Skip to main content

Main menu

  • Articles
    • Current
    • Early Release
    • Archive
    • Rufus A. Lyman Award
    • Theme Issues
    • Special Collections
  • Authors
    • Author Instructions
    • Submission Process
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Call for Papers - Intersectionality of Pharmacists’ Professional and Personal Identity
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Instructions
    • Call for Mentees
    • Reviewer Recognition
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
  • About
    • About AJPE
    • Editorial Team
    • Editorial Board
    • History
  • More
    • Meet the Editors
    • Webinars
    • Contact AJPE
  • Other Publications

User menu

Search

  • Advanced search
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
  • Other Publications
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Advanced Search

  • Articles
    • Current
    • Early Release
    • Archive
    • Rufus A. Lyman Award
    • Theme Issues
    • Special Collections
  • Authors
    • Author Instructions
    • Submission Process
    • Submit a Manuscript
    • Call for Papers - Intersectionality of Pharmacists’ Professional and Personal Identity
  • Reviewers
    • Reviewer Instructions
    • Call for Mentees
    • Reviewer Recognition
    • Frequently Asked Questions (FAQ)
  • About
    • About AJPE
    • Editorial Team
    • Editorial Board
    • History
  • More
    • Meet the Editors
    • Webinars
    • Contact AJPE
  • Follow AJPE on Twitter
  • LinkedIn
Research ArticleAACP REPORTS

Report of the 2012-2013 Academic Affairs Standing Committee: Revising the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Educational Outcomes 2013

Melissa S. Medina, Cecilia M. Plaza, Cindy D. Stowe, Evan T. Robinson, Gary DeLander, Diane E. Beck, Russell B. Melchert, Robert B. Supernaw, Victoria F. Roche, Brenda L. Gleason, Mark N. Strong, Amanda Bain, Gerald E. Meyer, Betty J. Dong, Jeffrey Rochon and Patty Johnston
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education October 2013, 77 (8) S8; DOI: https://doi.org/10.5688/ajpe778S8
Melissa S. Medina
aCollege of Pharmacy, The University of Oklahoma, Oklahoma City, Oklahoma
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cecilia M. Plaza
bAmerican Association of Colleges of Pharmacy, Alexandria, Virginia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Cindy D. Stowe
cCollege of Pharmacy, University of Arkansas for Medical Sciences, Little Rock, Arkansas
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Evan T. Robinson
dCollege of Pharmacy, Western New England University, Springfield, Massachuesetts
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gary DeLander
eCollege of Pharmacy, Oregon State University, Corvallis, Oregon
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Diane E. Beck
fCollege of Pharmacy, University of Florida, Gainesville, Florida
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Russell B. Melchert
gSchool of Pharmacy, University of Missouri-Kansas City, Kansas City, Missouri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Robert B. Supernaw
hSchool of Pharmacy, Wingate University, Wingate, North Carolina
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Victoria F. Roche
iSchool of Pharmacy and Health Professions, Creighton University, Omaha, Nebraska
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Brenda L. Gleason
jSt. Louis College of Pharmacy, St. Louis, Missouri
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Mark N. Strong
kNorthern Navajo Medical Center, Indian Health Service, Shiprock, New Mexico
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Amanda Bain
lThe Ohio State University Health Plan, Inc., Columbus, Ohion
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Gerald E. Meyer
mJefferson School of Pharmacy at Thomas Jefferson University, Philadelphia, Pennsylvania
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Betty J. Dong
nSchool of Pharmacy, University of California-San Francisco, San Francisco, California
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Jeffrey Rochon
oWashington State Pharmacy Association, Renton, Washington
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
Patty Johnston
pColony Drug and Wellness Center, Beckley, West Virginia
  • Find this author on Google Scholar
  • Find this author on PubMed
  • Search for this author on this site
  • Article
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF
Loading

Background and Charges

Started under the then Center for the Advancement of Pharmaceutical Education, Educational Outcomes were first developed and released in 1994 and then revised in 1998 and 2004.1,2 The Educational Outcomes were intended to be the target toward which pharmacy curricula should be aimed. Previous revisions were in response to changes in both practice and higher education. The 2010-11 Academic Affairs Standing Committee recommended that the Association reconvene a Panel to examine the affective domain since the current and previous iterations of the Educational Outcomes focused primarily on the cognitive domain.3 Then President Brian L. Crabtree in Spring 2012 charged that the now Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Panel be reconvened with consent of the AACP Board of Directors to undertake a revision of the CAPE Educational Outcomes. President J. Lyle Bootman continued this charge and appointed the CAPE Panel to meet in lieu of the 2012-13 Academic Affairs Standing Committee.

