Abstracts Presented at the 120th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, Chicago, Illinois, July 13-17, 2019

s Presented at the 120th Annual Meeting of the American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, Chicago, Illinois, July 13-17, 2019 ADMINISTRATIVE SERVICES Completed Research Admission Scores andCharacteristics in Relation to Performance Within PharmD Curriculum and on Licensure Examinations. Andrea J. Cameron, University of Toronto, Robert P. Bonin, University of Toronto, Sara J.T. Guilcher, University of Toronto, John A. Pugsley, Pharmacy Examining Board of Canada. Objective: To describe admission scores, including multiple miniinterview (MMI), pre-pharmacy average (PPA) and Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT), and covariates (age, prior degree, re-application, gender), in cohorts admitted in 2011 and 2012 to the PharmD program at University of Toronto. To determine predictive validity of admission scores and covariates, with respect to year 3 grade point average (GPA), year 4 advanced pharmacy practice experience (APPE) rotations, and scores on Pharmacy Examining Board of Canada (PEBC) Qualifying Examinations: multiple choice question (MCQ) and objective structured clinical examination (OSCE). Methods:Descriptive statistics and correlations were determined for admission scores and covariates. Multiple linear regression analyses were conducted with PPA, PCAT composite, andMMI scores as predictor variables. Dependent variables were Year 3 GPA, APPE scores (community and institutional), PEBC–MCQ and OSCE scores. Results: Consenting students admitted in 2011 and 2012 with matched PEBC scores totaled 229 (56.8% female) and 219 (64.8% female), respectively. Average age (22.0, 21.6), PPA (79.8, 80.3), PCAT (421.7, 422.5) and MMI % (62.5, 63.0) were similar. In both cohorts, PPA and MMI were significant predictors for annual Year 3 GPA. MMI was a significant predictor for community and institutional APPE (2011); model not significant with 2012. For PEBC exam, PPA, PCAT and MMI were significantly predictive for MCQ; only MMI was significant for OSCE. Implications: MMI was only admissions predictor for PEBC OSCE, supporting MMI continued use. PPA, PCAT, age, prior degree and gender were also significant in some models. Further analysis of in-program course performance is occurring. A PCOA “Gated Stakes” Model to Ensure Proficiency Prior to Progression. Patrick J. Davis, The University of Texas at Austin, Rochelle M. Roberts, The University of Texas at Austin, W. Renee Acosta, The University of Texas at Austin.Objective:Develop an administrative process to take the PCOA from a “high stakes” (pass/no pass) model to a “gated stakes” exam in which the level of performance dictated differential levels of remediation prior to progression. The lack of subjectlevel granularity in the PCOAmandated the identification of amore diagnostic process that could (a) identify and (b) remediate deficiencies, (c) confirm proficiency, and (d) if unsuccessful remediation, identify which course(s) need repeating. Methods: Class results were normalized by setting the score for the highest performing student as 100% (range5100% to 55%). Students 1-StdDev below the mean were designated “grey zone” and those 2StdDev below the mean were designated “red zone.” Access Pharmacy’s “McGraw-Hill NAPLEX Review Guide” was identified as the diagnostic/remediation/ assessment tool. A validation study conducted with PCOA-successful students showed a direct correlation with overall PCOA scores vs NAPLEX review scores (R250.7965) and set an acceptable cut score. Results: “Grey-zone” students were “gated” to identifying areas of deficiency, complete a narrative reflection, and meet with their faculty mentor to address how those areas would be addressed prior to and during the P4 year. “Red-zone” students were “gated” to identify areas of deficiency, remediate, and achieve the cut score set by the pilot; all successfully remediated and were then assigned faculty mentors for the P4 year. Implications: The Program Assessment Team has developed a process to extend the non-granular PCOA results to a “gated stakes” process allowing for identification of deficiencies, remediation, and demonstration of proficiency prior to progression. AStory of 11 Rubrics. Suzanne Carbonaro,University of the Sciences, Lisa Charneski, University of the Sciences. Objective: To describe a process of faculty engagement in program-wide rubric creation Methods: To support assessmentwithin the competency-driven curriculum (fall 2018 start) development of program-wide rubrics become a priority. Three faculty-centered workshops followed by three surveys set the stage for collaboration. Using tenets of Expectancy-value theory, faculty identified key performance indicators of value to our American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education 2019; 83 (5) Article 7654. 