Kelly C. Lee , Sharon K. Park , Daniel R. Malcom , Yolanda M. Hardy , Zhe (Amy) Wang , Elizabeth Hall-Lipsy , Surajit Dey
{"title":"Perceptions of Service Workload Among United States Pharmacy Faculty and Administrators: A Focus Group Study","authors":"Kelly C. Lee , Sharon K. Park , Daniel R. Malcom , Yolanda M. Hardy , Zhe (Amy) Wang , Elizabeth Hall-Lipsy , Surajit Dey","doi":"10.1016/j.ajpe.2025.101407","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"<div><h3>Objective</h3><div>To explore the perceptions of service workload among pharmacy faculty and administrators in the United States using a qualitative method.</div></div><div><h3>Methods</h3><div>A survey was distributed to solicit pharmacy faculty for 2 types of focus groups: administrative and nonadministrative faculty from accredited colleges and schools of pharmacy in the United States. Participants were selected to ensure institutional representation across demographic parameters, such as geographic location, funding status (public vs private), age of program (pre-1995 and post-1995), and program structure (3-year, 4-year, and 0–6). Based on the goal of balancing these parameters, participants were contacted to schedule their participation in semi structured interviews via focus groups. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.</div></div><div><h3>Results</h3><div>A total of 9 focus groups were conducted with 17 administrators and 10 non administrator faculty members. Five major themes emerged from both faculty and administrators: assignment and allocation of service, definition of service, equity in service, transparency, and value for promotion. An additional theme, motivation for service, emerged from the administrator group. Subthemes varied between the 2 groups, highlighting differing perspectives on issues, such as flexibility in service assignments, recognition of clinical service, and the role of seniority in service allocation.</div></div><div><h3>Conclusion</h3><div>This study revealed the complexities and challenges of pharmacy faculty service workload. The findings emphasize the need for clearer workload guidelines, equitable distribution of service assignments, transparency in workload assignment and allocation, and formal recognition of service in promotion and tenure decisions.</div></div>","PeriodicalId":55530,"journal":{"name":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","volume":"89 5","pages":"Article 101407"},"PeriodicalIF":3.8000,"publicationDate":"2025-05-01","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":null,"platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education","FirstCategoryId":"95","ListUrlMain":"https://www.sciencedirect.com/science/article/pii/S000294592500052X","RegionNum":4,"RegionCategory":"教育学","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES","Score":null,"Total":0}
引用次数: 0
Abstract
Objective
To explore the perceptions of service workload among pharmacy faculty and administrators in the United States using a qualitative method.
Methods
A survey was distributed to solicit pharmacy faculty for 2 types of focus groups: administrative and nonadministrative faculty from accredited colleges and schools of pharmacy in the United States. Participants were selected to ensure institutional representation across demographic parameters, such as geographic location, funding status (public vs private), age of program (pre-1995 and post-1995), and program structure (3-year, 4-year, and 0–6). Based on the goal of balancing these parameters, participants were contacted to schedule their participation in semi structured interviews via focus groups. The interviews were transcribed and analyzed using an inductive thematic analysis approach.
Results
A total of 9 focus groups were conducted with 17 administrators and 10 non administrator faculty members. Five major themes emerged from both faculty and administrators: assignment and allocation of service, definition of service, equity in service, transparency, and value for promotion. An additional theme, motivation for service, emerged from the administrator group. Subthemes varied between the 2 groups, highlighting differing perspectives on issues, such as flexibility in service assignments, recognition of clinical service, and the role of seniority in service allocation.
Conclusion
This study revealed the complexities and challenges of pharmacy faculty service workload. The findings emphasize the need for clearer workload guidelines, equitable distribution of service assignments, transparency in workload assignment and allocation, and formal recognition of service in promotion and tenure decisions.
期刊介绍:
The Journal accepts unsolicited manuscripts that have not been published and are not under consideration for publication elsewhere. The Journal only considers material related to pharmaceutical education for publication. Authors must prepare manuscripts to conform to the Journal style (Author Instructions). All manuscripts are subject to peer review and approval by the editor prior to acceptance for publication. Reviewers are assigned by the editor with the advice of the editorial board as needed. Manuscripts are submitted and processed online (Submit a Manuscript) using Editorial Manager, an online manuscript tracking system that facilitates communication between the editorial office, editor, associate editors, reviewers, and authors.
After a manuscript is accepted, it is scheduled for publication in an upcoming issue of the Journal. All manuscripts are formatted and copyedited, and returned to the author for review and approval of the changes. Approximately 2 weeks prior to publication, the author receives an electronic proof of the article for final review and approval. Authors are not assessed page charges for publication.