The purpose of this Report is to provide an overview of the process undertaken by the CAPE Panel to revise the CAPE Educational Outcomes. The revised CAPE Educational Outcomes themselves will be presented in their entirety in a separate publication in the Journal.4

Methodology

In keeping with the composition of previous CAPE Panels, both academics and practitioners were invited to join the Panel. Letters of invitation were sent to each member organization of the Joint Commission of Pharmacy Practitioners (JCPP) to appoint a representative from their membership to serve on the CAPE Panel. The remaining Panel was selected from the AACP membership to represent academic pharmacy. The Panel was selected and balanced on type of institution, discipline, role, practice type, and geographic distribution among other factors to ensure a representative group. The members of the CAPE Panel and their respective affiliations are listed in Table 1.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 1.

CAPE Panel Members

The first meeting occurred May 1-2, 2012, in a joint session with colleagues from the Interprofessional Education Collaborate (IPEC) to gain input about the future directions of competencies among the various health professions. IPEC representation included the Association of American Medical Colleges (AAMC), American Association of Colleges of Osteopathic Medicine (AACOM), American Association of Colleges of Nursing (AACN), and the American Dental Education Association (ADEA) as well as a patient care advocate. Four general areas of guidance for the CAPE revisions emerged after the IPEC session and further Panel deliberation:

  • • Include an affective domain that addresses personal and professional skills, attitudes and attributes required for the delivery of patient care,

  • • Frame outcomes that are forward thinking and aspirational, yet achievable and measurable,

  • • Continue the commitment to a firm grounding in the science of the profession, and

  • • Align the outcome statements with other health professions in core content and language.

Three additional themes emerged that focused on the structure of the CAPE document. The first theme focused on including a preamble to provide insight about the background and intent of the revisions and a glossary to define key terms and increase clarity and consistency in interpretation of key terms. The second theme related to finding the appropriate balance of detail in the outcome statements, while attending to minimizing redundancy in order to facilitate assessment. Including too much detail would be overly prescriptive for programs, while too little detail may not offer programs enough guidance. Finally, the last theme addressed the importance of writing measurable, evidence-based outcomes aimed at the level of an entry-level generalist practitioner.

Representatives from the CAPE Panel attended the “Listening Session” held at the 2012 AACP annual meeting in July. The feedback received supported and validated the discussion from the initial CAPE Panel meeting in May. Six CAPE Panel members also participated in the ACPE September 2012 Summit titled, “Advancing Quality in Pharmacy Education: Charting Accreditation’s Future” and shared pertinent information with the remaining CAPE Panel. The Summit further validated the Panel’s plans for the CAPE revision.

CAPE Panel members read through an extensive series of background readings and worked through smaller group assignments in preparation for convening October 29-30, 2012. During the October meeting a conceptual framework was developed with 4 broad domains and associated subdomains shown in Table 2 and Table 3. The domains and subdomains were designed to offer structure, limit redundancy, and maximize the development of evidence-based measurable outcome statements. Furthermore, they were created to intersect and were not intended to be viewed as isolated outcomes. The Panel also consciously embedded concepts from CAPE 2004 into this revision, especially in the Essential for Practice and Care domain. From October to December, that Panel was divided into workgroups to review subdomain concepts, define terminology, and identify pertinent literature.

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 2.

Four Domains and What They Mean

View this table:
  • View inline
  • View popup
  • Download powerpoint
Table 3.

The Subdomains and What They Represent

A series of weekly CAPE panel webinars were held in January through April 2013. The focus of these webinars was to write learning outcome statements and example student learning objectives for each subdomain. The conceptual framework and progress was presented at the February 2013 AACP Interim Meeting. May through June 2013, Panel members worked on finalizing the background, preamble, educational outcome statements, glossary, and references. The final CAPE 2013 Educational Outcomes were presented at the AACP Annual meeting in July 2013.

CAPE 2013 Moving Forward

The CAPE 2013 Educational Outcomes makes it clear that a singular focus on preparation in the sciences and the cognitive domain is not sufficient educate pharmacists to function as part of an interprofessional team and to practice at the highest level to improve patient outcomes. Attention must be paid to the skills needed to educate, collaborate, and communicate with diverse audiences, as well as to the importance of leadership, self-awareness, professionalism, and innovation. Reexamination of programmatic educational outcomes in context of this revision should include attention to admissions as this examination is critical to assure candidates are prepared to advance in all essential domains of the professional program. CAPE 2013 will help to inform the AACP taskforce looking at revising the PCAT exam to broaden the knowledge, skills, and attitudes examined, which is similar to academic medicine initiatives.

Overall, the CAPE 2013 Educational Outcomes define the curricular priorities of Doctor of Pharmacy programs and inform other health professions of those priorities, inspire and guide curricular revision and innovation, serve as the target for curriculum mapping, and function as a core component of a comprehensive assessment plan to assure achievement of the outcomes by the end of the professional program.