908 b y gu es t o n Ja nu ar y 8, 2 02 0. © 2 01 9 A m er ic an A ss oc ia tio n of C ol le ge s of P ha rm ac y ht tp :// w w w .a jp e. or g D ow nl oa de d fr om college in workshop 1. Informed by survey results, workshop 2 focused on rubrics. In the next survey, faculty identified rubrics of highest priority for development aligned to best rubric type (single point vs analytic). As a result, small working groups were assigned to create rubrics for presentation at the final faculty workshop. Faculty input for needed revisions was elicited in the final survey. Revised rubrics were then mapped to programmatic outcomes in our cloud-based assessment platform. Results: Eleven programmatic rubrics were created between January 2018 throughDecember 2018. Those identified as highest priority in the second survey (response rate 59%) included: (1) blood pressure; (2) communication; (3) empathy; (4) patient care writing; (5) patient counseling; (6) presentation; (7) reflective writing; (8) prescription dispensing; (9) participation (10) medication history; and (11) device. The third survey (56% response rate) asked faculty to indicate whether the specific rubric was “Ready for Use” (33-61%), “Minor Edits Needed” (39-67%), or “Major Revision” (6% of responses; 1/11 rubrics). Implications: This process provided transparency and faculty autonomy. The result is a facultyreviewed bank of rubrics, applicable to various contexts, and accessible to stakeholders. Student performance can be aggregated and tracked longitudinally. Becoming Pharmacists: Exploring the Professional Identity Formation of Student Pharmacists Through Self-Authorship. Curtis G. Jefferson, University of Washington. Objective: To explore how student pharmacists conceive and experience the concept and process of professional identity formation (PIF) using the theoretical framework of self-authorship. Methods: Fourth-year student pharmacists participated in semistructured interviews focusing on their expectations and experiences over the course of pharmacy school. Transcripts of these in-depth interviews were reviewed using an interpretative phenomenological analysis (IPA) approach. Through this iterative analysis process, themes and superordinate themes were identified that capture participants’ experiences with PIF and the conditions that appeared most conducive to supporting this type of development. Results: Three superordinate themes emerged as PIF domains: Defining the Profession, Building Confidence & Competence, and Discerning Values. Development within each domain occurred across three distinct stages that align with the self-authorship framework, which emphasizes the transition between defining one’s experiences based on external factors to relying on an internalized sense of understanding. A fourth superordinate theme, Significant Experiences, illustrated factors that helped to support participants in the PIF process: Early & Sustained Practice Opportunities, Exposure to Multiple Practice Models/Settings, and a Supportive Learning Environment. Implications: Programs should consider the PIF of student pharmacists in addition to helping them acquire the knowledge and skills necessary for practice. It is through PIF that students begin to understand and internalize the broader context of the pharmacy profession. Earlier placement of curricular practice opportunities, sustained engagement with practice throughout the program, varied practice experiences across settings and practice sites, and an open and welcome environment created by the faculty are potential considerations for fostering student development in this area. Common Practices and Decision-Making Factors Faculty Use in Accommodating Pregnant Students. Katherine S.Wadas-Thalken,CreightonUniversity, Leah Georges, Creighton University. Objective: To identify common practices and decision-making factors faculty used in supporting and accommodating pregnant students. Methods: An online survey was sent to faculty in one pharmacy program asking about their experiences working with pregnant students. Participants were also asked about their knowledge ofTitle IX and how it applies to pregnant students. Results: One of the key findings of the study was that school policies and procedures were a strong decision-making factor for participants who have worked with pregnant students in the past three years. Additionally, the findings revealed that faculty preferred accommodations for pregnant students be centralized with the pharmacy school’s dean’s office. The findings of this study suggest that university-level policies are less influential on faculty decision making than school policies and procedures. Lastly, only half of participants knew that Title IX protected pregnant students from discrimination. Implications: Nearly 75% of participants had worked with a pregnant student in the past three years andmost participants relied on guidance from school policies and procedures for how to work with these students. While participants were aware of legal implications when working with this population, only half of them knew that Title IX was a key law protecting pregnant students from discrimination. Findings from the study suggest