Identifying priority student leadership and professionalism attributes among faculty, preceptors, and students via modified delphi

Document Type

Article

Publication Title

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Abstract

Objective. To identify and build consensus on priority leadership and professionalism attributes for pharmacy student development among faculty, preceptors, and students. Methods. One hundred individuals (27 faculty members, 30 preceptors, 43 students) were invited to participate in a three-round, modified Delphi. Published literature on leadership and professionalism informed the initial attribute list. In the first round, participants reviewed and provided feedback on this list. In the second round, participants prioritized attributes as highly important, important, or less important for pharmacy student development. Leadership and professionalism attributes that achieved an overall consensus (a priori set to ≥80.0%) of being highly important or important for pharmacy student development were retained. In the third round, participants rank ordered priorities for leadership and professionalism attributes. Results. Fifteen leadership and 20 professionalism attributes were included in round one while 21 leadership and 21 professionalism attributes were included in round two. Eleven leadership and 13 professionalism attributes advanced to round three. Consensus was reached on the top four leadership attributes (adaptability, collaboration, communication, integrity) and five professionalism attributes (accountability, communication, honor and integrity, respect for others, trust). Differences were observed for certain attributes between faculty members, preceptors, and/or students. Conclusion. The modified Delphi technique effectively identified and prioritized leadership and professionalism attributes for pharmacy student development. This process facilitated consensus building and identified gaps among stakeholders (ie, faculty, preceptors, students). Identified gaps may represent varying priorities among stakeholders and/or different opportunities for emphasis and development across classroom, experiential, and/or cocurricular settings.

First Page

1523

Last Page

1531

DOI

10.5688/ajpe8076

Publication Date

1-1-2020

Share

COinS