美国药学院和管理人员对服务工作量的看法:焦点小组研究

IF 3.8 4区 教育学 Q1 EDUCATION, SCIENTIFIC DISCIPLINES
Kelly C. Lee , Sharon K. Park , Daniel R. Malcom , Yolanda M. Hardy , Zhe (Amy) Wang , Elizabeth Hall-Lipsy , Surajit Dey
{"title":"美国药学院和管理人员对服务工作量的看法:焦点小组研究","authors":"Kelly C. Lee ,&nbsp;Sharon K. Park ,&nbsp;Daniel R. Malcom ,&nbsp;Yolanda M. Hardy ,&nbsp;Zhe (Amy) Wang ,&nbsp;Elizabeth Hall-Lipsy ,&nbsp;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":"{\"title\":\"Perceptions of Service Workload Among United States Pharmacy Faculty and Administrators: A Focus Group Study\",\"authors\":\"Kelly C. Lee ,&nbsp;Sharon K. Park ,&nbsp;Daniel R. Malcom ,&nbsp;Yolanda M. Hardy ,&nbsp;Zhe (Amy) Wang ,&nbsp;Elizabeth Hall-Lipsy ,&nbsp;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}","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

摘要

目的采用定性方法探讨美国药学教师和管理人员对服务工作量的看法。方法采用问卷调查的方法,对来自美国药学院校的行政管理和非行政管理两类重点人群进行调查。参与者的选择是为了确保机构在人口统计参数上的代表性,如地理位置、资助状况(公立与私立)、项目年龄(1995年前和1995年后)和项目结构(3岁、4岁和0-6岁)。基于平衡这些参数的目标,我们联系了参与者,通过焦点小组安排他们参加半结构化访谈。访谈记录和分析使用归纳主题分析方法。结果共进行了9个焦点小组,其中17名管理人员和10名非管理人员。教师和管理人员提出了五个主要主题:服务的分配和分配、服务的定义、服务的公平性、透明度和促进的价值。管理员组中出现了另一个主题“服务动机”。两组的子主题各不相同,突出了对服务分配的灵活性、临床服务的认可以及资历在服务分配中的作用等问题的不同观点。结论本研究揭示了药学教师服务工作量的复杂性和挑战。调查结果强调需要更明确的工作量准则、公平分配服务任务、工作量分配和分配的透明度以及在晋升和任期决定中正式承认服务。
本文章由计算机程序翻译,如有差异,请以英文原文为准。
Perceptions of Service Workload Among United States Pharmacy Faculty and Administrators: A Focus Group Study

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.
求助全文
通过发布文献求助,成功后即可免费获取论文全文。 去求助
来源期刊
CiteScore
4.30
自引率
15.20%
发文量
114
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.
×
引用
GB/T 7714-2015
复制
MLA
复制
APA
复制
导出至
BibTeX EndNote RefMan NoteFirst NoteExpress
×
提示
您的信息不完整,为了账户安全,请先补充。
现在去补充
×
提示
您因"违规操作"
具体请查看互助需知
我知道了
×
提示
确定
请完成安全验证×
copy
已复制链接
快去分享给好友吧!
我知道了
右上角分享
点击右上角分享
0
联系我们:info@booksci.cn Book学术提供免费学术资源搜索服务,方便国内外学者检索中英文文献。致力于提供最便捷和优质的服务体验。 Copyright © 2023 布克学术 All rights reserved.
京ICP备2023020795号-1
ghs 京公网安备 11010802042870号
Book学术文献互助
Book学术文献互助群
群 号:604180095
Book学术官方微信