actions required to work together towards a common goal.”
Chief Pharmaceutical Officer Dr Keith Ridge
advised delegates, “In the current public sector financial
situation there will be opportunities for innovation in the
delivery of education and training. I hope all those with an
interest in this programme work collaboratively to deliver the
changes required.”
A report of the review, incorporating feedback
from the stakeholder event and making recommendations for the next
phase of the work, will be presented to the MPC Programme Board in
February 2010. The Board will consider how best to progress
development of the different approaches, addressing issues raised
and involving stakeholders in the process.
Click here to view the presentation from Dr Keith Ridge, Chief
Pharmaceutical Officer
Click here to view the presentation from Professor Anthony
Smith and Mr Rob Darracott
Click here to view the presentation from Dr David Guile,
Institute of Education