Development of a nontraditional PharmD program offered jointly between a private and public university

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education, Spring 2000 by Kelly, William N, Franciso, George E, Brooks, Paul J, Marquess, Jonathan G

In 1995, the faculties at the Southern School of Pharmacy at Mercer University, and the College of Pharmacy at the University of Georgia, began developing a joint nontraditional PharmD program. Neither faculty knew if this was even possible because of the major differences (private versus public, high tuition versus modest tuition) between the two schools. However, the project made sense from financial, political, and practical viewpoints. After much work and little compromise, licensed pharmacists in Georgia have an outcome-based, unique, flexible, and efficient nontraditional program. In 1998, each University approved the program and a pilot class of sixteen students began in October of that year. A second class of 15 students started, August 1999.

INTRODUCTION

In early 1995, the Southern School of Pharmacy at Mercer University (Mercer) started exploring the development of a nontraditional PharmD program. A task force looked at the feasibility for such a program. It was immediately clear the program would have a short life span (estimated at 10-15 years) yet require significant resources and work. At the same time, the demand for such a program was unknown.

At this point, it seemed prudent to try to develop a joint program with the University of Georgia (UGA), the other college of pharmacy in the state. The partnership made sense because a joint program would significantly lessen expense, and both programs brought unique strengths to the table. Mercer brought its 18 years of experience in providing a sole, entry-level PharmD program. UGA brought its technology and its recent expertise in developing a new, outcome-based curriculum. A joint program might also look attractive to external funding sources, and using joint faculties, would increase the likelihood of producing a unique and superb curriculum. Last, Georgia pharmacists would feel good about both colleges working together.

EARLY STEPS

Will a joint program work? UGA also saw the benefits of having a joint program. A few interested faculty from each college of pharmacy formed, on a voluntary basis, a working group, which was supported by each college. Many challenges immediately emerged. Mercer is a small-moderate size, comprehensive, private university. The tuition for pharmacy school is steep. UGA is a major, Division I, land grant university. The tuition for pharmacy school is modest. Which university would confer the degree? Is a third entity (new consortium) needed? Who would keep the records? How should tuition be set? How should tuition be shared? Although these were challenging questions, the working group never let them interfere with the dream of a joint program. The deans of each school were encouraging and there was good communication between themselves and the working group.

Is there a need? An early action of the working group was to determine the demand for such a program in Georgia. One member of the working group had recently performed a marketing survey on the need for a nontraditional PharmD program in Pennsylvania(l). He volunteered to do a similar study for Georgia. The project was underwritten by Mercer University. The instrument used in Pennsylvania was improved and mailed to a random sample of 595 pharmacists, licensed and practicing in Georgia. Respondents remained anonymous. This sample used the following facts and assumptions: (i) 8,421 pharmacists licensed in Georgia; (ii) 7,427 (88.2 percent) pharmacists actively practicing in the state; (iii) an expected response rate of 60 percent; and (iv) an error rate of +/- 5 percent.

After one mail follow-up, 313 pharmacists had completed the survey (52 percent). Of these surveys, 52 met exclusions, resulting in an actual response rate of 44 percent and a usable response pool of 261 (3.5 percent of pharmacists actively practicing in Georgia). Of those pharmacists responding, 12 percent would definitely enroll, and 32 percent would probably enroll. These results are similar to the surveys completed in Pennsylvania and North Carolina(1-2). Extrapolation to the population meant that roughly 891 pharmacists in Georgia may definitely be interested, and 2,377 may be interested in earning the nontraditional degree if offered.

These numbers were daunting; however someone saying they would complete a program versus doing it is not be the same. Of those responding that they would probably enroll in such a program, 25 percent would enroll within one year, and 51 percent would enroll within three years. The working group decided there was a sizable demand for such a program.

The next step of the working group was to pass this information to each dean. A preproposal included the purpose of the program, the results of the marketing survey, and a series of concerns and questions. After some time, each university gave approval to continue to develop a joint detailed proposal. With these approvals came a decision to grant the degree from either school, and the academic records would stay at the school granting the degree. At this point, the group agreed to defer decisions about tuition and tuition sharing.