Objective. To define essential skills for Doctor of Pharmacy (PharmD) graduates that are needed in the four most common sectors of pharmacy practice as determined by expert faculty who instruct within pharmacy skills laboratories.Methods. A three-round Delphi method was used to establish consensus. In the first round, participants were asked what skills were needed by students at entry to practice in community, health-system, ambulatory care, and managed care pharmacy settings. In rounds two and three, participants were asked to rate each skill with a level of importance using a 10-point Likert scale (1=not important to 10=very important).Results. In round one, participants produced a collective list of 289 essential skills. These skill statements were sent to participants in rounds two and three to assign a level of importance. After the third round, participants reached consensus using a mean level of importance for a final list of 69 community pharmacy skills, 47 health-system, 60 ambulatory care, and 15 managed care skills. These skills were then mapped to entrustable professional activities domains for schools and colleges pharmacy to use as a resource when assessing core competency development in the curriculum.Conclusion. The Delphi technique was used successfully with expert pharmacy skills laboratory faculty to identify laboratory-focused essential skills that recent PharmD graduates should have prior to entering community, health-system, ambulatory care, or managed care pharmacy practice. These essential skills can be used to guide curriculum development, develop milestone markers, and help ensure students are practice ready.Objective. To evaluate the metacognitive abilities of pharmacy students and determine whether introducing the concept along with team-based learning (TBL) enhances metacognition.Methods. Pharmacy students completed a Metacognitive Awareness Inventory (MAI) and a low-stakes pretest during the first class that evaluated students’ knowledge about the therapeutic concepts that would be taught through TBL. The same questions were administered on the comprehensive final examination for the course. For each of the course assessments, students were asked to indicate their understanding of the topic and predict their performance. Actual performance was measured as a result of each assessment.Results. The pre-MAI composite score was 77.3%. Scores significantly improved by the end of the course to 84.6%. There were significant differences in both declarative knowledge and conditional knowledge when evaluating performance groups. Students in the middle performance group demonstrated the greatest ability to predict their performance on the final examination. Though these were not significant, students in the low group overestimated their performance, while students in the high group underestimated their performance. Baseline grade point average was the only factor predictive of the final examination score and the final course grade.Conclusion. Pedagogies such as TBL may support development of metacognitive skills in pharmacy students. However, intentional guidance provided by an instructor is required to improve pharmacy students’ regulation of cognition skills.Regardless of a faculty member’s career stage, effective mentoring is critical for successful professional development and a thriving academic career. Traditional mentor-mentee relationships can be effective but may present challenges for some faculty depending on their individual needs and institutional resources. The use of peer mentoring circles, where group members serve as both mentor and mentee, may provide additional resources and benefits to faculty at all career stages and appear especially beneficial for women faculty because of their focus on interconnectedness and collaboration. However, literature is scarce regarding effective mentoring strategies for women pharmacy faculty. As members of one women faculty-only peer mentoring circle, we describe our experiences using this mentoring strategy and offer recommendations for other faculty members considering this approach.The COVID-19 pandemic has impacted almost every facet of modern life, causing almost a million deaths worldwide as well as widespread economic and social strife. While contemplating how we might emerge from this pandemic, we were reminded of the Stockdale paradox. We suggest that the Academy must not only confront the brutal facts of the current situation, but we must also maintain faith in the endgame and a commitment to prevail despite the enormous challenges we face. The Academy can play a key role in helping the world recover from this pandemic if we build on the diversity and strengths of our programs nationally and globally. We suggest that there are three key actions that pharmacists and pharmacy educators must take to show leadership in this time of need. First, we must be the voice that reassures the public about the value of science and the scientific method. Second, we must work locally and nationally to ensure an optimal public health response. Finally, members of the Academy must serve as role models with respect to the essential public health tools to prevent the spread of COVID-19. By remaining positive, keeping the endgame in mind, and confronting the most brutal facts of the COVID-19 pandemic, we are confident that pharmacy education and pharmacy will weather this storm and arise even stronger for it.Objective. To further refine and examine the validity of an instrument for assessing pharmacy students’ self-efficacy in implementing the Pharmacists’ Patient Care Process (PPCP) components.Methods. An