However, we observed effects favoring paper-based reading when considering texts relevant to students' professional discipline. Rigorous studies are needed to confirm this finding and to evaluate new means of boosting reading comprehension in HPE.Objective. To devise a pharmacy-specific, expanded Entrustable Professional Activities (EPA) entrustment-supervision scale, which frames preceptor ratings of entrustment in a prospective and retrospective manner for use in experiential learning settings. Methods. A series of focus group sessions were conducted to solicit expert opinion to develop and refine two entrustment-supervision scales. Purposive sampling was used to identify experts from different professional groups (physicians, pharmacy experiential administrators, and pharmacy practice faculty) and who had extensive knowledge regarding EPAs and at least one publication related to EPAs. Panelists were invited to participate via email. Three focus sessions were conducted by videoconferencing between June and September 2019. The primary outcome was development of a pharmacy-specific EPA entrustment-supervision assessment tool. Secondary outcomes were individual entrustment-supervision statements across five levels of the entrustment-supervision scale. Results. The focus group consisted of four pharmacy practice faculty, two experiential administrators, and one academic physician. Four concepts emerged from the focus group discussion 1. need for more granularity in entrustment-supervision scales; 2. limitations due to differences in licensure requirements across the United States; 3. colleges/schools of pharmacy already use expanded scales; and 4. uncertainty how to rate entrustment-supervision when a student exhibits unprofessional behavior. Conclusion. A pharmacy-specific, expanded EPA entrustment-supervision scale will be useful to support longitudinal assessment of learners in experiential settings utilizing EPAs. Determining when to use a prospective versus retrospective perspective requires further evaluation.Objective. To understand how colleges and schools of pharmacy utilize pass/fail grading systems in Doctor of Pharmacy curricula.Methods. An electronic survey with 15 selected response items and six open-ended questions was developed and distributed in 2020 to the 10 academic pharmacy programs known to utilize a pass/fail grading system to gather qualitative and quantitative data.Results. Leaders from eight of the 10 programs identified responded to the survey. Programs varied regarding the types of courses for which they utilize a pass/fail grading system and whether numerical scores are shared with students. A variety of grade designations (honors, pass, no pass, fail, satisfactory, etc.) are used, and the minimum pass level varies by program, ranging from 70% to 90%. For those institutions that utilize post-course remediation, the majority of remediation occurs immediately following the academic term or in the summer. The type of information shared with residency program directors (GPA, class rank, overall percentile, qualitative comments, etc.) varies among pass/fail programs.Conclusion. How pass/fail grading systems are utilized is inconsistent across schools and colleges pharmacy. Programs that utilize a criterion-based grading system might benefit from engaging in future conversations with one another to determine if and how consistency might be realized among terminology, passing level, percentages, grade point averages, and progression. Additional insights on post-graduate training requirements and honorary societies is warranted should pass/fail grading expand as it has in medical education. Further research on this topic may lead to greater understanding and adoption across the pharmacy academy.Objective. To assess changes in Emotional Intelligence Appraisal (EIA) scores following the coronavirus disease 2019 (COVID-19) pandemic for pharmacy students within a voluntary co-curricular leadership development program.Methods. Participants from the Class of 2021 (pandemic group) completed an EIA self-assessment near the beginning of the leadership program (August 2019, pre-pandemic) and end of the program (July 2020, during peak first-wave COVID-19 activity) and wrote an accompanying self-reflection. To determine changes in emotional intelligence potentially attributable to COVID-19, differences in EIA scores from the pandemic group were compared to the pooled results of previous program cohorts (Classes of 2017-2019). Prevalent themes in student self-reflections were also highlighted.Results.  https://www.selleckchem.com/products/fx11.html  A total of 35 student leaders comprised the pandemic group, with 166 students included within the control group. The proportion of students with final EIA scores indicating high emotional intelligence was greater for the pandemic group (74.3% vs 50.6%). While both groups had increased final EIA scores compared to baseline values, score increases were significantly higher for the pandemic group with respect to overall emotional intelligence and relationship management. Students commented that the pandemic highlighted the importance of emotional intelligence during stressful situations, though the lack of in-person interaction was noted as a limitation for social development.Conclusion. Pharmacy students participating in a leadership development program during the COVID-19 pandemic experienced greater increases in emotional intelligence than pre-pandemic cohorts. This may support the ability of health professional students to maintain resiliency through the pandemic and develop both personal and interpersonal relationship building skills.Objective To describe outcomes of an article club that was designed to foster leadership within Sour pharmacy school by informally gathering interested faculty and staff that provided a safe environment for discussion on leadership concepts.Methods Participants discussed a Harvard Business Review's Top 10 Leadership article monthly. After ten sessions, participants were asked to complete an electronic survey on their perspectives of the activities and could volunteer for an interview. Descriptive statistics were calculated, and qualitative software assisted in analyzing interview transcripts. Videoconferencing allowed for off-campus faculty and staff participation. No direct programmatic costs were incurred.Results Four to 24 participants attended each session. Sixteen participants completed the survey, with five volunteering for interviews. All 16 strongly agreed the sessions "increased awareness of leadership concepts," and 15 strongly agreed/agreed the activities "influenced my leadership decision-making" and "facilitated building a culture of leadership at the school.