  • © 2013 American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy

REFERENCES

  1. 1.↵
    Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Educational Outcomes 1998. Alexandria VA: Center for the Advancement of Pharmaceutical Education Outcomes; 1998. http://www.aacp.org/resources/education/cape/Documents/CAPE%20Outcomes%20Document%201998.pdf.
  2. 2.↵
    American Association of Colleges of Pharmacy. Educational Outcomes 2004. Alexandria VA: Center for the Advancement of Pharmaceutical Education Outcomes; 2004. http://www.aacp.org/resources/education/Documents/CAPE2004.pdf.
  3. 3.↵
    1. Mason HL,
    2. Assemi M,
    3. Brown B,
    4. et al
    . Report of the 2010-2011 Academic Affairs Standing Committee. Am J Pharm Educ. 2011;75(10): Article S12.
    OpenUrl
  4. 4.↵
    1. Medina MS,
    2. Plaza CM,
    3. Stowe CD,
    4. et al
    . Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) educational outcomes 2013. Am J Pharm Educ. 2013. In press.
PreviousNext
Back to top

In this issue

American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
Vol. 77, Issue 8
14 Oct 2013
  • Table of Contents
  • Index by author
Print
Download PDF
Email Article

Thank you for your interest in spreading the word on American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education.

NOTE: We only request your email address so that the person you are recommending the page to knows that you wanted them to see it, and that it is not junk mail. We do not capture any email address.

Enter multiple addresses on separate lines or separate them with commas.
Report of the 2012-2013 Academic Affairs Standing Committee: Revising the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Educational Outcomes 2013
(Your Name) has sent you a message from American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education
(Your Name) thought you would like to see the American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education web site.
CAPTCHA
This question is for testing whether or not you are a human visitor and to prevent automated spam submissions.
11 + 6 =
Solve this simple math problem and enter the result. E.g. for 1+3, enter 4.
Citation Tools
Report of the 2012-2013 Academic Affairs Standing Committee: Revising the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Educational Outcomes 2013
Melissa S. Medina, Cecilia M. Plaza, Cindy D. Stowe, Evan T. Robinson, Gary DeLander, Diane E. Beck, Russell B. Melchert, Robert B. Supernaw, Victoria F. Roche, Brenda L. Gleason, Mark N. Strong, Amanda Bain, Gerald E. Meyer, Betty J. Dong, Jeffrey Rochon, Patty Johnston
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Oct 2013, 77 (8) S8; DOI: 10.5688/ajpe778S8

Citation Manager Formats

  • BibTeX
  • Bookends
  • EasyBib
  • EndNote (tagged)
  • EndNote 8 (xml)
  • Medlars
  • Mendeley
  • Papers
  • RefWorks Tagged
  • Ref Manager
  • RIS
  • Zotero
Share
Report of the 2012-2013 Academic Affairs Standing Committee: Revising the Center for the Advancement of Pharmacy Education (CAPE) Educational Outcomes 2013
Melissa S. Medina, Cecilia M. Plaza, Cindy D. Stowe, Evan T. Robinson, Gary DeLander, Diane E. Beck, Russell B. Melchert, Robert B. Supernaw, Victoria F. Roche, Brenda L. Gleason, Mark N. Strong, Amanda Bain, Gerald E. Meyer, Betty J. Dong, Jeffrey Rochon, Patty Johnston
American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education Oct 2013, 77 (8) S8; DOI: 10.5688/ajpe778S8
del.icio.us logo Digg logo Reddit logo Twitter logo Facebook logo Google logo Mendeley logo
  • Tweet Widget
  • Facebook Like
  • Google Plus One

Jump to section

  • Article
    • REFERENCES
  • Figures & Data
  • Info & Metrics
  • PDF

Similar AJPE Articles

Cited By...

  • Competency, Programming, and Emerging Innovation in Graduate Education within Schools of Pharmacy: The Report of the 2016-2017 Research and Graduate Affairs Committee
  • Google Scholar

More in this TOC Section

  • Report of the Journal Editor
  • Strategic Plan Priority 1: Enriching the Applicant Pipeline
  • AMERICAN ASSOCIATION OF COLLEGES OF PHARMACY, INC. & SUBSIDIARY
Show more AACP Reports

Related Articles

  • No related articles found.
  • Google Scholar

Home

  • AACP
  • AJPE

Articles

  • Current Issue
  • Early Release
  • Archive

Instructions

  • Author Instructions
  • Submission Process
  • Submit a Manuscript
  • Reviewer Instructions

About

  • AJPE
  • Editorial Team
  • Editorial Board
  • History
  • Contact

© 2023 American Journal of Pharmaceutical Education

Powered by HighWire