instrument was developed and pilot tested in spring 2018 at one college of pharmacy. In spring 2019, a modified version of the instrument, the PPCP Self-Efficacy Scale (PPCP-SES), was administered to third professional year (P3) pharmacy students at seven institutions. Self-efficacy items were based on Bandura’s theory of self-efficacy, and students were asked to rate each item on a continuous scale (0-100). Data analyses included descriptive statistics, reliability analysis, and confirmatory factor analysis (CFA).Results. Three hundred P3 students completed the PPCP-SES. The domain-specific Cronbach alpha coefficients were collect, α=.89; assess, α=.92; plan, α=.95; implement, α=.96; and follow-up, α=.95. Based on the factor analysis results, three items were removed. Model fit statistics indicated the overall instrument had moderate goodness of fit.Conclusion. Results indicate the PPCP-SES demonstrated initial evidence of validity for use by pharmacy faculty members to identify students’ self-efficacy related to implementing components of the PPCP. Future research is needed to examine validity evidence in other student populations and among practicing pharmacists.Objective. To examine pharmacy students’ perceptions of an elective course on evidence-based learning strategies.Methods. Pre- and post-course survey questionnaires were administered to students who enrolled in an elective course, to determine the learning strategies they used prior to course attendance, track their use of evidence-based learning strategies and observance of healthy lifestyle habits, and assess their perception of the course. A written assignment was given that required students to reflect on the learning outcomes that resulted from their application of evidence-based learning strategies. Mean scores on the pre- and post-course survey were analyzed using a general linear model repeated measures test.Results. The 59 students in this study predominantly used less-effective strategies (eg, re-reading and re-writing of notes) prior to taking the course. They reported increased use of evidence-based learning strategies, particularly retrieval practice and elaboration, and practice of healthy lifestyle habits (ie, enough sleep, exercise, good nutrition) after course completion. Students believed that using the above learning strategies improved their learning and memory and performance on graded assessments, among other benefits. Students had a positive perception of the course.Conclusion. The elective course was associated with increased use of effective learning strategies, adoption of healthy lifestyle practices that aid learning, and increased appreciation for evidence-based learning strategies by the students. Future studies are needed to examine actual learning outcomes and barriers to implementation of evidence-based learning techniques.Objective. To investigate the effectiveness of using problem-solving and worked examples in teaching clinical note writing to Doctor of Pharmacy students.Methods. First year student pharmacists who were recruited to participate in the study first studied a worked example on generating a clinical note from a written patient case. Participants were then randomized either to study another worked example or to practice writing a clinical note from a written patient case. Embedded in each condition was problem variability (ie, participants encountered either a similar disease state as that in the initial worked example or a different disease state). The primary outcome was the combined performance on writing two clinical notes. Secondary outcomes included quiz performance on knowledge of the components of a clinical note and ability to transfer writing skills to a novel disease state.Results. Seventy-nine students completed the study. Participants who studied a worked example followed by problem-solving (WE-PS) practice performed better than participants who studied two worked examples (WE-WE) on clinical note writing. However, there was no difference in their respective knowledge as determined by quiz performance.Conclusion. Both worked examples and problem-solving facilitated students’ learning of the basic knowledge of clinical note writing. However, only problem-solving improved student pharmacists’ ability to apply that knowledge. While there were significant improvements in student pharmacists’ knowledge of the basics of clinical note writing, it is unclear how worked examples or problem-solving influence the clinical decision-making skills needed to write a clinical note.Objective. To explore and compare the prevalence of anxiety and depressive symptoms between first-, second-, and third-year pharmacy students.Methods. A repeated-measures study was conducted at two campuses (main and satellite) of the University of Arizona College of Pharmacy. A survey was administered in February 2019 and again in April 2019 during mandatory courses for first-, second-, and third-year Doctor of Pharmacy students to collect seven-item Generalized Anxiety Disorder (GAD-7) scores, nine-item Patient Health Questionnaire (PHQ-9) scores, and demographic information. A chi-square test with a Bonferroni correction was performed to compare the number of students in a class year with clinically significant symptoms, defined as scores of ≥10 for both the GAD-7 and PHQ-9.Results. The survey response rate was 82%. Thirty percent of students self-reported having clinically significant anxiety symptoms and 22% of students self-reported having clinically significant depressive symptoms. More second-year pharmacy students self-reported anxiety and depressive symptoms as the semester progressed.