To examine the rational (systematic and rule-based) and experiential (fast and intuitive) decision-making preferences of student pharmacists, and to compare these preferences to the preferences of other health professionals and student populations. The Rational-Experiential Inventory (REI-40), a validated psychometric tool, was administered electronically to 114 third-year (P3) student pharmacists. Student demographics and preadmission data were collected. The REI-40 results were compared with student demographics and admissions data to identify possible correlations between these factors. Mean REI-40 rational scores were higher than experiential scores. Rational scores for younger students were significantly higher than students aged 30 years and older (p<0.05). No significant differences were found based on gender, race, or the presence of a prior degree. All correlations between REI-40 scores and incoming grade point average (GPA) and Pharmacy College Admission Test (PCAT) scores were weak. Student pharmacists favored rational decision making over experiential decision making, which was similar to results of studies done of other health professions.

Objective. To describe preceptor teaching challenges and preceptor development programming design preferences through a qualitative needs assessment. Methods. In 2018, 148 experiential education stakeholders across North Carolina (eg, preceptors, residency program directors, experiential faculty administrators, and practice site administrators) were invited to participate in 60-minute semi-structured interviews as part of a broad preceptor development needs assessment. Interview questions focused on: (1) precepting challenges, (2) positive and negative features of preceptor development programs and, (3) preferences of program design. Interview transcripts were coded using thematic analysis. Results. Forty-two participants completed interviews, including preceptors from various rotation types, residency program directors, experiential faculty administrators, and institution administrators. Participants identified numerous teaching challenges related to learner, preceptor, and institutional levels. Example responses from these groups included challenging teaching and learning situations, difficulty self-assessing teaching ability, and increasing institutional demands, respectively. Participants often noted there was inadequate time, resources, and support to effectively teach. Desirable preceptor development program features included practical strategies, collaboration with preceptors, delivery by education and practice experts, and topics specific to precepting experience. Participants identified live, on-demand, and webinar formats as acceptable if collaboration and engagement were included. Participants also desired unique training opportunities such as online platforms, coaching programs, and simulated learning environments. Conclusion. Preceptors face numerous teaching challenges and require sufficient time, support, and resources to develop their skills. Participants requested training that included on-demand, frequent sessions delivered through various modalities, collaboration opportunities, a choice in topics and delivery formats, and sessions from educational and practice experts.

The objective of this study was to evaluate microlearning as a preceptor development method compared to a traditional method of learning. Twenty-five preceptor participants volunteered to engage in a learning intervention about two preceptor development topics. Participants were randomized 1:1 to either a thirty-minute traditional learning experience or a fifteen-minute microlearning experience; participants then crossed over to the other intervention for comparison. Primary outcomes were satisfaction, changes in knowledge, self-efficacy, and perception of behavior, confidence scale, and self-reported frequency of behavior, respectively. One-way repeated measures ANOVA and Wilcoxon paired t-tests were used to analyze knowledge and self-efficacy, and Wilcoxon paired t-tests were utilized to assess satisfaction and perception of behavior. Most participants preferred microlearning over the traditional method (72% vs. 20%, p = 0.007). Free text satisfaction responses were analyzed using inductive coding and thematic analysis. Participants reported that microlearning was more engaging and efficient. There were no significant differences in knowledge, self-efficacy, or perception of behavior between microlearning and the traditional method. Knowledge and self-efficacy scores for each modality increased compared to the baseline. Microlearning shows promise for educating pharmacy preceptors. Further study is needed to confirm the findings and determine optimal delivery approaches.